Yes. People forget the bulk of cold hard facts when discussing Roger Federer’s struggle to win his 14th Grand Slam. They attribute factors such as age, Rafael Nadal, and certain losses to young players as the end-all proof that the Fed Express has derailed.
Federer is only 27, which apparently means 90 in tennis years. It’s easy to associate Federer with aging talent such as Andy Roddick, Lleyton Hewitt, and Marat Safin because they are all former No. 1’s in their late twenties. It’s unfair to lump Federer into this talented, albeit inferior, bunch. Federer has won 13 Grand Slams. These guys are nowhere near that pinnacle. By capturing one more, Federer will surpass Pete Sampras as the most decorated player in the Grand Slam era. Keep in mind that Federer’s style of play is usually compared to that of Sampras. What I find interesting is how similar their careers have been as well. They both went pro as teenagers, then dominated for five years in their early twenties. Sampras never won a French Open – neither has Federer. Sampras won at least five championships at Wimbledon and the U.S. Open – same with Federer. Their careers are eerily similar when you compare statistics. One fact remains, however: Pete Sampras won the U.S. Open at age 30. I don’t see why Federer can’t do the same.
Oh, that’s right. Rafael Nadal. Federer can’t seem to beat the Spaniard. At 24 22, Nadal has already amassed seven six Grand Slam titles and is actually the true contender to win more Grand Slams than anybody in the sport’s lengthy history. Nevertheless, the guy has just begun to win hard court tournaments. His victory at this year’s Australian Open over Federer proved that Nadal has broadened his game. Everyone who witnessed his epic match against Federer at Wimbledon last year knows he can play on grass as well. The true test, and Federer’s saving grace, will be at the U.S. Open, which Federer has won five consecutive times. It’s the only Grand Slam Nadal hasn’t won, but it’s definitely within his reach. Remember, even though pundits like to compare Federer with Sampras, they absolutely love to compare Nadal with Andre Agassi. While Federer and Sampras were better players overall, Agassi was the last to win all four Grand Slams in his career. Nadal is more than capable of the same feat.
Bottom line is yes, Roger Federer will win another Grand Slam. Will he get two or three more? I doubt it, but it goes without saying that Fed could easily remain one of the top-five ranked players on the ATP Tour for the next few years. Sampras retired at 30, at a time when many believed he had a couple solid years left. Still, he did so as the most successful tennis player of all time. There wasn’t much need to continue if there wasn’t anything else to prove. Sampras could not predict the likes of a young Roger Federer breaking into the game, quickly accumulating three Grand Slams a year. It’s unpredictable because it’s a phenomenon. Nadal and Federer are both phenomenons. Fortunately, Roger Federer knows this about his rival. He can’t bow out now, not when he’s so close to the Grand Slam record.
From this point on, it’s a fair assumption that Federer will never again win the Australian Open or Wimbledon, or ever win the French Open. But mark my words: Federer has one more Grand Slam in him. It will solidify his stature as the best player tennis has ever seen. This moment will eventually come at the U.S. Open.
The department says Vick made a series of prohibited transfers from a pension plan sponsored by MV7, a celebrity marketing company owned by the former Atlanta Falcons quarterback. The department alleges that Vick violated his duties as trustee of a pension plan that covered nine current or former MV7 employees.
