During the 2008 Wimbledon final, I decided I was watching sport at its ultimate. Nadal was playing Federer, and the match was a supreme test of their speed, strength, agility, endurance, intelligence, and will.
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
The Federer-Roddick final was long and dramatic, yet at no time was it as interesting as the Federer-Nadal match the year before. This year’s last set went to 16-14, but not because neither player gave an inch in battle. No, it was simply that neither could handle the other’s serve. The problem with tennis has always been that a big serve compensates, or overcompensates, for a lack of the more fundamental qualities by which athletes ought to be measured. Nadal doesn’t have an overwhelming serve. He usually holds serve but he rarely aces, let alone putting together a string of aces to win a game in the time it takes to comb your hair. He’s in constant danger of being broken.
In other words, last year’s match was played closer to the brink. Last year Nadal served 6 aces and Federer 25. This year Federer, whose overall game didn’t look particularly sound, served 50 aces and Roddick 27. Against each other, Nadal and Feder each won the point on the opponent’s serve 33 percent of the time. Federer took the point on Roddick’s serve 28 percent of the time; Roddick on Federer’s just 21 percent of the time. The relative weakness of Nadal’s serve and the relative strength of his return of service gave spectators a 2008 Wimbledon final in which they knew that at any time anything could happen.
