The Fedalovic (Roger Federer-Rafael Nadal-Novak Djokovic) era began in 2005. That’s 14 years of tennis, comprising 56 Grand Slam tournaments. Among those 56 events, we have crowned exactly 8 different champions. Marat Safin, Juan Martin del Potro, and Marin Cilic won a single Slam. Andy Murray and Stan Wawrinka won 3 each. The rest were Fedalovic wins. There were 17 titles for Nadal, 15 for Federer, and 14 for Djokovic in that time.
I bring this up to illustrate two points. The first of which is that for better or worse, we have experienced a time of unprecedented dominance by a trio of players. The second is that the tennis pundit tendency of blaming the Next Gen members for their inability to make inroads at majors might be premature and is almost certainly unfair given the juggernaut they were/are up against.
Fedalovic changed the sport. It evolved into something, not just physically demanding, but physically punishing. That particular evolution (or devolution, depending on whether you talk to a Federer or Nadal fan) is placed almost solely at the feet of Nadal, who seems to be credited with “inventing” the brand of vicious tennis that inspired Tsitsipas to say of the Spaniard, “He was normal like the rest of us, but he managed to become this beast, this monster that he is today.” Now, being likened to a monster isn’t usually…complimentary. But in this case, we all know what Tsitsipas means. He’s just saying, “Mission accomplished, Rafa. That HURT. Literally.”
And so we swing back to Tsitsipas in Melbourne, who at age 20 managed to defeat Roger Federer in a for real best-of-five match. At a for real slam. Sure, Fed has lost plenty of times before. But this time he was…well…he was Federered. There’s just no other way to put it. Tsitsipas played his game better than he did. It wasn’t like Nadal, who bludgeons Federer into losing. Tsitsipas finessed him into losing. He volleyed. He whipped one-handed backhands past the Maestro. He played all 4 sets with the steadfast belief that he would win. He was right.
In the post-match interview, John McEnroe declared it the changing of the guard. Federer’s response? A dismissive, “I’ve been hearing that for 10 years now”. And yet this is the first time it feels true, or at least it feels like it could be true in short order.
Frances Tiafoe, the first American man able to excite a crowd since Andre Agassi, has had his own awakening in Melbourne. He didn’t take out one of the Big Three (though he gets a crack at Nadal in the quarters), but there is still something in the offing, a sense that Tiafoe is the real deal. He pulled off a string of upsets to earn his spot opposite Nadal. But in so doing, he now has to play Nadal. On legs that aren’t the freshest. So, yeah. The Next Gen campaign against the old dudes might take a little bit of a detour.
The reality is that in order for there to be a changing of the guard, it can’t just be Tsitsipas beating Federer. In many ways, Fedalovic is thought of as a single entity. The status quo only requires that one of them lift the trophy at the end of the tournament…and if they do, the other narratives are rather easily ignored. Now, if somebody else, somebody new wins it, that’s a different matter entirely. But with both Nadal and Djokovic playing well still, I have to assume that the proverbial guard will remain in place a little while longer.
[polldaddy poll=10218406]
[polldaddy poll=10218404]
Nice piece Cheryl
There is no one better when it comes to Cheryl. It is great to be able to read her blogs again.
After watching the replay of the Fed/Tsitsipas match on the tennis channel today, I think Cheryl got it right about why this upset shocker seemed different. Watching Fed lose all those break chances to win the second set and go up two sets, was surprising to say the least. You just don’t see Fed unable to capitalize on numerous break chances. It’s a huge difference to be up two sets as opposed to being tied at one set apiece. I think Tsitsipas got a big boost from pulling out that second set. He played like he believed he could win. It seemed that everything Fed threw at him did not faze him in the least.
But in the end, I also agree that with Rafa and Fed still in this and playing well, the old guard may not be ready to move aside just yet.
Great blog, Cheryl! You’re right, I think. Nadal is the one that drove this evolution. He was always very good as a kid. Then he got his first serious injury in 2004 when he broke a small bone in his foot and missed a couple of months. He felt threatened by that but instead of crippling him it hardened him into the “beast”. He accepted that injury might end his career at any time, but instead of giving up he told himself that he must play every match, nay, EVERY POINT, as if it was his last because at any time it might be his last and he would never know for sure. Faced with this indomitable beast, Federer and eventually Djokovic responded like the champions they are and got better. Both have said it. “He’s the one. He made me better.” And they made Nadal better in turn. So together they became the triple headed monster we have known and loved – and hated – for the last 13 years: Fedalovic.