Long live the King

Why do I support Federer? The answer is detailed yet painfully simple. In 2001 when he beat Sampras he was exquisite and since 2003 he’s been world number one for more weeks than even Connors, and yes he’s won 12 Grand Slams including five consecutive titles at Wimbledon. But that’s not it. Nadal is clearly better than him today and is better against him (12-6 overall record in his favor would suggest the same conclusion to even an idiot) Then why am I against this man whose talent I honestly do admire. The brute force and athleticism of the Spaniard are unparalleled across sporting boundaries. There never has been anyone who can make passing shots on the dead run with a flick of those weightlifter wrists and never shall they be anyone as well. No one who has used a whip to impart so much spin on the ball, that it kicks even on the hallowed greens of SW19. And even though I dislike his mind games before every serve with one-upmanship time wasting being a deliberate ploy, I still do respect him as a great champion.
I got up thrice that night from my more than comfortable bean bag to call it a night only to catch from the corner of my eye the determination and sheer brilliance of a man who was fighting; fighting not against his opponent or his critics but rather for something, for someone to be more precise for himself. The only thought painted all over his intense slightly asymmetrical face was ‘not tonight, I can’t lose tonight ‘. Many believe in the underdog theory and almost live by it. The underdog theory for those of you who are unaware states that in the event of a lack of a substantially plausible logical reason to support someone in any contest we must support the underdog. Why must we support the underdog? Quite simply because we don’t want to be seen to know nothing about the context of the contest and god forbid someone should turn around and say ‘you’re only supporting him/them because you know they’re going to win’ and that begs the other logically obvious question as to why support anyone at all? The even more obvious answer would have to be the fear of not having an opinion or an interest (however forced it might be) in what is clearly cool conversation talk for the fortnight.
Now, to finally answer the question; Despite these remarkable positives in his game why don’t I support him. The answer lies in those very unbelievable aspects of his game. For someone who plays tennis and looks forward to grand slams to lift his own game by 10% (only to fell to the original level a week later) I can’t possibly look up to Nadal. As brilliant as his shots are they’re not replicable, unless I spend 3 months in the gym and still hope for divine intervention every time step on to the court. The radically outlandish style the left hander has brought is not one that inspires. ‘Inspires’- that is critical. When I look at Federer and see him execute that marvelous serve and (sometime) sublime backhand, it gives me hope. It almost compels me to pick up the phone and call up the first person I think of and say ‘let’s play’. That is what a champion is supposed to do. That is why people supported Beckham; because he ‘forced’ us to try an impossible angle and defy physics to swing the football in the air when we were alone on the football field waiting for friends to arrive. Trust me, I’ve tried the whip forehand and it only made me feel ridiculous and Nadal look like a freak of nature. I can respect people who are ‘different’ and they’re identity and right to exist and succeed, but my idol and my ‘champion’ has to INSPIRE me to be better. Long live the King.