I'm sure you're surprised to see this tennis post surrounded by football. Hell, I'm sure I will be when I log onto the site. However, I thought that the Roddick vs. Federer US Open final was interesting enough to take a break from constantly thinking of football to touch on it.
The funny thing about this US Open is the guy who won it, Roger Federer of course, wasn't mentioned until the finals. First, it was all Agassi, until he was knocked out and put out of his misery. Agassi had too many aches and pains to go much further than he did. Losing to Benjamin Becker was better than if he went on to face Roddick. He put up a good fight against Becker, where Roddick would have owned him, just like he owned Becker.
After Agassi was retired, the story was Roddick. He had a nice resurgence with a more dominating serve and coach Jimmy Conners changing his play to a more aggressive style. He cruised into the final. Unfortunatley, when he got there, Roger Federer was waiting for him. No one had heard a thing about Federer until the finals. It's as if he was there the whole time waiting for someone new to beat.
Federer is the best tennis player there is now. Don't let his few losses to Rafael Nadal fool you. Those losses were on clay, where Nadal owns. Federer had eight grand slam titles coming into the US Open. And up until the US Open final today, he has owned Roddick 10-1. Roddick never solved Federer, and after his loss to him in the finals of Wimbleton in 2005, Roddick took a bad nose dive. For some time after, we'd hear of him losing tournaments early. It took Roddick a good year to recover.
When Roddick faced Federer today, early on, it looked as if he didn't think he could beat him. In fact, he was down 5-0 in the first set. However, that was soon turned around with the help of the home crowd. He won the second set 6-4. Then, in the third set, it was tied and he was up 40-0 on a Federer serve. If he won that point, he'd only have to win his own serves, which he was doing, to go up two sets to one. However, Federer decided to remind everyone why he rules and came back down 0-40 to win that game and eventually win the set. After that loss, Roddick knew he was done. He had played his best, pushed Federer to the limit, but still lost the set 7-5. He went down 6-2 in the final set.
I had this on in my house, and my mother was watching it a bit. Well, when they mentioned that Federer and Roddick are 25 and 24 respectively and the fact the winner gets a shitload of cash and a car, I had to hear about how I had let her down. Apparently, I should be out there winning the prize money. Then, during the final ceremony, she found out I wouldn't even need to win the US Open to get a cash prize but could be runner-up. That was even worse. I guess I should have started playing tennis young and then won the US Open so my mother could have a Lexus. It's a shame I'm such a bad son. See, Andy, you could have it worse. You could be the same age you are now, but live at home with your mom.
(Tiger dominates golf. Federer dominates tennis. And together they hold the WWE Tag Titles)
Honestly, Roddick's come back was impressive. It's just unfortunately that one of the best tennis players ever stands in the way between second best and best. Hell, Federer was hanging out with Tiger Woods before the match, probably discussing what it's like to be absolutely dominant. Roddick isn't the only guy who lost to Federer. Most tennis players do. On the brighter side, Andy Roddick did figure out how to beat pong. Maybe he'll figure out Federer one day too.