WHY PEOPLE CLING TO 'VINTAGE FEDERER'

A couple of months ago Roger Federer won the World Tour Finals. This end of season event, which features the top 8 players in the world, is supposed to be second only to Grand Slams in prestige and with this victory many were quick to proclaim Federer as back to his best. Yet it was surely obvious to many that this was not vintage Federer in any sense. The 2012 incarnation of Federer is not as good as 2005 Federer, for many reasons. While Federer is doing well to maintain a good level against much tougher opposition in his earlier days he cannot be considered anywhere near his best. So why does every good result by Federer bring out an outpouring of emotion about how he is back to his best?

THE DEBATE

Recently, this blog appeared on the BBC website. The usually excellent Jonathan Overend decided he couldn't be bothered doing a proper blog and decided to lazily blog about whether Federer was now playing better than ever. He cites various reasons including that the standard has improved all round, players now believe he can be beaten and some sort of ridiculous argument (peddled by many Fed fans) that because he was so close to beating Djokovic at the US Open then that counts as a win...

Now a quick look at the stats show that in 2005 , Federer lost four matches. He lost to Safin, Gasquet, Nadal and Nalbandian. In 2006, he lost only to Nadal and Murray. In 2011, Federer lost 12 matches (11 if you decide he did beat Djokovic in the US Open. Note to Federer fans, he didn't). These were defeats to Davydenko, Djokovic (four times ), Nadal (twice), Melzer, Gasquet, Tsonga (twice) and Berdych. In 2010, he lost thirteen times, including defeats to Gulbis, Hewitt and Montanes. Even taking into account the strength of the game now, there is no disputing that Federer is losing more matches. It was 2007 the last time Federer lost less than 10 matches in a season.

Even allowing for the increase in quality in the game there is no disputing that Federer is not as good as he was. Had Murray and Djokovic not broken through Federer would still have won less tournaments and less matches. He would still have lost in the Quarter Finals at Wimbledon in both 2010 and 2011, an unheard of result back in 05/06. He lost to somebody who wasn't Nadal at the French Open for the first time in 4 years in 2010. He was very close to a first round exit at Wimbledon in 2010. He hasn't won Indian Wells, Miami or the Rogers Cup since 2005.

2011 had been another disappointing season prior to the World Tour Finals. He had slipped further back from Nadal and Djokovic and blown the French Open final. He came into the World Tour Finals ranked 4th in the world. It was soon abundantly clear that Djokovic, Nadal and Murray were struggling with fitness and all of them crashed out early. Federer struggled past Ferrer and Tsonga to clinch the title. It was hardly vintage and indeed showed Federers frailty as he let match points go before losing the second set to Tsonga. The tennis world then went insane:

"Federer has realistic ambitions of being number one again"
Federer shows little sign of decline
Federer proves he is back to his brilliant best

amongst other absurd statements. A mere month earlier, Murray had beaten a similar field to win the Shanghai Masters. Nobody cared and Federer himself said "I'm not taking anything away from what he did but was Asia the strongest this year? I'm not sure, I wasn't there and (in Shanghai) Rafa lost early." Yet Federer wins a similarly poor tournament and the tennis world goes mad. Why is that?

THE STORY


There is a type of tennis fan I would like to punch repeatedly in the face. This is the fan who only knows of Wimbledon, who criticises Murray for both "hating the English" and "having no sense of humour" without a sense of irony, and who love Roger Federer. They have been consistently bleating that Federer is back to his best every time he wins any match against anybody. But after the World Tour Finals this love of Federer  (who is arrogant, classless, carefully tailors himself to appeal to those who only have a passing interest in tennis and has an horrificly ugly wife) and the desire to have him back at the top of the tennis world seemed to appear everywhere.

The simple fact is that Federer is now declining. The 2008 Wimbledon final will never be repeated. While Federer v Nadal matches are still exciting, they do not hold the same aura as they once did. Yet the almost the entire tennis world is clinging on to the notion that there will be a repeat of the 2008 Wimbledon final, but this time it will be better. The media and all those involved want to be there for the next great story of tennis, and Federer being number one is integral to this story.

For years they have been used to Federer producing moments of magic and ridiculous results, dare I say it making the stories speak for themselves. Then Nadal came along and the supposed 'greatest of all time' had a rival. At Wimbledon 2008, the story was complete and Nadal beat Federer where he was most at home, Wimbledon itself. Part-time tennis fans everywhere wept and cursed Murrays anti-Englishenss. Since then, there hasn't been the same narrative. Federer has faded, briefly come back when Nadal is injured, and is now comfortably the third best player in the world. Djokovics dominance is impressive but doesn't hold the same lustre as it did when Federer was doing it.

Therefore, the tennis world is pining for another final Federer moment. The need for one more story so they can say "I was there when Federer did it, and it was incredible". This could still happen. It isn't impossible to envisage a 35 year old Federer making one final dint at the Wimbledon title before retiring. But right now there is not a story. Federer is not going to return to number 1. He may not win a Slam this year. The response to the World Tour Finals was simply seeing something that wasn't there in the hope he could go back to dominating.

NOSTALGIA


There is a second string to this theory. Nostalgia being what it is, everything in the past seemed better. Plenty will be watching tennis thinking it was better a few years ago when Federer was winning all the time. The days were longer, the summer was warmer, there were less kids on the street and the economy wasn't ruined. Therefore it would be great if Federer was winning everything again. Many fans are simply pining for the time when Federer was dominating the sport as to them, it was better then. As a result, every good result he gets is examined for signs of him being back to his best in the hope he will go on to dominate everything again.

OTHER SPORTS

This sort of feeling is prevalent in other sports. I imagine many a casual observer was bemused as the Zidane at the 2006 World Cup show unfolded. Zidane was to lead France to the World Cup title in his final act as a player was the story. For two games Zidane huffed and puffed as France struggled and was suspended for the final group game. Then France beat Spain 3-1 in the Quarters, with Zidane himself scoring the third in injury time. The Guardian noted that this was "one of his best displays". In the next round, he was again lauded as 'magnificent' as France went on to beat Brazil. No matter what he did, it had been decided Zidane was back to his best and that was the story. Ultimately France went on to lose the final, but not after Zidane had given everybody an entirely different story.

Continuing the theme in football was the return of Thierry Henry to Arsenal. Chucked on as a substitute against Championship Leeds, Henry scored the winning goal. Rather than merely accepting "ageing star still too good for Championship", the world went a bit Henry crazy. "Look, here is Henry, who we thought we'd never see again, playing and he is just as good as before. He still has it." There was a wave of nostalgia, not half because when Henry had played Arsenal were successful. Many were clinging on to the idea of Henry scoring somehow bringing the glory days back. In his next match he gave away the winning goal and fell out with a fan, then got injured, but it didn't matter by then.

There is a similar story in golf right now. Tiger Woods dominated the sports for well over a decade while also shagging everything that moved. Once the world found out about the latter, his game collapsed and he went two years without winning anything. Where he once looked certain to beat Jack Nicklaus record of 18 Majors, it now looked almost impossible. He slipped outside the world top 50. Then, towards the end of 2011, Woods took part in a small fielded invitational event (like the World Tour Finals, anybody good was either injured or elsewhere). He won and people were quick to declare that "Tiger was back". People were desperate for Tiger to create another story to match his "Tiger slam", while also nostalgic for the days when Woods swept everybody aside with some majestic golf.

CONCLUSION


Next time somebody tells you Federer could go back to the number one spot, ask them to name a tournament other than Wimbledon. If they can't, punch them repeatedly in the face while shouting "ANYONE BUT ENGLAND" at them. If they can, then maybe let them off. They are just desperate to be involved in another great tennis story.