Charles on… anything that comes along

Back in the day, you were either a Borg fan or a McEnroe fan. When they met in the 1980 final, where Borg was trying to become the first person ever to win 5 Wimbledon titles in a row, it was immense. (And let it be noted that McEnroe himself got to 5 Wimbledon finals in a row from 1980 to 1984; bested I think only by Borg, with 6.)

Today, Federer beat Nadal in five sets - I’ll try to watch what I taped, but not all of it - which puts him on a par with Borg, utter tennis royalty, at least at Wimbledon.

There’s been a feeling that Nadal going for Federer has been like McEnroe chasing Borg, trying to stop the title sweep.

But the difference is that this would be like Borg going after McEnroe. Though McEnroe is in awe of Federer (and hell, who can’t be?), Federer isn’t another Borg. He’s quick like him, a champion like him, but he’s an incredible shotmaker, imaginative in what seem like obvious situations. Borg didn’t have that; he wasn’t as rounded. In this comparison, Federer is the McEnroe, and Nadal is the Borg.

Though Borg remains the better in these terms: he would win the French Open, and then he’d come and win Wimbledon, which was played on faster courts. Federer hasn’t done that, yet; and Wimbledon is slower, the grass holding the ball a bit more. He might actually benefit if it were faster. But the French/Wimbledon double is one of the toughest challenges in any sport, I think. It’s like the Tour de France, tennis version. And Federer still hasn’t done that one.

These posts might be related (the database thinks..):
• Tim Henman: a better player than everyone thinks (13 September 2004; score: 97.03%)
• That Wimbledon result in brief (3 July 2005; score: 86.21%)
• At Centre Court: seeing Federer, and what Murray got wrong against Roddick (4 July 2009; score: 50.65%)