Key moments

This year Roger Federer cried twice in a final of Grand Slam. First time they were tears of self-pity, but the next time he ensured they were tears of joy. The tears were enough retribution for the champion, who lost his Wimbledon crown and the Australian Open final to his greatest nemesis, Rafael Nadal.

The French Open 2009 will go down in history as the one of the best ever, with the greatest tennis player claiming what was seriously wanting in his career graph.
This year like 2008 seemed to belong to the likes of Nadal, Djokovic and Murray.
But true to its reputation the French Open produced plenty of surprises and disappointments. Looking back at the key moments, what is striking is that only Roger Federer of the Big Four survived the rigours of the red dirt.

Biggest Upset: No doubt the exit of King of Clay, Rafael Nadal. The inexorable World No 1 and four-time champion here had never lost a match here since his debut in 2005. But thanks to a certain Swede Robin Soderling, Nadal received a rude jolt to his bid for a record fifth title at the terre battue. While this year Nadal will have to do without his usual birthday present at the French Open, Roger Federer had the most unlikely of opponent in the final - Robin Soderling.

Second big upset: Novak Djokovic. The Serbian World No 4 had a creditable season on clay and was touted to be the most likely of candidates to (maybe, possibly) topple Nadal. In the finals at Monte Carlo, Djokovic took a set off Nadal and in Madrid he engaged the Mallorcan in a four-hour semifinal duel and almost made it. But the Serbian, who had the second best season on clay after Nadal, came up short in his French Open expectations losing to unfancied opponent Philip Kohlschreiber of Germany in the third round.

Man of the moment: None other than the fluid Swiss maestro, Roger Federer. The World No 2 had a shaky start to his Open bid, with unconvincing victories over Paul Henri-Matheiu and Tommy Haas. Gael Monfils looked a tough quarterfinal opponent as the Frenchman had shown some stiff resistance in the 2008 semifinal here against Federer. Once through the starting jitters, it was sheer finesse from the Swiss. In the semifinals, Federer survived a Del Potro scare to make it to his 19th Grand Slam final and his fourth French Open final. But this time his opponent was not his nemesis Nadal, but the Swede Soderling against whom he has a convincing record. No doubt the Swiss was the outright favourite to win the championship and the unflagging support he commanded showed his popularity with the French crowd. With the whole world rallying for Federer, the Swiss ensured he did not cave in to the pressure. He once again beat Soderling in straight sets to clinch the only missing silverware from his arsenal, and in the process complete his career slam.

Man, who created the moment: Robin Soderling: The Nadal-slayer, conqueror, not only played the tennis of his life-time to outclass the World No 1 and send him packing in the fourth round but also booked a place for himself in the final. The top seed looked lost and out of ideas against the booming big serves and accurate groundstrokes of the World No 25. In the process, the Swede also ensured that Nadal did not surpass his countryman Bjorn Borg’s record of four consecutive titles at Roland Garros. With the exit of Nadal, the biggest benefitter was Federer, who lost three consecutive finals to Nadal here. All eyes were on Federer to lift the title.

First timers: It was for the first time Robin Soderling had reached the fourth round of a Grand Slam in his career. Slovakia’s Dominika Cibulkova made her first appearance in a Grand Slam quarterfinal. Australia's Samantha Stosur beat Romanian teenager Sorana Cirstea to qualify for her first ever Grand Slam semifinal.
Romania's Sorana Cirstea stunned fifth seed Jelena Jankovic to reach her first ever Grand Slam quarterfinal. She was the first Romanian woman in a Grand Slam quarterfinal since Irina Spirlea at the 1997 US Open.

Last timers: Fabrice Santoro and Marat Safin:
Russia’s former World No 1 and two-time Grand Slam winner Marat Safin survived the first hurdle but lost to France’s Josselin Ouanna in a tightly fought match in the second round. Safin insists it will be his last year on the tour.
The 36-year-old Santoro, a Frenchman playing for the 20th time here, has never won any majors. His best result was a quarterfinal showing at the Australian Open in 2006. But even Federer and Nadal paid due tributes to the Frenchman, appreciating his unique technique and tactician’s mind-set that brought many a delightful moments to the fans.

Andys rock: Both Andy Roddick and Andy Murray surprised themselves by breezing into the second week at Roland Garros. Clay has not been a favourite with the Brit. However, having reached the semifinals in Monte Carlo and quarterfinals in Madrid and Paris it has been the best season on clay for the new World No 3. For American Andy Roddick it was the first fourth round match of his career at Roland Garros. The former World No.1 went out in the first round here in 2006 and 2007 and missed last year's tournament with a shoulder injury.

Comeback queen: Maria Sharapova: Having shown no favourable proclivity to the red dirt in her career and sidelined by a shoulder injury for almost 10 months, it was her first major on comeback. Coming in ranked No 102, the Russian played without fear and expectations, battling tenaciously through four three-set matches to reach the last eight. Though, she was thrashed by Cibulkova 6-0, 6-2 in the semis, the Russian girl is optimistic and believes it was a good start.

Comeback King: Roger Federer: The Swiss master rallied from a two-set deficit in his fourth-round match against Germany’s Tommy Haas only to toy with him in the latter three sets.

Rising star: Michelle Larcher de Brito
Portugal’s 16-year-old teenager de Brito, ranked 132, came through qualifying and on made it to the last 32 ousting China's 15th seed Zheng Jie.

Mellowdrama: Again Michelle Larcher de Brito.
Brito and France's Aravane Rezai were involved in a bad-tempered third-round clash where the latter complained the ear-splitting screams of the teenager were disconcerting.

Opportunity wide Open!

Guess it was a watershed day in history! Little known Swede Robin Soderling did what none of the big guys could do! He beat the King of Clay in four sets on his favourite surface, on the red dirt of his favourite tournament. It was definitely a rude jolt for World No 1 Nadal vying for his fifth straight title at Roland Garros.
For the last four years Nadal domination at the tournament was nonpareil. Such was his mastery on clay that even taking a set off Nadal would itself be an achievement. Since the 2007 final, where he lost a set to Federer, Nadal had not even lost a set in the tournament. So, little did anybody contemplate or even comprehend the World No 25 Swede beating Nadal.
Nadal’s defeat came at a time when the champion had proved that clay courts were not his only demesnes and he could wallow on the grass of Wimbledon and hard court of Australia as well. The aura of invincibility that had enveloped Federer for so long, had suddenly entwined another. The tennis world was out of ideas on how to play Nadal. The question was who could crack the Nadal clay code?
Djokovic? The World No 3 took a set off Nadal at the Monte Carlo finals. Close. Closer still? Djokovic played a four hour, forty minutes semifinal against Nadal in the Madrid finals. The match could have gone either way. In the end Nadal’s tenacity was the winner. Yet there was hope. Another match, another final and maybe Djokovic would do it. But Djokovic’s loss in Madrid was Federer’s gain. The Serbian No 4 tired the World No 1 to such an extent that next day in the finals it was a jaded Nadal that took on Federer only to lose in straight sets. But not to discount Federer’s efforts, even a five set thriller would not have sapped the energy levels of the Swiss. That’s the kind of game the Swiss plays. Facile backhands, lethal service games tossed with sheer finesse and grace. If the physicality of Nadal’s game propelled him to the highest echelons, it was also his pitfall. After all fitness is what determines a champion. How many times does Federer complain of injury? How many tournaments has Federer missed? Few. On the other hand, burn out at the end of the season is a common feature for Nadal. In 2008, Nadal missed the Masters Cup. Everytime he has played an exceptionally demanding semifinal, Nadal has been found wanting in the finals. (Chennai Open 2008, Madrid Masters 2009).
In the match against Soderling, Nadal looked patchy and out of sorts as he had no answer to some of the Swede’s thundering shots. It was always thought the only way to beat Nadal on clay would be to keep the points shot. And Soderling had done his homework. He did exactly that and came out with flying colours. Soderling did everything that tennis lovers wanted Federer to do. Now that Nadal is out, the expectancy to lift the only silverware missing from his arsenal rests onerous on Federer. Nothing could further the drama than the Swiss maestro winning the French Open and completing his career Grand Slam. That would be his one unfailing dream and so of die-hard Fedex fans’ like me!

Let the express chug on

The King of Grand Slams, Wimbledon breathed in the first whiff of fresh air. Federer is back on the surface he loves most, for it was here numerous intimidated opponents were ruthlessly decimated by the Swiss on rampage.

A Federer bastion of sorts, this grasscourt exponent will be under a lot of pressure to prove he is yet to wither.

If Federer wins Wimbledon, the disturbing images of the battered World No. 1, eking out a diffident fight against his clay court nemesis Nadal will be a vision saved for future French Opens. On the other hand , if Federer fails to make it on the grass, the tongues that started their petulant flapping since the Australian Open, will be on a non-stop mission further unnerving the undisputed champion.

Hey, so what if Federer lost the Australian Open? So what if he still has not won the French Open? We are talking about a person who has won three Australian Open (2004, 2006, 2007) reached the final of three French Open (2006, 2007, 2008) won five Wimbledon (2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007) and also won four US Open (2004, 2005, 2005, 2007).

Every sports person is bound to go through a lean period. You don't expect Sachin Tendulkar to score a century in every innings that he plays, nor do you expect the likes of Ronaldo, Lampard to strike in every match.

Sampras undoubtedly the best the game has produced failed to make an impact on clay. Forget winning, he couldn’t even reach the final stage. But Sampras with his rich haul of 12 grand slams was and will always be fondly remembered for infusing the game with facile grace, coupled with placid power.

Then why is this undue onus on Federer to prove himself in every tournament?
To some extent Federer himself created this so called "aura of invincibility". In the last five years, Federer hardly lost any match, and particularly his Grand Slam record sparing the one in Paris, was impeccable. Besides, something to be noted is Federer has always been at his ravaging best in the latter half of the year.

So, there is still time for quite rumination before the verdict on Federer is spilled. And it is sincerely hoped the verdict is positively disposed to the liking of the Swiss master.

For the sake of one of the greatest in the game, for the sake of one of the greatest grass-courters, for the sake of one of the greatest to excel on all types of surface, (mind you, Nadal may be the king of clay, but Federer is next in line) lets hope the Swiss is able to etch his way towards sixth Wimbledon, (that would make it 13 grand slams) inching his way closer to Sampras’ record.

New queen for the hearts

After the exit of Justin Henin, it does look as if the women's event has lost the grind. None of the matches could be deemed compelling or had the ability to confound the senses of an appreciable spectator, trying to sneak in some hair-raising, heart-thumping moments.
Gone are the fast-paced serve and volleys and the powerful groundstrokes hallmark of an exhilarating, adrenalin pumping round of play.
What exactly is a thrilling match?
A three-setter, peppered with service-breaks, assorted with court stabbing aces and iced with incisive winners. Unfortunately the tournament glaringly missed any of these intrinsic ingredients essential to juice up the game.
It was a tired-looking but spirited Safina, taking on a relatively fresh, Ana Ivanovic, who had an easy run enroute to her final stint on the red dirt.
The picture at Roland Garros was akin to mud on fire. The scorecard reading 6-4, 6-3 was indicative of a smug win over a waning spurt of spirit, notwithstanding the seventh successive women’s final divested off those gurgling moments of climactic exhilaration.
The game did look to be precariously treading the path of a one-sided washout, if it weren't for some remnants of those flashes of rallying brilliance that egged Safina to win her previous two matches.
Visions of those earlier matches did forge the hope that she might just about find her bearings sooner than later. But it was too much to ask.With Henin abdicating the French Open throne, Roland Garros may have a prettier, more glamourous queen, and the sports promoters may be revelling at the prospect of shuttling between a blonde (Sharapova) and a brunette (Ivanovic). But what remains to be seen is whether quality in looks can be matched by quality in play.

Together they made an unassailable pair.
When they trotted on to the court to take on the lesser or greater fancied mortals on the other side, it was an
occasion of unfabricated joy for many a Indians.
At last here were two, who could keep the Indian flags flapping in those Grand Slams. Hard, grass, clay they excelled on all.
Their fascile understanding of eachother's game, rhythmic placement of shots and confident bodylanguage made them the indomitable force in the world of tennis.
Like brothers in arms they etched their way into the Indian tennis annals.
But what went wrong?
Success can make you thankful or wilful.
somwhere down (up) the line, they seem to have lost the zest to make fruitful use of eachother's adroitness.
When two are so much made for each other why would they want to part ways just when everything seemed to fit like a cog.
Whatever their personal differences of 'opinion' it is of no concern to the tennis afficianados as long as it
doesn't diffuse onto the tennis courts.
But that is precisely the state of matter.
Indian fans have but become accustomed to a repetitive design. Everytime before the start of a prestigious
tournament, where the country's tri-colours are at stake, it has become a pattern for one or the other to vent their purported dislike for each other in overt ways such that tread the path of vituperative purgation.
First it was the revolt against Leander Paes' captaincy, stolidly supported by Mahesh Bhupathi.
Second, few days before the Davis Cup tie with Japan, it was Leander's emphatic revealation of how he sacrificed his supposedly flowering singles career to mentor and uplift a relatively dormant rookie, Bhupathi.
But then again the pair surprised everyone with their inviolable play and soon the episode was washed off the
public consciousness for some time at least.
Now, months before the Olympics is bracing to heave itself on the willing spectators, Bhupathi has gone all
out to express his apparent displeasure about teaming with Paes.
As loving spectators of tennis or for that matter any sport, we expect at least a scintilla of respectability from our players.
It is totally unbecoming of senior players to water their discontent in public, at a time when the country's only medal hope sits enceinte on their reliable shoulders.
What's the use of nurturing ambitions when one is unable to adhere to the basic spirit of sport.
After being in the sport for so long, having tasted their share of delightful successes together and 'untogether', it is time they mould their vims towards the development of the sport.
Their disgruntled attitude and public painting of sour relations are of late edging on the irksome.
On the part of the All Indian Tennis Association it's better they give the players free rein to choose their discerning ways, rather than coercing them in to an apathetic union.
As for the Olympics, even if we do snap a medal, it will always be remembered as one won with a bitter taste.

A 19 year-old girl barely 5" 5 and a half inches tall. The lady exuded an arcane aura that left many guessing what nestled deep in the cockles of her heart.

Justine Henin, all of 25, decided to throw in the towel at an age when some of the greatest sport stars were in their full bloom. Citing no specific reason, Justine Henin quit, when she felt her life goals have taken a diversion, where tennis was no longer in the scheme of things.

Henin is the first woman in tennis to call it quits, while still sitting pretty on topmost rung of the WTA. At the press conference she convened, Henin announced stoically, "I'm at the end of the road. This is the end of a child's dream." "I started thinking about (retirement) late last year," she said. "I was at the end of the road. I leave with my head held high."

It's a pity though. Women's tennis has lost one of its biggest challenges. A lady known for her ravaging backhands, this jolting departure leaves a deep void on the tour. None of the other women players seem to have the wares to become a dominant force. The top 10 itself has just about four players who have won a Grand Slam. Others rest on the points garnered through ATP titles. Biggest example is Jelena Jankovic.

When it came to Henin at least you knew you could look forward to a "pretty" game as against those "pretty" faces. Powerful strokes, coalesced with clinical backhands and unerring serves.

She looked frail. It did look as if even a whiff of air was enough to uproot her from her place of chosen roost. But when she got moving, as those supposedly muscular limbs got on to their natural calling, those benign signs of possible capitulation seemed to wane.

However, it is a pretty spectre as a spectator enjoying those heart-thumps, when your favourite player is oozing liquid sodium out there, while you implore the ubiquitious overseer to help out for the smooth conduct of the proceeding of course heavily disposed to suit your sentimental yearnings.

But then it may be not be as pretty for the player out there. It may be deeper. Possibly it doesn't end with the victory. There is much more they yearn for.

If Henin is done with tennis, it is time we are done with Henin too. Of course she will be missed greatly. But then again it willl be for a month or two. A year at the most.

Soon she too will adorn the history books, placed among those discerning tennis masters, who did what mattered. A cute, small piece of history.