The Sports Truth

He’s one of the only players to ever win three Grand Slams in one year, and he’s done it twice. He moves around the court and disassembles foes with breathtaking ease. Elite players raise their games and still can’t touch him. That said, the Sports Truth asks in its latest Face-Off:

Is Roger Federer Human?

YES

Ah yes, another cliché that’s used and abused in the world of sports media to the point where we’re now actually discussing whether Roger Federer is actually a human being or not. Certainly Mr. Federer, who dispatched Andy Roddick Sunday to win his third straight U.S. Open, has put together a run of tennis greatness that seems, well, inhuman.

However, simply because something has not been accomplished by a human before, does not mean that the feat itself is inhuman. By the definition, guys like Lance Armstrong, Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, or anyone who attains what was perceived to be unattainable should no longer be human.

Maybe it is Roger’s ability to play the game with absolutely no emotion — as if winning, losing, making an incredible shot or withstanding a crippling blow simply does not matter to him — that gives him the appearance of not being human.

Certainly even the most stoic human would eventually succumb to the pressure or emotion of the moment and reveal a soft, sensitive human beneath the concrete exterior, right?

Somehow Roger is able to remove himself from seemingly normal, inescapable stimuli and focus on his game, giving him an almost alien-like appearance.

Is this a sign of someone who is not of this world? Or rather is it the beginning of a revolution of athletes who remove all emotion from their play and focus on execution. Rather than argue that it is this quality that makes him not human, why not point out that it is his ability to contain his emotions that makes him so good?

Perhaps it is something as simple and Roger’s seemingly flawless game that makes him appear inhuman. All the talking heads discuss how Roger is the complete package with no shot he can’t make, nor one that is not his strength. Service, ground strokes, net play, return of service, offense, defense, chip shots, overhead smashes - they are all descriptions of Roger’s superb play.

Does this make Roger an extra-terrestrial, or someone who could turn out to be the greatest player of all time?

Apparently, it is difficult for us, error-prone human beings, to envision an athlete with no chinks in the armor nor cracks in the pavement of his game. Rather than simply believe that someone could perform at such a high level, we instead choose to take what we don’t understand and make it supernatural.

Is Roger Federer human? Of course. He walks, talks, breathes and bleeds, just like you and me. In fact, when he cut himself sliding on the hard court in Newport last summer, somewhere Tony Burton — he of the Rocky movies fame — could be heard screaming in his patented anguished face, “you see, you see, he’s not a machine, he’s a man!”

Federer is not only human, he’s got a long way to go before he’s even the best player ever.

While amazing in his recent accomplishments, Roger only has nine Grand Slams. He has a long way to go to match Pete Sampras’ incredible success. Sampras won seven Wimbledon titles alone, giving him a robust total of 14 Grand Slam titles. Roger would have to win five of the next eight Grand Slams, as he has done in 2005-2006, just to tie Pistol Pete.

Roger is an incredible player, no doubt, but he’s not even the greatest player ever, and that’s a very human trait.

– Lucas Dwyer

NO

On September 10, 2005, I was fortunate enough to be in attendance as Roger Federer, the world’s top-ranked tennis player, took on fourth-ranked Lleyton Hewitt in the U.S. Open semifinals. On paper, you’d think that two of the world’s top four stars, both of them past U.S. Open winners, would produce a competitive match, right? Wrong.

Despite his challenger’s early surge, the Swiss stalwart calmly seized the opening set, 6-3, and a 3-1 lead in the second. Hewitt wore a look of dejection, carrying a resignation that even his best efforts gave him no shot. As he prepared to futilely serve, a flag-waving Hewitt supporter in the nosebleed seats attempted to console and encourage his hero, bellowing:

“He’s just a man!!!”

Wishful thinking. While the statement made by this intoxicated Australian hooligan was clearly well-intentioned, I could not help but ponder its legitimacy. Is Federer, the most dominant performer that tennis — or any other sport — has seen in recent memory, even a human being?

Tennis like he has displayed in the past three years has rarely, if ever, been equalled. His record in 2005? 81-4. In 2006? 70-5. He has failed to reach the semifinals only twice in the last 14 Grand Slam singles events, of which he has won nine.

At age 25, Federer has already collected more career Grand Slam titles than all but five others. He’s been #1 in the world for 137 weeks as of this posting, with at least another 15 more assured. Jimmy Connors’ record 160 will surely fall in early 2007.

This could go on a lot longer if we were so inclined, but you get the gist. Absorbing these eye-popping statistics and witnessing him destroy the world’s top players time after time without appearing to break a sweat has led me to a shocking, yet undeniable conclusion.

Roger Federer is a cyborg.

Think about it. His game has no weakness. Federer is agile and in superb physical condition. He’s got great first and second serves. He is as deadly from the backhand side as with his forehand. He volleys well. He blends power with finesse, and turns strokes that most professionals would be lucky to merely return into winners.

Watching him effortlessly deploy these weapons is a joke, especially when he decides he will really assert control over a match. Even Pete Sampras, he of the record 14 Grand Slam crowns, could be worn down, especially on slower surfaces. There is no answer for Federer’s game. Andre Agassi, after falling to Federer in the 2005 U.S. Open final, conceded as much, calling Federer “the best he has ever competed against.”

There’s a reason for that, Andre. Federer is a machine created by the Swiss government.

Yes. He is the by-product of years of scientific innovation by a spiteful, wealthy European nation. Tired of being overlooked as a small, landlocked, politically neutral country for centuries, Switzerland developed this mechanized tennis prodigy in top-secret research labs in an attempt to grab a piece of the global spotlight.

It’s so obvious. Listen to Federer give an interview sometime. With a firm command of multiple languages, he will politely credit his opponents and modestly deflect attention from himself. So diplomatic. Almost too much so. It feels forced… robotic, even. The reason for his five losses this season, including the French Open final to Rafael Nadal?

Red herrings. Blips on the radar screen to throw us off. That, or the Swiss brain trust is still working out the bugs. Either way, there is clearly a plan in place, that being for Federer to usurp Sampras’ record and establish himself as the best to ever pick up a racket. This is a conspiracy.

– Michael Stephens

Posted in Face-Off, Roger Federer, Tennis