Simple insight into a inexplicable loss

Federer explained his loss in 3rd set to Tsonga at the 2009 Rogers cup as such:

“Well, I think I got off bad starts on all of my service games towards the end. I think I was down maybe Love 30 in each service game. That was a problem for me.
If I maybe just get off 15 Love, 30 15 kind of game, then things might look different, you know. But I didn’t, so I had to scramble each time and have to start playing safe a little bit, and that’s exactly kind of what he needed because otherwise I was just going to hand it over to him.
This way, you know, he made me work for it and he did well to come back. It’s not something I go through very often, being up 5 1 and ending up losing, get broken back to back after having not broken especially throughout the whole match.
It’s tough, you know, but you’re still in it with a chance. But in both tiebreaks I served horribly, and I guess that cost me the match in the end.”

Why I did quote him instead of giving my own theory (after all, I can also pretend to be a pundit, thanks to blogging paradigm!)? Simple: he explained my theory! Its key to have an edge in your service game when you are truly dominating in a match. Else, it opens the door for your opponent to claw his way back in. Towards this, the first 2 points on your service games are critical. Fed plunged on his first serve percentage and paid the price.

An economics concept simplified

Cost benefit analysis is a top decision-making tool in business world. While using it in terms of marginal benefits to costs comparison, it does have its share of intricacies. Here is one such intricacy, explained beautifully.

http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/03/why-my-wife-doesnt-cook-dinner/

Lightness of being

We talk of champions, their personalities, differentiating attributes etc. How about their aura? Where does that emerge from?


This is what Jim Courier had to say about Federer:
“Roger in the locker room is I think pretty unique in terms of players of his stature. I have several friends who are still playing on tour full time. They talk about Roger minutes before he’s playing a grand slam semi final. They’ll still be there playing doubles, and he’ll be listening to their ipods and asking them what their favorite new songs are. And this is literally minutes before he’s going out to play a prime time semi final grand slam match. . .Roger just has this very light energy around him. He’s not a tortured artist by any means. He’s someone who loves being around the courts. Loves hanging around tennis, loves talking tennis, loves being in this world. And it’s this very special lightness of being that I think the other players marvel at because he doesn’t show any mercy when he plays. But he knows how to make people feel comfortable around him. And for many, many years there were champions whose M.O. was to make everybody else uncomfortable. So it’s a very different energy that he brings to the table.“
Courtesy: http://www.gototennisblog.com/2009/07/30/edberg-chang-and-courier-on-the-tremendous-nadal-federer-era/

Think about that. Are we able to bring that to our professional settings? Should we aspire to for ourselves and our children?

Federer: What is he to society & our generation?

I had promised a follow up post to the Nadal blog...hmm...a few months back. The Sunday before (after French Open first week), I sat down to pen it and paused: should I not wait for the next Sunday? After all, world may see more of the phenomenon called Federer in those 7 days. Even, I did not expect the world to see so much in the last 7 days about this champion!

Champion, an over-used term in English... lets examine it in the sports context. I love sports since, it strips the weaker often-used human facades. We are often exposed for what we truly are, both in interactions and in values. Character. Sports professionals are able to build stronger facades, but as the stakes get higher, even those facades break down one by one. We start to tag the top performers in any sports profession as champions. Then, we get a bit more selective, in looking at the "extra ordinary performances over a period of time" and tag those associated. This is where media and critics and other pundits chip in, with additional criteria around who could be selected out of that elite group to next level. Then a human being or couple emerge out of that group based on their impact or truly extra-ordinary character. This is the space an Ali or Jordan occupies.

Lets look at Federer through these lenses. He is a top performer who has won 14 Slams, been world #1 for 237 consecutive weeks and is only the sixth man to win a career grand slam. Okay extra-ordinary tennis  performance by any measure in sports. Some pundits even tag him with "greatest of all time" and few more with "greatest of our era".  Can we now get a bit more selective? Lets talk about the attributes of the tennis game: A. Power - Fed has one of the best (arguably the best) & most versatile forehands that game has ever seen, a very powerful one-handed backhand, one of the most effective serves in the game; B. Movement & Skills - people who follow tennis swear by the fact that Fed has the most beautiful movement & touch that they have seen. Laver has gone on to say that its indeed unfair to have so much talent in one body; C. Stamina - Except in 2008, even the ring-side commentators have not seen him sweat or breathe hard in a 5 setter match. So much for tennis attributes, that could put him on par with the best on talent & hard work. Now comes the kicker: Federer has been to 20 consecutive Slam semi-finals. What is special about it? That is an astounding 5 years worth of Grandslam events where you have played against the best of the best "on form", not "on class or legacy". Players who are "hot on their current form" get to the subsequent rounds in Grandslams on the best-of-five format and meet the seeded players. As a player, Federer may have good days and bad days. But, to do this, even on bad days, you have to beat the "in form" players consistently without a SINGLE lapse. This is where, I believe, a true champion emerges and distances himself from the elite.

Now, lets go back to the term champion. What is Federer championing? With every single achievement, with every bit of his unlimited talent and hardwork, with his mental fortitude, with his love for the game, he is drawing the new lines of Tennis (or Sport itself). I can almost believe that Tennis can be played as an individual sport like Golf where your search for excellence is enough to make you a winner - opponents don't matter. I can believe that Tennis is a beautiful and elegant sport, played with grace. I can believe that Tennis at professional levels can be healthy on the human body while building the character. Great champions of the past & present have made contributions to some or other pieces of this. Never have we seen it whole.

To me that's the legacy that Federer champions.

Nadal and Federer: What are they to society? Part 1

As several of you have, I also have followed these 2 champions and their achievements for some years. I find myself compelled to pen my thoughts after the 2009 Australian Open final - a sports match that was more revealing of the champion personalities involved than their skills. Let me look at Rafa Nadal first.

I believe that there are 2 aspects of a personality that comes to fore when we analyze the impact of any sports champion over a period of time. The first has to do with his or her qualities as a competitor and second are the dominant values.

Quality as a competitor: This could be the "heart" of a Michael Jordan or the "sense of flair" of a Brian Lara. In the case of Nadal, I see him possessing relentless focus, seemingly superhuman physical abilities and never-say die attitude. This it to not trivialize his tennis skills - be it the forehand that puts 500 rpm more on a ball than the second best in business or the speed of footwork that allows him to cover the whole court from 8 feet behind the baseline at sub-second time frames. In a way, its a tribute to his perfection on the quality as a competitor. What is that quality? Its that of "challenger". He loves fighting and winning against someone above him. Playing this role allows every other quality of Nadal to tune in sync to meet the objective with perfection.

The below quote from Nadal as published in an article on from "The Australian" gives us a clear insight to this part of his psyche:
"I love the competition, not only in tennis, but I love the competition in all aspects of life," Nadal said. "When I compete I love to be there and fight always. Maybe I like more to fight for a win than to win."

In this respect, I suspect he owes more to Federer than even his Uncle Tony for achieving the close-to-perfection in tennis skills, which shall stand him in good stead for the years to come.

Now, does that cover him as a great champion? Not, by far. That is where the values come to the fore. I feel his values as a human being complement his "challenger" quality to create a great role model.
Lets peek into the values:
I would like to quote an excerpt from an interview of Nadal from TennisX.com:
------------

Q. After the victory of Wimbledon last year and after the victory of the hard court now, I guess you proved yourself as a true king from this moment. How do you think about that?

RAFAEL NADAL: Can you repeat the last thing only?

Q. You proved yourself as a true king.

RAFAEL NADAL: Oh, no, no. Well, the true, no. I don't know. I just win for sure an important title for my careera. But I no better five hours before than now, no? That's the true, no?

When you win an important match, but you have to know before the match who you are and after the match you have to know who you are, too. You are the same, no?

-------------
To me, Nadal's response above perfectly articulates his personal values. He is anchored in some of most cherished human values - humility and integrity. He is possibly a perfect role model for the children of our generation. Are we not fortunate to live in the times of Nadal...

I'll post on Federer in the second part to this.