Roger Federer: Carving a legacy that defies time

It is over two decades since Roger Federer first stepped on to Centre Court and showcased the greatest act of seduction tennis has ever seen. July 2001. A talented but untested teenager in the white heat of a Grand Slam battle. On the other side of the net stood Pete Sampras, the greatest grass-court gunslinger of them all, with a menacing serve and volleys as crisp as a hard candy shell.

The American had won seven of the previous eight Wimbledons and more Grand Slams than anyone else, yet such was the audacity of Federer's shot-making in his epic fourth-round victory that he quickly held the crowd in the palm of his hand.

Sampras gave the equivalent of a papal blessing to the deceptively slender, preternaturally determined, ponytailed 19-year-old Federer. "There are a lot of good players coming up, and Roger is one of them," he said. "But I think he is a little more extra special than the other guys." And so it proved. In the many years that passed by.

It took a further two years for him to win his first Grand Slam, at Wimbledon in 2003, but he soon dominated the game like no other, on and off the court. A certain beauty, grace, and sophistication existed unique to Federer's game. He successfully transformed tennis into an art form, seemingly inventing shots on the fly. The way he would go about contorting his body each time to hit serves or snap his wrist to unleash his demonic forehand looked so effortless because of his masterful execution.

With a quick pitter-patter of his nimble feet, he would almost hover above the court. I seem to think that in another life, he would probably give Fred Astaire a run for his money on the dance floor, who knows! He is one of the most romanticised athletes ever to walk the earth's surface, and it is easy to see why.

Beyond the genius shot-making and overwhelming success, he has swayed spectators with his charming persona. On the court, you see a player who is icy cool even in the face of pressure that would make others crack. And his affable, down-to-earth personality makes him someone easy to adore without limits. Perhaps those traits are what still make him so beloved. Even 10 months after he hit the hay.

At this juncture, some might even point to Rafael Nadal and talk about his dominance over Federer. Sure, the persistent thorn in his side arrived in the form of Nadal more often than not, the ferocious bull who has frazzled Federer over the years with his lefty game and clay-court wizardry. In 2006 and 2007, Nadal beat him in six finals. Two of those losses came at the French Open, keeping the Swiss maestro from winning a calendar Grand Slam both years.

Also Read: Roger Federer reveals hilarious incident when a fan mistook him for Rafael Nadal

A straight-set shellacking at the hands of Nadal in the 2008 Roland Garros final raised many eyebrows and escalated Federer's malaise. Never before had he been so thoroughly outplayed; it was an ignominious day for the man who is obsessed with perfection.

At Wimbledon, Federer had beaten Nadal in the last two finals, including a five-set thriller the year before.

Whereas Nadal owned the clay, Federer dominated the grass. When the two met again in the 2008 final, Federer was expected to continue those trends.

Thanks to an exhilarating match that many regard as the greatest in tennis history, Nadal finally toppled Federer and gained control of the throne. Wimbledon was supposed to be his salvation, instead, it became Federer's nightmare as he watched his younger foe steal his crown and the No. 1 ranking. His tailspin ended with a fifth-straight title at the U.S. Open. It was a ribbon on an otherwise disappointing season.

Federer with Djokovic (Pic: AFP)

The following year, he reasserted himself by appearing in all four Grand Slam finals, winning his maiden (and sole) French Open title and a dramatic Wimbledon victory over Andy Roddick. Yet painful five-set losses - to Nadal at the Australian Open and Juan Martin del Potro at the U.S. Open - was symbolic of a Federer whose invincibility had long since faded.

His virtuoso dismissal of Andy Murray in the 2010 Australian Open final served as a turning point in his career. While he seemed destined to extend his prime with that victory, Federer instead entered a new era, one fraught with more fleeting moments of brilliance.

When he arrived at that year's French Open, Federer had astoundingly reached the semifinals of the last 23 Grand Slam events. That streak came to a sudden end when big-hitting Robin Soderling took him out on a damp and gloomy day in the quarterfinals.

Similar results soon followed.

An exit in the quarterfinals of Wimbledon to Tomas Berdych meant Federer spent the championship Sunday at home for the first time since 2003. Ditto for the U.S. Open, where he blew two match points against Djokovic in the semifinals. He had lost further ground to a younger rival.

Since his Aussie triumph in 2010, Federer had advanced to the finals in three of the last 22 major events he has entered. That is a stark contrast to the previous period, where he somehow wound up in 17 of 19 Grand Slam championship matches.

A turn-back-the-clock moment occurred when he defeated Djokovic and Murray in succession for the 2012 Wimbledon crown. To date, however, it remains his only major title in the last five years.

Legacy is the key word looming over Federer everywhere he goes.

Nadal gets emotional on Federer's farewell (Pic: AFP)

His 10-23 record against Nadal is a substantial negative on his resume. But at age 37, Nadal is in the midst of a career crisis much more severe than anything Federer has ever experienced even at his lowest points. Whether or not Nadal will actually overtake Federer's major haul is firmly up in the air.

Djokovic, with 23 Grand Slam titles, is charging fast at both of them. Before all is said and done, it's conceivable he could finish near the top of the list. His level of dominance right now (from a win-loss standpoint) is in the same ballpark as what Federer engineered in his heyday.

However, for all his technical precision and machine-like destruction of opponents, Djokovic still doesn't possess that same awe-inspiring factor Federer did. The Serb smothers you with his consistency, whereas the younger Federer played a brand of tennis that really can't even be adequately described with words.

It is tantalising to argue over which player is the best of all time. And several people have a legitimate stake in that moniker.

But as amateur 'analysts' with our macro-level view of the game, we risk missing out on individual talent. That Wimbledon loss shouldn't diminish Federer's place in the annals of the sport. Rather, it should make us cherish all that he had to offer over these years. He has given us more than enough.

Take the Laver Cup for example. Nothing can beat the immensely powerful image of Nadal in tears over the retirement of his greatest rival, perhaps, it was stark proof of the impact that Federer has had on men's tennis.

To the extent that it keeps throwing up a set of quirky questions: If Federer wasn't Federer, would Nadal be Nadal after all? And then, would Djokovic be Djokovic? The fact that these men are still pushing each other so hard stems from their initial desire to dethrone Federer. Time and again.