The Other A-Rod
Posted: July 6th, 2009 | Filed under: Other Sports | 55 Comments »
I have never had many feelings about Andy Roddick. It always seemed to me that there are athletes you love and athletes you despise, athletes you respect and athletes you fear, athletes who can turn games into beautiful events and athletes who can turn your stomach inside out because you so badly want them to lose. And these are the ones you remember.
Take A.J. Pierzynski. Please. He has been a pretty-good-to-good player in his 12 seasons in the big leagues. His Baseball-Reference comps are Terry Kennedy, Tony Pena, Todd Walker — very solid players. But as far as I know, nobody loved or hated those guys as players. Pierzynski, meanwhile, moves the Love/Hate Balance needle. They boo him in Kansas City even though, as far as I know, he’s never said or done anything specifically to Kansas City. As far as I know the only current baseball players who routinely get booed in Kansas City are:
1. Johnny Damon — leftover bitterness from those days when the Royals felt compelled to traded him.
2. Derek Jeter — probably because he’s glamorous and represents New York and he’s just something else Kansas City cannot have.
3. Tony Pena Jr. — because he can’t hit.
4. A.J. Pierzynski.
A.J.P. is like the baseball version of Bill Laimbeer — you hate him because he’s annoying and almost every game he will do something that will get under your skin. As his manager Ozzie Guillen said in his inimitable way: “If you play against (A.J.), you hate him. If you play with him, you hate him a little less.”
But this gets to the point: There are those players — the bulk of players — who don’t get booed or cheered. They are just there, in the middle, the other people in the crime lineup. Look at those A.J.P. comps. Terry Kennedy was a good player — a four-time All-Star — but when you search “Terry Kennedy” on Google, you get a full page of links to:
1. Someone’s MySpace page.
2. A Wikipedia Entry on Terry Kennedy the skateboarder.
3. Some YouTubes of Terry Kennedy the skateboarder.
4. More links about Terry Kennedy the skateboarder.
5. “Terry Kennedy’s web page” which links some 19th century books on tunneling in New York
6. A collection of suggested Terry Kennedy searches, the first one being “terry kennedy in jail.”*
*Apparently this is Terry Kennedy the skateboarder again.
When you finally get to Terry Kennedy the baseball player’s Wikipedia page you are informed that he was “known for not wearing batting gloves.” Really? That’s it? A man dedicates his life to the game, becomes a college baseball star, gets drafted with the sixth overall pick, makes his way through the minors, gets traded, makes the All-Star team his first full year, is the main catcher for two World Series teams … and people will come up to him and say: “Hey, aren’t you the guy who didn’t wear batting gloves?” That’s what it’s all about?*
*On the other hand, wezen-ball points out that another comp, Tony Pena, had the single most average season in baseball history in 1984 … so he’s got that going for him.
But that’s the plight of most athletes … I always like the introductions at the All-Star Game — not to hear the players who get the loudest cheers or the wildest boos but to catch those who get neither, the players the fans give that most tepid cheer that really says, “I have potentially heard of you.”
Now, I am not speaking for anyone else — but Andy Roddick was in this netherworld for me the last few years. I was, of course, plenty aware of him, knew all about his monster serve and knew that he was with SI cover model Brooklyn Decker — apparently he saw her in SI and had his agent set them up.* I had seen him play lots of times, saw him win the U.S. Open in 2003. I once went out to a team tennis event to interview him, and for some reason or other the interview never happened, which was probably just as well because I probably didn’t have anything I especially wanted to ask him. I did sit in on a few Roddick press conferences at various events, and they were perfectly uneventful. As brilliant readers point out: There are some better ones on YouTube.
*I actually have an agent too — a literary agent. As far as I know, he doesn’t set up clients with supermodels, but maybe as a happily married guy I’ve just not been asking the right questions.
Point is, though, that while I was fully aware of him, I never had any feelings about him — positive or negative. He might be a nice guy or not. He might be a talented player who did not live up to his ability, or a limited player with a big serve who maximized his game — I never really knew and didn’t especially care to guess. I did not root for him or against him when he played. He was just a guy to me. I don’t mean that to sound harsh — think of the (at least) 80 people on the PGA Tour who you don’t care one bit about.* That’s about how I felt about Roddick. He’s interesting and charismatic, but you can’t make yourself care about an athlete any more than you can make yourself love William Faulkner or Charlie Parker if their words and music don’t speak to you. I’ve never wished him well or ill, he was background music for me.
*If I had to pick a golfer who was the best comp for my feelings about Roddick it would be Sergio Garcia. He won, he lost, he dated Martina Hingis, he did beer commercials … whatever.
All of that changed on Sunday, though. Funny thing, Sunday morning — for the first time in more than five years — I went out and played tennis with friends. That sparked quite a few emotions (one of those being an emotion called “back pain” — it still hurts, tennis at 42 is not like tennis at 36).
I used to be a moderately good tennis player — had a big and inconsistent serve, pretty good hands, and I could hit a variety of shots (though keeping them in was a whole other story). I was — and I realize now that I’m getting into preposterously boring self-scouting on my tennis … but this does fit in somewhere — I was one of those players who looked really good in practice. People would watch me warm-up — or they would be on the other side of the warm-up — and at that moment they thought I was REALLY good. But I wasn’t REALLY good. I was a good wall player — I could hit against a wall really well. I was a good machine player — I could hit with authority against a tennis machine. I was a good warm-up player because I could always hit one or two good shots that looked completely out of place.
But I was not so good in games because opponents had this nasty habit of not hitting the ball waist high at the proper speed.*
*Once I was in a match, and I was serve and volleying, and I hit a serve long. The guy hit a brilliant return down at my feet, and I put the racket behind my back and hit what would have been a clear winning volley through my legs. My opponent was stunned — called it the single greatest shot he had ever seen in his entire life. He then beat me like 6-2, 6-2.
In any case, I was absolutely awful starting out on Sunday. But slowly, very slowly, I started to get a little bit of my game back. It felt good, a bit like I was a kid again hitting balls against the brick wall outside the Harris Teeter shopping center in Charlotte. Of course, I wasn’t hitting the ball as hard or as accurately or as consistently or, you know, over the net much of the time. But just playing tennis again brought back those memories when I believed, really believed, that I was going to be the next McEnroe, the next Lendl, the next Borg. I really thought I was going to be a professional tennis player. I lost my baseball dream before I entered high school. I clung to my ludicrous tennis dream for a little longer.
By the time I got home Sunday afternoon, I already knew that Roger Federer had beaten Andy Roddick in five sets and that the fifth seat was 16-14. But I had recorded it, and I wanted to watch a little bit — since this was the match where Federer broke the grand slam record. I wanted to watch some — instead, I watched all of it. I found it mesmerizing and not all for the reason I expected. Some time early in the first set, I (quite unexpectedly — I would call myself a Federer fan) I found myself connecting with Roddick. It’s hard to explain, really … it isn’t that I associated my own tennis game with Roddick because I did not. Yes, sure, every so often I see a player and think “THAT is who I would be if I had real athletic talent.”* But Roddick is not that guy — not even if you multiply my game by a million.
*Duane Kuiper, of course, was the player who best represented this feeling for me, but I’ve also felt that way about NBA guard John Bagley, golfer David Toms and a pitcher like Brian Bannister, which probably best explains why I have written more words about Banny than J.K. Rowling wrote about Harry Potter.
No, the connection came from something else — I think it came from a theme that I find constantly and endlessly fascinating. That is: The theme of ordinary people reaching for their moment. Most of my favorite books, favorite sports moments, favorite movies (and many of the movies that I found myself loving despite myself), revolve around that theme. I unabashedly love the flawed movie “The Fabulous Baker Boys” — not entirely because of the mega crush I had on Michelle Pfeiffer but also because I’m mesmerized by the idea of those talented people who play piano at hotel bars night after night, people who had to settle low but who still hope against hope that something big might still happen. I watch “It’s A Wonderful Life” every year, not for the Christmas feel of it or that but because I feel so deeply with George Bailey who just wants to get the heck out and do something but he can’t because … he can’t. The original Rocky. The Full Monty. Waking Ned Devine. The Hustler — especially the Hustler.
One of my favorite sporting events ever is Buster Douglas’ upset over Mike Tyson … and not just because I hated Tyson (I don’t know that I really DID hate Tyson then) but because Douglas got his one chance, his moment, and in that moment he was greater than anyone ever believed he could. Another was Rulon Gardner beating the unbeatable Russian at the Olympics. This stuff just hits me.
Andy Roddick is not George Bailey. He’s not ordinary. He’s the No. 6 tennis player in the World. He’s a multi-multi-millionaire tennis player married to a swimsuit model. He hops around the world and hosts Saturday Night Live and probably wouldn’t even want to win the lottery because of the tax complications.
But here’s the thing: He wanted to win Wimbledon. I mean, yes, of course he wanted to Wimbledon, but you could see from the first point on that he WANTED to win Wimbledon, that it was hugely important to him, that it was everything to him, — you could surmise from his look and intensity that this was, in fact, what he had been dreaming about since he was a little boy. This was his moment, and few really thought he could win. As soon as the match began — Andy Roddick facing off against maybe the greatest tennis player ever on his favorite surface — I felt like it was Roddick staring into the mirror and asking himself that same question that I think most people ask themselves at some point in their lives: “Am I good enough?”
And he was good. He was very, very good. Federer is a beautiful tennis player who hits so many brilliant and impossible to reproduce shots that the opponent, at some point, goes, “Oh, geez, what’s the point?” I think this is why Rafael Nadal (and Nadal alone) has had success against Federer; he doesn’t care about those beautiful shots.
And I think Roddick psyched himself up to not led Federer’s splendor blind him on this day. He won the first set by breaking Federer (in rather stunning fashion) and he had Federer on the ropes in the second set. It was, in fact, a shot late in the second set that brought me entirely over to Roddick’s side … he was serving at set point, and he charged the net, and Federer was out of position and hit a high shot to Roddick’s backhand. It was not an easy volley — certainly not for anyone less than world class. But it was a volley that Roddick could have put away. It was a volley, I imagine, Roddick will see in his mind again.
He missed that volley, of course, Federer won the second and third sets, Roddick showed guts and won the fourth, and then it came down to that massive fifth set with neither player able to break the other’s serve. It wasn’t especially glamorous tennis — not like last year’s match between Federer and Nadal — but it was ultra-compelling not (as I expected) because of Federer’s chase for his 15th Grand Slam but because of Roddick’s desperate chase to beat Federer on Centre Court and be the best in the world just this one time.
And the chase became more and more desperate as the games went along. Even though I knew all the while that Roddick would lose at the end, I kept hurting with him especially in the final games when it was clear that while he might hold off Federer (and he did hold serve TEN STRAIGHT TIMES with the match on the line) he would never actually beat this beast. Federer’s last few games were ace after ace after ace, he was in complete control. At some point, the realization had to hit Roddick (like it hit everyone who was watching) that he was only postponing the inevitable. He was not going to win Wimbledon.
That point was the 30th game of the final set. Federer did not hit a single great shot in that game. He simply put the ball in play. And Roddick — who had been so great for so long — made errors and lost the match.
When it ended, Roddick looked like a broken man. And I could feel that pain with him — couldn’t we all? He was damned good. He was probably better than he had ever been in his life. And he wasn’t quite good enough. Isn’t that the saddest thing about sports? Isn’t that the feeling that we all have at that point when we realize that we won’t play big league ball, we won’t be an NFL starting quarterback, we won’t be on the 18th green putting to win the Masters. I remember playing someone on a high school tennis court, losing convincingly and then doing the math: If I wasn’t good enough to beat this guy (and I wasn’t good enough), and he wasn’t even the best player on the team (not even the second best) and our team wasn’t that good just in our community (our team wasn’t good at all) and Charlotte, N.C., wasn’t exactly a tennis mecca and some of the best tennis players nationally weren’t even PLAYING high school tennis, they were already out on junior tours or even professionals … well, wow, I wasn’t good enough.
Roddick stared out at the court, and he seemed to be on that aqueduct between crying and bravado, and then he said a few words — congratulated Federer, thanked the fans, all that. Then Federer, trying to be a gentleman like always, tried to compare Roddick’s feelings of loss to his own one year earlier when he had lost to Nadal. Roddick was not having any of it: “Yeah,” he said, “but you had already won five times.” Federer smiled and repeated the line without a terrible amount of sympathy. There was no way Federer could understand.
But I felt like I did understand. I really like Andy Roddick now. On Sunday at Wimbledon, he offered that rare fan feeling: He made me feel like we had been through something together. Roddick is still 26, and he still has that serve, and he will probably win a lot more money and big championships — he still might win Wimbledon someday. Then again, he might not. I thought of this conversation I had with a coach once — I asked him if he believed there were lessons to be learned in losing.
“Yeah,” he said. “Get better.”
And I wish I would asked him then if there were lessons to be learned if you couldn’t get better, if you had been your very best and that still was not good enough. I suspect his answer would have been simple: “Yeah,” he would have said. “Get used to it. Because that’s life.”
Loading ...
What another beautifully written article. It’s strange as, even though I live in the UK, which for these last two weeks of the year, is utterly obsessed with tennis, the experience you had was the same for me. I missed the game and, although I recorded it, I had found out the result before I watched the recording; but rather than watch the 45-minute highlights that evening, I watched the entire 4 and a half hour match. I wouldn’t call myself a particular Roddick or Federer fan, but I did appreciate the latter’s utter genius on a grass court. But I felt exactly the same way for Roddick as you did. And I wanted him to win every point, even if I knew he wouldn’t.
I find I have strong anti feelings for players who are clearly overrated… and there are a lot.
Yikes, Joe, that depressed me quite a bit.
Shades of Harvey Haddix. Andy essentially pitched a perfect game deep into overtime but walked off with the loss. But championships wouldn’t mean so much if only scrubs couldn’t win them. Championships are so rare that even brilliance may not suffice to get you one.
That’s not depressing, I don’t think. It’s bittersweet, true. But it is life.
My wife likes to joke about what the coach says when he goes out to visit the pitcher in trouble. She opens her mouth, pauses for effect, and intones intensely, “pitch better.”
It’s funny, because it’s sad.
Roddick once helped save several people in a burning hotel. Always seemed like a good guy.
i don’t know if you’ve seen the new tyson documentary, but i have to admit it pretty much singlehandedly turns my hate for mike tyson into strange adoration.
While I was watching the match (I only saw the fifth set, though that was about 40% of it), I was thinking that Roddick is still young enough to win it. Then I looked it up and found that he is a whole year younger than Federer. And Nadal is a few years younger than Roddick. Ouch.
Buster Douglas. Probably the biggest upset of them all, considering Tyson’s stature in boxing at that point. I worked in the sports department of a fairly large newspaper for many years, and so I saw quite a few big sports moments while there, including the Gibson homer off Eckersley. None came close to the reaction when Douglas knocked out Tyson. It was bedlam, almost like being at the arena.
I just find it kind of striking that you harbor no feelings toward Andy Roddick and Sergio Garcia when they’re two of the more prominent and/or divisive players in their respective sport. Roddick’s the media star who did the SI cover, SNL, etc, and Garcia’s got a rep as a really detestable guy on the tour. It just seems like there’re plenty of guys that would be more likely to inspire apathy.
I’m guessing Woods will win the poll against Federer. Why? I’m not sure; maybe because he’s a bigger star in America, maybe because he has a seemingly more intriguing person history. But I’m voting for Federer. Both gold and tennis have four majors; Woods has won 14 since 1997, Federer 15 since 2003. Woods is 33, and still behind Nicklaus all time; sure, I think he’ll eventually break the record, but Federer has already done so at 27. In the last five years, Federer has *never* not made it to the semi-finals or better. Mind boggling doesn’t describe that. I guess because of a golfer’s longevity, Tiger could eventually has more major titles, but dominance gives the implication of peak performance to me, and I’ll take Federer here.
Great read and I found myself feeling the same way. The worst part about that volley you spoke of is that it was his FOURTH set point. Roger was serving on the first two, but he had two chances to put it away on his serve and he didn’t convert. That shot Federer hit had a lot of spin on it, but he’ll play it in his mind the rest of his life. The fact that he even came back from that is pretty remarkable.
Kirk: There’s obviously a big difference in that in tennis you play against one person at a time and in golf you play against the entire field for four straight days. And the gap between the best and worst golfer in the field is much much smaller than the gap between the best and worst tennis player, that’s the nature of the two games. I haven’t done the math, but I’d wager that Tiger’s win %, in the context of golf is just as impressive as Federer’s win % in tennis.
I felt the same way, Joe. I started watching and started subconciously pulling for Roddick, and by the 4th set I was absolutely behind him. I also felt Federer lost a lot of his “normal guy” image when he put on that jacket embroidered with a “15″ on the back and had filmed that NetJets commercial beforehand in case he won. I hope Roddick takes him in the next major they play against each other.
Jojobebop, I would’ve agreed with you a couple of days ago and voted for Tiger, but I saw a comment that turned my opinion around. In tennis, Federer can’t afford to have an off-game. One bad game, and you’re out; there’s no chance to make it up the next day. Whereas, it was pointed out, Tiger can hit a few over par on one day and make it all back the next day with a spectacular game and go on to win the tournament.
For what it’s worth, Roddick has become the best post-match press conferencer in tennis, maybe all of sports (provided it’s not immediately after a career-defining loss).
He’s pretty quick on his feet and not afraid to get into discussions ranging from Novak Djokovic to Rick Astley.
Fave moment from an earlier round:
Q: You can get arrested in this country for having Rick Astley on your iPod.
Andy Roddick: You can get arrested in my country for lying under oath.
Federer may have won Wimbledon but Roddick clearly has a much better agent.
As Tina said, there are many Andy Roddick interviews and pressers worth checking out. Here’s one that really brings home the tragic situation he finds himself in, as discussed in your article:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGiSrj97txc
He also does some killer imitations:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siGkV-R80JM
At one point when I was a kid, I wanted to write for Sports Illustrated. If I had become a sportswriter, I’d have to compare myself to you, Joe. And you would win. And I would feel like Roddick, giving my best and finding it’s not good enough. So I’m glad I never became a sportswriter. And I’m glad you never became a tennis pro. Because now I can simply admire your considerable talent.
Nothing against Roddick, who seems like a perfectly good guy, but as scrappy underdogs go he isn’t exactly Rocco Mediate.
I don’t really see anything bittersweet in this match. Isn’t Roddick supposed to be in Grand Slam finals? This is a guy who has been pretty candid in saying there have been times in his career when he just didn’t work very hard.
I do think he’s a likable guy but I’m surprised at how many people have cast this match as David vs. Goliath. Seems more like Goliath against a guy who also could have been Goliath but didn’t do it.
The match was clearly compelling, and quite a follow up to last year’s classic.
But the post-match stuff was compelling, too. But also dissappointing.
* Federer seemed incredibly hesitant to give Roddick credit for a great match. He didn’t credit Roddick for forcing him to raise his game. He didn’t say “I had to serve that well just to stay in the match.” Though soft-spoken, it was a remarkably classless performance. He didn’t talk trash, no. But instead ignored Roddick’s existence and play as much as possible.
I understand that Federer is an emotional guy, so the crying last year and the jumping up and celebrating this year don’t bother me at all. But the interviews and other post-match stuff — at least the stuff on TV — inexcusable.
* The HBO crew was stuck on their script. They clearly were confident that Federer would win, thereby setting the men’s record for Grand Slam singles titles. They focused on Federer’s career accomplishment without really discussing the wonderful match as they should have. I understand the importance of the career aspect, but that can be celebrated for years. The match itself was the event of the day, and deserved more on Sunday.
* Over and over again they spoke of Federer setting the record for Grand Slam titles. But it was never true, and not even close to true. Martina Navratilova still has 48 more grand slam titles than Federer has. He has 15? Well, she has 63. That’s not even close!
Oh, you think that’s unfair to count doubles and mixed doubles? Well, I think you are wrong, but I’ll go with you for now. She still has 3 more Grand Slam singles titles than Federer does. 15 might be impressive, but 18 is more impressive. And let’s seal this point with the French. She won it twice, and didn’t make people wait for it. Moreover, she beat her rival there, rather then just being lucky enough to duck her.
He’s a fine fine player, and perhaps the best male ever. But he does not hold the record for Grand Slam titles. It’s too bad that the HBO crew couldn’t get that fact straight.
* I do not think that I’ve ever seen a player with the expression on his face that Roddick had. It was a clear, “Man, I *hate* that guy.” Clearly, sick of losing to him. He should have beat him, he broke him twice as many times, playing far better on break points. He was must have known that that was a well as he could play. And he still couldn’t win. “Man, I hate that guy.”
************************
I was pulling for Roddick, but this match and aftermath did not make me love him. It did make me feel for him, however. It’s like he is one of the great NBA players who couldn’t beat Jordan when their primes coincided. What more could he have to do? Sometimes, greatness is a result of timing — rather than skill, ability or work ethic.
It did make me think quite a bit less of Federer, however.
Nice work, Joe. Doing that math is never fun, but pretty much everybody realizes that they’re not the best sooner or later.
Roddick mishandled a ball prior to a serve during the 2nd set tie-break or immediately following that tie break. Nerves? Probably, but when he did that I had two quick thoughts. 1. Andy’s not going to beat Federer today. 2. I think I like this guy – He’s damn nervous, as he should be.
This was my favorite piece I’ve ever read by you. (and I’m a fan) When you are putting together the Joe Posnanski Anthology, this should definitely be featured.
“I was a good wall player — I could hit against a wall really well.”
Reminds me of the Mitch Hedberg bit: “No matter how good I get at tennis, I’ll never be as good as a wall. That f**ker is relentless.”
Ceolaf @ 19: What HBO crew are you talking about? The match was on NBC. Did HBO do some kind of special on the match that has already aired?
I agree Federer was not as gracious to Roddick after the match as he ought to have been, but I also thought the BBC interviewer put him in a tough position by starting the interview by saying “I’m sure you want to pay tribute to your opponent.” That was incredibly awkward and it denied Federer the chance to a) start by celebrating hsi own achievement and b) compliment Roddick in a more genuine way.
To Mikey @ 18…Roddick is not a goliath. He was 2-18 against Federer going into the match because Federer is much, much better than him. Roddick has a great serve and a big forehand and little else.
A lot of unrealistic expectations have been foisted upon Roddick simply because he was the next American to come along after Agassi and Sampras. From Jimmy Connors in the early 70s through Agassi’s retirement in 2006, not only was there always at least one great American player on the scene who was a threat to win majors, there was always at least one playing who was (or would wind up as) one of the top 7 or 8 players in the history of tennis. We went straight from Connors and McEnroe to Agassi and Sampras. There was really no gap in between.
So Roddick got annointed as the next great American player, and he was the best of the next generation, but he’s not remotely close to Agassi or Sampras or McEnroe or Connors. Beginning in 2007 and now for the 3rd year, for the first time since before Jimmy Connors, there is no American on tour who is among the greatest players of all time. Roddick gets looked upon to carry that mantle but he’s just not as good as those guys.
Joe hit the nail on the head: Roddick was so broken after that match because it was the best he could ever play. And it wasn’t good enough to beat Federer.
It’s funny. I saw the movie Up last night, and I think in a lot of ways, Joe’s article reminds me of that movie. Both of them get at an essential point in life that all but a literal handful of people in the world come up against – that at some point, you have to submit and accept. It’s sad, and it’s bittersweet, but there is dignity to be found in this as well. As always, thank you, Joe.
I didn’t remember Federer’s post-match remarks as classless at all so I went back and checked the transcript.
Here’s what Federer said about Roddick:
“He did great. He’s not going to let his head hang down. He’s going to come back strong and play great in the States. I think it’s one of the best matches we played against each other. I really thought I had to play my very, very best to come through.”
What a jerk!
For those who wanted more compassion or humility from Federer after the match, I suspect that the sort of person who would exhibit that emotion so soon after competition is not the sort of person who could ever craft a career remotely like Federer’s, and vice-versa. We may want a person to have both qualities – ruthless in competition, gracious immediately thereafter – but I’m not sure it’s possible, particularly in an individual sport.
As for the Federer vs Woods poll, it does say “athlete”, right? Doesn’t that take golf out of the equation? I kid, but only a little.
Funny, I would say Tiger Woods and Roger Federer are two athletes who inspire nothing but apathy in me. Maybe I’m just more geared towards team sports and real sports (sorry golf). Either way, Federer ought to win the poll.
I cannot think of an odder choice for “person in his sport who inspires apathy in fans” than Sergio Garcia in golf. That to me says more about how interested you are in golf than about Garcia’s famously divisive persona.
I have only a passing interest in tennis, (men’s or women’s) though I find myself reading articles from time-to-time so can’t say I’ve never followed it.
I did not see the match, the highlights, nor press conference.
But this article by you Joe, is why you are one of the very best sportswriters.
you pull people in, envelope them in the subject, make them feel the humanity and sometimes the humility.
we’ve all wanted to be something more, often reaching but not getting there, and sometimes defeating ourselves.
To me when you bring the feelings into your stories and make us feel we are part of the event rather than just a spectator, then you’ve done a terrific job.
Thanks for writing.
[...] This, of course, is a little old, but Joe Posnanski on Andy Roddick. I missed the match, because I was driving from Savannah to Atlanta during the match. But I gotta [...]
“think of the (at least) 80 people on the PGA Tour who you don’t care one bit about.”
That would be every single one of them. Can’t stand golf, don’t give a rat’s hairy behind about anybody who plays the game.
Thanks for the link to Wezen Ball, Joe! The site’s new to me, and I think I’m about to be a very unproductive worker the rest of the afternoon, as I dig into the juicy goodness available there.
@mikey @ceolaf
Thank you, Mikey, for restoring a bit of accuracy to the comments. Federer is an extremely classy guy, by all accounts, and has been thoroughly patient and open with the media and his opponents his whole career. I can’t believe you found his performance “classless,” especially when he mentioned Roddick again and again – even when not specifically asked about him – during the press conference and during his Sunday Conversation with Chris Fowler on ESPN. Given that he’s unquestionably the greatest ever, I thought he handled the moment graciously enough. I would talk about myself a lot if I were constantly getting asked “what’s it like to be the best tennis player of all time?”
Roddick may win Wimbledon someday, but if he does, it will probably be less fulfilling in some deeper ways than this loss was on Sunday. He played one of the great matches in the tournament’s finals history, win or lose, and he knows this. No one will forget that match. When I think back to the 1980 final, it always takes me a few moments to remember who won, Borg or McEnroe. In years to come, it will be the same with last year’s Nadal-Federer final. And now we have Federer-Roddick. Andy Roddick gained more from that loss than he did from any win in his career.
Warren,
I’m afraid that’s not right. It /is/ true of McEnroe and Borg that sometimes I forget who won that one, because the dominant story there was the play. But not this time. I think I will remember vividly every Slam final Roger does not win for his career, and particularly every non-French Slam final he does not win (all one of them, right now).
McEnroe and Borg were both great, both among the best ever. Of course, sometimes McEnroe will win, sometimes Borg. The ‘rivalry’ of Federer and Roddick is not like that. Even if Roddick had won (and I wish Roddick had won, despite my Federer fanhood, for all the reasons Joe puts out), I would have remembered this match as the match that Roddick finally played well enough, finally had that moment of brilliance on the biggest stage that every competitor longs for, to /beat Federer/.
As it is, I will remember this match for two things: Roddick finally finding that singular moment of brilliance, and it being insufficient to overcome Federer.
Awesome job Joe! I’m not a big tennis guy, but I’ve always liked Andy. He’s a Husker and we Huskers have to stick together.
For me it was likely watching swimming or track events at the Olympics, in then end you have the guy/gal who finished 8th and they are always so far from winning. You know they have dreams and in that moment they have to be saying, “Phelps beat me by 9 seconds (or whatever). I can never make up that much time. Never.”
Joe,
Thanks for the column.
I enjoyed it, immensely.
Guillermo
Joe,
I have read your blog for a while, and while I have never read your newspaper column, I have to say:
I can’t imagine you have ever written something with a better feeling than this. This is life. Absolutely perfect.
I am sure you have matched this before, but it just seems impossible to connect more effectiviely.
Bravo.
One of your best in a really long time Joe.
I’ve been a staunch Roddick fan since 01 when I first saw him play. He’s had other matches like this, against El Aynaoui at the Australian Open in 03. He won that match though.
The point is, he plays the game the right way. He’s the closest to McEnroe I think we’re going to see emotion wise. He wears his heart on his sleeve and I honestly thought this would be the one he’d do it. His game has become so much more polished this year, he had a few disappointing exits but he was working on other parts of his game and not relying on his big forehand to win all the time.
I think, if they meet again at the US he’ll have what it takes to win. Then again, Nadal wasn’t here for this one, so my hopes for Andy to win another couple of slams are being dashed to bits.
I became an Andy Roddick fan when he did the commercial with Bill Kurtis for the fast internet connection–the look on his face when Bill Kurtis, hat backward, kisses the trophy is priceless, and showed in a split-second that he “gets it” and isn’t too full of himself.
[...] The Other A-RodI have never had many feelings about Andy Roddick. It always seemed to me that there are athletes you love and athletes you despise, athletes you respect and athletes you fear, athletes who can turn games into beautiful events and athletes who can turn your stomach inside out because you so badly want them to lose. And these are the ones you remember. Take A.J. Pierzynski. Please. He has been a pretty-good-to-good player in his 12 seasons in the big leagues. His Baseball-Reference comps ar [...]
Bill C. (24): You’re right. NBC. So much HBO all week that I got confused.
Mikey (26): Does that come from the televised immediate post match NBC stuff (i.e. the BBC thing on court and the McEnroe lovefest) or the post-match press conference? I was referring to former, not the latter.
[...] This post was Twitted by SIPabloTorre [...]
Jon Wertheim tweeted about this article, Joe. Glad he did.
“I remember playing someone on a high school tennis court, losing convincingly and then doing the math: If I wasn’t good enough to beat this guy (and I wasn’t good enough), and he wasn’t even the best player on the team (not even the second best) and our team wasn’t that good just in our community (our team wasn’t good at all) and Charlotte, N.C., wasn’t exactly a tennis mecca and some of the best tennis players nationally weren’t even PLAYING high school tennis, they were already out on junior tours or even professionals … well, wow, I wasn’t good enough.”
Boy, did this part ever resonate with me.
As a High School senior back in the mid 1970s in Massachusetts, I went to the States with my doubles partner, having finished #1 in our Conference with a 15-1 doubles record.
In the 2nd round we faced two guys from different nearby towns who were the #1 singles players for their High School teams. I figured our doubles savvy would surely get us through.
It was like being Sam Stosur and Reneé Stubbs vs. the Williams sisters. They killed us. That’s when I knew there was a heirarchy.
I got out to Caltech in the fall and ended up at #3 singles. (The fact that 2 geeks were better than me at tennis was already a sign.) We would go out and play small schools like La Verne and have battle royales where we would generally lose by 5-4 or 6-3. Then we would go out to play schools like UC Riverside and get completely annihilated, 9-0.
Later we found out that UC Riverside had benched their top 4 or 5 players against us, and still beat us 9-0.
Later still, we found out that when UC Riverside would go play UCLA, UCLA would bench *their* top 3 or 4 players, and still beat the crap out of UC Riverside by like 8-1 or 9-0.
That pretty much told me all I needed to know. I was never a threat to become the next Björn Borg.
[...] Joe Posnanski » Blog Archive » The Other A-Rod By Joe Posnanski My wife likes to joke about what the coach says when he goes out to visit the pitcher in trouble. She opens her mouth, pauses for effect, and intones intensely, “pitch better.” It's funny, because it's sad. 6: Richard said at 12:29 am on July 7th ….. Funny, I would say Tiger Woods and Roger Federer are two athletes who inspire nothing but apathy in me. Maybe I'm just more geared towards team sports and real sports (sorry golf). Either way, Federer ought to win the poll. … Joe Posnanski – http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/ [...]
Great article Joe. If you go back to the old web design, it should definitely be featured prominently (like the Tiger, Musial, Rulon Gardner posts.
ceolaf @ #19
Comparing a woman tennis player’s numbers with Federer’s is like comparing a minigolfer’s wins with Tiger Woods’.
Pointless.
I hate to say i think Joe has almost got me liking tennis…don’t tell my dad.
Joe: Splendid. While depressing. You captured the match, but even more you have captured the essence of childhood dreams. From winning the WS, to becoming president, to being awarded an Oscar… At some point reality crashes in, but as write, that is life.
And it is.
The one thing you don’t really address: I have to imagine there was part of you rooting AGAINST Federer as much as FOR Roddick. Federer and his monogrammed everything and his “15″ jacket and his wife who gets in a twist when the family sitting behind her has the audacity to root for her husband’s opponent. All that really bugs me.
And it’s not a David vs. Goliath thing. Pete was a monster, but he also had a blue collar, workmanlike vibe about him. And he seemed genuinely appreciative of the fans and the moment. Pete was a great that you felt good about rooting for. Federer seems more like a robot giving a pre-programmed address every time he thanks the crowd after a W.
And then there’s the crying when he loses. And not just the big ones. But, like, every darn time (which, granted, isn’t really all that often). Fed loves to cry about losing – he probably cries when he loses his car keys. Kinda like Bill Lambier when you think about it.
@jobu
I never felt all that good about rooting for Pete, actually. He had such a galling lack of charisma that I constantly felt kind of embarassed for him. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think athletes should measure up to my internal “charisma-meter” to be recognized for their greatness, but neither do I think that the snippy reactions of a seven-month-pregnant wife and a noticeable sense of on-court style are good reasons to critique The Fed.
I’m proud of the guy for not having a mistress, for showing humility when he wins (the balance of his interviews give credit to everyone – and his press conference and next-day interviews all praised Roddick incessantly), for giving such a damn about winning that he cries when he loses, and for being the greatest of all time. A “15″ monogram is better than a GOAT tattoo, anyway. (Maurice Green, anyone?)
Your SI colleague Jon Wertheim also posted a video of his pick for best all-time Federer shot (which, naturally, came against Roddick).
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/399489/roger_federers_best_shot_ever/
Imagine having seen play like this over 18 losses and still having the mental fortitude to come out as strong in the Wimby final as Roddick did.
Reminds me of Vitas Gerulaitas beating John McEnroe after losing to him the first 16 times they played, when he told the press, “Nobody beats Vitas Gerulaitas 17 times in a row!”
What a lovely piece – very well done.
(I was cheering for Roddick, too.)
Joe,
Masterful writing about an amazing match. Thank you.
Go Fulham!