Rafael Nadal Completes Career Grand Slam; Es El Rey de Reinas; El Maestro del Melbourne, El Centro del Corte de Centro, y Popa del Paris

 Rafael Nadal, at only 24 years young, completed a career Grand Slam by winning the 2010 U.S. Open over a game but frail Novak Djokavic last night. Fred Perry, Don Budge, Rod Lever, Roy Emerson, Andre Agassi, and Roger Federer are the only other men to have won all four Grand Slam Tournaments in their career.

A major asterisk, though, for my main man Jimmy Connors. In 1974, Jimbo won the Aussie, Wimbledon and the U.S. Open, but was barred from entering the French Open because he had signed up with the fledgling World Team Tennis League. Moreover, Connors is the only man to win the U.S. Open on all three surfaces that it has used; grass and later clay in Forest Hills and then hardcourt in Flushing Meadows.

Does Nadal's achievement cheapen R-Fedz' same Career Slam, achieved last summer at Roland Garros?To quote John Starks, "No question." But for my lucci, I'd take Federer at his height and in his pomp. To paraphrase my man S-Boomz' thought on R-Fedz from Saturday night, his game is too beautiful to live. It's remarkable that Fedz reign was as long as it was, what with his one-handed backhands and exquisite netplay. Modern tennis, with its increased speed, power and insane world travel eats its stars. In doing so it robs us of marquee match-ups. Without longevity, tennis must constantly produce new stars as the current ones flame out by 25, and because that is impossible its popularity suffers.

 I watched last night's match online through the U.S. Open web site. They used a different camera angle than the tradish 3/4 angle on CBS. The stream was much lower to the ground, almost putting us at eye level with the players and made for much more exciting viewing. For all the changes to teevee technology there have been almost none with the camera angles with which sports are televised.

 That's Rafa Nadal's sister. Que Bonita.

I went to the Open on Friday with Pop Dukes and Coups, got to see Rafa, Fedz and Bryman's gurrl Venus practice up close as they all practiced side-by-side outside Arthur Ashe. They're all metronomes.

My main man Jimmy Connors, I still own his replica metal-framed racket. In 2005 I attempted a Connors-esque haircut, which is pretty much the same haircut John Ritter rocked on Three's Company, but for me, it was bad company.

 On the Billie Jean King United States Tennis Association National Tennis Center grounds (that's a mouthful!), there's a bizarre statute of a tenny-playing dad with his kids. The dad looks a lot like George H.W. Bush, no?

 When they reminisce over you. Or, Killa Hills, 11375.

Finally a note on  Arthur Ashe Stadium. I heard gasbag Dick Enberg repeatedly refer to this dump as a "grand arena." It is a high-school football stadium expanded to 23,000 seats. From the outside it's horrific, what with the grotesquely exposed seats of the upper tier and the watered-down Camden-Yards motif on the halfway built facade except it's not even brick but tile. What is it with the modern trend of exposing the backs of the seats rather than have the facade reach the top? And, of course, there is no roof. Tradition-bound Wimbledon has a roof at Centre Court. Rod Laver Arena in Melbourne has a roof. The French are installing a roof at Roland Garros. What's the holdup? The Open is a cash cow. This is the third year in a row that the Men's Final was postponed to a Monday. On the broadcast we heard that, once again, the Open was not prepared for a postponed final and so most services were lacking. Big Dood was there all day and reported that nary a drop of beer was to be found. That's no way to enjoy the tennis.

If Arthur Ashe had a roof from day one the Nets could have been balling it up all these years in front of full houses. The Isles could be skating there, avoiding bankruptcy or worse at the Coliseum. Billy Joel would have someplace to warble in the winter. Helen Marshall could give a series of speeches where she'd explain what exactly her job is and why she is paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for it.

News : Roger Federer is the Greatest Tennis Player of the Open Era; Also, Selleck Waterfall Sandwich.

R-Fedz has repelled wave after wave of challengers to his throne. His streak of semi-final appearances is absurd. Yesterday (I think), Federer repelled the more powerful Andy Murray, shining brightest in an epic third-set tiebreak, prevailing 13-11. The 2010 Aussie Open title is the 16th of his career, the most titles for men in the Open era. He's won on all three surfaces and has won all four Grand Slams. He's defeated many different kinds of players by employing the pin-point-placement artistry of a Greg Maddux. Or perhaps more like Ted Williams, cuz he hits the ball where they aint.

The only disappointment was in seeing the Melbourne crowd and ESPN's announcers get so clearly behind Murray. Rooting for the underdog is a natural inclination. But Federer is the kind of player we only see once in a couple of generations. We should enjoy him while he is here.
---
Also, props to Cannatar for finding Selleck Waterfall Sandwich. The anonymous artist behind these masterpieces of modern art should be applauded for staying so dedicated to his vision.

Shifting Sands of Clay/Thundering Thuds of Hooves

Shittin' on 'em. The Competition

"Je veux que vous gagniez...et vous goût aimez juste le miel."
"....merci beaucoup...mon boo."

Why should we care?

Derby winner Mine That Bird and 9 other horsies will run in this afternoon's Belmont Stakes out in the nether-world Queens/Nassau border town of Elmont without Freakness winner Rachel Alexandra.

No rematch between the he/she Mine That Bird, shorn of his bawlz after all, and fab filly Rachel Alexandra?

Every year, the promise of an exciting Triple Crown season returns, struggling a little less each year to avoid becoming part of the vestigal Americana of egg creams, soda jerks, adults playing baseball, automats, newspapers, chomping cockily on cigars, heavyweight champions, suits worn with hats and a strong domestic industry. We are told tales of when horse racing was right there with baseball as our most popular sport, that past champions such as War Admiral, Secretariat and Seattle Slew mattered as much as any star slugger or singer. I suspect the sport would be long dead were it not the only sport on which gambling is allowed. A $5 million bounty still stands for owner of the next Triple Crown champion.

This year, in yet another Triple Crown-less season, horse racing still had a chance to maintain the sporting public's interest with a Freakness-rematch in the Belmont. Instead, Rachel Alexandra's owners have pulled her out of the race, citing "tiredness." If the powers-that-be in the sport don't care about the Belmont, then why should we?

We'll take Frownie's old fav, Luv Guv, at 20-1 in the state that luvs its guv the least, followed by Mine That Bird (2-1), and Dunkirk (4-1).
- - -
Speaking of unconsummated rivalries, Roger Federer will take the court in Paris tomorrow for the French Open title. Winning would not only give him a tie with Pete Sampras for the most Slam titles, it would place him amongst the rare handful of eternals to win on grass, clay and hardcourt. Unfortunately, Nadal, whom Federer has faced in a record 7 times in Slam finals, beat him to that later feat when he won the Aussie Open back in January. Nadal will not be facing Federer, which is a damn shame as their rivalry reached a new plateau as each has adapted to win on the other's dominant surface.

I suspect that Federer will not find it to be a hollow victory if he wins tomorrow, much like how the Celts must have felt in winning the title in '86 over the Rockets instead of the expected Lakers.

The bigger question is where Federer ranks amongs the all-time greats. There is no more difficult sport in which to compare eras than in tennis. None. First there is the fact that the Open Era inaugerated 1968 made comparing tournament track records impossible, much like expanded postseason play in baseball has made a mockery of all-time postseason records.

More important is the change in equipment.I grew up playing with a metal racket that has about half-the-surface area of a modern racket. To play with a wooden racket is simply inconceivable. The rackets held by Big Bill Tilden all the way through McEnroe look like ping-pong paddles compared to today's equipment. They may as well have been playing with their hands. It is nothing like, say, the shift from wooden baseball bats to aluminum ones. It would be more like replacing a baseball bat with a adamantium cricket bat. It is replacing a feather with a bazooka.

Still, judging by Federer's unique-for-the modern-game all-around skill set, he would have likely thrived in past eras. Not everyone agrees on the importance of winning on all three surfaces, but I rank the feat as the most important factor in judging champions. Only Rod Laver and Andre Agassi have won all four titles, which is a major reason why I admire Agassi's career more than Sampras'. And why I think Federer is the superior player to Sampras, regardless of career titles.

Which is good, because I don't think he will win tomorrow. Fatigue has been a major issue for Federer of late. The man had mono after all. His semifinal lasted five sets, and the expectations of the entire tennis world will weigh heavily upon his floppy-haired dome tomorrow. Unless, of course, the fix is in, as hinted by the overly-supportive quotes given by the men's field in Paris. An example, as reported by the L.A. Times, "Everybody wants Roger Federer to win, even his quarterfinal opponent Gael Monfils, who said so in their post-match handshake." We'll be there, bright and early hoping.

How about y'all out there? Share your opinion on who is the greatest player in your lifetime and in history.