Incredible Nadal and Federer are defying logic, insists Henman
JUST when Andy Murray thought he’d overthrown the old order, back they come. As cocksure and as dangerous as ever. Honestly? Tim Henman is beginning to wonder if veteran superstars Roger Federer and Rafa Nadal are mere humans.
Like everyone in tennis, Henman has watched in admiration as 35-year-old Federer and 31-year-old Nadal — whose miles on the clock, and knees, mean more than his date of birth — have raged against the dying of the light in the first half of 2017.
The era of the Swiss and the Spaniard battling it out for the Slams, an age that everyone thought had passed with the rise of Murray and Novak Djokovic, is back; Federer’s Australian Open triumph and Nadal’s tenth — yes, tenth — French Open victory prove that.
Former British No 1 Henman believes the pair are rewriting the rules for older players, insisting: ‘I’ve given up being surprised by Rafa and Roger. Because, if you’re surprised, you’re naïve.
‘They’re not normal. They are just such incredible sportsmen that they defy logic.
‘What Federer did is amazing. To have six months off and then come back like that, playing the way he did in Melbourne, then back it up in Indian Wells and Miami, it’s remarkable.
‘Then Rafa took over on the clay. And it’s incredible to watch.
‘People like us, we try to make rules on what you should do when you get past 30 — but these guys are different animals.
‘It’s going to be very interesting to see how they carry on now.
‘Before, it was Federer and Nadal with Murray and Djokovic trying to catch up. Then it flipped. We had Murray and Djokovic at the top.
‘Now? You could make a pretty good argument for any of them.
‘If we were having this conversation 12 months ago, we would be talking in the context of Djokovic possibly being the best player of all time.
‘He had just won four in a row, he was No 1 by a log way and had 12 Slams. We would have said he will win a few more every year and that would take him to 18.
‘But he is down to four in the world and hasn’t won a Slam since. People also questioned Federer after six months out and then he wins in Australia.’
Federer’s ability to straddle several generations of his chosen game, a sport where young men usually begin to feel old the moment they leave their 20s behind, is illustrated by the fact that Henman — a member of what we all know as the Pete Sampras Years — played him twice at Wimbledon.
‘It’s incredible to think he could still be favourite all these years later — he’s just been so good for such a long time,’ said the Englishman.
‘To be playing at that level at 35, he’s moved the goal posts.
‘I stopped at 33 — and that wasn’t a week too early.
‘I was ready, for a lot of different reasons.
‘I beat Roger in 2001. It’s great to have that on my CV. But he was only 11 at the time!
‘Yeah, I beat him after he’d beaten Sampras in the round before. He beat me in 2006, easily, in the second round.
‘He had improved a lot but it was very different conditions, the grass had changed.
‘For me, it was hard work when it was much slower, with the ball bouncing much higher.
‘But I don’t think it would have mattered what surface we were playing on. There was only going to be one winner at that stage. With Rafa, I was never concerned about his form. Yeah, he had a dip but I always felt he would still have chances.
‘I just didn’t think he would play well enough to make the final in Australia and Miami, then dominate on the clay. And he’s only 31.
‘He will be hard pressed to play at 35, just because he’s different physically from Roger and he has a different technique.
‘I think Andy will have another three or four years, for show, although that’s always going to be dictated by injury.’
Murray heads to Queen’s Club next week as the only British contender for the title, then moves on to Wimbledon knowing that he’ll have limited back-up. Henman, now on the tournament committee at the All England Club, admitted: ‘The worry is what is coming behind Andy, Kyle Edmund and — although he’s injured — Dan Evans, apart from Aljaz Bedene, who is a slightly different case.
‘We have the Wimbledon wildcard meeting on Tuesday and you think it is not easy to give them to British players.
‘Ideally you want six or eight guys in the top 100 and the same in the top 200.
‘If they are knocking on the door then it is an easy decision — but it’s sad that we can’t really give them away.’