Andy Seethes

Tough loss for Roddick in the Open final. He was thoroughly in it in the second set and well into the second, after he brought the crowd into play, but Federer knew that if he could keep the third set from going to a coin-flip tiebreaker, he could probably pull it out, and pull it out easily. As he did. Federer with a two-set lead is basically unbeatable, everyone knows that. So, 2006 US Open, Fed the champ, QED.

Of course, I was pulling for Roddick. I like his new Connors-inspired 'tude. I also like that, in defeat, he was extremely grudgingly gracious. This is what separates him from Blake: Blake has too much respect for a guy like Agassi, who obviously had no qualms about beating him last year, and he has too much respect for Fed, who likewise took him out of his home tournament. Roddick, by contrast, was seething as he watched the Open trophy handed to Fed, and I for one was thrilled. I'm sick of all this locker-room camraderie carrying over to the court. I want to see some scraps. Roddick has to believe that on hard courts and at Wimbledon, he's the chief opposition to reign of Fed. Give Nadal the French. My feeling is that Roddick at 24 has around half a dozen good Open runs left in him, and probably a few more at Wimbledon. Federer will be the likely opponent in each case. He showed that Fed is vulnerable to attack, so if he can just eliminate some errors, serve a bit bigger, and up the winner count (the slow Open courts didn't help him this time), he could take one or two off Fed, in Slam finals. Crucially, however, he needs to cultivate this disgust with losing to the guy. I hate to say it, but he needs to learn to hate Federer. It has to be sickening to dominate the hard-court season and then have Mr. Perfect swoop in and steal the big prize at the end.

On another topic, Federer is just the death of the five-set thriller these days. I was seeing a tiebreak in the third tonight, won by Roddick, followed by possibly another, won by Fed, then a raucous fifth. No dice. Fed knew when to out the hammer down, and right now, he has the tools to do it.

But if somebody made him hit pass after pass after pass...

We'll see if Roddick can become that player.

Crampadelic!

Once again, the US Open is proving that its conditions can reduce magnificently well-conditioned athletes to guys who look as if they have crapped their pants! First Baghdatis cramps against Agassi, then Gasquet cramps against Hewitt. Think about it--the Bag Man is, what? 21? And Gasquet is just shy of 20. Scary.

Who will cramp next? Well, one has to examine the draw. It's doubtful that anyone playing Federer will have time to cramp, so let's think about the rest of the pack. Roddick plays too many short points on his own serve. Nadal seems ferociously well-conditioned. Hewitt? Nope, he'd chew the cramping appendage off before he'd allow it to defeat him. I'm betting on Andy Murray, who looks as if he's going to have a dogfight with Davydenko when their match resumes.

You heard it here first: Next to cramp--Andy Murray!

Fed's Flaw

I noticed a defnite tactical weakness in Federers current game during his match against Henman yesterday. OK, he waxed Tim in straight sets, but Henman still managed to win a decent number of point by constantly attacking Federer. Henman is a nice combo of serve-and-volley attack and transition-from-the-baseline attack, but he's never had the power to be dominant. He hits a ball that's kind of light and spinny, which is OK on grass an strangely useful on clay, but not so great on hard courts. Anyway, a player utilizing the same style--neither a monotonous S&V, nor a total transitional game--could make Federer feel some heat. Nadal wears him out, but thus far he is the only guy who has been able to get at Fed through fitness and sheer competitive fire. Safin hammers Fed back off the baseline, but Safin's game is unique and inconsistent. If a guy ever comes along who's a sort of neo-Sampras, I think the matchup with Fed would be incredible. In fact, I think that if Fed had to play a Sampras- or a Pancho-Gonzales type in his prime, he would be in real trouble. It's worth noting that when Fed dropped the first set to Andy Roddick at Wimbledon three years ago, Roddick was playing a totally attacking, power game. Unfortunately, I don't see a single male pro on the way up who plays in this style. Maybe Sampras should stage a comeback, just we can test my theory!

I've begun to see Fed as a kind of modern Jack Kramer. Kramer was utterly dominant for quite a while, with a devastating all-court game, but he eventually became vulnerable to the "big" all-out attacking game that began to emerge in the 1950s.