The offer of variety is, as is almost always the case, compelling and welcome. Every sport loves the new guy, the flashy rookie, the newcomer, the change of pace, the threat to the established order. That’s what makes the games interesting, right?
Men’s professional tennis, it’s fair to say, is enjoying one of those moments right now, with Kei Nishikori and Marin Cilic, two young players who have yet to win a Grand Slam title, set to meet in the final of the U.S. Open on Monday. After years of complete and utter dominance by a small clutch of players — mostly Rafa Nadal, Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic, with a smattering of Andy Murray — seeing Nishikori and Cilic vanquish Djokovic and Federer, respectively, en route to the final was (and is) a blast of fresh air.
So good so far.
One of Nishikori or Cilic will emerge with the title, just as Stan Wawrinka purloined the Aussie Open championship in January and changed the conversation about the ATP tour. Then, and pretty much ever since, Wawrinka’s win looked a little bit flukey, or at least an aberration. Nadal won the French, Djokovic outlasted Federer at Wimbledon and Federer, in Toronto for the Rogers Cup in August, said rather emphatically he doubted that the so-called “young guns” were ready to scramble the status quo just yet.
Now, of course, the scrambling has surely begun. Just imagine the conversation we’re going to have in January when the next Grand Slam event rolls around, about who can and will win, about the future of the ATP Tour, about the new stars, about the changing of the guard.
But let’s be clear: over time, this may or may not prove to be a good thing. The past decade has been an unqualified golden era for the ATP, and it’s been created by the ascendants of true superstars (and true sportsmen), led by Federer and Nadal. As I’ve often said, everybody loves an upset until they realize the marquee athlete or team has actually been eliminated and won’t see further action, and we’ll see how much this change of pace entrances tennis fans.
The tennis world has grown and expanded even since Federer won his first Wimbledon, and Nishikori is the first bona fide star from Asia. How a tour with a different winner every week, or every Grand Slam, will appeal to a larger audience beyond the hardcore tennis fan is intriguing to contemplate, particularly these days in an era of shrinking U.S. tennis influence. The Big Four (Three?) have all been intriguing characters, not just players, and it’s unclear which of the rising stars (Nishikori, Cilic, Milos Raonic, Grigor Dimitrov) can ever hope to match their broad appeal.
For a limited time get Sportsnet Magazine’s digital edition free for 60 days. Visit Appstore/RogersMagazines to see what you’re missing out on.
Federer, of course, is like a tennis industry unto himself, even now as it appears he will not be able to add to his 17 Grand Slam titles. His press conferences take place in multiple languages, he has set a tone for decorum and ambassadorship for the entire tour, he seems as comfortable in Dubai and Hong Kong as he is in London or Montreal, and he remains, depending on your personal preferences, the most exciting and elegant performer on the tour.
Who can hope to ever match all that Federer offers, even now as his magnificence begins to ebb?
This is the nature of any sport, and while it pains one to watch Federer unable to be all that he once was on court, he’s still entertaining as hell. Tom Brady says he won’t quit until he “sucks,” and that’s pretty much what Federer has said, too.
Nadal is less open and available and international than Federer, and he disappears from the tour for long stretches due to injury. You can make the argument that he is actually better than Federer, and at times more thrilling to watch, but he’ll never match the entire Federer package. At any rate, it seems hard to imagine Nadal, because of the unending injuries, being a major presence in quite the same way two years from now.
So, even assuming Djokovic can stay at No. 1 for a while, we are almost certainly now at a point of great change in men’s tennis after a spectacular period fuelled by superstars. It’s going to be different, for sure, and that’s good. But will it be as good? Doubt it.