Federer Over Roddick, 16-14 in the 5th

One sad thing about tennis is that when you reach the 5th set, rarely does one guy raise his game and win the match. What generally happens is that the loser gives it away. You get a double fault or a couple unforced errors or a makebale shot into the net. That kind of stuff.

So as I watched set #5 of Federer-Roddick (a set that never should have happened -- Roddick pissed away the set 2 tiebreaker, gagging on his own vomit as he did it), I was rooting for Federer, but I was sincerely hoping that we would not see the typical tennis ending. Roddick had played admirably all tourney and he was the better player for most of this match.

But one thing was working hard against Roddick -- Federer always wins and Roddick basically never wins. Past history is a powerful, powerful force. Once you get used to winning, you expect it. Same thing with finishing second -- you get used to it. You wait for something bad to happen.

In the final game, Roddick commits 4 unforced errors and 1 forced error (a questionable designation, but hey, we will give him some credit). So basically, just like always happens to the non-winners, Roddick gave it away. He gave away enough points in Game 30 to, literally, give Federer the game. So what do we say? Should we credit Federer for his seemingly endless supply of above-average steady shots that eventually wore down Roddick, or should we ask ourselves why Roddick since 2003 has never been able to win anything of great value against a true high-end player like Federer?

It is hard to be overly critical of Roddick. Like a 200-average bowler who bowls a 220, he certainly did a great deal more than anyone expected. His new wife, Brooklyn Decker, seemed to inspire him (of course!!) despite wearing what appeared to be an old flour sack with a big belt ("Hmmmmmm, I am one of the top 50 best looking women in the world, what should I wear to Andy's biggest ever event? Hey, Kenny, do you still have those old white curtains we used to hang in the barn? Cut me a V neck into them and grab my big leather belt, OK? We are going to a Wimbledon final!!").

Anyway, Roddick bowls 220 and Federer (a declining player, but one who still is probably a 220-average guy) bowls a 221. So how do we blame Roddick? Because at the end of the day Roddick needed to go spare-strike in the final frame to win, and he went spare-8 (ignore the bowling math here you get the point). He had Federer. Federer was average, maybe a touch better. Roddick had done everything as well as he possibly could. And he.....just........needed......a strike. One ball, one strike. YOU get the trophy and the OTHER guy gets that shitty, tiny plate. One strike............and you leave your shot out wide and knock over 8 pins.

But Roddick is a multi-millionaire and he is married to probably the #2 or 3 best-looking swimsuit model in the world, so he really doesn't need the title............which, when you think about it, might be part of the problem..........