Grandma's Tales

January 28, 2007

Australian Open – a perfect 10 for Federer

Filed under: Language — Geeta Padmanabhan @ 5:00 pm

The Fedexpress rolled on and blew out the Red Hot Chile, 7-6, 6-4, 6-4. Yes, he won the tourament, (third Aussie Open) without dropping a set. Gonzales from Chile wasn’t hot enough today. He wasn’t expected to win, really not after you watched Federer make mincemeat of Roddick, but Gonzales had had a dream run to the final. A win by him would have put him up in the sky. It wasn’t to be. One can only remember what Federer said some time ago.
“I’m probably playing again on Rod Laver Arena. I play so well on that court, and with my experience and the way I finished the season and the way I’m coming into this – I don’t see why I should be vulnerable. It’s going to be really tough for people to beat me here.”
Call that confidence – honest or supreme. Pre-match, he agreed that Gonzales was playing well, he had played him in Madrid some time ago. But “it was one more day, one more game.” When Gonzales won the toss he decided to “receive”,  giving the serve to his opponent. Federer isn’t known to do that. He always takes the serve. A more complete, all-court player who’s also totally in control, unruffled, it’s hard to find.
The best comments came from commentators Alan and Vijay during the warm-up. “A time comes when a good player becomes great. Will Gonzales do it?” asked Vijay. “So he wouldn’t do it?” replied Alan. Vijay said, “I bet you 1 to 50. You didn’t take it. But Gonzales wouldn’t be alone if he lost. He would be joining a large group of players who lost to Federer.”
Rod Laver said, “Federer is in the middle of his career. Let’s not call him the greatest yet. Let him play more. There’s still time to judge him.”
The best repartee came when Miss Chang talked of astrological predictions. She said she had consulted an astrologist (I thought it was “astrologer”, but never mind) and her Hindi teacher (?)  about the outcome of the match. The astrologist thought Federer’s distractions would come from off the court :-). That would be due to his moon position. The Hindi teacher, however, had no doubts. Federer’s Jupiter was in a strong place and he was invincible.
Alan: Do you believe that?
Vijay: These are the same poeple who said Sharapova had her stars (actually, they are all planets!) in the right place. They said she was in a good position to win.
Alan: Do you believe in stars, Vijay?
Vijay: Yes, I do. But they are all in Bollywood!
Alan had no answer to that. He called for a commercial break.

You certainly missed Nadal today.



  1. Ha ha! So the commercials were the ones that benefitted from Vijay’s smart remark. Funny, that one…

    Comment by Jimmy — January 29, 2007 @ 5:50 pm | Reply

  2. So true, Jimmy! Vijay’s is a smooth transition from on-court games to off-court wordplay, right? He is a delight to listen to! That remark about Bollywood stars may also have been triggered by the fact that Vijay’s brother is a filmmaker, though in Hollywood.

    Comment by Geeta Padmanabhan — January 29, 2007 @ 8:28 pm | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: