BBC News Komla Dumor death 'He looked for the light as well as the dark'

Colossus of a man!!

IN SEARCH OF LOVE...

Before it became his signature moment to date, Novak Djokovic was motivated by a slight.

He had just made the greatest shot of his career, maybe of any career: Down two match points to Roger Federer in the 2011 U.S. Open semifinals, he made the wicked, desperate cross-court forehand return that saved, for the moment, the greatest season of the Open era. The shot was terrific, but the match was still over, certainly, with Federer holding another match point.

As a final acknowledgment, Djokovic turned to the crowd at Arthur Ashe Stadium, hugely partisan toward the great Federer, waving both hands high, as if to say You want more, don't you? And everyone did. But Djokovic was also saying You should want more of me, too. Look at what I'm doing. I'm having the greatest season in history and NO ONE here is on my side?

We all know what happened next. Djokovic broke Federer's spirit in that moment, right there. Federer was up 5-3, 40-15 in the fifth set, another potential final matchup with Rafael Nadal waiting. Federer never won another game. After that game, he never even reached another match point. Djokovic won the next four games, then steamrolled Nadal in four anticlimactic sets the following day for his third major of the year. The legend of the iron-willed Djokovic as the toughest out in sports was written that weekend, and it continues to this day. The original slight, the abundance of respect for Djokovic but a curious absence of universal love from the tennis world, has never quite been massaged, has never quite healed. At some point, it was inevitable that despite his six majors, dominance over the rankings and recent destruction of Nadal in the Monte Carlo final (a place where Nadal had won eight straight titles), the wound would be reopened.

It happened in Madrid, where Djokovic was being stunned by Grigor Dimitrov, the young Bulgarian who seems to have patterned his every step on a tennis court after Federer. Dimitrov pulled off the three-set upset. But it wasn't the loss that seemed to annoy Djokovic nearly as much as it was the crowd, who seemed to be pulling for the upset over the game's best, suggesting once more that he hasn't completely bridged the affection gap he confronted after saving that first match point against Federer 20 months ago in New York.

After Djokovic won the second set tiebreak, he went to his chair, incited the crowd with some hand-waving, and then shouted to them in Serbian. Numerous blogs and media outlets reported Djokovic's words as obscenities. Tension had built, crystallized by the fact that Djokovic is rarely, if ever, the crowd favorite, and having the crowd pull for Dimitrov seemed too much. The fans at La Caja Magica reacted negatively to Djokovic taking a medical timeout in the second set, commencing a series of whistles and boos and, to Djokovic's great annoyance, lustful cheers after each of his miscues. For the tennis crowd that loves rivalry, the 21-year-old Dimitrov blew up the bracket, his win denying a delicious Nadal-Djokovic rematch from Monte Carlo, but the crowd didn't care. Just like in New York, the issue wasn't underdog versus favorite, but anyone versus Djokovic. For all his fun and playfulness and talent and erudition, it seems that upstart or favorite, Djokovic is the villain.

Novak Djokovic is the greatest tennis player going right now -- winner of five of the past nine majors, three straight Australian Opens, finalist in eight of the past 10 majors. He is the No. 1 player in the world. He plays with a ferocious indomitability on the court and owns a definitive, likable charisma off it. He is approachable and funny, evidenced by his comedy at Kids Day at the U.S. Open last year and his impersonations. But the roaring love of the tennis world is largely reserved for the two men who have carried the sport the past decade and into history: Federer and Nadal.

Of course, the two own the tennis imagination for good reason. Federer is the greatest player the game has seen, and Nadal is his greatest rival, overshadowed by Federer only in titles but not head-to-head. Together, they have accomplished more than any pair of men. Only Evert-Navratilova compares.

The Federer-Nadal camps are rabid, both entrenched, both passionate, both seeing Djokovic for part of what he is: the scary gate-crasher of one of the greatest rivalries in the history of all sports, the guy who keeps the major count down because he can beat them both. Federer-Nadal is as good as Ali-Frazier, ManUtd-Liverpool, Madrid-Barca, Lakers-Celtics, RedSox-Yankees, Cowboys-49ers. It is the matchup that makes fans watch the tournament draw, figure out the possibilities for the fourth round and the quarters and the semis, hoping for the dream final. It is the equivalent of the football schedule being released in the spring and circling a game that is nine months away.

Federer and Nadal will be, for many parents, the entry point or continuation of their love of the sport, the way the old guard talks about Mantle and Mays, Williams and DiMaggio.

None of which has much to do with Djokovic personally, but the individual nature of tennis creates, fairly or unfairly, a hero-villain dynamic. There are contemporary players, like Andy Murray or Tomas Berdych, who lack the leading man public persona and on-court game, and others, like Andy Roddick, who carry a certain brusqueness that marketers are paid to transform into charm, but Djokovic possesses a genuine winner's flair.

Earlier in his career, Djokovic was temperamental; his on-court rage at his play and erratic serve did not play well against the regal and elegant Federer or swashbuckling charisma of Nadal. During his 2011 season, however, Djokovic seemed to carve out a space for himself both with his relentless, unbreakable play and the recognition that it would be he and Nadal fighting for supremacy of the sport. He carried himself like a champion. He put his personality, his intelligence and multilingualism on display. His commercials are funny. But in the space of the public imagination, nothing much can replace the hold Federer and Nadal have on this generation of tennis.

Djokovic is in many ways Ivan Lendl, the great talent who upended Jimmy Connors-John McEnroe and McEnroe-Bjorn Borg, the player who played his way into the starlight. Lendl was respected, never loved. Lendl took over for Connors against McEnroe the way Djokovic has for Federer in many ways. A Djokovic-Nadal final is box-office, top-shelf athletic entertainment.

Unlike Lendl, Djokovic does not come off to the public as cold and distant. He is Eastern European, but the Serb luckily is not saddled with the Cold War and its nationalistic trappings. Nor does he possess something gauche or unprofessional as there seems to be on the women's side with Victoria Azarenka, the reigning Australian Open champ who hasn't quite been forgiven for her various odd fits of gamesmanship on the court.

At least only for now, Djokovic remains something of the outsider, despite his gifts. Djokovic is a worthy and great champion, and has a rabid fan base. He plays with a furious and admirable desire to succeed, to belong -- no different than that of Federer and Nadal. He is, however, simply unlucky to follow the star show of two icons. Perhaps it is a slight that fuels him even as it wounds him, and over time, if he continues to dominate the game, the crowd tenor toward him will change. Nostalgia will take over and he will gain from its sentimentality in a way Lendl never did. Lendl on some occasions would mention to audiences that just once it would be nice if the crowd wanted him to win.

It should also be remembered that for much of the first two decades as a pro, Connors was never showered with universal affection, not until his surprise 1991 U.S. Open run that changed how the public would view him. In the meantime, as he dominates but can't seem to win more than half of the crowd, Djokovic is faced with an interesting adventure in self-discipline: absorb the disappointment that winning the crowd is out of his control, or continue to lose his cool and embody the villain label he seems desperate to avoid.

LeBron or Messi..???

LeBron James has told us over and over, since that championship breakthrough last June, that he's not and never will be Michael Jordan and doesn't relish the comparison. At all.

OK, OK.

Let's try a new comparison, then. How 'bout, just for sport, LeBron James versus Lionel Messi?

Since King James is still facing a bit of a ring deficit when his achievements to date are set against Jordan, let's dig into something a little more current: Which of these two modern-day titans, LeBron or Lionel, is the reigning king of team sports? It's a question I've wanted to pose and explore for some time, purely for some harmless March fun. So with LeBron's Miami Heat in full flow, and Messi fresh off last Tuesday's two-goal shredding of Italian giants AC Milan, why not now?

At a time of the season, where you can get away with trying some things if the circumstances are right, i've drawn up a list of categories applicable to both sports, surveyed experts from both of those worlds and see if we can get anywhere near a consensus on a question that strikes me as plenty relevant, not simply because these are my two favorite sports but because LeBron and Lionel -- unlike LeBron and MJ -- are in active competition.

The question, incidentally, was just thrown at James by The Associated Press earlier this week after Messi's virtuoso destruction of AC Milan in a must-win match in the knockout round of the Champions League. Asked by The AP's Tim Reynolds if Messi, even after his record-breaking 91 goals in all competitions in 2012, is merely soccer's LeBron.. James replied: "Is he? I'll let you decide."

So Yes. Let's decide. Let's break these two down and give it a go. For sport.

Impact

LeBron has an inherent advantage here as an absurdly talented star of a five-on-five sport playing on a smaller playing surface, meaning his hands are on the Spalding even more than Messi's magical little feet are on the ball. As one of the most versatile players to ever grace his game, furthermore, James plays four positions comfortably in the NBA and all five with ease in international competition, giving him boundless influence on any given game's proceedings.

Yet it's a huge compliment to Messi, heartbeat of a Barca team that's won the Champions League three times and Spain's La Liga five times, that the basketball player isn't running away here. Maybe the biggest compliment in the view of a well-known soccer addict who also happens to have two Most Valuable Player trophies at home for his work in the land of giants: Lakers guard Steve Nash.

"I'm not going to choose between them, because it's silly in a lot of ways to even think you can even choose between two guys playing different sports, but the fact that Messi -- playing 11 v. 11 -- can put his stamp on the game they way Michael Jordan or LeBron can do it on a basketball court is mind-boggling," Nash said.

Legacy

LeBron and Little Leo actually have some good stories to swap here, since both are so frequently reminded of what their résumés lack.  James needed nine seasons to win his first NBA championship, which is only two seasons longer than Jordan needed but constantly thrown in his face. Messi, even after becoming world football's first-ever winner of four successive Ballon D'Or awards and all those team trophies at Barcelona, is routinely reminded that Argentina has won no major honors -- beyond gold at the 2008 Olympics in a sport which is merely an under-23 tournament at the Summer Games -- with Messi wearing his country's iconic blue and white stripes.

 

So ... The real argument here is who shoulders the greater legacy burden. Is it James, at 28, who still has time to stack rings up high but lives in a world where reputation is overwhelmingly determined by the number of NBA championships you deliver? Or is it Messi, at a mere 25, who presumably has a little longer than LeBron to chase a World Cup trophy with Argentina, but who lives in the shadow of another Argentine of similar build and genius who, according to soccer legend, single-handedly won the 1986 World Cup for his people with a supporting cast that can't compare to the team of Albicelestes sprinkled around Messi today.

So let's turn again to Nash, who I'm quite sure owns more Diego Maradona T-shirts than anyone associated with the NBA, for some perspective here, bearing in mind the leaguewide assumption on these shores that James, now that he has his first ring, is inevitably going to work his way into Kobe Bryant's (five rings) or even Michael's (six) zip code.

"I saw a tweet from (English legend) Gary Lineker the other day saying he played against and watched Maradona a lot," Nash said. "And he says Messi is now better than Maradona and much more consistent. I know (Messi's record with) Argentina puts that into question, but in the modern game I think it's become much harder to dominate because of professionalism and athleticism being at such a premium."

Style

Here's another area of unexpected area of commonality. Unexpected because we're talking about a 6-foot-8, 250-pound, one-of-a-kind monolith who has no match physically in basketball, and a 5-foot-nothing wizard who, much like Maradona before him, uses his low center of gravity, silky touch, unfair agility and underrated lower-body strength to routinely deceive and run away from defenders.

They're both freakishly durable, too, despite the stark difference in how they're assembled.

And more common ground surfaces when we start talking tactics. In Miami, as you surely know by now, position is a bad word, with James possessing the physical tools and basketball IQ to do just about any job on an NBA floor at the heart of Erik Spoelstra's so-called "positionless" system. Messi, meanwhile, doesn't have anywhere near the defensive ability or responsibilities that James shoulders, which would never even be possible on a mammoth soccer pitch, but he's also frequently given a free role to go wherever he sees fit in attack as a world-class finisher and playmaker as opposed to being shoved into a positional box. There are natural goal-scoring strikers and Stockton-esque midfield setup men all over the world soccer map, but no one has ever combined those two talents like Messi. Not even Maradona. Which is why a certain Mr. Bryant, self-avowed Barcelona fanatic, chimed in to say that Messi actually has more in common with The Great One than basketball's Chosen One.

"Messi," Kobe told the press this week, "is more (Wayne) Gretzky."

Streaks

Hilariously, even this might be a coinflip. Even with LeBron at the heart of a 20-game Miami winning streak entering Friday night's trip to Milwaukee, Messi continues to change the way people think in the historically stats-averse soccer universe by scoring so often that you're forced to track these things American-style nowadays.

And we do: Stats & Information aces Paul Carr, Albert Larcada and Alok Pattani send out frequent reminders that, just to share an example, Messi is up to a ridiculous 17 straight matches in La Liga with at least one goal.

Rest assured that is as hard (or maybe even harder) to do than shooting better than 64 percent from the floor for an entire month, as LeBron just did in February.

Responsibility

Lifelong football fan Dirk Nowitzki of the Dallas Mavericks issued a warning when he heard about this story: "Both of them have great teammates, so don't just totally take them out of it."

Warning heeded. But that also leads to an obvious question: Which of these two goliaths, bearing in mind their supporting casts as well as their respective sports, has the biggest set of responsibilities on a game-by-game basis? You could make the case that it's James, who indisputably ranks as one of the top two or three two-way players we've ever seen in high-tops. And you could likewise argue on behalf of Messi, given that goals in soccer are so much more precious and harder to come by, and with No. 10 at the heart of so many for Barca.

"Gotta say that I think LeBron's job is probably a little harder," Nowitzki said. "Messi can hide sometimes and only needs one genius touch to look good. LeBron can never hide. Eyes are always on him. But he's just such a better athlete than anyone we've ever seen. He just makes the game look easy."

Likability

LeBron hasn't been subjected to villain talk in ages. Or at least months. Joining His Airness in the exclusive club of players to win an NBA championship, both the regular-season and NBA Finals MVP trophies and an Olympic gold medal in the same calendar year took care of that, shifting the scarlet V onto the shoulders of Public Enemy No. 12: Dwight Howard.

However ... Dwight might have unwillingly supplanted No. 6 as basketball's most vilified superstar, but LeBron isn't quite beloved like Mike just yet. You suspect it'll take a few more championships before the fallout from The Decision is swept aside to the point that LeBron is universally and routinely embraced as opposed to merely admired for his uber-efficient dominance. (Outside of Cleveland, of course.)

Messi, by contrast, is rather Roger Federer-like when it comes to public acclaim. He emits the same sort of graceful statesman vibe as Fed. The next bad thing someone says about him, Real Madrid supporters exempted, will pretty much be the first.

It's Messi's more flamboyant foil, Real's Cristiano Ronaldo, who ranks as the far more polarizing figure.

Rivalry

Bringing Ronaldo into the discussion is what gives LeBron perhaps his biggest source of separation. Because the gap between Messi and Ronaldo, depending on whom you survey, would appear to be shrinking.

Or put another way: As the bigger and more superior athlete doing plenty of top-level winning himself, Ronaldo is a lot closer to Messi's stratosphere, even sneaking into that same stratosphere on occasion when Real Madrid beats Barcelona, say, twice in the span of five days as we recently witnessed -- than Kevin Durant or any of LeBron's other rivals are to James.

It's more than conceivable that Durant can assemble a season, if the backstory proves as good as his basketball, that will earn KD an MVP trophy over LeBron someday, depending on how their teams fare in the regular season on top of what they achieve as individuals. Yet the gulf between LeBron and Durant -- and anyone else you want to nominate -- is only widening in terms of Best Player in the Game status. It takes more than that to win the annual MVP race, but LeBron will start every season for the foreseeable future having sewn up Best in the World status in his sport before a ball is dribbled.

Messi can't exactly say the same. Not when it's clear that Ronaldo, not Messi, is more like LeBron in terms of having the sort of blueprint body and skill set for young footballers to dream of.

Conclusion

As I can scan through all the selected categories, I'm surprising myself somewhat but unavoidably giving the edge to LeBron. Hard as it is to believe, so soon after Messi just shattered his sport's record with 91 goals in the calendar year of 2012, LeBron's ability to lord over everyone else in the NBA sways it for me. As we speak. 

Yet as Nash suggested from the start, there aren't exactly clear-cut answers when the kings in question are playing two different games. That's what motivated me in first place to seek out active experts from both orbits, from Planet Roundball and Planet Footy, to try to help make the call.

For Luol Deng, All-Star swingman from the Chicago Bulls and a lifelong Arsenal supporter who knows precisely how it feels to chase James around a 94-by-50 hunk of wood, it's Messi. Deng introduces an interesting fresh variable by bringing up Messi's ceiling, which is indeed higher than LeBron's because his whole legacy changes in a dramatic way if Argentina wins just one World Cup in his time.

"As good as LeBron is," Deng says, "I have to go with Messi. Because what he's doing, he's about to, he's on pace to (become) the best ever." Whoever Barcelona's playing, you're just interested to watch because Messi's playing."

Can LeBron Raymone James go down as the greatest to ever play NBA basketball? Can we just assume he's going to wind up with a Jordan-esque fistful of championships?

See? Interesting variable.

Said Simone Sandri, NBA correspondent for Italy's famed La Gazzetta dello Sport and a former professional soccer player in his country's Serie B and Serie C divisions with, among others, his hometown club Novara: "If I have to cast my vote, I have to say LeBron. Leo is obviously having another fantastic season, but LeBron, in my opinion, is having a bigger impact. Barca is such a machine that I really believe, for the sake of argument, that they could afford a Messi injury and still reach some of their goals at the end of the season.

"It's hard to imagine the same thing for the LeBron-less Heat. I would have to say that, right now, LeBron is bigger threat to his opponents. Not to put Messi down, but shutting Messi down does not mean shutting Barca down. That's a team that can hurt you in many ways. Shutting down LeBron doesn't guarantee you a win over the Heat, either, but it's a bigger step in that direction."

We've given the final word, trying to stay focused on the now, to U.S. national team midfielder Sacha Kljestan, who went all the way (like Messi) to the Champions League this season with his Belgian club Anderlecht when Kljestan wasn't following his beloved Clippers by any means necessary as Europe's biggest fan of L.A.'s other team: "Right now, Messi is the king of team sports. For a few reasons. He's young and has won more. He's been the world player of the year for the last four years; LeBron only has three MVPs. Messi has won the Champions League three times; LeBron only has one NBA championship.

"Of course Messi has been playing for Barcelona the whole time, with 10 other world-class players, whereas LeBron has only recently joined his "Barcelona." But right now, Messi is king. You know how much I love basketball, but Messi is on another level."

Some things never change...

It was billed as the latest episode in a wildly successful and long-running tennis show, driven by new twists in the plot and the full force of a hefty backstory. But the showdown between Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer on thursday night in an Indian Wells quarterfinal ended up looking more like a rerun.

From the moment the first ball was hit, you had this feeling that you'd been here before. Had seen this, or something very much like it, not all that long ago. That the ending was foretold early on, and all the rest of it was -- for you -- mostly about hanging in there idly enjoying the formidable skills on display until Rafa quietly closed the deal with a 6-4, 6-2 win.

This wasn't a rerun of Federer versus Nadal at the Wimbledon final of 2008. This was a reprisal of their 2011 semifinal match in Miami, in which a desultory and oddly distracted Federer radiated surrender as he sleepwalked through a 6-3, 6-2 loss to Nadal. Just like thursday's clash, that one was overhyped to the extent that it made an honest man cringe. Sure, some Federer partisans will put their disappointment down to the fact that he apparently has a sore back. But then Nadal backers can argue that Rafa has chronically bad knees and is just now beginning to round into form.

Who cares? What we had here was a tennis match -- and matchup -- that poses no more intriguing questions, that has no more surprises in store.What... did you think these two guys would go on playing 2008-level tennis forever? Among other things, thursda night's match was a demonstration of the inevitable toll taken by age. That five-year age difference -- Federer is 31, Nadal 26 -- didn't mean very much as little as two or three years ago. But it really hurts Federer now, just as it helped him in the early stages of their rivalry, which goes back to 2004.

The match also gave us some insight into the state of Nadal's mind and game. As much as he may obsess about the reliability of his knees, the very sight of Federer across the net appeared to have a magical healing effect on those Nadal joints. Mostly, though, the message sent by Nadal's 19th win over Federer (who's won 10 in the rivalry) was that despite those sore knees, those seven months off, that drop to No. 5 in the rankings (while Federer has gamely clung to No. 2), Rafa enjoys an enormous style-based
advantage in the matchup.

This is not rocket science, folks, which is why I don't really buy into the conventional wisdom that contrasting styles make for the best rivalries.
Whether Sampras' serve can prove superior to Agassi's return, McEnroe's volley can trump Borg's passing shot, or Nadal's topspin forehand can break down Federer's backhand are not complicated questions, and the answers to those questions are obvious when you watch the rivals clash. When you come right down to it, a Djokovic versus Murray or Lendl
versus Wilander pairing is a much more nuanced contrast cos of similarities in play, and it's outcome is determined by more subtle and changeable elements.

As has been true for some time now, Federer's backhand is no match for Nadal's forehand. That Rafa is a lefty only adds, perhaps immeasurably, to his edge. At the most basic level, this was another of those matches decided by Rafa's ability to punish and hurt Federer in that familiar way: With a cross-court killer forehand that goes directly to Federer's versatile but not terribly threatening one-handed backhand. And so does Nadal's most comfortable serve.

Bear in mind, though, that this wasn't always the case. Early in this rivalry Nadal wasn't nearly as confident about and reliant upon blasting apart Federer's backhand. Federer's all around skills, and the indisputable beauty and variety of that one-handed backhand, masked his vulnerability. Who imagined you could lay low perhaps the greatest player ever in this sport by following the first commandment of parks-and-rec tennis: Hit to the backhand! It took a few French Open meetings, where the fruits of serving the kicker and beaming the forehand at the backhand side were most obvious, for Nadal to develop his approach to Federer, and Rafa has
been fine-tuning it ever since. He's got it stone-cold figured out now.

Hate to see this happening to Federer. As a die-hard Rafan, will always prefer Federer to Djokovic. Somehow, I think Roger deserves better. But the scoreboard and stat sheet don't lie. Ultimately, this match was no new episode, and if it was a rerun, it served mostly to remind us of the good old days when the outcome was less predictable, and perhaps to confirm that the rivalry no longer has the ability to excite and surprise. Hold the hype and say a prayer for Federer...

Not the same Rafa!!

If tennis players could ever be greeted on court with a robust and feverish ticker-tape parade, Rafael Nadal would have been a worthy recipient at his first singles match in over seven months at the VTR Open in Chile on Wednesday.

Tennis Channel scrambled to secure TV rights, Twitter was flooded with coverage and every stroke, slide, and twitch was deconstructed as a tell. All this for a second-round match at an ATP 250 tournament in South America with an opponent ranked outside the Top 100. So yes, Rafa, You were missed. Let's not make a scene.

A lot has happened since Nadal's knees said no mas in June after a shock second-round exit at Wimbledon at the callous hands of Lukas Rosol. Andy Murray is no longer the Slamless pretender and well there was.... OK, never mind... Not much has changed!!

Aside from Murray's wins at the Olympics and U.S. Open, the tennis
world didn't do much to leave Nadal behind. Sure, David Ferrer has passed him in the rankings to become the new No. 4, but the usual suspects still rule the ATP Tour, and Ferrer's dismal showing at the Australian Open semifinals, wherein he won a mere five games off Novak Djokovic, was further proof of that. Not that we needed it, No..??

As Nadal mounts his comeback he'll find a tour familiar to him. Djokovic is still the man to beat on hard courts and gunning once again to complete the career Slam at the French Open. His great rival, Roger Federer, is older, wiser and just as dangerous on the quick surfaces as he was when he won Wimbledon last year and briefly recaptured the No. 1 ranking. And Murray, despite the U.S. Open title, is still trying to chase the original Big Three down in rankings, titles and accolades. As for the Other Four; Ferrer, Tomas Berdych, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga and Juan Martin del Potro?? They're still dangerous and capable of an upset here or there. But the reality is they failed to take advantage of Rafa's seven-month absence.

Nadal says athletes in Spain doping investigation should be named. While the tour hasn't changed much since Nadal's knees took a siesta, the same can't be said about Rafa. There are the little, arguably trivial things. His Nike shorts are noticeably shorter.. not Berdych short but it still takes some getting used to. Also shorter? His hair. And sticking to the theme he clearly used his time off to read the ATP memo about time violations. He's been much quicker between points in Chile than before.. More importantly, Rafa has shown signs that he's not going to make things difficult for himself.

His decision to begin his comeback on clay was a departure from his 2009 comeback that started on hard courts. In 2009, he sputtered through 11 straight hard-court tournaments, where he went 2-11 against the top 10 and won zero titles. He didn’t regain his mojo until nine months later during the spring clay-court season. And what mojo it was. He went on a tear to win the French Open, Wimbledon and the U.S. Open to reclaim the No. 1 ranking and complete the career Slam. Of course, that was only two and a half months off. This time, Rafa's been out of the game over seven months, and history has shown that long a layoff can be hard to shake off. Del Potro sat six months in 2010 with a wrist injury, and it took him over a year to get back into the top 10. Even then, he has yet to equal his pre injury career-high ranking of No. 4, and he's still trying to find the consistency and power from his pre-injury days. Nadal is a different caliber of player, but a lot has to go right.

Rafa turns 27 in June, smack in the middle of the French Open as the stars would have it. He's no longer the invincible kid who could barrel his way across any surface with abandon. I suspect he's more aware of his physical limitations than ever, and with time less on his side than it was when he was 20, he's wisely made adjustments. Don't stack the deck against yourself. Take all the time you need to heal. Don't rush back. Avoid the hard courts as long as possible. Use the softer red clay to ease back into competition. Give yourself the best opportunity to win. Remind people that you can still do what you do on this surface that you own. It's all clay, but this three-tournament swing through Chile, Brazil and Mexico still must feel a little weird. He hasn’t played a lower level ATP 250 on clay since 2007. But aside from his need to squeeze in as many clay tournaments before the hard Masters, Nadal's decision to play in South America for the first time
since 2005 may be a boom for the game. Not unlike Federer’s South American exhibition tour two months ago, which was met with feverish excitement, the heightened anticipation and expectation brought on by the Chilean crowds have a nice celebratory quality to Nadal's return.

Tennis needs Rafa. His brand of relentless, punishing, physics-defying tennis is unmatched. I couldn't help but smile after he hit one of those patented running forehands down the line that curled in like a banana on Wednesday. That's a shot I haven’t seen in seven months. With each leaping fist pump, snarl and Vamos, Rafa breathes life into the game not because he's more of anything intense, skilled, exciting, you name it compared to the other men. It is simply because he has his own brand of that something that the greats all have that make you lean forward with anticipation to see what they'll do next...

Welcome back Rafa!!

LeBron and Heat must avoid hole...

In only two weeks the Miami Heat's season has swung from adversity to opportunity. They're no longer missing a key player because of injury and they no longer have the threat of elimination pointing in their face like the tip of a bayonet. Their opponent is formidable, but their scenario is simple: win three home games to become NBA champions. They're serving for the match.

And that could be the their biggest issue.

The Heat used to have a reputation as front-runners, but that's gone the way of Udonis Haslem's braids. This Heat squad seems to be at its best when the conditions are the worst. When it held an 11-point lead in the third quarter and a chance to sweep the New York Knicks in the first round, the Heat let it slip away and bought themselves an extra day of work. But when they fell behind to the Indiana Pacers 2-1 in the second round, they didn't lose a game the rest of the series. When they couldn't lose either of the final two games of the Eastern Conference finals against the Boston Celtics, they didn't. The most recent example: their bounce back in Game 2 of the NBA Finals after dropping the opener to the Oklahoma City Thunder.

"We're at our best when we play like a desperate team," Haslem said. "Why is that? It's a tough question. What I will say is, as a group, we understand that now. So there's no reason not to play desperate every game. There's no excuse. ... We play desperate, I think we have our best chance of winning."

In this case, "we" and "the Miami Heat" can be considered euphemisms for "LeBron James." While the team as a whole has had great performances sprinkled throughout the playoffs, clearly James' two superlative games -- the only two times he has reached the 40-point level -- came when the consequences were greatest: Game 4 in Indiana and Game 6 in Boston.

In that case, the question of why they're at their best when behind in the series is best posed to LeBron.

"I don't know," he replied. "I guess when we're behind and when we're down, that's the best time people like to see us at. People like to see us when we're behind and see how we're going to react or make adjustments going into the next game."

A curious response. He's right in that interest spikes when polarizing teams such as the Heat and the Lakers are on the verge of losing a series. But does it really take the prospect of people tuning in with the hope that they fail to force the Heat to prove them wrong?

There never has been a star as self-conscious as LeBron. It's as if he would rather convene a focus group than a huddle during timeouts. Sometimes I'm convinced he can hear the keyboards clacking away on press row when he steps to the free throw line at the end of games and he wonders what's being written about him. Saturday, he referenced the high TV viewership of these Finals, saying, "I've seen some of the ratings, so that shows the excitement around the game of basketball, shows the excitement around the two teams, and what these two teams have to offer."

Wasn't he supposed to be shutting off the outside world and entering a mental bunker for these playoffs? Who pays attention to the TV ratings in the middle of a series?

Only LeBron. 

But who can uncork a 40-point, 18-rebound, nine-assist game against the Pacers with Chris Bosh out, the Heat wobbling and opposing benchwarmers disrespecting him? Or score 45 points on a masterful 19-for-26 shooting night (and grab 15 rebounds to boot) with the season on the brink in a hostile TD Garden?

Only LeBron (now that Wilt Chamberlain is no longer with us).

No one -- not even video game characters -- can sustain that invincible-mode level of play. Maybe that's why he saves it for emergencies.

But how's this for a crisis scenario? Give the Thunder a game and the Heat would have to win another game as a visitor in Oklahoma City -- something that just happened for the first time in the playoffs. Give the Thunder a chance and the Heat could give them the series. Give them that championship experience -- thus removing the one thing the Thunder's star players lack -- and LeBron's Heat could be condemned to spend the next few years playing the role of Jerry West's Lakers to Bill Russell's Celtics.

"We don't want to be behind," James said. "We're not trying to get down in the series, we can tell you that. But it's good to see that we can come back after a little adversity, a little down."

Maybe they can feel desperate to avoid losses just because of everything a loss brings about. Heat losses aren't merely judged on their effect on their series; they are dissected for what they mean for LeBron's legacy, Erik Spoelstra's future and the worth of this super-team concept.

There were moments in the aftermath of Game 1 and the practice day that followed that the Heat players seemed tired of the burden (albeit self-imposed) of being THE HEAT. A victory in Game 2, a day's break from the media and a return home did wonders for their attitudes.

They're even speaking with a more unified voice. Players are echoing Spoelstra, like in this Dwyane Wade comment: "Each game is going to come down to, as coach continues to tell us, come down to four or five plays."

The Thunder have a similar attitude, recognizing that their effort might be the only obstacle to victory. They can use their turnaround in the Western Conference finals as a reference. They found their edge in Game 3 and didn't lose it. But now they face a team with a one-two punch that can match Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook, so it's more a matter of details.

"Whatever team is going to play harder and dive for the loose balls, those 50-50 plays and take charges, small things are going to win the game," the Thunder's James Harden said.

The Heat's Bosh had what almost sounded like a request.

"I'd like to stay ahead from now on," Bosh said. "I don't think it's a question of talent with this team, it's a question of effort. As long as we bring the effort and the determination and we play in that desperate form, we're really tough to beat. We can't let our guard down because we're at home. We've got to turn it up another notch. We have to keep getting better as we get deeper into this series."

The Heat realize they have their hands full with the Thunder. And their habits might be just as big a challenge. It's that tendency to play cool, to act as if victories should be ceded to them that keeps popping up whenever they have the option of losing. On its surface, Sunday's Game 3, with as many as four remaining afterward, doesn't feel like a moment of truth. But it will reveal the veracity of the Heat's words, and whether they've really learned to avoid their perils of prosperity. 

Rafa stands alone..

History was always going to be made in the red dust of Roland Garros this week, but that inevitability didn't make the moment any less dramatic or draining when it finally arrived.

In fighting through the exhaustion, emotion and cold drizzle  to win the French Open 6-4 6-3 2-6 7-5, Rafa Nadal ensured that this time it was he, not his electric adversary Novak Djokovic, who required the record books to be erased and re-written.

Seven French Open titles, by the still remarkably tender age of 26, puts Nadal alone in the Parisian pantheon, clear of a record of Bjorn Borg's that once looked impossible to surpass. Djokovic, stoic in damp defeat, must wait another year at least to join those elite players who have held all four Grand Slam titles at the same time. 

If it rained on Rafa's parade in Paris, it was an equally unexpected coronation for those watching rapt court-side or glued to the battle via their televisions in the UK.

A French Open final hasn't been delayed until the Monday since Ilie Nastase's stroll to the title in 1973, which may explain the empty seats around Court Philippe Chatrier at the resumption.

Neither was the match quite - quite - the eyeballs-out, all-time classic most had hoped for. Those frequent rain delays made it feel like watching a great film interrupted by breaks for TV adverts and prime time news, the narrative disrupted and the tension dissipated just as the plot was threatening to sweep us away as it had during the Australian Open final five months ago.

Maybe we have been spoiled by that near six-hour Melbourne marvel. The peaks, as we have come to expect of these two remarkable men, were as lofty as ever. But that the match was lost on a double fault was perhaps fitting when the unforced error count was the key statistic that separated the two.

Djokovic almost matched Nadal in clean winners (34 to 39), first serve percentage (59% to 62%) and total points won (116 to 125). He was more ruthless on break points. But in shipping 53 errors to the Spaniard's 29 he created the openings that a competitor like Nadal does not give up.

Free points, when facing a player with Rafa's armoury, equate to suicide. His forehand alone is enough to trigger surrender.

On days like Monday, when it cut and chopped Djokovic to pieces, the gasps of astonishment in the crowd were mixed with shrugs of Serbian sympathy.

It is a frightening weapon, a horror to scare children to sleep and give grown men nightmares. At the same time it is a thing of beauty, admired and cherished by everyone except the poor unfortunate facing it down across the net.

That it was the result most wise men expected, despite Djokovic's top seeding, should not detract from the magnitude of Nadal's achievement.

His magnificent seven at Roland Garros means he now has 11 Grand Slam titles overall, just one behind Roy Emerson, three behind Pete Sampras and five away from the record of 16 held by Roger Federer.

How many more French Opens can he win? Time and form remain on his side. Three years ago only tendonitis looked like stopping him, but even that debilitating knee condition looks to be in check, if not beaten.

He dropped just one set en route to this latest triumph, and that on Sunday as the heavy rain tethered his topspin forehands temporarily to the wet clay. Since he first set foot on these famous courts he has amassed 52 wins and only one loss, a half-century that neatly accompanies his 50 career singles titles and $50m in career prize money.

Borg, his predecessor as the king of clay, was a fitting icon of his era - long hair, tiny shorts, a laconic rock star pin-up for playboy times.

Nadal is equally symbolic of our own age: a player at hyper speed in a non-stop world, physique carved by obsession, a dominance built on power and ruthless application of superior strength.

As he celebrated on Monday by climbing up into the crowd in search of his uncle Toni, his vanquished opponent sat upright in his chair, staring intently at the plasters on his fingers rather than the cavorting up above.

Djokovic will see these as crumbs, but in extending Nadal to almost four hours he had given him his toughest French final yet. To win eight games in a row against the best player ever to step foot on clay, at his peak, is a little miracle all of its own.

He will also know, once the immediate disappointment fades, that Paris was just another chapter in a rivalry which should illuminate the men's game for many Grand Slams yet to come.

Five times these two have now met in the big finals. Even after this defeat Djokovic leads the series. With his Wimbledon crown to defend in a fortnight's time he may not have to wait long for his revenge.

For those of us on the outside, watching spellbound as another layer is added to a rivalry that already has so much, there is delight in what has gone before and relish at what may follow.

These are momentous times for Nadal, but they are also remarkable for men's tennis - for its quality, its depth and its triumvirate of complementary heroes at the top of the rankings.

If all three of Nadal, Djokovic and Federer will leave the game among its all-time greats, on Monday it was another storied band whose ranks Nadal symbolically joined.

The trophy that he raised with tears in his eyes, the Coupe des Mousquetaires, pays tribute to the four Frenchmen who lit up world tennis 80 years ago.

Jean Borotra, Jacques Brugnon, Henri Cochet and René Lacoste, 20 Grand Slam singles titles between them, were immortalised in sporting myth as the Four Muskeketeers. In Nadal, they have their D'Artagnan .

IT'S A CHESS MATCH...

Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal play in the finals of Roland Garros on Sunday in a match guaranteed to make history. A Djokovic win would be his fourth straight major title. While technically not a Grand Slam (which must occur in the same calendar year), it would nonetheless be an astonishing accomplishment. For Nadal, a victory on Sunday would give him a record seventh French Open title, eclipsing Bjorn Borg, and further cementing his reputation as the best clay-court player ever.

The two men have played in the last three Grand Slam finals, with Djokovic winning in four sets at Wimbledon and the U.S. Open last year. Djokovic defeated Nadal in six straight finals in 2011, on three different surfaces, and the normally imperturbable Nadal looked frustrated at being unable to solve the mystery of Djokovic’s game.

But in their marathon Australian Open final in January, Nadal came within a few points of toppling Djokovic, narrowly losing in five sets. Nadal drew confidence from the close loss, however, and has won their last two matches, in the finals at Monte Carlo and Rome.

Before last year, Nadal dominated the rivalry with Djokovic. He knew that Djokovic had three weaknesses: his serve, which had developed an awkward hitch that led to frequent double faults; his fitness, which was suspect; and his mental game, which led to some dramatic meltdowns in major tournaments. Djokovic’s upset of Roger Federer in the semifinals of the 2010 U.S. Open, in which he saved two match points with daring, aggressive play, signaled a possible breakthrough for Djokovic. Although he lost to Nadal in four sets in the final, Djokovic seemed to grow in confidence. His stirring, emotional play in leading Serbia to the Davis Cup infused him with a buoyant self-belief that he carried into 2011.

How did Djokovic solve the Nadal Problem? How did he turn their rivalry around? He began by returning to his old service motion. After weeks of work, the smooth delivery returned, and Djokovic began to get more free points on his serve. Next, he improved his fitness, getting leaner and improving his strength, speed, and stamina. And he grew more positive and focused on court.

Djokovic dominated Nadal in 2011 by exploiting Nadal’s weaker side — his backhand — and controlling court position to take time away from Nadal. Because Djokovic’s ground game is so balanced, he can transform a point with either a forehand or a backhand. By contrast, Nadal is a forehand-dominant player.

This is a major difference between the two: Djokovic can rip a winner off both sides, while Nadal can dominate with only his forehand. Last year Nadal’s backhand was almost always hit cross court. He seemed to lack faith in his ability to rip a backhand up the line. This made Nadal predictable.

But in the chess match that is their rivalry, Nadal has addressed the weakness of his backhand. He has expanded his repertoire of shots on the backhand side, with a noticeably improved backhand down the line, a heavier, more penetrating slice, and an accurate topspin angle that he places just past the service line to run his opponent wide of the sideline. All of these shots are designed to increase the chances that he can play a forehand, which has become the most lethal ground stroke in men’s tennis.

Another area where Nadal can fall into predictability is his serve placement. Look for him to use more body serves and serves to the forehand to keep Djokovic from getting dialed in with his formidable return of serve. In their Australian Open final, Djokovic kept Nadal under sustained pressure with his consistently deep returns.

For Djokovic, a key to the match will be his ability to win the battle of court positioning. If he can impose his game on Nadal, taking the ball early and pushing Rafa off the baseline with his penetrating ground strokes, then he will force Nadal to cover a lot of ground. Look for Djokovic to go wide to Nadal’s forehand, which will expose the Nadal backhand. Too, Nadal hits way fewer forehand winners when pulled wide than when he gets to run around his backhand and use his favorite winner, the inside-out forehand.

Both men are physically fit, and as we learned in their nearly six-hour contest in Melbourne, they are prepared to suffer. It will be fascinating to watch this match unfold, to see which player can will himself to an historic victory on the slow red clay of Paris.

HISTORY BECKONS EITHER WAY!!

At this late date, after all the sets and all the points and the hurdles, only one remains for Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic each other. They are where they expected to be -- in the final of the French Open. Through different paths and contrasting degrees of difficulty, the main event following their epic 5-hour, 53-minute Australian Open final has arrived.

So much history-making rests on the performance of each, but Djokovic and Nadal have already made tennis history just surviving the French Open draw. No pair of rivals in the history of the Open era, not Borg and McEnroe, Connors and McEnroe, Sampras and Agassi or even Federer and Nadal has ever played in four straight finals of a Grand Slam. Djokovic has beaten Nadal at Wimbledon, the U.S. Open and the Australian Open consecutively. Nadal is not only trying to win his seventh French Open, but he's attempting to break that agonizing losing streak as well..

Although the history is obvious -- Nadal is trying to break his tie of six French Open titles with Borg and Djokovic is chasing Laver to be first man since Laver in 1969 to hold all four Grand Slam titles at once -- the future will also be shaped by Sunday's events. A victory for Djokovic would cement his current status that over five sets, on any surface, he is the dominant player in the game without peer.

A Nadal victory would return the balance in his favor, a resurgence that began in the fourth set of the Australian Open, where Nadal saw his own tennis mortality in the face of Djokovic. For the first time in Nadal's career, a player stood on the other side of the net that he could not beat with his current game. From the fourth set forward, despite ultimately losing the match, Nadal began hitting deeper backhands, attacking the Djokovic forehand and concentrating on creating a bigger weapon out of his serve. After losing seven consecutive finals to Djokovic, Nadal righted himself this year by winning their last two meetings, both on clay, in the Monte Carlo and Rome Masters finals.

Djokovic destroyed a listless Roger Federer in the semifinals, yet Federer still referred to Djokovic as an underdog against Nadal. This, no doubt will fuel the fire that resides in Djokovic , one that helped him tame Andreas Seppi and Jo-Wlifred Tsonga here.

Nadal's heat-seeking focus during the fortnight has been evident both on the court and in the weeks leading up to Roland Garros, where he had been calibrating his game to play Djokovic. Through total destruction of excellent top-15-level players, he has arrived at his moment, and nothing, not the competition or the pressure of history or the fickle weather will stand in his way.

"What can I think? What can I think?" Nadal said Saturday about the ominous forecast that threatens to wipe out the final. "If it rains, it rains, then we play Monday. That is all."

But perhaps the potential break will give us more time to think about the personality of today's tennis dynamic, which has been on display for two weeks. From the French love of Federer to the doomed, demoralized faces of Nadal's opponents to the terrific struggles and triumphs of the great Djokovic in his quest for the career Grand Slam, this tournament has been nothing short of sensational. 

Djokovic is the best player in the game today. And that's saying something considering the giants whose followings are as big as their championship resumes. Federer is not only the most decorated player of his time, but he is also the most beloved. During his semifinal loss to Djokovic, it was clear who the public favored. With each Federer serve, each wild forehand forced by the wind, the Chatrier crowd groaned and tried to rebuild Federer with applause, and Djokovic could not help but notice. Of course, it did no good as Djokovic continued to smother Federer like a boa constrictor, and as his dominance grew, the crowd slowly responded to his excellence. It is not an easy balance. 

Djokovic is not Ivan Lendl, who gave off little personality and played with a driven, cold efficiency that did not connect him to the public, especially as the successor to Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe and Bjorn Borg as the game's next great player. McEnroe was not universally beloved, but played with passion that fans could identify with. 

Djokovic is funny and personable and charismatic, but like Lendl, who once said to a post match audience that he wished one day the crowd would root for him, he has made his appeals to the public for a hug. The was most noticeable after The Shot Djokovic hit against Federer in that tremendous U.S. Open comeback. 

At times on the court, Djokovic moves in an uncomfortable acknowledgement that he is for now, and perhaps permanently, not exactly a villain, but certainly not a sentimental favorite.

It remains to be seen if a Djokovic victory will shorten the gap between love and admiration from the crowds, but during the tournament there is no questioning his ability to channel and focus against the most desperate of odds. It has become part of his legend. 

Meanwhile, Nadal, who has not dropped a set during this tournament seems too close to be stopped now.

Rafa's rise to world domination!

All hail the new king of the courts. Rafael Nadal fell to his knees under the leaden skies of Flushing Meadows on Monday after beating Novak Djokovic to be crowned US Open champion and firmly cement his place in the history books.

After two weeks of charming the New York crowds with brute force and devastating beauty, the 24-year-old Spaniard finally got his hands on the trophy that had eluded him for so long to become only the seventh man to complete the Grand Slam set. Five titles on the Roland Garros clay, two on the Wimbledon grass and last year's victory at the Australian Open were signs of greatness in the making.

Nadal's 6-4 5-7 6-4 6-2 win over Serbia's weary number three seed meant the New York concrete had finally been conquered after seven years of trying. Sunday's downpours merely delayed his conquest. "That's more than I dreamt," declared the man from Mallorca who had never previously got past the US Open semi-finals. "For the first time in my career, I played a very, very good match in this tournament. I played my best match in the US Open at the most important moment."

It was a contest that Roger Federer, five-time champion in New York and loser to Djokovic in this year's semis, could not bear to watch. The 29-year-old Swiss had already been replaced by Nadal at the top of the rankings and with the player boasting the deadliest and most powerful left arm in the business now more than halfway to Federer's haul of 16 Grand Slam titles, it could be argued the Spaniard is set to topple his arch rival.

Federer has up until recently been hailed by many to be the greatest. Nadal says any comparisons with him are "stupid". But the stats are compelling.

When analysing the duo's accomplishments at the same age, Federer secured the Slam sweep at the 2009 French Open aged two-and-a-half years older than Nadal's current age. Nadal has won 42 titles with Federer having won 33 when aged 24, while Nadal has won 82.4% of his matches, compared to Federer's 76.6% five years ago.

Bjorn Borg, US Open runner-up four times, was the only other man to bag nine major championship victories by 24.

NADAL v FEDERER AT SAME AGE

Matches won - lost (Nadal): 460 - 98

Matches won - lost (Federer): 390 - 119

Winning %: 82.4 - 76.6

Titles: 42 - 33

Grand Slams: 9 - 6

Slams played: 26 - 27

Davis Cup titles: 3 - 0

Olympic golds: 1 - 0

Longest winning streak: 32-34

Nadal first picked up a racquet aged four with his uncle Toni (who remains his mentor and coach) and after turning professional in 2001, won his first match on the ATP circuit in Mallorca to become the ninth player in the professional era to win an ATP match before his 16th birthday.

His first ATP title arrived in Poland in 2004, a year later he became the first man since Mats Wilander (1982) to win the French Open title on his debut and in the following year at Roland Garros, racked up his 54th consecutive clay-court win. His winning streak on clay would go on to reach 81.

His march to the top was relentless. A straights-set demolition of Federer ensured a fourth successive French Open crown in 2008 and a month later, the Swiss was toppled once again in a five-set epic as Nadal conquered Wimbledon's grass for the first time. Federer was again on the receiving end eight months later in the Australian Open final as his Spanish nemesis powered his way to glory on Melbourne's hard courts in another belting five-setter.

The left-hander's rise has not been without its setbacks. The last year has been a monumental test, on and off the court, with knee tendonitis, abdominal pain, a knee injury and the break-up of his parents all proving major obstacles.

"The life changes sometimes," Nadal said in New York on Monday night. "The second half of the year was very difficult. Ten months ago seems like I was never going to be the same. Now seems it's going to be one of the greatest."

The true test of Nadal's greatness will be his longevity and being able to surpass Federer's 16 Slam crowns. His approach to this year's tournament at Flushing Meadows and his evolution from king of clay to king of concrete provides a glimpse of what the future may hold.

While the packed crowd on Arthur Ashe cheered their tearful new victor on Monday, Nadal admitted the US Open was the most difficult tournament to play in - having to adjust his game for the "balls, the court, everything, but especially the serve". As well as the barrage of missiles firing at all angles from the baseline, his serve is now one of his crucial weapons.

Nadal's average serve speed increased from 107mph in 2009 to 119 this year, and through six rounds and 91 service games in the build-up to the Djokovic clash, he won 84% of his first-serve points and was broken just twice. These could be worrying signs for anybody considering competing with the current Slam champion of three surfaces and last year's winner in Melbourne.

Djokovic, the only player to take a set off Nadal in seven matches at Flushing Meadows, said: "Nadal is proving each day, each year, that he's getting better. That's what's so frustrating. He's getting better each time you play him. "He's so mentally strong and dedicated to this sport. He has all the capabilities, everything he needs, in order to be the biggest ever."

John McEnroe, a four-time champion in New York, had no doubt of Nadal's credentials in August when predicting Nadal's success at the US Open. "The guy's just an animal. He's mentally and physically incredible," the American former world number one said.

More telling perhaps was Nadal's verdict that there remained room for improvement. He added: "I need to keep working on my serve and be more aggressive. I am not a perfect player. Everybody can improve."

RAFAEL NADAL TIMELINE

1986: Born 3 June

2003: Makes top 50 for first time

2005: June - wins French Open title on debut

2006: Defends French open title with 59-game unbeaten streak

2007: May - Winning streak on clay ends at 81 matches with defeat in the final of Hamburg Masters to Federer

2007: Wins third straight French Open, beating Federer in the final for second successive year

2007: Loses Wimbledon final to Federer over five sets

2008: Beats Federer to win fourth successive French Open title to become fifth player to win a Grand Slam without dropping a set

2008: Beats Federer to win first Wimbledon title and become first man since Borg in 1980 to hold Wimbledon and French Open titles simultaneously

2008: August - Wins Olympic gold in Beijing

2009: Beats Federer to win first Australian Open title

2010: January - Retires with knee injury in Australian Open quarter-final when trailing Murray

2010: June - Beats Murray and Thomas Berdych to claim second Wimbledon title