The Greatest Ever...?

In honour of Roger Federer's latest victory, and fourth straight US Open championship, I thought I'd bring up an issue recently brought forth by a good friend of mine. Of all sports and otherwise ¨athletic ventures¨ who is the greatest athelete in the world? Of course, this question is one which will draw many different opinions from many different people, and it would be difficult to remain objective, particularly coming from places where coverage of different sports varies, so the issue is fairly open to discussion. However, all that being said, in my personal opinion, there is one man who stands above all the others in terms of complete dominance in every facet of his game.

I don't think that anyone can deny the fact that Roger Federer, who is now chasing Pete Sampras' record of 14 Major titles, is talented. However, I am going to take it a step further, and try to say that Roger Federer is so dominant, he may just be the greatest athlete this world has ever seen. So what is it exactly that sets him apart from the likes of Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemiuex, Pete Sampras, Tiger Woods, or Michael Jordan (or perhaps even Mike Tyson, as someone once pointed out, justifiably or not)? Where might one even begin to tackle such an encompassing argument as this? One might think that in order to make a proper comparison, one might have need of a greater knowledge of sports statistics than I currently possess. However, when making a comparison such as this, statistics become a variable indicator, as different equipment, different rules, and different accomplishments in different sports start to cloud the waters of a pond that was clear as glass moments before. If a given sport has a "mercy rule" (for example) that a team may only win by 5 points, regardless of how dominant an athlete is, his/her true greatness will never be illustrated by those statistics, only indicated. That is, what makes an athlete truly great is not the numbers they are able to put on the board, respective of the other players, but rather the ability to adapt and dominate over his/her peers, regardless of the rules of the game, the opponents played, or the equipment used; this is a trait not easily measured by numbers. Greatness is something more intangible; something that can be "felt", not only by the opposing players, but by the people watching the event. Not soley the ability to control the flow of the game using athletic ability, but to mentally dominate the opponent; the amount of palpable fear and utter sense of futility they inspire in their opponents because they (their opponents) realize that no matter what course of action they take, they have already lost.

This is what separates Roger Federer, not only from his inter-sport contemporaries, but from his professional sport (as well as any other form of sport) peers as well. For example, the comparison between Roger Federer and Pete Sampras has been one which tennis pundits and aficionados have been hotly contesting ever since Federer's rise into the tennis elite. While possessing many of the same traits as Pete Sampras, such as his devastating passing shots, accurate and consistent baseline game, deft, artistic vollies, and hard, accurate service game, Federer begins to distinguish himself from Sampras (and the rest of the athletic world) in terms of his intellect. While Federer and Sampras have very similar athletic ability, Federer is able to beat his opponents, not only by striking winners, but by seemingly being able to grasp victory from the hands of defeat time and time again. And this is not in reference to his ability to "serve his way out of trouble", as both men possessed this ability, and it is one that relies more on athletic ability than mental ability. The area in which Federer begins to disinguish himself lies in the fact that, while great players are proven in their ability to defeat their opponents, Federer alone possesses the ability to achieve victory by having his opponent lose. That is, while many great athletes are capable of winning, only rare athletes recognize that an opponent's loss can also lead to victory. While these two methods of play may seem similar, they are quite clearly discrete. It is one thing to aggressively and directly cause victory, but it is entirely another to confound and befuddle your opponent into beating themselves. Roger Federer possesses this ability. Much like Muhammed Ali's "rope-a-dope", when it appears that Federer's opponent is close to achieving victory, he is actually skillfully manoevering them into a position where he can snatch the point away, causing frustration, loss of focus, and a feeling of desperate futility.

No other athlete in any sport possesses the combination of mental poise, athletic ability, and intellectual dominance that Federer does. There is no other athlete in the world that possesses such a thorough understanding of his/her game, and such supreme confidence in his/her abilities that it allows them to divert their focus and intensity away from the belief that the sole way to victory is through defeating your opponent. Federer is unique because he understands this; he is able to sense his opponent's frustration like an open wound and key in on it by playing to their weaknesses, each time tearing the wound wider until the opponent can do nothing more than stop the bleeding. Federer understands that a mentally wounded opponent cannot mount an effective offense. His calm and poised exterior belies a ruthless intensity that can be matched be very few others. He is opportunistic in his strikes, and his vicious and unrelenting execution only compounds his opponent's frustration, for the only feeling worse than playing poorly, is having your opponent play to perfection. And Federer plays to perfection almost every time.

There are many different sports with many different players, many of which are very, very good. Some of them are even great. Roger Federer is not a good athlete, and he is not even a great athlete. Roger Federer has reached the realm of the sublime. His skill must be seen to be believed, and the palpable self-doubt he casts on his opponents can be felt simply by looking into their eyes. Whether or not Roger Federer is the greatest athlete ever in any sport may still be up for debate, but the statistics have spoken, and Federer has made his case. The issue of true greatness may be a difficult one to accurately, and "objectively" be described. Perhaps it is one that can only be understood. And perhaps Federer's case is not one that can be accurately or "objectively" examined, only felt. If this is the case, than do it justice. Watch his brilliance for yourself. They say that "nobody is perfect", but Roger Federer is likely as close to perfection as any man will ever come.


Burnsy... out!

The start of a new day

This will be my first post in what should hopefully be a long-standing series of tirades and bombastic, pretentious dialogues about basically anything and everything. So how to properly christen such a momentous occasion? I believe this calls for a Psalm:

Watch your thoughts: They become your words.
Watch your words: They become your actions.
Watch your actions: They become your habits.
Watch your habits: They become your character.
Watch your character: It becomes your destiny.

I included this in my first post for three reasons. One, I think it's excessively gay and preachy (and it was aggressively campaigned at the last school I taught at). Two, I hate aggressively campiagned, excessively pretentious, gay slogans/phrases/passages that use conventional, household wisdom, and try to pass it off as original and thought-provoking. Three, although I am apt to become philosophical, emotional, and sometimes downright cheesy; contentious, controversial, and possibly even egotistical, I will never stoop to the depths of what is the literary equivalent of a carnival sideshow. I am sure that, in the future, I will throw out many a phrase that might resemble such mainstream filth, but be reader beware! As the intelligent reader, it is your job to discern the true pieces of literary genius from the dregs of literary sewage.
Now, some of you might be thinking, "...but Mr. Burns, how will I know whether something is truly thought-provoking, or just philosophical filler?" Well, I'm glad you asked that question. Here's a simple little test which is easy to administer and will give you positive results each time you use it: If you can understand what the writer is saying with minimal resources allocated to the "thinking" portion of your brain, it's likely prosaic. The easier literature is to digest, the less thought it takes to digest it. Don't believe the hype!
All that being said, I am hoping to deliver some truly thought-provoking and impassioned speeches in the future from this, my little virtual soapbox. Whether anyone will read them, or whether it will go down as just another blog in the sea of virtual literature remains to be seen. There are no special feature, nor anything particularly original about this blog, so I suppose there is no reason for it to be distinguished above the rest, but that doesn`t make it any less meaningful. In one blog amonst millions, it would take something truly special to be elevated above the rest. Fortunately for me, I have have significantly lower expectations. It's not my goal to gain worldwide acclaim, so read on! (or don`t) because I`m going to rant on regardless.
I believe I will now christen this site properly with a couple words of wisdom from the brain of Burns. Perhaps a little something from my own personal philosophy: This is a passionate site for passionate people. Everyone is passionate about something, it's simply a matter of finding what it is. And when you DO find what it is, don't let anyone tell you that it's lame, stupid, childish, or otherwise unacceptable. Do what you do, and do it with pride. Anyone who poo-poos on your passion is either ignorant, or trying to sell you something. There are exactly 2,350,645 different ways to live life (give or take 2 or 3), and none of them are right. So if you're gonna live life the wrong way, you should at least take pride in f***ing it up in your own way.
There you have it. My first of hopefully many philosophical harangue. Is there any truth to it? Probably not, but then again I never said that there would be. Much like many other things out there, it's just an opinion. Whether you choose to accept it is your own decision.
This sadly ends my first post, but with the the optimism that there will be many more to come, and that this blog will be blessed with many readers, and many ardent and contentious responses. Until then, read on, you lovers of literature. Goodnight my sweet princesses and princes, live long and prosper and all that.


Burnsy... out!