David Foster Wallace on Roger Federer in the NY Times

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/20/sports/playmagazine/20federer.html

I'm a big DFW fan, actually printed this out on the computer to read it at home tonight, just can't read something this dense and long onscreen...but perused it a bit, looks promising...Wallace writes really passionately about tennis, esp. in some of his nonfic comp like the thing in A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again and the review of Tracy Austin's autobio in Consider the Lobster....thought some of you might be interested.

M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 22 August 2006 22:37 (nineteen years ago)

I've never particularly believed I would like DFW, but this was well done, if a bit unfriendly at times to people who don't either play or seriously watch tennis. Along with the good Outkast thing in the magazine, I'm wondering what's going on with the NYT.

gabbneb (gabbneb), Tuesday, 22 August 2006 22:41 (nineteen years ago)

i read about half of it before i needed a nap. i thought i did pretty good! i thought the whole omg! how does he do that! thing was kinda tiresome. and i'm sick of the footnotes.

scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 22 August 2006 22:42 (nineteen years ago)

i have liked dfw's essays/journalistic stuff before. i'm not a hater. i also liked the outkast thing.

scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 22 August 2006 22:43 (nineteen years ago)

you might want to revive this and link it up. or not.

david foster wallace - is he a cunt?

scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 22 August 2006 22:45 (nineteen years ago)

I don't know if the NYT article would be that captivating to someone who knew or cared little about tennis or Federer, but I thought he was just getting on a roll and then it ended; I wished it was about 3 times as long, like those old John McPhee articles, 50,000 words about geology or tramp steamers... DFW is my favorite writer about tennis, because he gives context, as if he is writing both to the cognescenti, and the layperson; his article about Michael Joyce is my favorite glimpse into the wacky, mysterious, grinding, somewhat cruel pro tennis world.

Donald (donald), Thursday, 24 August 2006 00:46 (nineteen years ago)

the fact that a big sweetspot and topspin is the key and not "power" as such is hardly a revelation tho, to anyone who even, e.g., reads the advertising copy on tennis racquets at sports stores.

Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 24 August 2006 01:14 (nineteen years ago)

i like the attempt to outline a little how federer sets himself up, the way those omg shots of his are planned out well in advance. which, i mean, of course they are, but it was still nice to read some intelligent analysis of it, because federer's game tends to get treated (with some justification) like it is constantly manufactured abracadabra out of thin air. also, i thought the last graf about jr. wimbledon was interesting, the idea that there's already a next generation absorbing federer's game.

gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 24 August 2006 03:17 (nineteen years ago)

i agree with donald re: length, but beyond that, i think that he should have skipped all the bullshit and just written a breathless play-by-play of his favorite federer match.

a little knowledge can go a long way (lfam2), Thursday, 24 August 2006 15:46 (nineteen years ago)

that sounds like the least david foster wallace method of writing a thing ever.

tom west (thomp), Thursday, 24 August 2006 23:30 (nineteen years ago)

erm i wrote the wrong thing. but you are right.

a little knowledge can go a long way (lfam2), Friday, 25 August 2006 01:52 (nineteen years ago)

i meant if he still took the scenic route but interwoven with a narrative of the match as the backbone of the article.

a little knowledge can go a long way (lfam2), Friday, 25 August 2006 01:53 (nineteen years ago)

two weeks pass...
BUMP.

Not related to article, but if anyone wanted to turn this into a general Federer discussion thread I wouldn't be opposed, because right now dude is looking very seriously like he's going to be the greatest tennis player of all time. Jeezus his game is so balanced, there's like nothing he's NOT good at.

M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 11 September 2006 15:34 (nineteen years ago)

yeah. things can change so fast in tennis that it's silly to make predictions, but still, barring injury, it doesn't seem like there's anyone who's gonna seriously challenge him in at least the next year. it's hard to imagine him not winning at least 2 majors next year, and he has another serious shot at a grand slam. even if he retires at 30, he'll only need one major title per year to tie sampras.

take yesterday's match: roddick was playing about as well as i've ever seen, more confidence and better command of a greater variety of shots, but he only made it seem like a serious game for about a set and a half. nadal when he's at his best can obviously come a little closer, but i don't see him seriously challenging for the no. 1 spot for a while, if ever.

but of course, all this talk about his inevitable dominance probably means he'll go out in the second round of the australian.

gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Monday, 11 September 2006 16:10 (nineteen years ago)

yeah that's the scary thing is that roddick was playing VERY well, but it still seemed like his small victories were more times when federer wasn't quite focued and roddick still lost.

apparently, the announcers said that this year he could lose every match (including yesterdays) and would still be guaranteed of being the year-end number one in the ATP ratings.

M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 11 September 2006 16:21 (nineteen years ago)

it was like he was just toying with roddick yesterday, though.

hstencil (hstencil), Monday, 11 September 2006 16:24 (nineteen years ago)

yes, he's great, but it also seems that there aren't too many other greats on the mens' side (maybe why the talent seems so deep?). Nadal is the first since Becker to reach No. 2 in his teens - because the older players aren't all that? Regardless, I expect more from him and other young guns down the road.

gabbneb (gabbneb), Monday, 11 September 2006 16:26 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/tennis/open/2006-08-30-youngsters_x.htm

gabbneb (gabbneb), Monday, 11 September 2006 16:32 (nineteen years ago)

Player Age Rank
Rafael Nadal, Spain 20 2
Marcos Baghdatis, Cyprus 21 8
Tomas Berdych, Czech Republic 20 14
Andy Murray, Great Britain 19 19
Novak Djokovic, Serbia 19 23
Richard Gasquet, France 20 29
Gael Monfils, France 19 31

yup, there's a lot of talent on that list, probably at least a couple of longterm contenders for the top. but i think we're in for a minimum of two more years of roger dominance (i.e. without injury, i bet he'll win half the majors for the next two years).

gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Monday, 11 September 2006 16:38 (nineteen years ago)

at 25 he's hardly an old man!

M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 11 September 2006 17:40 (nineteen years ago)

he's in his absolute prime right now, i think. he can sustain that for a while -- 2 or 3 years? -- but obviously not forever. but even a sub-prime federer could maybe be a title contender for another 10 years, you'd think.

gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Monday, 11 September 2006 17:54 (nineteen years ago)

for sure...i don't see any reason why he should age as well as agassi...it's not like his game is based on overpowering physical power like roddick.

M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 11 September 2006 18:18 (nineteen years ago)

nadal is progressing so quickly it is scary, he's got no ceiling and he matches up better v federer than anyone - it's the beginning of an epic rivalry.

the conrtasing personalities are sweet too. and nadal looks like a super hero and federer looks like morrissey.

jhoshea (scoopsnoodle), Monday, 11 September 2006 18:33 (nineteen years ago)

I have no opinions about tennis but wish to state that I am a huge fan of David Foster Wallace, for pretty much every single thing he's ever had published except the Wardine section in IJ, and this article was no exception. Carry on.

xero (xero), Monday, 11 September 2006 19:01 (nineteen years ago)

word DFW is the Roger Federer of footnotes! I love him!

M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 11 September 2006 19:58 (nineteen years ago)

eight months pass...

whoa

gabbneb, Friday, 25 May 2007 20:55 (eighteen years ago)

I didn't realize they'd only played the one time.

Alex in SF, Friday, 25 May 2007 20:57 (eighteen years ago)

"After practicing with Roger in March, I felt that I really could hold my own," Sampras said.

Seriously, wtf.

wanko ergo sum, Friday, 25 May 2007 21:09 (eighteen years ago)

Maybe someone should send Pete a clip of Leconte caning Borg 6-3 6-1 in Stuttgart in '84. And BB had only been out of the game for two and a half years. And that was on clay. And Leconte wasn't even top 20 at the time.

Did anyone see footage of the half-grass/half-clay Nadal-Federer challenge match in Majorca a few weeks ago? They had to change footwear at every change of ends, apparently. Rafa won 12-10 in a 3rd-set breaker.

Michael Jones, Friday, 25 May 2007 21:32 (eighteen years ago)

six months pass...

So...Fed and Samp played three exhibitions in Kuala Lumpur, Macau and Seoul and 36-y-o Samp actually won one of them! Lots of clips on YouTube.

Michael Jones, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 12:31 (seventeen years ago)

Exhibition tennis matches are so goddam dull even when its players like these. It's not particularly surprising that Sampras would win one since Federer would likely hold a lot back so as not to risk an injury.

Sampras doesn't have to worry about that so much, unless he really *is* planning a comeback.

Upt0eleven, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 12:45 (seventeen years ago)

Exhibition tennis matches are so goddam dull even when its players like these.

Disagree. DFW OTM w/ "TV tennis is to live tennis pretty much as video porn is to the felt reality of human love." The only live tennis I have seen in 15 years was an Agassi-Courier exhibition and it was surreal, an absolute revelation... TV just cannot translate the power and speed and skill that players at this level demonstrate in even when going through the motions.

wanko ergo sum, Wednesday, 28 November 2007 18:18 (seventeen years ago)

I guess one shouldn't read much into it but I was a little stunned when I saw the result - at least until I thought about it and realised that there's no reason why Sampras, 5 years into retirement, can't still send down those 115mph line-accurate second-serves on a fast indoor court and hence not face any break points. Hell, Fed even lost to Roddick in an exhibition event at the start of the year!

(Andres Gomez was the first pro I saw play in the flesh - outside courts, Wimbledon '87. Revelation is about right).

Michael Jones, Thursday, 29 November 2007 00:42 (seventeen years ago)

that live tennis is a revelation to someone who's never seen it does not change the fact that top players may play a different game in exhibition rather than tournament play

gabbneb, Thursday, 29 November 2007 00:56 (seventeen years ago)

yeah i got lost... i wansn't contesting uptoeleven so much as riffing on DFW's point that live tennis>>>>>>>>>>>> TV tennis

wanko ergo sum, Thursday, 29 November 2007 01:00 (seventeen years ago)

gabby have you ever seen an exhibition or pick-up basketball game between greats? in many ways it's a lot more fun to watch!

Tracer Hand, Thursday, 29 November 2007 02:04 (seventeen years ago)

yes

gabbneb, Thursday, 29 November 2007 02:06 (seventeen years ago)

six months pass...

holy shit what a forehand
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/7429565.stm

Herman G. Neuname, Monday, 2 June 2008 13:59 (seventeen years ago)

One of those occasions when you really need better streaming video quality! To hit such a low, awkward, mid-court ball like that; I mean, from there you'd expect him to hit a deep, heavy approach and set up the volley but he just spiked it into the corner. Like the net wasn't there or something.

What's happened to our Roland Garros thread?

(Fed two sets up vs UnitedCouleurs before it started raining, btw).

Michael Jones, Monday, 2 June 2008 14:09 (seventeen years ago)

love those inside-out shots.

tipsy mothra, Monday, 2 June 2008 14:10 (seventeen years ago)

inside-out is the coolest

Surmounter, Monday, 2 June 2008 14:10 (seventeen years ago)

I can't stop watching that video

Herman G. Neuname, Monday, 2 June 2008 14:40 (seventeen years ago)

What did happen to the French Open thread? There was one last week...

Anyway there was something totally awesome that just happened on the women's side and I want to scream and dance about it.

HI DERE, Monday, 2 June 2008 16:13 (seventeen years ago)

eleven years pass...

Fed's slam record might survive because Corona

xyzzzz__, Friday, 13 March 2020 17:29 (five years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.