Though I liked Suveen Sinha’s column (“What’s the big deal?”, September 18) I would like to add a few points.
First, you simply cannot predict what would happen if Rafael Nadal had been part of a previous generation of tennis players. How can you say that he wouldn’t have or would have found it difficult to win Wimbledon when the basis of the statement is a hypothesis?
Second, you might want to say there is no big deal in completing a career grand slam, but in actual fact it is the sheer genius of Rafa and Roger Federer that is making it look easy. Why are others (such as Andy Murray, Novak Djokovic) not even managing to win slams consistently? In fact, Murray is struggling to win even one. This shows how dominant Rafa and Roger are.
A career slam was considered the holy grail previously because players were one-dimensional (except Borg). Rod Laver completed a career slam when tennis was played only on two surfaces. Please appreciate the achievement of these champion players and enjoy the tennis, because you never know when such fantastic players will come again to dominate an era together.
Siddharth, on email
