Simon Barnes
Your last chance to get tickets to Top Gear Live

I am a genius. But I bet you knew that already because I suspect, dear reader, that you are a genius, too. I suspect that you and I are both geniuses for two weeks of every year and have been so for the past five years. That's because for every Wimbledon fortnight since 2003 I have been Roger Federer and so, I shouldn't wonder, have you.
Bad thing, in a way. Hopeless for making objective judgments. I was trying to make them yesterday afternoon as Federer cruised through his third-round match against, er, no, hold on a moment, I'll look it up, it was a chap called Marc Gicquel. But that's enough about him; Federer won 6-3, 6-3, 6-1 and it was either (a) a performance of such perfection that he cannot fail to win Wimbledon or (b) a performance that betrayed all kinds of fragilities and fallibilities, and he will be lucky to reach the final and if he gets there will have no chance against Rafael Nadal.
If that seems something of a compromised judgment I can only apologise. The problem is that I want Federer to win. Federer is a genius and he plays for the genius in me and the genius in you; the genius that never was, the genius that we each might have been had we been someone completely different.
Let me run through a few of Federer's shots. There is the head-nodder: the one when you see him set up an opponent with one shot and play the kill-shot with the next and you nod to yourself with a knowing smile, as if at a particularly neat philosophical argument. Then there is the head-wagger: the one when you shake your head from side to side in disbelief. Did that really happen?
Then there is the gasper, a more extreme version of the head-wagger, in which your sense of disbelief is so extreme that you gasp audibly. You can sometimes hear 15,000 people - all of them geniuses - gasping in unison as Rodge unleashes another one on Centre Court. There is also the purrer. Now I know that humans don't purr audibly, but there are occasions when Federer hits a sustained level of mastery over both ball and opponent and you just sit there with a daft smile on your face, purring within. That was the case for a good deal of yesterday, or at least for the 90 minutes or so Federer was detained on court.
After that, there is the sigher. This is more an aesthetic than sporting judgment; those times when the opponent seems to become a willing collaborator, when the illusion of complicity is at its height and tennis resembles not a competition but a series of ritualised, long-rehearsed movements of beauty and purpose.
There is one more shot I need to discuss and that is the wincer. Federer played a few of them yesterday. These come when he makes unforced errors, hits a volley into the net, wipes that forehand - the one called “the liquid whip” - beyond the baseline and you find yourself making your at-the-dentist face. At these moments the genius within us lapses into self-doubt: my God, he is a man, he's human, he makes mistakes and surely he won't win it now, and this year, this year of all years, we want to see him win.
Federer has won 38 successive matches at Wimbledon: closing in on Bjorn Borg, who won 41. The 42nd, the streak-buster, was the final of 1981, when he was beaten by John McEnroe and never really recovered. Now I am keen to see Federer win 41 matches, but I am even more keen to see him win 42. And this ridiculous sense of identifying with a player completely obfuscates judgment; do the wincers mean that he is not going to make it? Do the purrers and the sighers and the gaspers mean that he is? I don't have the least idea. All I can tell you for certain is that he (a) is a great player and (b) has not had a great year so far.
But he was doing his serene stuff yesterday, that little shuffle to put his feet into the micron-perfect spot to receive the ball, turn his wrist on it and hit the corner; a joy in feeling ball on racket, a simple delight in shot-making. “Do you think he ever gets bored with playing tennis?” my neighbour in the press box asked. “Did Van Gogh get bored when he was in Arles?” I asked in turn.
There is something about the nature of sporting genius that insists on comparisons to the greatest practitioners of the arts. Geniuses in sport and in art are not trying to do the same thing but, all the same, both categories see the world and its possibilities in a way quite different to the rest of us. As a result, we who watch are forced to make an adjustment in the way we ourselves do our seeing and understanding.
That's why we can't fail to be touched by genius, we become complicit in genius, we become, for a set or two, for a week or two, geniuses ourselves. And I'm sorry and all that Rafa, but I hope very much that we'll all be geniuses together a week tomorrow.

Simon Barnes is the multi-award-winning chief sportswriter at The Times. He also writes a Saturday column on wildlife. His 15 books include three novels and the best-selling How To Be A Bad Birdwatcher. His latest, The Meaning of Sport, was published last autumn. He lives in Suffolk with his family and five horses
Explore your passion for food with the delights of Thai, Indian & Chinese cooking
In our new series, Tony Hawks takes a dry, wry look at modern life - junk mail, interminable meetings and snooty sales assistants
Read the training tips and advice that helped our London Triathletes
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers

Find tickets for:
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
2007
£30,000
2006
£14,337
2008
£39,937
Great car insurance deals online
c.£75,000
GlosFirstmeansbusiness
Gloucestershire
£32,795 - £41,545
Universitry of Southampton
Southampton
£
£32,795 - £41,545
Universitry of Southampton
Southampton
Competitive Package
Npower
West Midlands
1 & 2 Bed apartments
From £249,995
Great Investment, River Views
Great Dubai Investment Opportunities
from £89,950
low-cost ownership homes in London
Las Vegas SALE!
£POA
With Ramblers Worldwide Holidays!
£POA
List your property with two leading travel websites
£POA
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Globrix Property Search - search houses for sale and rooms and property to rent in the UK. Milkround Job Search - for graduate careers in the UK. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Federer could have won nothing at all, and he'd still be the best to watch, and my favourite; his unparalleled success is nothing more than a bonus. He remains the only player who, after watching him complete an easy victory, still makes me feel as though I'd made good use of my time.
SJS, London, UK
Mr Barnes u seem have got ur statistics wrong.If Federer won Wimbledon this year he would still be tied at 41 with Bjorg cos he had a walkover against Tommy Haas last year and that does not count as a win. Great article though!
Sam, new york, USA
I felt the same way but after reading this I realize I don't want Federer to win for sentimental reasons. I just want the 'genius' tennis to show up and leave me gasping in the way McEnroe did at his best and Rafa did at the French. I don't care who plays it. It could be Gasquet, Murray, Rafa or...
Ed, Singapore, Singapore
I can't describe in words, how big a fan of Roger I am. He gives pleasure to me. Just watching him is privilege. I want him to win Wimbledon and win it by beating Rafael Nadal in straight sets.
I want him to beat Nadal on clay in French open next year as well.
SHH!! genius at work
Sanjeeb Mohanty, Kolkata, India
I was totally moved by that article, I am an ardent Federer fan and your article made me realise why there are so many of us out there, Genius indeed! To all those who cannot wait to write him off, do not forget he came upto 2 major finals even when he was sick, playing the best players in the world
Viji R, Singapore,
beautifully put
i definitely want THE GENIUS to prevail over n continue his majestic realm of beauty,elegance,grace and style in tennis...
hes definitely 1 of the greatest players tennis has had.....RAFA is remarkable too but i guess any1 remarkable is NOT a GENIUS.....and so win.RF wins!
samreen, lahore, pakistan
Fererer is brilliant but I find Nadal more exciting.
They both deserve enormous respect but I have to
admire Rafa more because they did not start on a
level keel in terms of talent at birth!
I would love to criticise your articles but like Roger's
play, faults are hard to locate.
Keep writing!
Dom Lester, Horsley, Surrey
Great article, identified with everything Simon Barnes said of Federer, I feel desperate for him to win his 6title at Wimbledon but have my doubts, Nadal looks invincible and on fire. Federer is looking a little vulnerable and not as fluid and fiery as last year.
SHANTI PENDURTHI, HYDERABAD, INDIA
Federer should have called it a day after his last Wimbledon win when he was at his most sublime. Best to go out on a high; nothing worse than seeing a hero going downhill as he must, surely.
ian cheese, london, uk
Beautifully written, Mr. Barnes. Indeed, RF is unique, a great player and a beautiful human being.
Will you have something good to say about Nadal?
a nadal fan, palm springs, california, usa
Loved this article! I'd never thought about categorizing the various reactions to Roger Federer's tennis shots, but having felt them, must say you've nailed them perfectly! Federer's genius inspires awe. Long may he play to the delight of tennis fans the world over. Here's to his 6th Wimbledon!
M.K. Giles, Farmington Hills, USA
Concerning the genius of Federer, let me just repeat a line once written about that other genius that somehow got stuck in my brain. I quote from memory: "... But McEnroe's [performance] was one for the connoisseur. An evocation of times past. Blending elegance, wit, beauty and imagination."
Kees van de Wiel, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Federer has some very good strikes (not all: his sliced backhand is weak, hence the bad volleys) but not a consistent game play. Against Nadal he lacks a plan B (this year at RG even an A). He simply lacks quality adversaries and does't need to play better.
ortega, barcelona, spain
Roger, on occasion, loses his genius when he doesn't know where the court is. Too often I've seen him hit the ball long past the baseline, short into the net and wide of the side lines. Sometimes he plays like a duffer. I wonder why?
Bill Steers, Oakville, Ontario, Canada
to Freddy in Manila
I can only assume you either have never played tennis or do not know much about it. Federer is like Zidane or Senna, or even Fred Astaire - his natural gift for the game allows him to have a command and ease over a tennis ball that are decidedly elegant
John Matthews, London, England
Roger is not the biggest, nor the tallest, nor the strongest tennis player, but grace he does have in immeasurable measure.
Tim B, Lake Stevens , USA
lovely article!i love federer, he takes my breathe away all the time and i really hope that he wins wimbeldon again, cause he deserves it! he just amazing!!
janessa, cambridgeshire, england
I knew you were toying with us last week Mr Barnes in your pre tournament article. I just knew you wanted Roger to win!Thanks for your honesty . I am a big fan of the "purrer" and the "sigher" but you hit that raw emotional truth about our search for genius in our own lives...my thanks.
marie, adelaide, Australia
Any praise levelled at his closest rival, i.e. Rafa, is taken to be a slite against RF by his fans, RF is all that has been written but ask him who he would least like to have to play in the final.. He does not walk on water. He will lose Wimbledon, if not this year, it will be next..Vamos Rafa
Dee Kingston, San Miguel, Spain
uhm, Nadal more graceful? Uhm duh, just how do YOU define grace buddy.
Kim, QC,
Roger federer is defenitely fantastic.But Nadal`s shots sometimes matches Rogers`s.I wish Rafa will win wimbledon 2008 .He is such a good human being and he matches it with his competitiveness on court.Carry on rafa!.
bobby, kannur,kerala, india
I get so angry when you hear people say "Go on, Andy Murray ! Behave like a silly, spoilt brat ! Scream and shout with that inhumanly large mouth of yours - I am sick of well behaved losers !" Well, excuse me, but haven't the two outstanding players of the last generation been Sampras and Federer ?
bob houghton, Jugon les Lacs, FRance
"Genius" aside, who is the more aesthetically pleasing to watch? Let's go by empirical evidence. You only have to watch slow motion replays of Federer and Nadal reaching out for their shots to realise immediately the Spaniard is the more lithe, the more compact, and the more graceful on any court.
Freddy, Manila,
Beautifully put. I never get tired of Roger winning at Wimbledon. I hope he wins no. 6!
Grainne, Alameda, US
rodge is not only a genius, he is elegent,a true gentleman and we have the honor of watching the most incredible player ever. rodge lost badly at roland garros, but it doesnt matter. what he has showed us at wimbledon is magical! simon you write like shakespear. thank you for being brilliant.
honey starr, new york, u.s.a.
In fact when Roger Federer plays he just makes things look so simple that everyone wonders why they don't play as well. As I said it just looks so natural. In fact the opossite to Nadal. Nadal is might, force and energy, that's what makes me think tenis is a hard sport. Good luck to them both.
E. Bee, Toulouse, France
Very thoughtful article - especially at a time when most sports commentators sound more like bookies than journalists. So thanks for making me purr - a testament to your own genius.
momo benmos, New York, USA
Mr Barnes,
Thank you for a thoroughly enjoyable article that took my breath away when you described Federer's shots and our reactions- I couldn't help my smile when you described the wincer after a shank or a dump in the net.
A welcome relief after all the press that expresses only doubt.
A. Liu, Sydney , Australia