Federer May Be Great, but Opponents Aren’t

Roger Federer is to be congratulated on his U.S. Open win. However, this talk about Federer being the Tiger Woods of tennis needs to stop. It is just plain silly. The talent level in tennis is so low these days, that Federer’s opponents make Joe Louis’ “bum-of-the-month” club seem like Murderers’ Row. McEnroe played against Borg, Connors and Lendl. Sampras competed against Edberg, Becker and Agassi. Federer is competing against Nalbandian, Blake and Baghdatis.

Get the picture? Twenty years from now, even the most ardent “Jeopardy” fan won’t be able to name any player who competed against Federer. Yes, Federer is the best of a field of very ordinary players. But the best of all time? No way.

CRAIG P. FAGAN

San Diego

I enjoyed Bill Dwyre’s write-up and concur wholeheartedly with his description of Federer’s supremacy on the tennis court. I wish, however, he would have dwelt on Roger’s artistry, a virtue that is nonexistent in the sport today. There is nobody (woman or man) who moves with such nimbleness on the court today. If Baryshnikov played tennis perhaps he’d have a rival; or Pancho Gonzales, when he was champion.

There is no question that Federer’s dominance in tennis is due to his superior playing ability; he beats everyone. But what really separates him is the way he beats them: with style, finesse, elegance and effortless power. He has brought back the gentleman to the sport that was once the sport of gentlemen.

GIUSEPPE MIRELLI

Los Angeles

Hats off to Lisa Dillman and her crack group of colleagues in their relentless pursuit of the truth regarding Maria Sharapova. What a marvelous job of beating up on a teenage girl!

I can clearly see their motivation: The last thing that this country needs is a pro sports role model who doesn’t use drugs, doesn’t use foul language, has not exposed herself and hasn’t been arrested.

DAVID G. GREENHUT

Huntington Beach