Nadel, Nadal, whatever ... it's all in the family!

^
All those hours I spent teaching my nephew how to play tennis -- not to mention, how to grow hair -- are paying off big time.

Another major for Rafael Nadel!

("Nadal," as everybody knows, is merely the Spanish translation.)

Has there ever been a better clay-court player or a better defensive master? Freakishly athletic and ridiculously talented, Rafa was unbeatable again at Roland Garros. So the better question might be: Has there ever been a better tennis player ... period?

I thoroughly enjoy listening to John McEnroe analyze tennis. There are few better commentators in any sport. It's especially rare to hear one so accomplished as an athlete articulate the nuances of his sport in plain English for the masses to comprehend.

Yet it was the almost-as-good Mary Carillo who made the single best point as Rafa was steamrolling Roger Federer in Sunday's French Open final:

Yes, Federer has won a record 16 majors to 10 by Nadel/Nadal. But Roger is almost 5 years older than Rafa, meaning the gap likely will close quickly. More significantly, Rafa is 17-8 against Roger in majors. So how can Federer be the greatest player ever, as many observers claim, if he hasn't even been able to win half of his big-tournament matches against his generation's other great player?

I like to think of it this way: While Roger didn't have to contend with a mature Rafa to build his record, Rafa had to go through perhaps the greatest player ever -- when said player was in his prime -- to succeed on a major scale.

And Rafa has done just that. Over and over and over again.

Makes me proud to be a fellow Nadel/Nadal!
^

Tiger vs. Roger: It's a win-win proposition

^

Tiger or Roger? Well, it's kind of a trick question. 

And depending upon how it's asked, there really is no wrong answer.

By winning the French Open, Roger Federer pulled even with Eldrick Woods in the Majors Won Dept. at an incredible 14 apiece.

If you're asking which player has had the better career in his chosen occupation, it's Woods - and he likely will continue his dominance long after Roger has put his racquet in mothballs.

Such is the nature of the two games. Woods won his first major - the 1997 Masters, by a record landslide, as a 21-year-old - before anybody even knew who Federer was.  And Woods has kept winning and winning and winning.

Meanwhile, after dominating tennis for several years, Federer has been overshadowed and overwhelmed lately by my good son, Rafael Nadal ... to the point where some respected observers were wondering out loud if Roger's best days were done. 

Tiger? He's been No. 1 for so long now it's hard to remember when he wasn't. He was No. 1 as an amateur, he was No. 1 in college, he established himself as the No. 1 pro as a 21-year-old kid and he's still No. 1 as a 33-year-old father of two even after undergoing major surgery that kept him out of action for nine months. 

Sad to say, tennis pros simply don't have that luxury of longevity.

OK, but whose run of 14 majors has been more impressive? 

That's a different question - and one with a different answer.

Woods is nearly six years older than Federer. Nevertheless, if Tiger wants to keep winning well into his 40s, he surely will. Roger can have all the want-to in the world, but he simply won't be able to compete with younger players.

So Roger had neither as much time nor as much room for error to get to his 14. Roger won his 14 in a six-year span - twice as quickly as Tiger got his 14.

And then there's this: 

Tiger never hit a drive only to watch Phil Mickelson or Sergio Garcia or Ernie Els slam the ball back at him. There is no way to defend Tiger because golf is the ultimate me-against-myself game. 

There is, however, a way to defend Roger. Nadal has been doing it quite well for a couple of years now. Before that, Federer had to get the ball past Andy Roddick. Before that, Andre Agassi. 

You can make a great shot in tennis ... only to see your opponent return it for a winner anyway. Tiger has never had to worry about a great putt being kicked out of the cup by Vijay Singh.

Hell, Tiger goes ballistic if he hears the slightest camera click. Imagine how he'd react if his opponent was charging the fairway the way Pete Sampras used to charge the net.

So yes, Tiger has had (and will continue to have) a wonderful career. And yes, he deserves props-a-plenty for being the most accomplished athlete in all of sports. 

But I'm giving props for Best Major Achievement to Federer, who has had to both psych out and physically whip his opponents.

Still, when Tiger gets Major No. 15 - very likely in two weeks - I reserve the right to change my mind.