Now I hear today that SI will feature the match on its cover. When Pete Sampras won his record 13th Slam and 7th Wimbledon, we came home to see a muscled and tattooed Jason Giambi on the SI cover. Sampras was appalled. And now we know that tennis fell victim to the BALCO scam.

This was pure.

This was cojones grande, the only way to describe Rafa doing what he could not 12 months earlier, find a way to win the third set from Federer.

This was a champion falling in “brutal gladiatorial combat…but tumbling with valour” in the stirring words of London Daily Mail writer Paul Hayward. And how fine is that description.

In 24 hours back home, there is a talk-show buzz and coffee shop chat about this match that I have not witnessed in many years.

These two made tennis relevant. Now can it sustain what these two have created?

More from the Wimbledon cache:

* The disappointment over early exits by Andy Roddick and James Blake certainly went away. Stories always emerge; be it Andy Murray’s next step towards the top echelon, Marat Safin (up 35 places to 40), Rainer Schuettler (up 55 to 39) and Arnaud Clement (up 73 to 72) all made themselves relevant again, the two-week siege and double wins for the Sisters, Britain’s obsession over 14-year-old junior champ Laura Robson and her marvelously refreshing attitude over new fame, and the continuing presence of so many former champions at the AELTC.

* The roof can’t arrive fast enough. Sunday’s final ended about 10 minutes before a nightmare encounter would have occurred. The Club, understandably, wanted play to continue until 9:30-9:45 p.m.. They, like everyone, wanted a result. The money and disruption for Monday play, perhaps as little as two games, would have been wasteful. Yet, there was a point at which the players would have said, understandably, that a Championship, particularly from a match so superior, couldn’t be decided in darkness. Thankfully, we were spared the moment. A match for the ages had a proper ending in the dusk of Centre Court.

And traditionalists need not weep. Centre Court will still be open. Remember that grass needs light. The roof will only close once it rains, a 12-minute process. Thus, the courts will be still be covered for a short period. The benefit of the roof will be to guarantee play after a short stoppage and thus never again the drama of Sunday night.

* Major consensus in London was that the Williams Sisters success was due in part to the weakness of the WTA Tour. This is a debate for another time but the perception must be countered by the Tour.

* Start perhaps with Aggie Radwanska, the most impressive of the game’s young women. She has a Martina Hingis-like presence on the court that adds conviction to less-than-punishing shots. She simply doesn’t beat herself. Her lack of serve may hinder the hopes of a Wimbledon title, but the women’s game needs a player like Aggie to rise.

After all, this week’s rankings still feature Patty Schnyder, a career fourth-round player with one Slam semi to her credit, at 13 in the world. Lindsay Davenport won one round at Wimbledon and rose to 23. Tough to explain that to the sporting public.

* While we’re on that point, Serena passed Venus on the computer (reason 5,742 why I hate the concept). But my colleague, SI’s Jon Wertheim, poses a terrific question: has Venus’ career eclipsed Serena’s?

* Now we move to the hard courts and wonder whether Donald Young, John Isner (both of whom fell and are close to being out of the top 100) and Sam Querrey can make a move. Can Bethanie Mattek continue her momentum from the spring/summer and make a Robby Ginepri-like charge through the summer?

And can Rafa play well in the States, particularly the Open? Will his knees, the ones that Uncle Toni admits are so tender that the family wants Rafa to play LESS on the hard stuff, allow him to show New York his greatness?

And does Roger, whose performance at Wimbledon showed he is certainly not done, feel a little pressure to win Slams sooner rather than later?

From the States comes word that this Wimbledon final mattered, that Fed and Rafa have registered with the American sporting public.

Except the order must be changed – it is now Rafa and Roger.

John McEnroe said it in the moments after the match – Nadal is No. 1. I don’t challenge John’s opinion. Rather I only question how anyone can be No. 1 with minimal success on hard courts.

But that does not detract from a classic Wimbledon final. One that legions, including John, are calling the best ever played.

Now John can’t be objective, and other longtime observers claim it is in contention with 1980 Borg-McEnroe for the “best ever” claim. This match, though, will grow in statue with time. Our appreciation for two champions willing to dig so deep physically, willing to fight so hard for something, wanting something so badly that they defy any physical limitations, is immense.

Their effort through a wet afternoon and evening at Wimbledon was cause for adoration. They are simply the best rivalry in sport since Ali-Frazier, Leonard-Hearns, and Nicklaus-Watson. The champions fully respect each other and the vibe emanates to all.

What decided this Wimbledon?

BREAK POINTS: They have played 10 sets in the last two Wimbledon’s and Nadal has only had his serve broken four times. This is the man with few aces but increased power and terrific play behind his serve. In Sunday’s final, Nadal played five-plus sets and was broken just once. This final resembled the 2007 French in that Roger had chances but Rafa was better on those big points.

NO FIFTH SET TIEBREAK: Which was likely Rafa’s biggest advantage. Federer has won five sets from Rafa in the last two Wimbledons and four have been in tiebreaks. Roger can’t break Rafa and the fifth set requires a break. Without one, Roger was at the whim of Rafa’s return game.

MENTAL STRENGTH: Perhaps the French Open hangover reared its head in the fifth set. Perhaps in the critical moment when one break would decide the match, it was Rafa’s belief that he could handle Fed’s serve that was decisive. Perhaps Rafa had the belief this year that he lacked last year because of the French final.

DUELING DELAYS: No doubt the first rain delay, in the third set, benefited Federer. But before a 2004 final could be written again (Fed was 1-1, 2-4 in the third when rain struck. Upon a resumption of play, he dominated Andy Roddick), a fifth set delay struck. At the time, Nadal’s faith was wandering. No rain and I believe Federer wins 6 in a row. But the last delay steadied Rafa and he survived into the “overtime.”

What does this mean?
 
Federer told Johnny Mac in our NBC interview that “it hurts.” I had never heard Roger say those words. John told me that Roger was intensely emotional. The effort expended in such a match could take time off the career of a champion who will soon turn 27.
 
Nadal has a terrific chance to finally ascent to the #1 rank by year’s end. Huge question: can he hold up on hard courts? Can he play enough tennis, and succeed in the US Open, to sustain the momentum generated by this historic double?

We are so lucky to watch this duo. Tennis is blessed to have two so fine. (Novak Djokovic is not yet worthy of inclusion with this pair.) All we can hope is that they persevere to do this again and again and again.

BREAK POINTS
Serena had chances, none more than a point to give her a 4-1 double break lead in the first set. It was the first of more than 10 break points that Venus saved, and it may have been the most important. If Serena had charged through the first set…..

MENTAL TOUGHNESS
Venus appeared to start slowly and for a few moments it looked like another of the Slam finals where Serena simply overpowered Venus. Perhaps it was saving that huge break point at 1-3 in the first and a subsequent bounce off the soft net cord, but Venus awakened. And her mind was strong. When the two played a 26-minute group of 3 games to start the second set, Serena finally cashed in a break. Venus calmly rose after the sitdown and broke back. That moment broke Serena’s spirit.

THE MAGIC KINGDOM
That is what Centre Court remains for Venus. No one moves better on grass than Venus. She has a belief on the most hallowed court in tennis that is unshakeable. The only person who had been able to shatter that belief was Serena but….

BEATING LITTLE SIS
Venus finally seemed to conquer the notion of taking something from Serena. It seemed through the glory years of 2002-03 that Serena had an easier time with the notion of beating Venus than vice versa. Well, Venus clearly ended that notion with Saturday’s win. And she played the classy big sister afterwards in every possible way while the disappointment was etched in Serena’s face. It was high quality tennis, the best match the sisters have ever produced against each other. They should be proud to produce two champions, two finalists who on Saturday held a private party on Centre Court.

Court 5 stands amongst the dozen “side courts” that ring Centre and Court 1. They are courts that allow players to feel like creatures in a zoo; spectators walk around the courts in constant conversation while player sometimes no more than 10 feet away are playing a significant match. It toughens some players and weeds out others.

But the proximity is special, achieved nowhere else.

And that’s what drew a throng to Court 5 in the morning. They ringed the court 6-deep and security personnel were preventing people from accessing some perimeter walkways.

The attraction: Rafa Nadal was hitting with John McEnroe.

Think about this: the morning of his Wimbledon semi, a young man born 2 years after Mac’s last Slam title asked the 49-year-old legend to share a warm up hit.

Needless to say, John was flattered. And the Wimbledon ticket holders were entertained.

The moment spoke volumes about Nadal, his respect for the game, even for a champion he never saw play. It speaks to Nadal’s assurance that he was winning to endure the large throng of fans without losing his focus on his match four hours hence. And it speaks to Rafa’s soul that he remembered it was a hit and that he takes pains not to show up a great player more than twice his age.

I watched about 5 minutes, mainly because my 6-3 standing allowed me to see over the crowd. More interesting to me was John’s post-mortem which was my privilege to receive in our NBC booth and some of which John shared on-air.

John repeatedly talked about Nadal’s backhand; the improvement in the stroke now allows him to hit winners from anywhere. And John astutely noted that the better backhand should allow Nadal to not expend energy in hitting run-around forehands.

I have seen John hit with many great players. Rarely have I seen him so impressed. Nothing that happened on the court Friday altered anyone’s view on Nadal. Nor should it with Roger Federer. They are both peaking and it’s a gem when two champions meet with both playing at peak levels. That is what awaits us Sunday.

I have never seen that kind of gathering so I paused to assess.

It was Richard Williams holding court.

My views on the man are clear: he is reprehensible in his words (racist) and deeds (the abandonment of his first family including three kids, see VENUS ENVY by Jon Wertheim for more details.)

My views on the father are also clear: he and Oracene Price raised two intelligent, talented and increasingly classy women.

He has said he is leaving Wimbledon, that he can’t watch the Sisters face each other. It doesn’t matter that he won’t be here. He has already won.

Women’s tennis is in a precarious state. Globalization doesn’t sell in America, the best emerging American player in recent years won’t acknowledge the U.S. (Maria Sharapova), the tour is losing its title sponsor and the world’s best player abruptly quit.

So enter the women who propelled the tour to new heights in the early part of this decade. They have been part-time players since with part-time success. But now, with a vacuum at the top of the sport, temporarily occupied by Ana Ivanovic while Sharapova flounders through the summer, Venus and Serena have made women’s tennis relevant again.

When they play Saturday, for the third time in a Wimbledon final at a Club they have owned (only one women’s final this decade has been without a Williams), America will watch. And that matters in tennis. The world will also watch, if nothing else but to see how time has treated the Sisters.

They will see a mature Venus who carries herself with grace and has superior grass court movement. They will see a pleasantly maturing Serena, who has finally tempered the loose tongue that has often dismissed and disrespected opponents.

Venus is never more confident than on Centre Court. It is her Magic Kingdom. Serena is healthy, playing in her eighth consecutive Slam, a personal record.

They were both pressed in the second sets of their semis, but neither was threatened with defeat. They simply serve too well.

But they have faced overmatched competition to this point, particularly Venus. No one else can challenge them thus the challenge must come from each other.

Rarely in their previous Slam finals did that happen. Five years of wisdom and maturity could well lead to a better match. As unpleasant as the assignment may be, I think the Sisters will put their lives on hold for two hours and give us a worthy final Saturday.

Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal obliterated their foes; Rafa taking down a top-10 player (Andy Murray) so thoroughly as to render his five-set comeback career changing win in the fourth round irrelevant.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

Federer and Nadal are ManU and Chelsea. They are the Yankees and Red Sox – in good years. They are the kings; Rafa owns clay, Roger owns hard courts and the grass is looking more like a tossup despite Roger’s five consecutive titles.

Mario Ancic had precedent in his corner as the last man to best Fed on grass. Three games into their quarter, it was clear that the 2002 result would never be repeated. The King served impeccably, dropping only 10 points. Ancic was destroyed in the first set, fought back after a two-hour rain delay to play with passion but never made a dent on Federer’s serve.

Tickets for the Nadal-Murray affair started at $3000 on the broker’s market. England was captivated by a marriage certified Monday night on Centre Court; Murray bonding with his fans for the first time.

Could the recently maturing Murray enter the “big time” with a resounding match in the biggest moment of his career?

Nadal has made his living the last 3 years smothering such hopes and dreams. Murray fell as many before him, working so hard to hold serve only to see Nadal, with a better serve yet few aces, be unbreakable. When Murray became engaged in baseline rallies, Nadal would uncork a winner from unfathomable positions, no different than if he was rolling in the red clay.

The general theme of the BBC commentary was that Murray simply wasn’t ready to match up with Nadal.

But who is?

And with Federer for that matter?

These are the two Kings. Djokovic may demand his place in a troika, but he must another major first. I am a Federer fan for Rafa has yet to prove his worth on the hard courts that dominate the tour. But it would be an utter shock, despite Marat Safin’s resume and 2005 upset of Fed in the Aussie semis, to see anything but a third straight Wimbledon final between the Kings.

This is a glorious time in tennis. Those of us blessed to watch and chronicle this should be grateful to have another Bjorn Borg-John McEnroe or Pete Sampras-Andre Agassi in our midst. We know it will be short-lived, that the game will claim these greats sooner rather than later thus we need to treasure them now.

We confronted this for years with Tim Henman – how to convey the obsession in England with a Brit at Wimbledon. Anyone that covers this event wonders about the day when a Brit wins. Will the town survive? Will anyone work in the next month?

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

Murray’s win over Richard Gasquet afforded a small peek at the possibilities. Longtime Wimbledon observers called it one of the best atmospheres they have seen alongside the famous 2001 Rafter-Ivanisevic final. The AELTC gambled with weather and assigned Murray-Nadal the late match Wednesday. More important the Brit gets maximum time to recover from his late night than to worry about rain. Oh, they must hope to avoid a repeat of the disastrous scheduling that cost Henman a shot at the 2001 title.

On court, the Williams Sisters relentless march to the semis continued. And their success, along with the absence of so many of the top-ranked women, has raised questions.

Tracy Austin wrote in a London paper Tuesday that this “was a thin time at the top of women’s tennis….There is a big vacuum at the top of the game that none of the current players seems able to fill.” True I say, but no fault of the Sisters. Certainly their path here has been easier with the lack of significant opponents, but their play at Wimbledon, especially Venus, requires no apology. Simply, they have the track record.

The question arose in a Tennis Channel discussion with Jon Wertheim: Would you rather have the Sisters playing part-time for more years or the Clijsters-Henin mode of full-time play and early retirement? Jon’s position was that the WTA Tour requires full commitments from top players to make the “business” of tennis viable. Agreed, but I would lean to the longer run. Allow me to watch players grow, develop, mature, peak and finally, slowly decline. Meteoric rise and fall is of no interest.

How in the name of sense can the seedings be allowed? I am told that the women at Wimbledon are seeded by the rankings with no exception, explaining the incredible scenario of Thursday. Elena Dementieva will be the higher seed against Venus….and a massive underdog!

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

Murray deserves credit. I left the grounds with Murray down two sets. Walking through the crowd watching on “Henman Hill”, there was a natural and palapble level of disappontment, the kind that in England is usually accompanied by a tall pint of Pimm’s. So imagine my surprise when I turned on my hotel TV to see Murray rallying in the third. And then the reports started arriving from folks still on Centre Court, phrases like “You can’t believe the atmosphere,” “The crowd is going crazy,” and “Murray is going to win this!”
 
The game that advanced Murray, that may elevate him into the ranks of the top players, was the 10th game of the third set. Gasquet had finally broken Murray for a 5-4 lead and came out to serve for the match. Murray quickly struck to 0-40 but Gasquet saved the first two break points. Then, though, the Frenchman double-faulted, Murray was still alive and the reversal had begun.
 
By the fifth set, Centre Court was engulfed in a roar, Murray was charging and Gasquet, who recall rallied in a similar manner to stun Andy Roddick last year, was asking the chair to halt play. No stay from the governor. And just past 9 in the evening, Murray ran to the court with a flex of the bicep that we hope is never to be repeated. But he gets his “muscle match” with Nadal Wednesday.
 
The Sisters were terrific Monday. On court, they both handled their assignment with relative ease. Only a brief bobble by Venus when trying to win the last game slowed her progress. Serena easily handled Bethanie Mattek. Both moved well on the grass, looked confident and appear destined for Saturday.
 
More impressive, though, was how they handled the scheduling. Six Wimbledon titles between them and they were assigned to Court 2, seating capacity 2,130. It was not a decision worthy of champions. And the expected questions were there for both Serena and Venus. With the door opened multiple times for them to criticize the AELTC, neither took the bait. All Serena admitted to was some “surprise.” I have come to expect such class from Venus; Serena’s poise in the moment is newer and quite refreshing.
 
On Tuesday, Venus draws Tamarine Tanasugarn, age 31, on Court 1 while Serena gets a Centre Court match with Aggie Radwanska, a talented 19-year-old. Different types of opponents but similar in that neither should slow the Sisters Express.
 
It’s still remarkably dry at Wimbledon; the grass has dried and the courts are browning on the edge. Some rain is predicted for early Wednesday, but it’s one day only as we march through one of the driest Wimbledons in recent history.
 
Also on Tuesday, the Bryans receive a Centre Court match, following Serena in the men’s doubles. The Sisters, after their singles wins, advanced to the quarters in doubles with an easy win over the Spanish duo of Ruano Pascual and Medina Garrigues. And, top-ranked junior Melanie Oudin, No. 1 seed here, won her first round match Monday.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

Is Roger rattled by the French final? No outward signs were apparent.
 
Does he concern himself with the “media writing him off?” (I find the question unfair, as the “media” in tennis in often comprised of former players whose job is to analyze. I see no dismissal of Federer, rather a lovefest for Nadal, understandable given the French results and Rafa’s  near-miss here last year.) Roger admits the talk is an irritant; he claims he forgot the French the moment he left Paris and that he is reigning champ, 5 times at Wimbledon and 4 at the Open, and should be afforded the commensurate respect. Point well taken.
 
I asked Roger about his streaks: 16 straight Slam semis (active) and 10 straight Slam finals (ended at Australia). Are these a source of pride? He said yes, especially when seeing Novak Djokovic an early KO vicitim here and Andy at the French last year. His consistency is something he cherishes, usually discussed in terms of his #1 ranking but very real in his Slam performances.
 
Hard to understand Monday’s schedule. The Club likes to give each top player a Centre Court match before the semis in order to share the experience. But how could Venus, defending and four-time champ, and Serena,  a two-time champ, be scheduled consecutively on Court 2, the third show court and one without commentary booths? It, sadly, has every look of a slap at champions.

Being a prominent sporting figure in these parts is lucrative. After all, there is little competition in that arena.

Check out MediaZone Tennis | E-mail Ted at MediaZone’s Mailbag | Sign up for my RSS Feed

Winning Wimbledon, though, would make Andy Murray a sporting hero.

And what’s funny is that his game might allow him, and a nation, to dream.

Murray has always had the talent, now he has some sound grass -court experience, and finally, he seems to have grown into his body and out of his immaturity. His Saturday win over Tommy Haas featured high level play on grass, including the short variety that endears Murray to all who truly love the game.
 
What struck me was his body language- it was less mopy, less Gumby-shouldered, less negative. A wise person recently commented that the difference with John McEnroe was that John used anger as fuel. It was often a positive for John while Murray seemed to drag himself down through his behavior.

Now, Murray looks and acts like a man who believes he can someday become a British hero. Perhaps not now, with Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal in their prime, but someday soon.
 
Nadal followed form with a decisive win over Nicolas Kiefer – after a first set in which the over-30 Kiefer turned bacvk the clock. He struck serves in the mid-130’s, moved adeptly and struck the ball with significant pace. Pushed to a tiebreak, Rafa delivered the goods, then broke Kiefer’s spirit in the next two sets. A potential Nadal-Murray quarter is still a delicious thought
 
I lamented here how frustrating it is to pull for James Blake. Perhaps Richard Gasquet is that man for the French. He bails on Davis Cup, wanting no part of an indoor match with Andy Roddick. He bails on Roland Garros, the tournament where he clearly cannot handle the pressure. But at Wimbledon, he is a different player, again in the round of 16 and a legit threat to disrupt the Nadal-Murray match. Wimbledon is to Gasquet what the US Open is to Blake, their one major to shine.
 
Jelena Jankovic wanders through the first week in anonymity, although her third-round win owned a share of drama. A hyper-extended knee hampered, followed by a tape job that hampered Jankovic enough to cause her to remove it in the third set. She is always injured, always bandaged and always calling trainers on-court. Yet she is still No. 2 in the world and still a darkhorse threat in Week 2.
 
Monday is Williams day. But I hope that Bethanie Mattek seizes the moment to make people talk about her tennis rather than her wardrobe.