Working as a presenter after a successful tennis career, Vijay Amritraj has watched Roger Federer from the closest of quarters. Right from his win over Pete Sampras in the fourth round of 2001 Wimbledon to his loss to Hubert Hurkacz in the 2021 Wimbledon quarterfinal.
With Federer announcing his decision to retire from the sport after next week's Laver Cup, Amritraj, who is the tournament director at the ongoing WTA Chennai Open, talks to ESPN about the Swiss maestro and how he evolved into a GOAT.
When I say Federer, what's the first game that comes to your mind?
I remember Federer playing Sampras at the [2001] Wimbledon. I was covering the match, I was doing television. Actually, I've covered his entire career, all the Grand Slams, for television. I saw him grow from a good player to a great player to a champion to a genius. And it's very rare that happens, that you see that transformation, and how he has handled himself all the way through. I think that's why he has the fanbase that he has.
What do you remember from that match? Anything that stood out?
The strange thing is even before match ended, even before Federer won, I got the feeling that we were seeing the changing of the guard.
What really made me happy about Pete's retirement was the fact that he then retired after he won the 2002 US Open. Which is why I'm thankful that Federer is doing it on his own terms. He wanted to leave after the Laver Cup, but he realised that he probably won't do another year till Wimbledon comes around. I'm sure he would have liked to do it at Wimbledon, but this is the right moment for him to do it and he's literally doing it on his terms.
It must be hard to leave the sport while being conscious of the fact that you can't make it through another season...
It is a hard decision. If you've played at a high level, it's very hard to leave the sport. And that's why you have to make sure that when you do leave the sport, that you have squeezed out every element of your desire for it, that you literally will not want to get to that work ethic again, at least for a good period of time, till you're actually doing something else where that discipline translates into the rest of your life.
What are your views on Federer's game? He was one of the few who played a touch game in an era of power.
He played a modern version of yesterday's tennis. He was able to show skill in different aspects of the game, where everyone else kind of played fairly straightforward, one-dimensional tennis, and very good at it from the backcourt for moving forward, he was able to give you a sense of variety. And the grace and elegance with which he moved gave you the feeling of you know, you're watching a ballet dancer perform on a tennis court. You don't really hear a move when he moved. That's why that graceful elegance and majesty of the way he played came out to the viewer.
He's also a stark contrast to someone like Rafael Nadal, who grinds out those points, but what do you think helped Federer look so effortless?
Well, a lot of people have different ways of delivering the goods. The biggest comparison always drawn is between John McEnroe and Ivan Lendl. You know, what took McEnroe 30 minutes to learn, took Lendl a week. But Lendl put in the week and became the world's No.1 and McEnroe was also the world's No. 1. Similarly, Roger puts in 50% effort for a 150% return, whereas Nadal puts in 200% for a 150% return, but they both delivered the goods.
The good news is that for about four or five years, very few people were actually matching Federer until Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray came along and caught up with him. And that forced Federer to work even harder to keep up with the challengers.
We had rivalries. Sampras and Andre (Agassi). Stefan (Edberg) and Boris (Becker). McEnroe and (Jimmy) Connors. But to have these three guys for such a duration of time, and they've all won more majors than everyone else. So that was the uniqueness of this era.
Do you have any fond memories of Federer from your many interactions with him?
Oh, wonderful memories. We've both been Rolex ambassadors for the last 20 years. So we've been at events together, and we have had dinners together. His parents are wonderful people. It's been just a terrific relationship.
The interviews I've done with him have been quite out of the ordinary. I was able to compare him to...when I did an interview with Tiger Woods, in Jupiter, Florida...I was able to compare the two. When Tiger had won 14 Majors and Roger had won 18, I did ask him if he would be able to catch up with Roger, even though they're completely different sports.
So when you talk to the guys like this, you see what goes through their minds, and why they will be considered geniuses at work. That's exactly what Roger was.
Do you remember your first interaction with him?
The very first time I met him in person, it was in Shanghai. I was coming down in the lift at the hotel and there was another lady in the lift with me. We got talking and she said she'd seen me play over the years and that she was from South Africa.
We came down to the lobby, and she said she would like to introduce me to her son. So she called Roger over and it was Roger's mother [Lynette].
We shook hands and she turned to him and said 'when you actually go through your career, this is the guy I wanted to emulate to behave.' I thought it was a very...it happened out of the blue. I think Roger and I started off on a good note.
When he was talking to you, did you ever realise that he was destined for greatness?
No, I think the racquet did the talking. He was always very special when you watched him play. The interesting thing about watching them play even in 1998-99 was the fact that you could see there was a difference in the greatness of what he was doing over what everyone else was doing.
Because he literally played great shots with instinct. Sometimes you yourself don't know what you're doing and it's practically impossible for the opponent to know what you're doing. So Roger was that and he played it with such great elegance. But when he started doing that, his backhand was suspect and then it got better and better as the decades progressed.
What would you say of the legacy he's left behind?
I think he has left behind the tremendous feeling of 'I want to play the sport' to every youngster. There's no part of the globe that would not know Roger Federer and he played the second most popular global sport after soccer perhaps.
He carried his whole genius brand on his shoulders. Through the years, he proved why he was so great, why he was a genius, and then carried himself with fans and sponsors and people alike. Those things generally encourage kids to play that particular sport. He certainly left that legacy with youngsters, both boys and girls. And to be able to speak two-three languages fluently and address the press in a variety of languages.....it makes him more than just a genius tennis player.
Do you have a favourite Roger match?
I got to pick the Wimbledon finals, all of them! I mean, every time you looked it was Roger Federer and this guy, Roger Federer and that guy...because I covered those matches and you're in it. You literally don't even feel like going to the restroom. I think those were special moments. I know he played great matches in Australia but the ones that truly stick out are his Wimbledon matches.