For the non-tennis fans, this past Sunday the “greatest match” ever to be played in the history of tennis occurred in the Wimbledon Final match up between #1 ranked Roger Federer and #2 ranked Rafael Nadal. Roger Federer, widely regarded as the best player EVER at age 26, is going for his 6th straight Wimbledon Championship, surpassing Bjorn Borg. Also, the 22 year-old Rafael Nadal is looking to become the first player since Bjorn Borg to win the French Open, where he beat Federer for the 2nd straight year and 4th straight overall, and Wimbledon in the same year. So as you can tell there was much anticipated hype. It was an amazing and exquisite display of exceptional shot making, unfiltered emotion, and raw guts and determination. After all is said and done, Rafael Nadal was able to beat Roger Federer in a thrilling 5th setter that was the longest game with the most games played (Rules of Tennis), and tennis analysts and commentators are immediately commentating about match, exclaiming that this is the best match ever in the history of tennis.
Although the statement about the match is most likely true, it reminds me of a sensation going on in the sports world and that is people becoming “prisoners of the moment”. I think people want to be able to boast about witnessing “history” and that in doing so they fail to properly examine the event and place it in its proper historical text. This is especially prevalent in Sport Center telecasts which sensationalize certain events in order to attract viewers.
An example would be Super Bowl XLII, where the NY Giants defeated the heavily favorite New England Patriots, who were undefeated entering the game. Sure, the game is considered an instant classic and that is synonymous, but to consider it the greatest Super Bowl after 1 day is doing a great disservice to the history of the NFL and Super Bowls. Another example would be Kobe Bryant scoring 81 points against the Toronto Raptors 2 years ago. Again, people are so quick to proclaim it “the greatest offensive display in the history of the NBA”, but aren’t people forgetting that Wilt Chamberlain scored 100 points? Aren’t people forgetting about the individual performances from Michael Jordan during the playoffs and NBA Finals where the magnitude is much greater than a regular season game?
If we witness something great, just enjoy the fact that what we witness was astounding, and just let the event place itself in its proper historical context instead of us immediately proclaiming it to be something that is not.
2 comments:
I really liked the way you built up the Wimbledon Final match between Federer and Nadal. I might be making an incorrect assumption but I'm guessing most people don't know or care too much for tennis. You gave enough information to draw in the reader and hype the match. It was an incredible back and forth match and it surely left a lasting moment in the memories of all who were witnesses.
I completely agree with you when you mention that "people want to be able to boast about witnessing 'history'" and don't really examine the event more thoroughly. This year's Super Bowl was a great example. It had its classic moment (David Tyree's catch) but many would argue that there were better Super Bowls.
The comparison between Kobe's 81-point performance and Wilt and MJ's performances is another great one. It is difficult to instantly compare performances from different eras. Each performance was spectacular and should be appreciated on its own without comparison.
The way you describe us as "prisoners of the moment" can probably hold true for other aspects of life asides from sports. If we were caught in the middle of a devastating natural disaster or some "historical" event, we would be "prisoners" of those moments as well. Perhaps an example of something asides from sports would be good too.
This is a really great post, Sam. I like how you've used the Wimbledon Final video to start off your discussion of sports and “prisoners of the moment.” Is this your term, or are you getting it from somewhere else? It is very compelling, and your final assessment is right on: "If we witness something great, just enjoy the fact that what we witness was astounding, and just let the event place itself in its proper historical context instead of us immediately proclaiming it to be something that is not." This is the critical point of 'difference', right? We have to appreciate different things differently, in different contexts, rather than trying to reduce, equate, or compare events outside of history. This is a thoughtful and energized post. Nicely done!
Post a Comment