Will Roger Federer strike back?

[1]

For those who started to watch tennis from the 21st century, the sport went on to become synonymous with one man: Roger Federer. Had it not been for Federer, the start of the open era in tennis would probably have served as the marker for the chroniclers of the history of the game.
Federer, now 31, started his remarkable journey in professional tennis at the tender age of 17 in 1998. In 2001, just when the Wimbledon crowd was bracing itself for a fifth straight victory for Pete Sampras, Federer emerged from relative obscurity to cause what was the the biggest upset till Federer's own exit a dozen years later. But, it was in 2003 that Federer kept his date with destiny by ousting Mark Philippoussis, a player whose game was almost tailor-made for the lawns of Wimbledon, in the final of 'The Championships'.
The victory marked the beginning of a new age in tennis where Federer would not only be serenaded by tennis fans the world over but odes and paeans would be composed describing his glorious campaigns. Incongruent though it may seem, the only individual in the abyss of time with whom Federer can be compared is probably Gaius Julius Caesar. Rome had not known a man who could orate, write, lead, legislate and of course, also destroy as proficiently as Caesar. When it comes to ancient Rome, the history books say 'before Caesar' and 'After Caesar'. So is the case with tennis with respect to Federer.
But, after holding the entire world in thrall with his sublime display of tennis, it looks like the invulnerable Federer is fallible after all. The likes of Marat Safin, Andy Roddick, Lleyton Hewitt were all brushed aside brutally, albeit with Federer's eternal grace before a certain Rafael Nadal, he who refused to accept defeat, sauntered along and broke the illusion that Federer was invincible. The two locked horns umpteen number of times and each time they confronted each other, the life of tennis fans were enriched by many a notch. Then came the Novak Djokovics and the Andy Murrays, the youth brigade, who seemed to hold the edge against Roger Federer. With each passing year, it seemed as if Federer's aura of invulnerability was diminishing.
In 2008, Djokovic sent Federer packing in straight sets at the Australian Open. In Paris later that year, Federer was handed a bagel (6-0) for the first time since 2002 by Nadal. And then at Wimbledon, where he was the uncrowned king, Nadal proved to be his undoing yet again, defeating him in what was the match of the decade. But, Federer, eager to gain lost ground, came back like a wounded lion to win at Roland Garros and Wimbledon the next year.
By virue of his Wimbleodn triumph in 2009, Federer won his 15th Grand Slam and went past Sampras (14) as the most successful tennis player of all time. But, time hasn't been very kind to Federer. In 2011, Federer failed to win even a single Grand Slam tournament. It was the first time since 2002 that he failed in his quest for a major. Although he managed to lift the Wimbledon crown for a record-equalling seventh time in 2012, his defeat to Murray in the Olympic final later last year and his struggle against the top ranked players on the circuit this year are testimony to his waning prowess.
But, one must not read too much into Federer's defeat to Ukraine's Sergiy Stakhovsky, a serve and volley player with an extremely menacing serve. Just when his critics were beginning to write him off, the Swiss came back strongly to clinch his seventh Wimbledon title last year. To borrow an immortal phrase, never say never with Federer. After all, Sampras was 31 when he won his last Grand Slam title at the US open in 2002.