READ BEFORE YOU PROCEED: D2G wears no responsibility of the views published here by the respective Author. This Editorial is used here for Study Purpose. Students are advised to learn the word-meaning, The Art of Writing Skills and understand the crux of this Editorial.
MEANINGS are given in BOLD and ITALIC
In times to come, 2017 will be remembered by tennis fans as the year the Australian Open went retro (imitative of a style or fashion from the recent past). For, it featured the big-stage revival (an improvement in the condition, strength, or fortunes of someone or something) of two of the sport’s most storied rivalries (competition for the same objective or for superiority in the same field). Roger Federer was pushed to the limit by Rafael Nadal’s relentless (constant, continual, continuous, non-stop), shape-shifting style before the Swiss maestro’s sublime artistry (creative skill or ability) prevailed (prove more powerful or superior) in a classic — his third win in nine Major finals over the Spaniard, his 18th Grand Slam crown and his first since Wimbledon in 2012.
And Serena Williams, playing sister Venus in a Major final after nearly eight years, continued her dominance (supremacy, superiority, ascendancy), capturing a professional-era record 23rd title. The warm nostalgia (remembrance, recollection) these great champions evoked (bring or recall) was accompanied by the thrill of the unexpected. Of the four, only Serena’s presence in the final was unsurprising.
The resurgence (an increase or revival after a period of little activity) of the old guard — the first time in the Open Era that all four finalists were over the age of 30 — might have had something to do with the faster courts in Melbourne this year. Federer, among others, certainly thought so. He said it kept points shorter than normal and made fewer demands of the body. He also felt that those who had started out before 2005 had an edge — they were more instinctively (without conscious thought; by natural instinct) attuned (make receptive or aware) to the quicker movement of the ball.
It takes singular skill and a certain ruthlessness, however, to make capital of the smallest advantages, and Federer and Serena, and to a marginally lesser extent Nadal and Venus, did precisely that. Federer, who missed six months last year with an injury, knew he could not allow Nadal time and space.
With his opponent looking in excellent physical condition, Federer could not afford to be drawn into long, bruising rallies; he had to dictate the tempo of play. This meant taking the ball uncomfortably early, with a narrow margin for error, and it required all of Federer’s genius to pull it off. He also had to overcome the psychological scars of past defeats to Nadal. Federer’s nerve in big matches against his greatest rival has been questioned before, but on Sunday he displayed a calm resolve.
Serena, too, had to master her emotions against Venus, who is both beloved sister and formidable (inspiring fear or respect through being impressively large, powerful, intense, or capable) threat. While her explosive athleticism is the most apparent facet of her game, Serena’s underrated tennis intelligence has contributed significantly to her capturing a record 10 Grand Slam titles after turning 30. With their triumphs (a great victory or achievement) in Melbourne, Federer and Serena, both 35, managed what only a few of the greats have. They quietened the voice of doubt that speaks in every athlete’s ear — a voice that grows more persistent (continuing to exist or occur over a prolonged period) with age — and raged against the dying of the light.