Wimbledon final

It was indeed a pleasure to read D. Chandramouli's letter on July 9 giving an account of this year's Wimbledon men's and women's finals in his inimitable style. Apart from his signature style, gloss and expertise in the use of the choicest words and phrases, the contents of his letter in terms of knowledge of the game of tennis and its finer points were really very enjoyable.

The only place where his narrative jarred me was his description of Federer, calling him a "robot programmed to win" and a person with a robotic smile. I think this is far off the mark. The only robot I have seen on the tennis court was Bjorn Borg, whose face never changed, not only when he won or lost a point but also when there was a grossly wrong line call against him. His expression also did not change much whether he won or lost a championship. He was really a player with nerves made of steel and ice!

Federer is different. I think he is too unassuming, too polite and too well behaved for a champion, and in the era of flamboyant enfants terribles strutting across the tennis courts, he appears to have descended from another planet. To call him a person with a robotic smile is really like missing the very core of Federer's personality.

The Swiss, the watchmakers to the world for centuries, are known for their precision and so it should come as no surprise that Federer enjoys this genetic advantage when it comes to the placement of his shots.

In my 40 years of watching Wimbledon, I have seen many styles of championship winners -- Pat Cash climbing into the gallery, Andre Agassi falling to his knees, etc. I have seen players weep for having lost a championship when it was almost in their hands but slipped away, but I don't remember having seen a champion weep with joy in a silent and somewhat self-conscious manner after recording his third consecutive Wimbledon title!

Maybe Chandramouli meant to say that Federer is a robot programmed to win and also to weep after winning.

K. B. KALE, Jakarta