Published: July 09, 2008 10:39 am         

'You cannot be serious!'

I read in Monday's Times-News that Cathy Coughenour is on vacation and doing quite well, and that's something I'm happy to know.

I wonder if she went to Wimbledon? Certainly her favorite color, white, would be appropriate for The Championships. Wherever she went I hope she's having a great time, that's for sure. And, if she did go to Wimbledon, she saw an amazing round of championship matches.

I missed the all-Williams women's final on Saturday, but watched most of Sunday's Rafael Nadal-Roger Federer men's final and that's about as good as it gets. Tennis needed a weekend like this one, and immediately (before it was even over) the Nadal-Federer match was being compared to the 1980 Wimbledon final when Bjorn Borg beat John McEnroe in five epic sets to win his fifth and final Wimbledon.

So, what do you think? Go to www.times-news.com and vote on our Internet sports question. Currently it's 69 percent to 31 percent in favor of Nadal-Federer.

I really don't think I would be able to say one was better than the other one, because I think they were so similar: Each one had a rock-star left-hander trying to knock off the favored stoical and staid right-hander, who had dominated Wimbledon for close to half a decade; each one had tiebreakers out the yang (although this year's didn't have an 18-16 tiebreaker); each one had extended fifth sets, because they don't use tiebreakers in fifth sets; and each one had all the tension, drama and wonderful shot-making anybody could ask for.

I'm old, you see, so I've become one of those old guys who used to drive me nuts when they'd brush me off with, "Everything was better then." Well, the level of tennis being played in 1980 wasn't better than what we saw on Sunday. But certainly the health of the game was much better and far more interesting. The '70s and '80s, after all, marked tennis' golden age as on both the men's and women's sides, the top 15 to 20-ranked players were all stars, you know? Tennis, its players and their personal lives were front-page news around the world; and back-page news in New York - which is the same thing. Although not to the extent that we see today.

I mean, I never dreamed I would ever write a headline for this newspaper like the one I wrote for Tuesday's morning's Times-News: "A-Rod's wife cites 'extramarital affairs;' Madonna denies involvement"

Madonna denies involvement? Only in New York. Only the Yankees. Only this day and age.

Anyway, to be honest, the real reason I would lean to the 1980 match as being the better one is because nobody had ever seen anything like it before as I believe that might have been the first year they used tiebreakers at Wimbledon. Plus, nobody dreamed Borg could even be challenged on grass in those days, but McEnroe darn near beat him (Actually, Roscoe Tanner - remember him? - did give Borg a run for his money the year before on the grass).

Borg said afterward that during that 1980 match, it marked the first time he had ever thought to himself that he might lose. Well, then he did lose to McEnroe in five sets of the U.S. Open final, then again the next year in the Wimbledon final to end his title run at five. Then, after falling again to McEnroe in the '81 U.S. Open final, Borg basically moved away to one of his islands and was rarely seen or heard from in tennis again as McEnroe had clearly become the best player in the world.

I wonder what will happen to Federer now that he's finally lost a Wimbledon final, and lost it to a player who seemed to already have his number on all over surfaces? Another apt comparison between Federer and Borg, besides their dignified, gentlemanly ways, is, great as they both were and are, there was always one tournament neither one of them could win: Borg could never win the U.S. Open. In fact, he hated the Open because of the hardcourts and its carnival (read loud, ugly American) atmosphere. Federer, on the other hand, like so many others, can't win on the clay at the French Open, which Nadal, of course, owns.

Federer is a great champion. A real gentleman, just like Borg was, although it does appear Federer's parents didn't have his personality surgically removed at birth as it often seemed Borg's parents had done. I wouldn't count Federer out of anything, particularly the upcoming U.S. Open. Nor would I count out Nadal, who seems poised to go on one of those monster rolls the way McEnroe did in 1981 once he had finally beaten Borg at Wimbledon. I just wonder if Nadal's body will hold up, given the attacking, physical way he plays.

Tennis has the Williams sisters on the women's side. The men's game could really stand to see one of the great rivalries in its history continue to flourish in the right here and now. So here's hoping Federer and Nadal are both practicing on a hardcourt even as we speak, because this really has the chance to be something great.

But as far as which one was the better tennis match? I'm content to stay in the '80s, because, as I said, there was nothing to compare the 1980 match to at that time, yet that's the match the 2008 match is being compared to now.

One person, however, who saw both the 1980 and 2008 Wimbledon finals says the 2008 match was hands-down the better one. And that person would be one John Patrick McEnroe.

Of course, Johnny Mac probably believes the 1981 Wimbledon final was better than this one. He won that one.

Contact Mike Burke at mburke@times-news.com.