Give me a non-Federer match, any day!

Last night I watched one of the most intriguing tennis matches of the first Grand Slam of the year. Featuring the 2-time French champion Nadal and the wannabe champion Andy Murray, this match was one of tremendous battle of wills. What one saw was a contest of lacerating intensity with twists and turns, ups and downs that were extremely nerve-wracking on the spectators as well as the players. Just when you thought that one of them was down and out, he would pull out an astonishing shot from his enormous repertoire stunning the opponent and eliciting gasps from the packed court on Rod Laver Arena. In this cliffhanger that lasted just under 4 hours, Nadal won, not because he played better than his opponent, but because he was far more calm, composed and patient under pressure as compared to the erratic, temperamental just-one-year-younger-to-Nadal Murray. The reigning French champion just refused to give in and eventually prevailed, much like the Spanish conquistadors did aeons ago. This surely is the sign of times to come; the future of tennis.

The Australian Open this year featured some of the best competitive tennis one has seen in recent years. They tell me, now that the first grand slam of the year is half-way through, and since we are almost near the quarter finals, the tournament is only gonna get more interesting. The first week of any tournament, they opine, is to eliminate the also-rans. But to me some of the best matches of this tournament have already been played in the first week of the championship. Case in point, the match last night. But that was not all. There have been others too, and some of the most enthralling matches have featured the 2005 champion.

Consider, for instance, the first-round match that Safin played against Benjamin Becker (yes, the one whose claim to fame is winning over Agassi in the latter's last competitive match). At the end of the match the scoreboard read 5-7, 7-6, 3-6, 6-3, 6-4 in favour of Safin. Down 2 sets to 1 Safin showed enormous grit and fighting spirit to come back and win the last two sets. This wasn't the end of struggle for this former champion at the tournament. In his second round match against Israeli sensation Dudi Sela, at one point Safin was two points away from the exit route. But the big Russian dug deep to prevail - help of course came from above (in the form of rain) giving him a much-needed 15-minute breather to recoup, recharge and reemerge as the winner that he truly is. After the restart Safin started off with an ace, duly forcing a tie-breaker which he won, and then steamrolled the Israeli and won - game, set and match.

Safin was not the only one to feature in some astonishing comeback matches of the tournament. Lleyton Hewitt was all rusty in his first round contest, surviving a mighty scare with American qualifier Michael Russell taking a two-set lead. Hewitt had to dig deep inside and take recourse in all his resources in order to make it to the second round. In yet another fascinating contest in the first round Nalbandian prevailed in a dramatic five-setter against Janko Tipsarevic before the Serbian withdrew in the final set with the score at 6-7(5) 4-6 7-6(2) 6-0 2-1. Or take for instance that engrossing play off between Andy Roddick and Mario Ancic, won finally by the 6th seed 6-3, 3-6, 6-1, 5-7, 6-4. In a battle of big servers, Roddick held fast to finally get the better of his opponent. This two and half hour match was certainly one of the most gripping, a classic no-holds-barred contests between two equally deserving opponents. You would have wanted both men to win, both to advance to the next round, if only that were possible.

Then, of course, there was the punishing four-setter that saw the 2006 finalist and tournament sensation Marcos Baghdatis exit from this year's championship. Despite an injury time out for Gael Monfils, the 20-year-old from Paris triumphed over Baghdatis, 7-6(5) 6-2 2-6 6-0. With Monfils having a great run in the tournament with his near-impossible shots and glide across the entire court, it seemed as though Melbourne had found itself a new cult figure. As he himself described, Monfils surely was having "the best time of life".

A fascinating encounter does not necessarily mean blowing out cobwebs with gruelling five-setters. To me, a match is one where there is sustained drama, excitement and improbability, with the tide of the battle shifting back and forth ensuring that you don't turn your attention away from the idiot box even for a minute, lest you miss out on an astonishing rally resulting in about 20 to 25 shots before one of them makes a mistake or a serve and volley that is a feast to the eyes, resulting in that edge-of-the-seat experience that you savour until another such match. This is probably why I don't understand it, when they say the real tournament starts in the second week, just around the time of the quarter finals. This is also why I probably don't particularly like watching a match in which one of the players literally runs through the opponent.

In contrast to the above mentioned plays offs, consider these headlines: Federer blitzes Bjorkman or Federer cruises or Clijsters on song. Honestly, nothing wrong with any of them. Truly, I do believe Federer is a great champion and his game is a treat to watch. But his contests are not riveting or absorbing, gripping you from the moment go. They are like a ride on a smooth river, with absolutely no waves or tides, no crests and troughs. No offence meant to Federer fans, but that predictability can indeed get boring - the winner of such matches more often than not is a foregone conclusion.

Give me a Marat Safin vs Roddick encounter any day. Or the one between Nadal and Murray. At least you know that is a contest being played between two equally qualified and equally deserving humans. And you got a match on hand.