Roger Federer watches an era of domination ebb away

New York: One earthquake per night is enough for any city. So, while New York was still reeling from the seismic ripple of Roger Federer’s failure to make the quarter-finals of the US Open for the first time since David Nalbandian beat him in 2003, Rafael Nadal was doing his best to restore calm.

And, although it took him four sets to discourage the talented Philipp Kohlschreiber, at least he is still in the tournament, and might even win it for a second time. The odds of Federer adding to his tally of five trophies here are as long as Gareth Bale returning to Spurs.

The moment now belongs to Tommy Robredo, who did the dreadful deed and who meets his compatriot in the quarter-finals. Afterwards, he could hardly contain his joy.

“It’s amazing. For me, Roger for the moment is the best player of all times. And to beat him in a huge stadium like the US Open and in a grand slam, a match of five sets, it’s like a dream, no? I am so, so happy.”

Never the less, the presiding sentiment was not — unfortunately for Trob, as he is affectionately known — to embrace the underdog but to dwell on the grim reality that there is change in the air. This is an era slowly ebbing into the history books.

Federer and Nadal have never met in the US Open and the widespread anticipation of returning one more time to the greatest rivalry in the history of tennis was shattered in two hours and 24 minutes when Robredo, the 19th seed, gutted it out to embarrass Federer in straight sets.

And it was an embarrassment. Robredo had not even come close to beating Federer in 10 encounters. Roger had his number — and he was in sublime form. He said, too, that his back was just fine. How could he not swat away a solid but predictable opponent who, two nights earlier on the same Armstrong court, had needed four sets to beat a qualifier, Birmingham’s Dan Evans?

Federer was in a hurry. He said he “self-destructed”, and added: “I kind of feel like I beat myself, you know, without taking any credit away from Tommy.”

Which, of course, did take credit away from Tommy, who deserved the win because of his patience in the shot and a clear-headed commitment to frustrate Federer by not taking unnecessary risks, the mirror opposite of his opponent.

What about that match with Rafa: was that on his mind? “Yeah, I mean, it would have been a quarters,” he said, “not a final. Not that much of a disappointment at the end of the day.”

Really? Of the many statistics that descended upon his stooped shoulders, two stood out. After making Slam quarters 36 times in a row, the man with 17 majors to his name has failed to get that far twice in a row.

As for slam finals, for the first time in 10 years, he has not made one of those in any of the four majors in 2013. He was always there. He has been part of our tennis lives. Now, at two majors in a row, he has lost to players who previously would have been delighted just to share a court with him: Sergiy Stakhovsky and Tommy Robredo.

It cannot have been easy for Federer because these post-defeat inquisitions are becoming too common. Wearing a monogrammed cap to shield the harshness of the press room lights and perhaps the glare of doubt aimed at him he struggled at times to keep his cool.

Usually a model of politeness, he strayed into sarcasm. When asked why, as a usually ruthless closer, he had converted only two of 16 break points, he said, “Yeah, that was a great close.” Pressed to explain this deficit in his performance, he said, “I think I explained enough, you know?”

It was not exactly an Andy Roddick cold blast, but it did betray his frustration and impatience. He knows he is running out of time. He does not want to dwell on defeats, because they undermine his self-belief and without that, he is reduced to the ranks.

“I’ve definitely got to go back to work and come back stronger, you know, get rid of this loss now as quick as I can, forget about it, because that’s not how I want to play from here on. I want to play better. I know I can. I showed it the last few weeks, that there is that level.”