Serena is the Defining Tennis Player of This Generation —​ Male or Female

This article originally appeared on VICE Sports UK.

Roger Federer was faced with his own legend on Sunday. Victory over Novak Djokovic in the Wimbledon final would have crowned the 33-year-old the Open era's oldest ever Grand Slam winner — and the defining player of his generation. But that plot-line, engorged by Sue Barker and BBC montage hyperbole, somewhat ignored that both those honours had been claimed just 24 hours previously.

By beating Spain's Gabrine Muguruza in straight sets on Saturday, Serena Williams won her 21st Slam and sixth Wimbledon title, completing the final leg of what has become dubbed the 'Serena Slam.' While Federer failed in his admittedly graceful efforts to win a first major championship in three years, Williams — his contemporary in age — was likely still toasting her success in holding all four Grand Slam titles at the one time.

This era of men's tennis is hailed as the greatest ever, and with good reason. 'The Big Four' of Federer, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray have taken the sport to new levels, both physically and in terms of mainstream hype and bluster. There can be little doubt that all four men have been good for the development of tennis in general. And yet the defining star of this tennis generation has to be Williams. How can it possibly be considered anyone else?

Never before in the modern era of tennis has a player dominated the sport for so long. Now regarded as the greatest tennis player of all-time, Federer's career-span provides prime precedent. The Swiss won his first Grand Slam 12 years ago at Wimbledon, just a day after Williams had completed her first 'Serena Slam' — an achievement so rare it is now named after the American.

Williams actually won her first Grand Slam at the US Open in 1999, nearly 16 years ago, and four years before Federer (who hadn't even made the top 100 by that point). Federer's spell of supremacy pales in comparison, with Williams' period of dominance now a dynasty spanning the best part of two decades.

But it's not just tennis Williams has conquered. To become the defining player of her generation, Williams has had to overcome racism and sexism — both of which remain in some form. Not one of the men's game's 'Big Four' have had to deal with that.

The narrative of Williams' entire career is underpinned by struggle, going all the way back to her training as a child, when her father Richard pulled both Serena and sister Venus out of junior tennis tournaments after hearing racism from parents directed towards his daughters. Racism is something Williams has to handle even to this day, being an unabashed powerful black woman of working class background in an overwhelmingly white, middle-class sport. A quick trawl through Twitter during one of her matches reveals that.

Williams is respected and revered, but she is certainly not a favourite of the Centre Court crowd in the way Federer is. When the American clinched her sixth Wimbledon title on Saturday — as Muguruza found the tramlines with a wayward forehand down the line — little more than polite applause rippled round the famous venue. Given the gravity of her achievement, Williams deserved more. In truth, she deserved a ticker-tape reception right there on the most sacred court in tennis.

One shy of Steffi Graff's all-time record, Williams seems almost certain to be officially named the most successful player in women's tennis before retirement (regardless of how far off that may be), but such achievement has done little to prevent the frequent direction of disgraceful vitriol her way. You'll have probably seen J.K Rowling's suitably sharp retort to a moronic tweet sent to her on Saturday regarding Williams' body-shape. Even on the day of her greatest achievement, Williams' brilliance is still reduced to a discussion about her physical appearance.

In monetary terms too, Williams is not rewarded like she should be. Using the Federer yardstick once again, the American measures up unfairly, with Federer boasting $58 million in endorsements compared to Williams' paltry (relatively speaking) $13 million. The two even share the same kit sponsor, yet Nike pay Federer $13 million a year and Williams 'just' $6.8 million a year.

Then there's Maria Sharapova, who despite having won five Grand Slams to Williams' 21 out-earns her American counterpart quite significantly, claiming $23 million in endorsement deals and sponsorships. Of course, such market value is dictated by assumptions of what society views an attractive female to look like — and who the Daily Mail are most likely to publish upskirt pictures of — but it only serves to reiterate how the scales continue to be stacked unfairly against the greatest tennis player of our time.

As an icon and tennis' most dominant figure, Williams now transcends her own sport. Who else, regardless of sporting circle, can claim to have reigned at the top of their field so supremely and for such a prolonged period of time? Certainly no football player, for all Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo's undeniable excellence. Not Michael Jordan, nor Tiger Woods. Perhaps only Floyd Mayweather — whose celebrated unbeaten run stretches back 49 fights and 19 years — can hold a candle to Williams' brightly-burning, utterly irrepressible flame. But then Williams does not get a say in who her next opponent will be; Mayweather certainly does.

Some may point out that Williams has never been faced with a rival in the way Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray have with each other. But that critique is not entirely fair, given that there have been challenges to Williams' supremacy — most notably from Sharapova, Viktoria Azarenka, and her own sister, Venus. It's just that in every instance, Williams has been good enough to simply swot away any competition, illustrated by the way she swept all three rivals back-to-back on her way to winning Wimbledon this year. The women's game put forward its best contenders, and Williams barely even flinched.

Before Saturday's final, Williams insisted that she didn't "need" to win another Wimbledon title, but her on-the-court drive and demeanour suggested differently. To watch the 33-year-old play at a Grand Slam is to often observe the manifestation of a professional athlete's inner struggle. Every shriek and anguished outburst — frequently ill-assigned as displays of petulance — is a by-product of Williams' individual mental tussle with her own competitive spirit and desire to dominate.

And at 33 she is as dominant as ever. Federer has been showered with superlatives and eulogies over these past weeks for the manner of his late career renaissance — particularly after his comprehensive dismantling of Murray in the semi-finals — but the Swiss is still on the decline, given that he hasn't won a Slam in three years. Regardless of how gracefully he is doing so, Federer is proving the old adage about tennis players fading at 30 correct — while Williams continues to decisively counter it.

Since 2012 (Federer's last Wimbledon win) Williams has won six Grand Slams, two ATP Tour Finals and an Olympic Gold medal, finishing as the end-of-year WTA number one twice, which she will do for a third successive time this year. That's not a career renaissance; that's sheer supremacy, no matter the age at which it is achieved. The current top-end of men's tennis might well be heralded as the greatest ever — a defining era of the sport — but this generation should go down as the age of Serena.