To me, the way Federer takes care of his serve is a greater key to his success than we acknowledge. It's a tool that he wields with that absolute, nearly unconscious confidence with which our friend the carpenter swings his most basic tool, that hammer. We all know that Federer isn't inordinately, maybe not even moderately, interested in clubbing aces, a la Ivo Karlovic or Andy Roddick. But he doesn't use his serve just to start a point, either. His serve is designed to start the point from as advantageous a position as possible, without pushing the envelope. He's not willing to risk the double fault in hopes of eliciting a really weak return. He wants a so-so return, because that enables him to start the ensuing rally from neutral to slightly favorable term.

Who's going to stay with Federer, throughout an entire match, under those conditions?

I know there are times when Federer must think: I think I'll bring the heat and sneak in to end the point at the net. Or, He's showing me a lot of space on the forehand, I'd better fire up an ace to teach him to show a little more respect. . . Tactics are part of the game, even for Federer.

But you also get the feeling that where to serve, at what pace and with what kind or degree of spin, isn't a question Federer needs to ask himself very often. Other guys, including great servers like Roddick, not only ask themselves such questions, they often live or die by how they answer them. That actually skews the essential balance in their games, and if it sometimes brings great rewards it can also punish them.

Now don't get me wrong; when Roger has a bad serving day, he pays the price. The 2009 Australian Open was a great proof of that. But when Federer is serving fair to well, it has a pervasive if hard to quantify affect on the match. I don't think you have to be a Justine Henin or Elena Dementieva to understand what a luxury it is to know that your serve is automatic - hail, Federer himself probably doesn't even know it is, because thinking about it, even the way a Serena or Andy Roddick thinks about it, makes it something less than automatic, in not by any means less effective.

Automatic.

As I watched Murray struggle, I felt that he was lashed to the wheel of his serve in a way that more or less kept everything on hold until that serve landed somewhere, thereby closing some options even while it opened others. I really appreciated the extent to which Federer's serve liberates him to explore all options. Federer's serve rarely carries him to a landslide win, but it just as rarely gets in his way of doing almost anything. It's a beautifully calibrated weapon, rarely asked to do too much, seldom incapable of doing enough.

Slideshow   The Week in Sports Pictures A kayaker flips out, a racehorse eyes the Triple Crown and more. more photos

For Federer, each serve seems less a task to be completed than an act similar to taking a breath. He knows the air is going to be there; his nervous system and sometimes even his mind tells him just how much to take in or expel, over and over. Having it down pat that way frees Roger up to think about other things or, to the even greater peril of his opponents, follow his instincts. The value of having such a serve is evident in Federer's record.

Roger's serve may not be great, but it's automatic. And that may be even better.

Important note: Next week, we plan to answer some readers' questions in our weekly podcast. So if you have a question you'd like to ask James Martin, Steve Tignor, or me, just send it via e-mail to our dedicated address: .

For more news from TENNIS.com, click here.

Also on NBCSports.com Will Serena surive Week 1 at the French Open? 'Dancing' man Castroneves talks Indy 500 PFT: Jets' Scott doesn't want son to play football Follow us on Twitter: @NBCSports  |  And Facebook