If you were writing a typical preview piece, you'd talk about each player remaining, describing their history and how you see them performing today, and then you'd make a prediction.
You'd talk, first of all, about Cilic and Querrey, and say things like "Cilic has the experience of winning a Grand Slam, and is less likely to be overwhelmed on this big stage, but Sam Querrey has twice shown himself to be a giant-killer at Wimbledon, and is overlooked at Cilic's peril." You'd point out that Cilic and Querrey have met twice before at Wimbledon, and that each time Cilic has prevailed in the fifth. (The more recent of the two, in 2012, was 17-15.) You'd probably say, as many writers have, that Cilic looked like a dark horse to compete for this title from the very get go, and that, based on the quality of his play, that assessment has only strengthened over the course of his tournament.
Then you'd talk about Federer-Berdych. You'd mention that Berdych has twice beaten Federer in Majors, including once at Wimbledon. You'd write about how Federer absolutely erased Tomas Berdych at the Australian earlier this year, 6-2 6-4 6-4, taking only 90 minutes to win three sets, but then had to stave off two match points to beat Berdych in Miami back in March, 6-2 3-6 7-6 (6). You'd talk about Federer being perhaps the best grass court player ever, but you'd also talk about how Berdych's game seems quite suited for grass, and how sometimes Federer's concentration can slip, and how that's a risk given that all three of his main rivals are out of the tournament. You'd suggest, correctly, that if Federer doesn't maintain his concentration, we'll be seeing Tomas Berdych in Sunday's final. But then you'd conclude by saying that Federer, the greatest of all time, playing some of the best tennis of his career, is certainly the favorite.
What you probably wouldn't say in a typical preview piece is that you are rooting hard for Federer--whom in your heart you call Roger, as though he were a friend, because of all the pleasure he's brought you over the years--that you want to see him win with a fan's fervent wanting, and that you are a little afraid of that wanting. You are afraid of how it will feel if it doesn't turn out that way. You've been here before, after all. Remember how great Roger was playing back in the summer of 2015? The only problem was that Djokovic was playing better, and took both the Wimbledon and US Open titles from him, and both times your heart broke a little. When Roger was down a break in the fifth at the Australian this year, you tried to gird yourself against that impending sadness, and when Roger broke Rafa and then broke him again, you exulted, you felt joy, but you were relieved as well.
You would try to maintain a little journalistic integrity, but deep in your heart you know what you want, and you're afraid that with that wanting you might jinx it. That's an irrational fear, of course, except that you know that you are looking ahead. In your fervent wish that it be Roger who hoists the trophy on Sunday, you are looking ahead, and you worry that you are in some way screwing things up for him. "Only play the next point," you tell yourself, as though you are on the court. "Stay centered. Don't look ahead."
But look. Cilic, Querrey and Berdych are all fine tennis players. They are all capable of doing amazing things on the court. But it is Roger who makes your heart go pitter-pat, Roger who does things that look simultaneously effortless and like magic. It is Roger who represents to you, perhaps more than any other athlete you've ever seen, the beauty of the capacities of the human body as witnessed through sports. For all that he's given you, you feel, he deserves this. He deserves this as a bit more magic in a magical career. And you feel bad for saying that, because you know that just because you like that story, his opponents aren't exactly going to get out of the way for him. And you worry about saying that, because you worry that in putting that energy out into the world, you risk distracting him.
But you can't help it. The heart wants what it wants.