Split Loyalty

Morning when I switched on TV for the US open, Blake and Federer were playing with the third set tie-break at 3-3, and Federer 2-0 sets up. Then for the first time in my life I willed Federer to lose points, so that I could watch him play another set. There was so much conflict inside me when the rallies were going on, with the "Black bloke Blake unable to finish the tiebreak". Prolonging it , but prevailing at 11-9. Then before you could say Roger, I had switched sides. Admiring the phenomenon as he went about pummeling Blake, and finally winning the fourth set and the match.

Such instances of split loyalties are very rare for me. When I was a kid I saw no point in watching a game without giving support to one side or the other. I had to pick sides even if it was with the throw of a dice.
I had no concept of enjoying the game by admiring the performances of both the sides. I would be befuddled if someone told me that he was not supporting any of the teams. For any major cricket or football or tennis tournament I had a mental ranking of favourites, so I always knew whom to support.
But from my college days onwards I started appreciating the game of both the sides. Learnt to be a neutral or even if I do support a side I see the good points in an opponents game, and I have started enjoying the game more but the passion of the earlier days is gone.