Federer bottling the clay season again

The fan boys will be along shortly to tell us how great he is and such smart scheduling .... no problem changing his strict schedule to play Rotterdam ...... man is a total fraud and I hope upon hope that Nadal retires with more slams than him because listening to the Fed love in each week from so called tennis pundits gets more and more nauseating

great thread here mes, wp

couldnt agree more with both posts, federer is a total **** and a mug

p uss y

Yeah, sad thing is though it makes his chances of fluking another Wimbledon though.

though = even higher.

Jealous Mugs bow to the Goat

bobweenit    Joined: 09 May 10
Replies: 56058

I think somebody could give Fed a run for been a bigger mug

If I wasn't abusing the likes of you Wisey and Grant my post count would be lower than yours but chatting to mugs like you keeps me mildly amused during the lonesome punting hours that accompany a  top betting pro like me

Your saying Fed is a fraud? Shirley you have to realise that the slick gringo who always tries his best and only loses when he is injured has been juiced for the most part of his career! Or are you that naive to think Rafas many documented  trips to Dr Fuentes a known top doping Doctor where just coincidences

................. Rafa is clean .... somebody who runs around though for 3 hour plus and doesn't sweat , mmmmmmmmmmm

Hate to see Fed bunking the clay season. But I think its a bit harsh to say players shouldn't be allowed to cherry pick tournaments. Why not? People(such as GrantCKing) have been known for skipping lunch to fully utilize a free dinner or a 2 for the price of 1 deal. Fed doing just the same.

The elephant in the room is that Federer is being allowed to set an extremely dangerous precedent here.

Nobody would dispute that on his day he is a very good tennis player on all surfaces, but as an ambassador for the sport has he truly considered the potential consequences of what he is doing.

1- Undermines the status of the French Open in the mind of the casual observer with a year on year tapering effect
2- Sets a precedent for strategically sitting out an arduous period of the calendar and gaining an advantage of being fresher for Wimbledon immediately afterwards. The sequence last year of 'win slam 1, sit out slam 2, win slam 3' looked ridiculous but if it happens again this year it normalizes the sequence.
3- The idea that this can be allowed to balance out the adverse effect of ageing is one thing, but it's only a matter of time before a 29 year old tests the water, then a 28 year old etc.

It seems to me that Federer is the David Cameron of tennis, someone who is putting personal agenda ahead of the welfare of the greater community/structure with potentially calamitous long term consequences.

I hope djockovic regains some sort of form and puts fed back where he belongs, fact is nadal cant beat him on the faster hards, clay he would totally own him

Very well put JM.

I don't know how Federer can be satisfied with just 1 French Open, people say he has nothing to prove there, but given he only won that year because of Soderling removing his greatest obstacle, you'd have though he'd want to win it a second time even more than the first.

Novak doesn't have the most aesthetically pleasing gamestyle, but Tennis definitely needs him back, and Murray. A fit Murray would have won Wimbledon last year imo.

Is it possible for ATP to not allow people to skip slams? I am sure they have no control over it. It doesn't make any sense that they force people to participate. The best that they can do is penalize them through ranking etc.

I think Fed is paying the price for skipping FO in that people are questioning his greatness. and asking why he is shying away from a slam that he should strive to master. That should be a punishment in itself. But as I said earlier, if the guy wants his legacy to be like this(and has surrendered to the fact that he can't beat Nadal there), then who are we to question him.

If however he is still playing when nadal hangs his boots, and enters the FO and wins it, there will be some heated debates

As referred to in the opening post, he's over 31, has given 12 years+ service and played more than 600 matches meaning he is exempt from being a commitment player, in Layman's terms, he can play when and where he wants. A bit like a Harlem Globetrotter.

I should point out that the criteria above applies to Masters events, Grand Slams are not actually mandatory. I don't know why at the very least he doesn't play the French. The first 4 rounds are usually a train for him anyway so he's practically playing a 3 match tournament should he make the final.

Federer is fairly decent on the clay to, if nadal was injured he would enter for sure, ino it is probably decent scheduling for him but no nadal he plays

Clearly there’s some dodging his least favourite surface and his least favourite opponent on it going on here but Fed is about 8 years past what we used to think of as peak for a male tennis player and has had a few injuries in the last couple of years. He’s allowed to skip a chunk of the season. He’ll take a little bit of flak for it and rightly so and I’d rather he played but he knows his fitness better than the rest of us. I think he’d play the French Open if it were possible to do just that but clearly he’d need a couple of warm up events and that’s too big a commitment and injury risk, is I suspect what he feels.

I get the precedent argument but it’s an essentially unique situation and I doubt that Federer skipping the clay really liberates anyone else to do so. Players could already manage their seasons in that way if they wanted (gosh my leg hurts at the start of April, let’s hope it’s better for June) but it’s hard to imagine it suiting anyone else competent to skip the French, even if relatively bad on clay. Any other top 20 player would want the ranking points (and the prize money) and would be hopeful of a decent run. None of that really matters to Federer, of course, he’s just about winning more slams and is entitled to find the best way to do that.

He’s played Nadal disproportionately many times on clay already, by the way.

Oh and I liked the Cameron analogy, even though I don’t really agree with it. Course Cameron’s self and party before country approach is routine for politics.

I agree, not good for Fed's legacy that he chooses to avoid his biggest rival on his most favourable surface.

Probably the right decision tho giving nadals start to the season

clay season

Sometimes a man who knows he is in the wrong
will demonstrate subconscious feelings of guilt through his clothing choices

http://uk.businessinsider.com/roger-federer-wore-rafael-nadal-sleeveless-shirt-2018-5?r=US&IR=T

Great OP. Wholly agree. Dreading the once-a-year tennis fans and prawn sandwich brigade who rock up at Wimbledon & deify lovely Rog.

I don't mind the fans so much, it's the bl00dy media commentators and sidekicks drooling that annoy me, as they should know better.

how can you deify a god?

It's my life
It's now or never
I ain't gonna live forever
I just want to live while I'm alive
(It's my life)

top man is the boy Fed,a peerless artist,urbane,suave,possibly a tad smug at times

how he yearns to have achieved as much in life as his haters on here

Yeah because that's such a great counter argument, comparing him to gamblers, ok.

Paris: While boosting his Wimbledon hopes, Roger Federer’s decision to skip the French Open has dented the Parisian Grand Slam event and hurt the very sport that made him a global superstar, Mats Wilander told Reuters.

“I’m not criticising his decision but the tennis world needs him,” the Swedish former world number one said.

“Along with Nadal, he is literally still the world of men’s tennis, and to not play a Grand Slam on a surface that we play for two months, on which everybody has grown up on, to not come to the showpiece of claycourt tennis, it hurts the tournament, it hurts professional tennis, it hurts men’s tennis.”
Mats Wilander additionally picked Roger Federer as a favourite for this year's Wimbledon. Reuters

Mats Wilander additionally picked Roger Federer as a favourite for this year's Wimbledon. Reuters

For the second year running Federer, who owns 20 Grand Slam titles, decided to skip the entire claycourt season to conserve his energy and his knees for another tilt at Wimbledon.

While to many the Swiss maestro has earned the right to choose his schedule as he approaches his 37th birthday, Wilander maintains he should be in Paris.

“No, I don’t think he was right to skip the French,” the host of Eurosport’s flagship French Open show ‘Game, Schett and Mats’ added.

“I understand 100 percent why he would skip the French because he doesn’t want to get used to clay and he’s 37-years-old and all that.

“(But) he could come here, practice a week, maybe lose first round. How much can that dent your confidence? And how will that change your preparation for Wimbledon? Nothing.”

“SMART DEVIL”

Federer completed his career grand slam in 2009 when he beat Robin Soderling in one of only three years since 2005 that his claycourt nemesis Rafael Nadal did not win the French title.

He also made the 2011 final but, after a stunning return from injury to win his first Grand Slam title for five years at last year’s Australian Open, Federer has steered away from clay to protect the knee on which he had minor surgery in 2016.

“I can understand it but I think at the same time he could play the French,” Wilander, who won the French title in 1982, 1985 and 1988 said. “Federer is bigger than the professional sport but he is not bigger than the game of tennis.” (eh ?)

Wilander says Federer’s absence is even more conspicuous considering fellow 36-year-old Serena Williams battled to the fourth round this year having returned from maternity leave.

“It’s unfortunate and I think Serena must get a lot of credit (for trying) to come and do that,” he said.

“It’s not a criticism but it’s a shame. It’s not like it’s (fast court specialist) Pete Sampras. Roger knows how to play on this surface. He wouldn’t have got hurt.

“He said it’s about being competitive. But I think it’s about him coming here to compete. I played this tournament many times when I wasn’t competitive but I still came to compete.

“Ninety five percent of the field is not competitive when Nadal is playing. You should play all the slams you physically can.

“There is not one single person who walks through these gates here and doesn’t miss Roger Federer, and he knows that.

“We are disappointed in a constructive way. I don’t blame him but would have loved to see him here.”

Wilander makes Federer favourite to win a ninth Wimbledon title though. “Of course, because he’s not here! He’s a smart devil Roger! Wimbledon without him would be a disaster.”

Think that quote means: he don't need the cash

i.e. he's bigger than the 'profession/cash' but not bigger than the spirit of the game/sport.

Or summat like that.

More chicken than goat.

He has only won one French Open in all the attempts he has had in the peak of his career(that too because someone else beat Nadal if im not wrong). He is not good on the surface(judging as a lay man). Skipping the season entirely doesn't make him bad than he already is on the surface. You may be right by saying it hurts the game. But if I fail an exam for 10 years, and then skip it for the next two, it doesn't make me a worse student than I already am.

Its more important to celebrate whatever he has to offer. Don't think we will have sportsmen like these two for quite a few years. Maybe never.

Fed doesn't need to play on clay to be #1

Jun 16, 2018 -- 6:41PM, bb66 wrote:

Fed doesn't need to play on clay to be #1

hes not number 1 tho, you checked the world rankings lately?

By reaching the final here he will return to number 1 on Monday, but he's still a bottle job.

To be fair, at his age (and career) there might be some forgiveness for his clay take of 'frankly, I can't be arsed' (Points for anyone giving the comedy show reference)

The elephant in the room is.. what if Nadal now wins wimbledon?

Especially if Roger comes in fresh from his hiding place behind the bins at Roland garros, and then loses on the SW19 gress to the guy he was trying to avoid on clay?
Everyone would then be calling Nadal the GOAT. Even Mirka would be whispering it in her sleep

Jun 11, 2018 -- 11:57AM, detraveller wrote:

Its more important to celebrate whatever he has to offer. Don't think we will have sportsmen like these two for quite a few years. Maybe never.

good post.

bad post, he's diverting attention.

JM's is a good post.

Amazing how Djokovic has dropped out of all GOAT contention over time....

TBF though, whatever else is argued, to have the era of the big 4 (when they were all good), Muzza, Doker, Rafa and Rog, is possibly a greatest era that might not be beaten again in the game.

Jun 20, 2018 -- 1:51PM, stu wrote:

Amazing how Djokovic has dropped out of all GOAT contention over time....

he sure was heading for GOAT status as recently as two years ago. Now he'll have to settle for being the 3rd greatest tennis player ever.

He's greater than Federer.

Without a doubt Mes

djockovic at hi best beats nadal and federer for me, and gives nadal a good go at roland garros if not beating him

don't be silly Rafa's best beats anyone elses best

dont agree larsson, as good as rafa is and was, novak always had the edge over him when at his best

yeah because that wasn't rafa' best , watch rafa 2008

is that the year he beat federer at wimbeldon?

Yep and absolutely annihilated him at the French Open - great times pal

"Legacy in tatters, running away from his biggest rival on his best surface for the third straight season just so he can keep trying to make inroads on the lop sided h2h on fast hard courts as his ego is that big, this also makes a mockery of Tennis the fact players over 31 are allowed to cherry pick which tournaments they play in so as to keep themselves as fresh as possible and puts the opponents at a distinct disadvantage, if you're not fit enough or good enough to play a whole season you should retire, instead he's been allowed to gobble up cheap slams and the cringy Federer fanboys lap it up.

You can fool the casual into thinking you're the greatest, but seasoned Tennis connoisseurs know better.

Kind Regards."

what? federer is not 24 years old anymore! what do you expect?

I expect him not to be a part time player, he doesn't play clay because of age, it's because he fears Nadal on clay, if Nadal didn't exist, there is no way Federer would skip the French Open.

It is barking mad
to suggest a player has skipped a slam due to age
when that player has just won the previous slam in the calendar
(and 50 percent of the available slams in the last 18 months)