Mats Wilander...

[MarcusInKensington]

Everyone knows the story. Great player, idiotic commentator.

He’s just said that Sir Roger is the biggest thing in tennis (100% correct) and that the ATP should do everything they can to keep him interested, and playing in to his 40’s. He said they should speed up all courts and balls so that he has a good chance of continuing to win.

Would this be good for the sport, or would it lead to serious questions about the integrity of the sport?

My view is this: Wilander is a fool, and although Fed is the most important asset the tennis world has, they should not bend over and do anything he likes in order to maintain his presence on tour. If there comes a point when he’s losing to younger players on a regular basis, then it’s time to hang up the teniss bat.

 

[Alba Barragan]

No one is bigger than the sport. No one. It doesn't matter if Roger is the best ever, if he's a great ambassador for tennis and one of its biggest attractions, by no means the sport or the conditions should be changed to please him and keep him playing for longer. I get it if they change things to stop injuries, to keep the players healthy or to make the sport more 'entertaining', but to do so for just one person is preposterous and just plain wrong.

I'm a big Roger fan, I think he's the greatest player ever and not only I want for him to keep playing but also keep winning. But I'd like to see him doing it in the right way, by adapting his game, changing his tactics and staying relevant by his own merits, not because it was handed to him in a silver plate. It would feel wrong and unfair to both his legacy and the sport.

 

[Zeref]

No sport should ever bend for a player, No matter how much great he/she is.

 

[EdSWright]

Faster courts could mean less grind and fewer injuries? Some should be careful what they wish for.

 

[NatF]

The most important thing for the ATP is to cultivate new stars not cater to someone who will be retiring in a couple of years regardless of what they do.

 

[Tennisanity]

Well the sport has already bent over by concocting the Fedal rivalry by slowing everything down.

 

[Zebrev]

It should be a free market. If a tournament wants to speed up the court to attract the GO@T, that's their choice.

 

[augustobt]

Is this really truth? Because Wilander is a known Fed-hater, of course, not even close to Pat Cash, but still.

 

[Fedinkum]

Federer will be too busy running for president post tennis.

 

[Sudacafan]

Everyone knows the story. Great player, idiotic commentator.

He’s just said that Sir Roger is the biggest thing in tennis (100% correct) and that the ATP should do everything they can to keep him interested, and playing in to his 40’s. He said they should speed up all courts and balls so that he has a good chance of continuing to win.

Would this be good for the sport, or would it lead to serious questions about the integrity of the sport?

My view is this: Wilander is a fool, and although Fed is the most important asset the tennis world has, they should not bend over and do anything he likes in order to maintain his presence on tour. If there comes a point when he’s losing to younger players on a regular basis, then it’s time to hang up the teniss bat.

Wilander is an alt-Fed.

 

[Sudacafan]

Federer will be too busy running for president post tennis.

I think that the President of Switzerland is a decorative figure though.

 

[Terry Tibbs]

Didn't hear him say that but I quite like listening to Wilander. I find him a good commentator and interesting to listen to.

 

[Fedinkum]

I think that the President of Switzerland is a decorative figure though.

Perfect for Roger...give him more time to coach his twins.

 

[MarcusInKensington]

I’m glad to see that it a world where supporting specific players leads to such dislike for one another on message boards, that the integrity of the game trumps all.

Congrats to everyone, except for Mats Wilander, who really should consider changing the habit of a lifetime by thinking before speaking.

 

[fedfan39]

Mats Wilander once said *Fed doesn't have balls to face Nadal*. Sorry, even though he thinks he might vindicate himself a decade later, I don't buy it.

Edit: For reference, this is what he had to say about Federer. ******* is as ******* does. Ironic, I find it funny Wilander knows anything about balls.

"Everybody says Federer is too good, and he is too good, but they don't have the balls that Nadal has to say, 'Listen, if you play like that throughout the whole match, then it's true, you are the greatest player ever … but if you're not the greatest player in the world, then you're not going to be able to keep that up'.
"(Federer's) not the best player ever, by a long shot, yet. You face him against the likes of Jimmy Connors and I don't know that he's going to beat Jimmy Connors for two reasons here (Wilander points to groin)

"Sports is about balls and about heart and you don't find too many champions in any sport in the world without heart or balls. He might have them, but against Nadal they shrink to a very small size and it's not once, it's every time."

 

[MarcusInKensington]

Is this really truth? Because Wilander is a known Fed-hater, of course, not even close to Pat Cash, but still.

100% true. No fake news here.

 

[Adv. Edberg]

Everyone knows the story. Great player, idiotic commentator.

He’s just said that Sir Roger is the biggest thing in tennis (100% correct) and that the ATP should do everything they can to keep him interested, and playing in to his 40’s. He said they should speed up all courts and balls so that he has a good chance of continuing to win.

Would this be good for the sport, or would it lead to serious questions about the integrity of the sport?

My view is this: Wilander is a fool, and although Fed is the most important asset the tennis world has, they should not bend over and do anything he likes in order to maintain his presence on tour. If there comes a point when he’s losing to younger players on a regular basis, then it’s time to hang up the teniss bat.

This is what the ITF have been doing for the past 15 years. Ever since they realised they needed new superstars to replace Sampras/Agassi.

 

[junior74]

I’m glad to see that it a world where supporting specific players leads to such dislike for one another on message boards, that the integrity of the game trumps all.

Congrats to everyone, except for Mats Wilander, who really should consider changing the habit of a lifetime by thinking before speaking.

First speed up the courts, to give Federer a few more.
Then raise the nets, to give Rafa a few more.

If they add a 3rd serve, perhaps even Ivo gets one before he retires!

 

[augustobt]

This is what the ITF have been doing for the past 15 years. Ever since they realised they needed new superstars to replace Sampras/Agassi.

ahahahahhahahahahahahha, don't you even have the slightest shame to type this kind of crap?

Yeah, ITF is really doing that. That's why they changed the AO from the (already mid/slow) Rebound Ace to the slowest possible Plexi, with 2012 being the slowest hard-court in the ENTIRE tour. Not to mention the US Open and Wimbledon.

 

[tennis_pro]

He's not dumb but he sometimes says the most idiotic stuff.

 

[Adv. Edberg]

ahahahahhahahahahahahha, don't you even have the slightest shame to type this kind of crap?

Yeah, ITF is really doing that. That's why they changed the AO from the (already mid/slow) Rebound Ace to the slowest possible Plexi, with 2012 being the slowest hard-court in the ENTIRE tour. Not to mention the US Open and Wimbledon.

Yeah, anything to protect the big 4. They needed super stars to attract interest in the sport since it's interest started to decline after Sampras and Golden Years in the 80s and 90s. There's no way Fed would win 20 slams with 16 seeds and the court variance of the 90s.

 

[augustobt]

There's no way Fed would win 20 slams with 16 seeds and the court variance of the 90s.

Yep. By now he would be standing at 25 or maybe more.

 

[Red Rick]

Everyone knows the story. Great player, idiotic commentator.

He’s just said that Sir Roger is the biggest thing in tennis (100% correct) and that the ATP should do everything they can to keep him interested, and playing in to his 40’s. He said they should speed up all courts and balls so that he has a good chance of continuing to win.

Would this be good for the sport, or would it lead to serious questions about the integrity of the sport?

My view is this: Wilander is a fool, and although Fed is the most important asset the tennis world has, they should not bend over and do anything he likes in order to maintain his presence on tour. If there comes a point when he’s losing to younger players on a regular basis, then it’s time to hang up the teniss bat.

Wilander is a fool, though I fear many agree with him on this point.

By all means keep Federer involved through stuff like Laver Cup, exho's and that, but don't artifically inflate his legacy and cult by making unnecessary changes that benefit him specifically

 

[Ralph]

The most important thing for the ATP is to cultivate new stars not cater to someone who will be retiring in a couple of years regardless of what they do.

And they know that, which is why they're making the most of the Golden Egg that is Roger, whilst working on the 'next gen' (next gen this, next gen that, next gen Milan comp.) Heck, the fact that we all refer to these younger players as 'the next gen' says it all - the ATP are TRYING to move things in the right direction, which they'll need to - for they are a business at the end of the day.

 

[Steve0904]

Alright this will be a devil's advocate type post since everybody is apparently moral and virtuous around here. First let me say that I'm fine with having Federer's career play out as it will on all the current courts, but quite honestly there is another side of me that thinks he was hurt by the initial slowdown at places like the AO, USO and even a couple years at Wimbledon. Now, the across the board slowdown has helped them all, but it's pretty clear that it helped Nadal and Djokovic the most in their primes. I won't say they should do it with Federer's tennis well being at the forefront of the discussion, but I wouldn't complain if they did and nor would many others despite what they might say about tennis needing new stars. We all know that.

As far as the integrity of the sport goes, there's enough questions about that already, what's a few more?

 

[Jackuar]

Alright this will be a devil's advocate type post since everybody is apparently moral and virtuous around here. First let me say that I'm fine with having Federer's career play out as it will on all the current courts, but quite honestly there is another side of me that thinks he was hurt by the initial slowdown at places like the AO, USO and even a couple years at Wimbledon. Now, the across the board slowdown has helped them all, but it's pretty clear that it helped Nadal and Djokovic the most in their primes. I won't say they should do it with Federer's tennis well being at the forefront of the discussion, but I wouldn't complain if they did and nor would many others despite what they might say about tennis needing new stars. We all know that.

As far as the integrity of the sport goes, there's enough questions about that already, what's a few more?

I had similar thoughts here. They shouldn't speed up the surfaces with Fed in mind but to do that in general will only help the sport after the past 10 years of homogenization. It will revive serve and volley and if they bring back the variety of surfaces a well, carpet including, this sport is gonna be bigger than ever.

 

[Enterprise]

I think the one thing that unites the tennis family is the agreement that wilander is useless as a pundit and commentator.

 

[Enterprise]

I had similar thoughts here. They shouldn't speed up the surfaces with Fed in mind but to do that in general will only help the sport after the past 10 years of homogenization. It will revive serve and volley and if they bring back the variety of surfaces a well, carpet including, this sport is gonna be bigger than ever.

Need more grass courts. Urgently need at least two masters 1000 on grass and to drop two HC masters

 

[Jackuar]

Need more grass courts. Urgently need at least two masters 1000 on grass and to drop two HC masters

Of course, yes, please. It's eye paining to see cardboard plain vastness of ground for 10 months in a year.

 

[Steve0904]

I had similar thoughts here. They shouldn't speed up the surfaces with Fed in mind but to do that in general will only help the sport after the past 10 years of homogenization. It will revive serve and volley and if they bring back the variety of surfaces a well, carpet including, this sport is gonna be bigger than ever.

They won't bring back carpet because the players complained about the injuries it caused, and I doubt we'll see any sort of revival of true S&V. More players up at net for sure, but not out and out S&V. I agree that they could speed up a few more courts on the tour. The AO has started it and it hasn't resulted in the death of tennis yet so we should be ok on that front.

 

[Chanwan]

The most important thing for the ATP is to cultivate new stars not cater to someone who will be retiring in a couple of years regardless of what they do.

Man, I know it's on purpose, but I think he's back every time I see your profile pic.

Wilander is a fool, though I fear many agree with him on this point.

By all means keep Federer involved through stuff like Laver Cup, exho's and that, but don't artifically inflate his legacy and cult by making unnecessary changes that benefit him specifically

Steve makes some valid points imo.

Alright this will be a devil's advocate type post since everybody is apparently moral and virtuous around here. First let me say that I'm fine with having Federer's career play out as it will on all the current courts, but quite honestly there is another side of me that thinks he was hurt by the initial slowdown at places like the AO, USO and even a couple years at Wimbledon. Now, the across the board slowdown has helped them all, but it's pretty clear that it helped Nadal and Djokovic the most in their primes. I won't say they should do it with Federer's tennis well being at the forefront of the discussion, but I wouldn't complain if they did and nor would many others despite what they might say about tennis needing new stars. We all know that.

As far as the integrity of the sport goes, there's enough questions about that already, what's a few more?