Proof that Federer is not playing clay tune ups in 2018

zagor said:
And they did see him play, he played ~60 matches last year as a 35-36 year old. That number is likely going down this year and the year after that unti he finally retires. And yes, his worst suface (by a significant margin) might get the permament boot in the meantime unti his farewell tour.
Click to expand...
I'll quibble with you about this, it's not his worst surface "by a significant margin". It's just that he faced the king of clay so many times. He made the FO final 5 times, and has a pretty good record against all other players.

The reason he's not playing clay has been explained by his fitness coach. It's bad for his knees.
 
EloQuent said:
I'll quibble with you about this, it's not his worst surface "by a significant margin". It's just that he faced the king of clay so many times. He made the FO final 5 times, and has a pretty good record against all other players.

The reason he's not playing clay has been explained by his fitness coach. It's bad for his knees.
Click to expand...
Lost to Guga in 2004, also to Soderling in 2010. Wawrinka wasn't playing particularly amazing in the MC final when he beat Fed. Fed also lost to Nole at Rome in 2012 whilst also beating him at Wimbledon and Cincy. At most, the margin narrows as between slow HC and clay but it's still a significant difference and he is incomparably better on medium and fast HC, to say nothing of grass.
 
Dolgopolov85 said:
Lost to Guga in 2004, also to Soderling in 2010. Wawrinka wasn't playing particularly amazing in the MC final when he beat Fed. Fed also lost to Nole at Rome in 2012 whilst also beating him at Wimbledon and Cincy. At most, the margin narrows as between slow HC and clay but it's still a significant difference and he is incomparably better on medium and fast HC, to say nothing of grass.
Click to expand...
He also won Hamburg a bunch of times. Soderling beat Rafa in 09 so he's no slouch. Federer beat Djokovic in 2011 RG, his only slam final that year.

It's still his "worst" surface because he's had more success in other surfaces. But not by as much a difference as people think. Just people see 8-6-5-1. Without Rafa it would be 9-6-6-5. I'm not trying to award him moral wins, just that without Rafa in the equation, he can win on clay.
 
vex said:
As usual Mr Failure shows u chasing after me and just spews nonsense instead of arguing any of the points made in the post. Make an actual argument worth responding to and I’ll debate with you. Otherwise ur weak era trolling bores me and going back and forth with u is beneath me.
Click to expand...

"Mr failure"
"Back and forth with u"

Oh boy! Sounds like an 8 year old. Carry on.
 
Last edited:
EloQuent said:
I'll quibble with you about this, it's not his worst surface "by a significant margin". It's just that he faced the king of clay so many times. He made the FO final 5 times, and has a pretty good record against all other players.

The reason he's not playing clay has been explained by his fitness coach. It's bad for his knees.
Click to expand...
Do you actually believe anything that comes out the Federer camp, the machine. Grass is the most dangerous surface on the ATP tour now carpet, the surface Federer himself voted to remove, is gone. Clay might be grinding over time but grass is signifigantly more hazardous to joints and muscles I assume you never played on it, so just spout the Federer Camp ****e.
 
EloQuent said:
He also won Hamburg a bunch of times. Soderling beat Rafa in 09 so he's no slouch. Federer beat Djokovic in 2011 RG, his only slam final that year.

It's still his "worst" surface because he's had more success in other surfaces. But not by as much a difference as people think. Just people see 8-6-5-1. Without Rafa it would be 9-6-6-5. I'm not trying to award him moral wins, just that without Rafa in the equation, he can win on clay.
Click to expand...

Of course he can win, but he is far more vulnerable on clay than on HC/grass. I really don't see how you can argue otherwise. Witness how Wawrinka completely dismantled him in 2015.
 
Mr Feeny said:
Haha fair enough.
Rusty rregistered under an alt as well, incidently, and was outed by a couple of posters.
Click to expand...

Yes, but he's still going strong. Some people deactivate their accounts and come back as "new" users. But those people weren't banned or anything like that.
 
PMChambers said:
Do you actually believe anything that comes out the Federer camp, the machine. Grass is the most dangerous surface on the ATP tour now carpet, the surface Federer himself voted to remove, is gone. Clay might be grinding over time but grass is signifigantly more hazardous to joints and muscles I assume you never played on it, so just spout the Federer Camp ****e.
Click to expand...
you seem nice. you can look up the reason why clay is hard on his knees yourself, I'm sure you know how to google.
 
zagor said:
And they did see him play, he played ~60 matches last year as a 35-36 year old. That number is likely going down this year and the year after that unti he finally retires. And yes, his worst suface (by a significant margin) might get the permament boot in the meantime unti his farewell tour.

Expectations and desires are one thing, reality is quite often different.



Nah, not for an ATG like Sampras. He very visibly half-assed it after '96 FO in order to save himself for Wimbledon. Without surface specific seedings for FO, those kind of stunts only serve to imbalance the draw.

I rather doubt Sampras would have even showed up at FO if he continued to play in his mid 30s, Agassi did but he skipped Wimbledon in 2004/2005.
Click to expand...

Youre arguing for the sake of it. Give it up.
He played the FO, which means he played, not skipped it.
 
mike danny said:
Not the same thing. That's like saying Borg in 1982 was the same as Fed now.
Click to expand...

No one is comparing Borg here. Sampras played a lot more tennis than Borg did, and the end of his career was in his 30s. The same as most players.
Borg left the game in his prime for his own reasons, having not even played 10 years on the tour.
But then youre still agreeing with me even picking Borg. He still played the same number of slams in his last year as he had the rest of his career, bar 1974 LOL
Federer still is the only player to skip certain tournaments towards the end of his career because he doesn't like the fact he cant win LOL
Must have a fragile little ego that he wont compete on his least successful surface;)
 
kevaninho said:
No one is comparing Borg here. Sampras played a lot more tennis than Borg did, and the end of his career was in his 30s. The same as most players.
Borg left the game in his prime for his own reasons, having not even played 10 years on the tour.
But then youre still agreeing with me even picking Borg. He still played the same number of slams in his last year as he had the rest of his career, bar 1974 LOL
Federer still is the only player to skip tournaments towards the end of his career because he doesn't like the fact he cant win LOL
Must have a fragile little ego that he wont compete on his least successful surface;)
Click to expand...
Federer is nearing 37. He clearly is older than 90% of the past ATG when they played their last tennis years. You can't apply Sampras to him since Fed at Pete's age was routinely playing between 70 and 80 matches.

It makes sense that the older you get, the harder it becomes to play a full schedule. So you need to become more selective.
 
kevaninho said:
No one is comparing Borg here. Sampras played a lot more tennis than Borg did, and the end of his career was in his 30s. The same as most players.
Borg left the game in his prime for his own reasons, having not even played 10 years on the tour.
But then youre still agreeing with me even picking Borg. He still played the same number of slams in his last year as he had the rest of his career, bar 1974 LOL
Federer still is the only player to skip certain tournaments towards the end of his career because he doesn't like the fact he cant win LOL
Must have a fragile little ego that he wont compete on his least successful surface;)
Click to expand...
Federer has competed at the French Open more times than Sampras. More times than Nadal, even.

I understand you’re probably incredibly butthurt about Federer’s climbing Grand Slam title tally, but this is just a stupid line of argumentation. Try something better.
 
PMChambers said:
Do you actually believe anything that comes out the Federer camp, the machine. Grass is the most dangerous surface on the ATP tour now carpet, the surface Federer himself voted to remove, is gone. Clay might be grinding over time but grass is signifigantly more hazardous to joints and muscles I assume you never played on it, so just spout the Federer Camp ****e.
Click to expand...

Didn’t know that about carpet but thanks for saying it.

Its quite the coincidence prior to 2017 clay was universally acknowledged as the best surface for wear and tear.

Some poster here recently thug jumped me asking if I ever played on clay, and do I even know what clay is?!?!?!?

When I sent a picture of me on clay a few days back he said it didn’t prove anything, it could be anyone.

Wonder what the recent turning point has been? ;)
 
Hydrocella said:
Didn’t know that about carpet but thanks for saying it.

Its quite the coincidence prior to 2017 clay was universally acknowledged as the best surface for wear and tear.
Click to expand...
In general, for the same amount of play, yes, Clay is probably the safest Tennis surface for the body. But every body is different and some surfaces are better for some bodies than others. Federer’s doctor has already explained why clay isn’t good for Federer’s body.

Either way, I don’t think you’d dispute that clay lends itself to longer points and longer matches than any other surface. And at Federer’s age, that’s not a good thing for his body. The shorter the matches, the better for Federer’s (or anybody’s) body. It’s that simple.
 
Zhilady said:
In general, for the same amount of play, yes, Clay is probably the safest Tennis surface for the body. But every body is different and some surfaces are better for some bodies than others. Federer’s doctor has already explained why clay isn’t good for Federer’s body.

Either way, I don’t think you’d dispute that clay lends itself to longer points and longer matches than any other surface. And at Federer’s age, that’s not a good thing for his body. The shorter the matches, the better for Federer’s (or anybody’s) body. It’s that simple.
Click to expand...


If the assertion is clay is specifically bad for Federer’s knees I’m going to need some pretty convincing evidence that Federer’s knees are unique and special from the rest of humanity.

There’s no article that said Federer couldn’t play on clay last year, let alone this one. Not by his team, not by anyone.

What’s simple is Federer is committed to a certain style of play of shortened points. Win or lose. On all surfaces.

Whether or not this can work on clay is the real conversation.

Shifting the conversation to injury just gets in the way.
 
Hydrocella said:
If the assertion is clay is specifically bad for Federer’s knees I’m going to need some pretty convincing evidence that Federer’s knees are unique and special from the rest of humanity.
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting that all the knees of all the people in the world are identical? If you’re not, Federer’s doctor’s opinion should be good enough. Nobody needs to give some random guy on the Internet evidence about Federer’s knees. Federer is not on trial.

There’s no article that said Federer couldn’t play on clay last year, let alone this one. Not by his team, not by anyone.
Click to expand...
Federer has said last year (and this year, too, apparently) that his doctor advised him against playing on clay. Of course, he can still play on clay. But he can also jump off the Burj Khalifa, so I don’t see why that’s relevant.

What’s simple is Federer is committed to a certain style of play of shortened points. Win or lose. On all surfaces.

Whether or not this can work on clay is the real conversation.

Shifting the conversation to injury just gets in the way.
Click to expand...
It might get in the way for you, but you’re not Roger Federer. It’s not your body, so you’re obviously not as concerned for it as he obviously will be. But let’s set aside the point about whether clay is good for his body or not and oblige you.

Let’s say Federer can, theoretically, still win the French Open. I actually do think he can. But that’s not necessarily reason enough for him to go play the claycourt season. Assuming that Federer’s goal, right now, is to win as many Grand Slam tournaments as he can, he’ll also need to consider how playing the claycourt season will affect his chances at Wimbledon and the US Open. It’s perfectly reasonable to think playing the claycourt season will hurt his chances at Wimbledon. If certain Federer fans think he is likely to win more Grand Slam titles if he skips clay, that is reason enough for them to want him to skip clay. After all, he did win Wimbledon last year after having skipped the claycourt season.
 
Zhilady said:
Are you suggesting that all the knees of all the people in the world are identical? If you’re not, Federer’s doctor’s opinion should be good enough. Nobody needs to give some random guy on the Internet evidence about Federer’s knees. Federer is not on trial.

Federer has said last year (and this year, too, apparently) that his doctor advised him against playing on clay. Of course, he can still play on clay. But he can also jump off the Burj Khalifa, so I don’t see why that’s relevant.

It might get in the way for you, but you’re not Roger Federer. It’s not your body, so you’re obviously not as concerned for it as he obviously will be. But let’s set aside the point about whether clay is good for his body or not and oblige you.

Let’s say Federer can, theoretically, still win the French Open. I actually do think he can. But that’s not necessarily reason enough for him to go play the claycourt season. Assuming that Federer’s goal, right now, is to win as many Grand Slam tournaments as he can, he’ll also need to consider how playing the claycourt season will affect his chances at Wimbledon and the US Open. It’s perfectly reasonable to think playing the claycourt season will hurt his chances at Wimbledon. If certain Federer fans think he is likely to win more Grand Slam titles if he skips clay, that is reason enough for them to want him to skip clay. After all, he did win Wimbledon last year after having skipped the claycourt season.
Click to expand...

And what exactly was Federer's Medical Team's opinion? You seem absolutely convinced it was to not play on clay.

Evidence?

I'm going by what Federer said about his skipping clay last year:

Fedforever said:
I think he won't. Because this is what he said about last year's decision:

During all that, you make the decision of not playing on clay …

– Yes. Late on, actually. Because I was on clay. I told myself: I’ll see how I feel, where I’m at. Honestly, it was a coin-flip situation. I remember exactly where we were and how we decided. My entourage told me: ‘If you do it, Roger, think it over carefully. Because it will be a month where you’ll work like crazy. It won’t be easy, and what will it get you? Because if you don’t win Roland … And my physio was worried about my knee that had bugged me the year before. My conditioning coach, Pierre [Paganini] told me: ‘Listen, there’s so much work to do before playing on clay, and, in the end, what’s the goal? Just playing? It’s your decision.’ The coaches told me: if the priority is Wimbledon, you have to really think about it. Twenty-four hours later, I told myself: bah, you know what? OK, it’s tough, but it’s wise. It was the first time in my life I said no to a Slam while feeling healthy. Because the year before I pulled out of Roland with a bad back and knee, and I couldn’t play the US Open because of the knee. There was a solid reason each time. But this was a first and it was weird, yeah …


In hindsight, wasn’t it the best decision you made this year?

– No, no. It doesn’t give me any pleasure withdrawing from a tournament. I’m still a competitor. In hindsight, it wasn’t a bad decision, but it wasn’t a good one either, if it had turned out I could play on clay anyway, and still play on grass after, like I’ve done my whole career, in fact. Even in hindsight, I see what you mean, but I won’t accept it. It was an important and difficult decision to make because I was healthy.

Sounds to me like someone who instinctively regrets a decision that had to be made but also realises it was correct. And that logic applies just as much this year if not more.

Full interview:

https://tennistranslations.wordpress.com/2017/12/
Click to expand...

If you're going to intimate I'm speaking on behalf of Federer, at least do the homework of being more familiar with his own views.

If you want to talk about clay being bad for Federer, or anyone's joints and knees, that's perfectly fine. I pretty much leave such posts alone at this point. I had initially responded to the person who said it made no sense, which I agree with.

But I'm happiest talking/indulging on whether or not his shortened points can work on clay, because I happen to think it can, and I'm quite excited at the idea of him trying. We've never seen a modern baseliner with a net strategy before.

Footnote:
Re: Indulging me. I appreciate the sentiment. When us posters put up things here we're basically putting forward our own views, it's understood there's a personal bias: Just as when you say something, you're echoing your thoughts and beliefs, as am I. So I'm glad you’ve made the allowance for it, it makes communicating across a difference in views so much more pleasurable.

You're right in saying another French might not fit into his overall view on his remaining career objectives. I might even agree with it, but for the fact I suppose I'm more a fan of tennis than Federer himself. In tennis you always want the best players at the top tournaments, and sports in general you want to see the highest levels of competition. But mainly, in any sector, or endeavour, what's awfully exciting is seeing someone prove naysayers wrong and show us what new things are possible. I don't really care about Federer winning or losing tournaments, he's achieved so much already for me as his fan. What makes me interested is seeing how he continues to evolve.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hydrocella said:
And what exactly was Federer's Medical Team's opinion? You seem absolutely convinced it was to not play on clay.

Evidence?

I'm going by what Federer said about his skipping clay last year:



If you're going to intimate I'm speaking on behalf of Federer, at least do the homework of being more familiar with his own views.
Click to expand...
I have.

’I’m talking about that with my team right now – what do they think No. 1? They were a big part of me not playing the clay last year.

‘I was kind of ready to do it until the very end. When we sat down for Madrid and Rome, they thought: “Think about it wisely about what you want to do because remember the year before you had problems with your knee on the clay. Maybe this year is not right. We know it’s a really difficult decision for you but take it into consideration not to play.”

‘And that’s kind of what I felt, maybe it’s the right decision not to push it because it’s been a great season so far.
Click to expand...

Pierre Paganini, who met Roger when Roger was 14 years old and started working with him at 19. TheNew York Times wrote yesterday:

"It not because he [Federer] has no chance at the French Open. He needs to pace himself and avoid too much risk to his postoperative knee, as Pierre Paganini, his longtime fitness trainer, explained to me late last year.

“The advantage when you play on clay for the joints is there is less shock because there is the slide, and the disadvantage on hard courts is there is that shock,” he said. “But the advantage on hard courts is that the shock is brief. It’s bang and the foot leaves the ground and a player who is as coordinated and a dancer like Federer, he crushes his joints a bit less at that bad moment.

“In contrast, the disadvantage with the slide on clay is that in the joints there is a lot of vibration. We don’t see it from the outside, but to control this slide there isinstability in the knee, the foot, the ankle. And that in some cases can be bad for the knee or joint in question.
Click to expand...

If you want to talk about clay being bad for Federer, or anyone's joints and knees, that's perfectly fine. I pretty much leave such posts alone at this point. I had initially responded to the person who said it made no sense, which I agree with.

But I'm happiest talking/indulging on whether or not his shortened points can work on clay, because I happen to think it can, and I'm quite excited at the idea of him trying. We've never seen a modern baseliner with a net strategy before.
Click to expand...
It’s cool if that’s what you want to see. But it’s time you accept that Federer has had concerns with his knee on clay before and is being advised against it by his medical team. Unless you think Federer is a liar, that is.

Footnote
Click to expand...
:
Re: Indulging me. I appreciate the sentiment. When us posters put up things here we're basically putting forward our own views, it's understood there's a personal bias: Just as when you say something, you're echoing your thoughts and beliefs, as am I. So I'm glad you’ve made the allowance for it, it makes communicating across a difference in views so much more pleasurable.

You're right in saying another French might not fit into his overall view on his remaining career objectives. I might even agree with it, but for the fact I suppose I'm more a fan of tennis than Federer himself. In tennis you always want the best players at the top tournaments, and sports in general you want to see the highest levels of competition. But mainly, in any sector, or endeavour, what's awfully exciting is seeing someone prove naysayers wrong and show us what new things are possible. I don't really care about Federer winning or losing tournaments, he's achieved so much already for me as his fan. What makes me interested is seeing how he continues to evolve.
Click to expand...
As a Tennis fan and Federer fan, I’d rather Federer played 2 more non-FO Grand Slam tournaments than 1 more FO tournament. Federer has said that he withdrew from the French Open last year partly because he wanted to extend his career. If skipping clay will mean that he will have a longer career, it makes perfect sense for Tennis/Federer fans to want him to skip clay.

I’m not saying I want him to skip clay, mind you. I think he knows best and I’m leaving it up to him. I’m just saying it’s very reasonable to want him to skip clay.
 
Zhilady said:
I have.





It’s cool if that’s what you want to see. But it’s time you accept that Federer has had concerns with his knee on clay before and is being advised against it by his medical team. Unless you think Federer is a liar, that is.

As a Tennis fan and Federer fan, I’d rather Federer played 2 more non-FO Grand Slam tournaments than 1 more FO tournament. Federer has said that he withdrew from the French Open last year partly because he wanted to extend his career. If skipping clay will mean that he will have a longer career, it makes perfect sense for Tennis/Federer fans to want him to skip clay.

I’m not saying I want him to skip clay, mind you. I think he knows best and I’m leaving it up to him. I’m just saying it’s very reasonable to want him to skip clay.
Click to expand...

Ha! I can't accept it, its a logical conundrum for me:

How can someone be healthy and cleared to play, and in the same breath, not be cleared? He talks about having issues at the USO, but you're not going to see many people here give relevance to that, inspite of the fact that RG was the more recent grand slam win between the two.

I don't think its as clear and as straightforward - when there's so much documentation about clay being the best surface for wear/tear, it's difficult for me to land on the side you have when trying to make sense of this.

PS
It's cool whatever he decides to do. I'm really not about him winning tournaments. My favourite period as a FedFan was 2014-2016 when I came across the below article which put what he's been doing into lovely perspective:

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-sun-never-sets-on-roger-federer-endings-and-wimbledon/
 
Hydrocella said:
Ha! I can't accept it, its a logical conundrum for me:

How can someone be healthy and cleared to play, and in the same breath, not be cleared?
Click to expand...
He's fit to play on clay in the sense that he doesn't have any injuries or ailments. It's just that the risk of injury for him is apparently much greater on clay than on any other surface. And seeing as how it's also his weakest surface that immediately precedes his best in terms of the Tennis season, it makes sense for him to skip it. It is fairly straightforward.

He talks about having issues at the USO, but you're not going to see many people here give relevance to that, inspite of the fact that RG was the more recent grand slam win between the two.
Click to expand...
When has he, and what are these issues he speaks of?

I don't think its as clear and as straightforward - when there's so much documentation about clay being the best surface for wear/tear, it's difficult for me to land on the side you have when trying to make sense of this.
Click to expand...
It is straightforward if you don't think Federer is a liar. Maybe you just think he's a liar.
 
EloQuent said:
And Tommy Haas beat him last year on grass.
Click to expand...
Eh, you can't be serious. He just let poor Tommy on his way out of the tour have that one. He was utterly dominant at both Halle and Wimbledon and won without dropping a set at Wimbledon and the gap between THAT and clay is not much, you say? Ok forget the results but his serve, slice, drop and volleys are all most effective on grass and least on clay.
 
Dolgopolov85 said:
Eh, you can't be serious. He just let poor Tommy on his way out of the tour have that one. He was utterly dominant at both Halle and Wimbledon and won without dropping a set at Wimbledon and the gap between THAT and clay is not much, you say? Ok forget the results but his serve, slice, drop and volleys are all most effective on grass and least on clay.
Click to expand...
I don't think he tanked to Haas. I think at his age sometimes he just loses. And of course he's better on grass than clay. Just pushing back against the notion that he's so weak on clay.
 
EloQuent said:
I don't think he tanked to Haas. I think at his age sometimes he just loses. And of course he's better on grass than clay. Just pushing back against the notion that he's so weak on clay.
Click to expand...
One loss at his first grass tune up event of the season really isn't much push back.
 
I like how the titles have progressively changed from Fred is not playing clay at all to Fred is not playing any clay tuneups. Next one will be Fred will only play Roland Garros.
 
His doctor already said that clay is very bad for his post-operation knee, and playing there is a gamble.

So according to some trolls around here, he should play on a surface dangerous for his knee and risk a career ending injury at the age of 37?

I mean I know some ppl dont like him but wow....seriously..
 
I am of the opinion that if roger wins indian wells he is going to skip miami and take a couple of weeks holiday...after the holiday I expect him to begin an intense training block on the clay.....how he feels during the training block will determine if he plays one tune-up and then the french open....if the knee can't handle it then there is no way he plays at all on clay, but if he feels good and I think he will then he will give everything to win his 2nd french open....
 
Zhilady said:
He's fit to play on clay in the sense that he doesn't have any injuries or ailments. It's just that the risk of injury for him is apparently much greater on clay than on any other surface. And seeing as how it's also his weakest surface that immediately precedes his best in terms of the Tennis season, it makes sense for him to skip it. It is fairly straightforward.

When has he, and what are these issues he speaks of?

It is straightforward if you don't think Federer is a liar. Maybe you just think he's a liar.
Click to expand...

Let’s conclude this one with your illuminating hypothesis:

I think Federer is a liar.

I’ll respond to the various other people that also/maybe/perhaps/possibly believe Roger Federer is a liar and you can feel absolutely free to stop worrying about it.

;)
 
justasport said:
I am of the opinion that if roger wins indian wells he is going to skip miami and take a couple of weeks holiday...after the holiday I expect him to begin an intense training block on the clay.....how he feels during the training block will determine if he plays one tune-up and then the french open....if the knee can't handle it then there is no way he plays at all on clay, but if he feels good and I think he will then he will give everything to win his 2nd french open....
Click to expand...
I sincerely doubt it.

He is not going to risk everything for winning a slam title he has little chance of winning. Not when Wimb is right around the corner.
 
Hydrocella said:
Let’s conclude this one with your illuminating hypothesis:

I think Federer is a liar.

I’ll respond to the various other people that also/maybe/perhaps/possibly believe Roger Federer is a liar and you can feel absolutely free to stop worrying about it.

;)
Click to expand...
It helps to know what I’m dealing with, so thanks for that admission. You can now go ahead and complain all you like about why you can’t wait to watch a 36-year-old liar of a player play on clay because you’re such a big fan of his and Tennis.
 
I don't understand the obsession of some with Fed playing on clay.

The VB's arguments are understandable.

But I don't get why @Hydrocella, who insists is a Fed fan, obsessively wants Fed to play on clay and all the threads covering the topic have him/her as the protagonist.
 
mike danny said:
I don't understand the obsession of some with Fed playing on clay.

The VB's arguments are understandable.

But I don't get why @Hydrocella, who insists is a Fed fan, obsessively wants Fed to play on clay and all the threads covering the topic have him/her as the protagonist.
Click to expand...

Yep, it's weird. This sudden obsession. That guy is as much a Federer fan as 90s clay. A Federer fan whose favorite period was 2014-2016? The guy is obviously a hater and best ignored.
 
Steve0904 said:
I just don't understand why Federer would fix something that wasn't broken last year. His schedule was perfect (even Montreal because he could've just as easily been injured in Cincy). Why would he do it? It's not worth the risk. If he doesn't win RG his clay season is a failure (yes I believe that), and then the only way he redeems that failure would be to win Wimbledon anyway, and/or the USO. Playing clay, in all reality will lessen his chances at the other 2 slams no matter how few clay events he plays.

Playing clay may also keep him free of rust, but it didn't seem to matter at all last year so I just don't see the point. The upside is extremely small and the downside carries huge risk. And IMHO the people that think he can beat decently healthy Nadal or even the rest of the field to get to Nadal are grossly underestimating how different HC and grass are compared to clay and are frankly living in la-la land.
Click to expand...
Thank you. Truth Bomb detonated. TW fanboy brains exploding.

As I said in another thread, I do enjoy watching Fed troll FRA.
 
Pagoo said:
Yep, it's weird. This sudden obsession. That guy is as much a Federer fan as 90s clay. A Federer fan whose favorite period was 2014-2016? The guy is obviously a hater and best ignored.
Click to expand...

Theres only an 'obsession' because the best player in the world is skipping 1 of the 4 grand slams on the tennis calendar . If he was playing, and not announcing all this rubbish that hes not sure if he will play on clay, then no one would be talking about it.
 
kevaninho said:
Theres only an 'obsession' because the best player in the world is skipping 1 of the 4 grand slams on the tennis calendar . If he was playing, and not announcing all this rubbish that hes not sure if he will play on clay, then no one would be talking about it.
Click to expand...

The weird part is about his detractors suddenly wanting to see him play, when many of those same people were berating him for not retiring, even when he was winning Majors just recently.

Talking about a 36 something y o player that is looking to prolong his career is fine.

:cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Another Federer streak could end in Madrid
Replies
2
Views
929
Deleted member 77403
D
BeatlesFan
It's official: Federer will not play Madrid or Rome
2
Replies
99
Views
8K
Meles
Meles
T
Nadal should cut his schedule for the clay season
Replies
37
Views
2K
El_Yotamo
El_Yotamo
Sudacafan
Clay season points to be defended - #1 perspectives
Replies
1
Views
746
Zhilady
Zhilady
TripleATeam
  • Poll Poll
More 2022 clay wins - Nadal or Djokovic?
Replies
19
Views
1K
Rattie
Rattie
Back
Top