Roger only playing French on clay

Sport

Legend
Okay, if this is the only remaining career goal, then maybe such a decision is understandable, but not if the full Slam count is on the line. Also I doubt that playing a few weeks earlier really influences the chances at Wimbledon.

By the way, not long ago I watched that 1970 final and I felt bad for Rosewall. I think it’s essentially the lack of a Wimbledon title which excludes him from many GOAT discussions, but he wasn’t really worse than Laver overall.
I agree. It is also unfair to criticize Ken for not winning Wimbledon. Rosewall was banned from participating at Wimbledon 11 years, between 1957 and 1967, when he was 22-32 years old. They did not allow him to participate at Wimbledon 11 years when he was in his best years (22-32 years old) and he still made 4 Wimbledon finals. We can't assume he was unable to win Wimbledon, because no one knows whether he could have won none or many Wimbledon titles during the11 years of 1957-1967 had he been allowed to play at Wimbledon.
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
That's quite stupid. But you must know that. It's never 0 chance, especially for someone like Federer.
Machi, you're detached from reality.

At nearly 39, if you think Federer can play extended rallies on clay over 5 sets against much younger opposition and win, all I can conclude is that you're a teen or in your early 20s and have no idea how the body feels at nearly 40!
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
Assuming skipping French does not affect Wimb seeding, there is no reason to play the French. Unlless it is a farewell appearance.
Even then, his past strategy was to focus on fitness by skipping French. Makes no sense to change that now. :unsure:
But who wants to enter the French to get ass whipped by a nobody.
Going in half-assed is just a bad look. Either skip it or enter it with proper warmup events.
:(
Most likely, this is his last year on the tour. So he's playing it to say farewell.
 

pasta

New User
After all is said and done it will be a big stain on RF an ND careers winning just one RG ...

Ubeeleebable ... ONE TITLE ... ???
 

MeatTornado

Legend
Looks as if Monte Carlo and Rome are forever going to be the only big ATP titles missing from Fed's resumé.
A shame. 4 finals a piece at the 2 events with no trophies to show for it. 5 of the 8 lost to Nadal.

Really puts in perspective what Novak's done by winning all 9. The difference between them being that he managed to beat Rafa at both MC & Rome.
 

ThiemPlayer

New User
Machi, you're detached from reality.

At nearly 39, if you think Federer can play extended rallies on clay over 5 sets against much younger opposition and win, all I can conclude is that you're a teen or in your early 20s and have no idea how the body feels at nearly 40!
You're delusional if you think there's 0 chance. Otherwise you must not understanding the meaning of zero. Your conclusion is ignorant. If Nadal and Djokovic are upset, Federer certainly has a chance.
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
You're delusional if you think there's 0 chance. Otherwise you must not understanding the meaning of zero. Your conclusion is ignorant. If Nadal and Djokovic are upset, Federer certainly has a chance.
Otha! Let's just wait and see, that's the best we can do at this point (y)
 

mental midget

Hall of Fame
He did great last year. Should play if he can. But his match with Nadal was really anti climatic due to the weather.
agree. not that he would have won but he was hitting the ball well and the points/games etc were pretty competitive under the circumstances. didn't feel like an 08 style beatdown, certainly.
 

mental midget

Hall of Fame
You're delusional if you think there's 0 chance. Otherwise you must not understanding the meaning of zero. Your conclusion is ignorant. If Nadal and Djokovic are upset, Federer certainly has a chance.
endurance isn't the issue so much as pure speed/explosiveness, biggest problem he's got nowadays is getting yanked to the forehand side, has trouble getting in position and getting behind the ball. so much of 'prime federer' in those early years was being in such good position that he caught almost everything out in front and could rip through it. these days, a lot more buggy-whip forehands, getting to the ball when it's almost past him, hard to control and makes errors.
 

mental midget

Hall of Fame
Most likely, this is his last year on the tour. So he's playing it to say farewell.
a few years ago in one of the million 'when will fed retire' threads my guess was: unless injuries force his hand, he'll start thinking hard when he hits a billion dollars. not judging in the least but honestly, you're where he's at, could keep going of course, but you hit that nice round number and, eh...pretty cool. i'm out. i would get it.
 

ThiemPlayer

New User
Otha! Let's just wait and see, that's the best we can do at this point (y)
That's the point, we have to wait and see which by definition means non-zero chance. The only way it's zero chance is if Fed does not enter the FO. p.s. just to educate you, 0.00000000000001% is a non-zero chance.
 
But why would he care about going deep? If he doesn't feel he's got a chance in hell of winning the French Open, why bother with clay? He's not going to beat Nadal or Djokovic or Thiem. He'll probably struggle against many other lower ranked players.
He totally blew away thiem in 1st set and half in 2019 Madrid QF.
If not for Thiem's exceptional clutch serves again and again in the TB, fed would've taken him down 6-3 7-6
 
He also had the absolute weakest draw leading up to the SF. He didn't play any threat whatsoever other than Stan in the QF who was already dead from the previous match going 8-6 in the 5th set against Tsitsipas.
Federer has declined further since then. His last 2 Slams (USO and AO) have seen him physically falling apart on the court to the point where he's almost had to quit mid-way against journeymen. He's looking a lot worse than 1 year ago. And no surprise. He's really old now that he can barely keep up any longer. He might as well skip clay and give it one last go at Wimbledon.
Not any weaker than Djokovic or Nadal (who played qualifiers back to back)
QF opponent :- Stan > Zverev > Glassikori.
Stan didn't play like a dead man. He's a physical beast
 

junior74

G.O.A.T.
Can Federer repeat SF at RG? Only Goffin, Tsitsipas, Medvedev and Shchartzman have a legitimate shot to defeat the Swiss at RG before the SF. Wawrinka is too declined to do so, I believe.
Will Bull's protege the friendly ghost have a chance against 0lderer this year?
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
Based on what? When did Wimbledon ever alter the seeding formula (that was in place before Fed won his first Wimby) for Fed specifically? Go ahead, I'm curious.
A Nadal fan making speculations about favourable seeding for Federer at Wimbledon is hardly a surprising event.

 

Hitman

Hall of Fame
Bad news for the clay events that would have wanted to milk the Federer cash cow to get more people to attend and pay more.
 

Xavier G

Professional
After all is said and done it will be a big stain on RF an ND careers winning just one RG ...

Ubeeleebable ... ONE TITLE ... ???
No, there's no stain. One title each and multiple finals. They played in the era of Nadal, the greatest clay court player ever.
Djokovic imo still has a chance of winning another RG.
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
a few years ago in one of the million 'when will fed retire' threads my guess was: unless injuries force his hand, he'll start thinking hard when he hits a billion dollars. not judging in the least but honestly, you're where he's at, could keep going of course, but you hit that nice round number and, eh...pretty cool. i'm out. i would get it.
Great post, Midget! (y):)
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
If he makes final and neither of djokodal are standing there, I'd like his chances very much.
He's lost 1 slam final to non djokodal opponents, just one
That's an incredible record! It'll be nice to see Federer win it but seeing as he has already reversed his losing trend against Nadal, we'll have to see if he can do it against Djokovic (y)
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
A shame. 4 finals a piece at the 2 events with no trophies to show for it. 5 of the 8 lost to Nadal.

Really puts in perspective what Novak's done by winning all 9. The difference between them being that he managed to beat Rafa at both MC & Rome.
Still can't believe how lamely Federer let Cincinnati go, an event he has won more times than anybody else and had never lost a final at (beating Djokovic in straights on 3 different occasions). After that, I knew that Djokovic would always be the favourite between them no matter where they met.
 

Subway Tennis

Hall of Fame
Based on what? When did Wimbledon ever alter the seeding formula (that was in place before Fed won his first Wimby) for Fed specifically? Go ahead, I'm curious.
Fed will most likely get in on merit anyway, so the issue may be moot. But even if his points weren't there, we both know there is no chance they would seed him outside top 4 ;)

Not saying that "only" Fed gets this treatment either, btw. Others have benefitted also (Serena got a deserved seeding bump during her comeback).
 
Last edited:

MeatTornado

Legend
Still can't believe how lamely Federer let Cincinnati go, an event he has won more times than anybody else and had never lost a final at (beating Djokovic in straights on 3 different occasions). After that, I knew that Djokovic would always be the favourite between them no matter where they met.
Well he had no business being in that final to begin with. That was the height of his hand issue that summer and probably the worst his ground & return games have ever looked.

He barely got past a still on the mend Wawrinka in the QF and then got a retirement in the semis. Goffin had a shoulder injury and Roger still couldn't break his serve. I was upset at the time that he let his stronghold go, but Novak certainly earned it. He put in the work year after year in Cincy but was always stopped by a well playing opponent. He probably deserved an "easy" win after all that time.

I think their Paris match a couple months later was a much bigger indicator of where their rivalry was going.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Well he had no business being in that final to begin with. That was the height of his hand issue that summer and probably the worst his ground & return games have ever looked.

He barely got past a still on the mend Wawrinka in the QF and then got a retirement in the semis. Goffin had a shoulder injury and Roger still couldn't break his serve. I was upset at the time that he let his stronghold go, but Novak certainly earned it. He put in the work year after year in Cincy but was always stopped by a well playing opponent. He probably deserved an "easy" win after all that time.

I think their Paris match a couple months later was a much bigger indicator of where their rivalry was going.
The thing is that he was not even playing the best version of Djokovic. The latter was also on the comeback trail that year following his elbow injury (yes he had won Wimbledon but only had to face a clearly exhausted Anderson in the final). Novak must have thought all his Christmasses had come seeing Roger play like that in a Cincy final of all things.
 
Top