I don't care how many clay tournies he wins. RG is the only one that really matters. Well MC, Rome and Hamburg do too but he's won Hamburg and made the finals of MC and Rome. He made the SF and F of RG with his current schedule. Why would he need to play more clay court events? I don't think playing some MM event in South America or Mexico is going to make it any easier for him to win RG.
As a fan, Roger would be the greatest to me if he never wins one more title. But that's not the point.
On historybooks, SF, F won't cut it when all said and done. Sampras legacy will always be tainted by his lack of RG. He too made SF once. Does anyone care? How quickly did the former players, several tennis commentators threw sampras out of the window and are clamoring federer as the greatest one. And this would repeat when the next greatest player comes in another 5-10 years. But, Laver's legacy has always been there since he did something remarkable, a true GS. So, Roger's legacy will forever be linked with how he does at RG.
What's the point in keep on playing in Miami? Roger has 2-3 years to win RG. And sooner his fans comes to grip with it, the better.
>>I don't think playing some MM event in South America or Mexico is going to make it any easier for him to win RG.
It may. It may not. What else could he do? He can't just play 2 warm-up tourneys every year and show up in RG hoping to win it. Lets hope this coming year might be his break-through year !!