Mens Tennis Forums banner

If I were Federer I would have focused on the clay season...

5K views 76 replies 40 participants last post by  Supercell 
#1 · (Edited)
I think Federer skipping the clay season might eventually be a regret. He was playing so well and then he decided to completely stop. I'm not saying that he should have played all the clay tournaments but definitely a few including the FO.

There's no doubt that he is at this point regarded as the GOAT by most people, but there's always a debate because of other champions like Laver, Nadal, Djokovic, Borg, Sampras, who have all achieved so much.

However IMO the main case against Federer is his lack of clay titles. He definitely has a good clay career, but it's the weak point. The other case against him is his record against Nadal in the big matches. Could you imagine if this clay season he added another masters 1000 and another FO title? And what about if he beat Nadal along the way? It would almost make his GOAT status as beyond any doubt.

A lot of people here talk about Nadal's accomplishments outside of clay as his weakness, but he already has 2 wimbledons and 3 uso/australian. What if he adds a 3rd Wimbledon and another hardcourt slam? What if Djokovic wins a 2nd FO in a few weeks? What if in the future a player comes and wins all 4 slams multiple times? To me, if I were Federer, I would have actually FOCUSED on the clay season because this is where my resume lacks, winning more there is what would shut down every argument against my GOAT claim.

If people talk down about how Nadal's strength is mainly 1 surface (clay), then praise how Federer's strength is 2 surfaces (hardcourt and grass), then believe me one day someone will come along and people will downplay Federer and say how that X player is equally strong on 3 surfaces (hardcourt, grass and clay). If Nadal and Djokovic aren't the ones to do that in the next few years, then someone else eventually will. Federer missed a chance to perhaps solidify himself as a true force on all 3 surfaces, not only 2. That lone 1 FO might in years to come play against him, even more than now. He should have TRIED. Just my 2 cents!
 
See less See more
#2 ·
True.

Federer's clay resume has actually taken a hit even in this era. While he used to be widely regarded as the second best clay courter behind RAFA of his time, now he's fallen to third place behind RAFA and Djokovic.

Also, congrats on your 19th post in 12 years.
 
#4 ·
That's true, his clay career is certainly lacking when compared with his other results and there's big room for improvement there though if he really wanted it though. I don't think Fed will regret it though. I think it's important to remember that players probably don't fixate on the idea of GOAT or whether their records will remain the test of time. They just play in the moment and look forward to the next tournament. Fed has said that he wants to prolong his career as much as possible, wants to be healthy, so to him skipping clay is a good thing. Nadal also has constantly mentioned that although he was disappointed with not winning AO, he was happy at his level and recovery from injury. I think just playing to them means a whole lot more than trying to work out how to be cemented in tennis history. Maybe we ask too much from them as fans :haha: For me too it would be great to see Fed at FO and get good runs oh well
 
#5 ·
I'm kind of fine with him skipping, I assume he had good (physical) reasons to skip it. It was disappointing because I think this year he would have had much better chances than any other years since 2010. But if it endangers the grass swing or even the rest of his career, I fully understand not risking it on a surface that you haven't felt that great on in the last couple years. 1 slam, a few masters and a couple more finals should be enough to show that he at least had a good level on the stuff.
 
#6 ·
Federer was set to play Stuttgart as per contract with the MercedesCup at the end of last year. And Stuttgarts starts ONE DAY after the French Open Final. That would have meant playing for three weeks straight. Seeing as he played four weeks straight during Indian Wells and Miami and was tired enough to take off most of the clay season initially, the potential drop in performance by suddenly switching from clay to grass probably did not seem worth the effort.

Basically it was a choice between French Open and Wimbledon, and we all know where Federer stands in this matter.
 
#9 · (Edited)
Federer was set to play Stuttgart as per contract with the MercedesCup at the end of last year. And Stuttgarts starts ONE DAY after the French Open Final. That would have meant playing for three weeks straight.
I think it was stupid of Federer to commit to an ATP250 right after RG in the first place.

It was probably a financial decision more than a career one. I assume he's getting paid considerable fat stacks.
 
#7 ·
If I were Federer, I would've been thinking about prolonging my career instead of risking to end it right now solely to satisfy a bunch of glory hunting fans obsessed with silly numbers. Oh wait... that's exactly what he's doing! Wise dog, this Federer.

Think about it yourselves. I don't know how old you are, but imagine you were forced to quit your very much loved job at 35 y.o. and never be allowed to have it again. Wouldn't you want to delay this moment as much as possible? As a fan I am most definitely disappointed and sad he's chosen not to play on clay, but as a person of a very similar age I can easily relate to what he's being through and understand his priorities perfectly.
 
#10 · (Edited)
He's almost 36. He might win FO if he tries, but at what cost? He said his knee didn't feel good playing on clay last year. He could risk his health here if he plays FO. There's no guarantee he could win it with Nadal/Thiem/Djokovic there which means he surely would have to try very hard to get a shot at the title. And it would have an impact on the rest of his season i. e. the grass and HC season which are traditionally the surfaces he excels on.

Is it worth it to go for something harder to get at the expense of the remaining season where he could bring his best and with less competition ?
 
#44 ·
Because there is no reason to criticize Fed's scheduling decisions. He has been SUPERB in his scheduling throughout his career. He is 35? years old. He knows his own body. He has to pick and choose his spots. He has chosen to emphasize those tournaments which he has the best chance of doing well (non-clay events). His last big decision to take off 1/2 year worked out extremely well. Why must Fed haters criticize even an area of great strength in his career - scheduling?
 
#16 ·
All in all, the absolute stupidest thing the old man could've done is to play on clay. We've seen how big hitters ended up having to grind points to oblivion. He's three months away from 36. If wants to keep playing he needs to plan accordingly.

Besides, a months long hiatus led him to win the Australian Open and the Sunshine Double, beating Rafa three times in a row. I'm pretty sure he and his team learned something from that.
 
#19 ·
The only point why i would have loved him to play clay this year is cause the field is so weak that he actually had very very good chances making this year epic. Sure he might gonna play longer if he doesn't and I can understand that but it has never been as easy winning big titles as this year....Well and all the time nole was n#1 and vultured slams against a non existing field sorry :p nah jk ;)))
 
#23 ·
There is a reason why Federer announced his withdrawal from RG just a few days before the tournament. After Miami he went into hiding to see what's going on on clay. He was thinking this way: "I'm a pigeon of RAFA, Thiem and Zverev. If they don't play well, I will definitely take advantage of it and vulture another FO title". But all of them have been having a great clay court season, so Federer realized he has no chance of winning RG and deciced to withdraw.
 
#36 ·
Let me guess, scared of rafa? Lol

No one is scared of rafa anymore not even on clay
 
#35 ·
Fed wants another wimby, he lost sf and f so he as us aml5her chance


He won't risk his chance at this just for the clay, it's not worth it


Be sure if he will win his 8 wimby that next year he will play RG no doubt
 
#37 ·
In hindsight this may turn out to be a good decision. I think him scalping another SW19 title or another US open shouldn't be the only metric to judge his decision. A good run doesn't always have to be a title win you know. So let's see. It's going to be great to see him back. Tennis has missed him...
 
#41 · (Edited)
Impossible to say. On the other hand, if he loses, we can definitely say it was a bad decision.

Fed should have kept pressing on, he shouldn't have let Nadal gain confidence. Playing Monte Carlo and Rome wouldn't have been very taxing. He's also not gaining match toughness while the other players are.
 
#42 ·
skipping clay was the best decision. It wud be dumb to skip all warmups and come back on a new surface and all of a sudden play BO5 on clay. You can bet these 11 weeks federer has worked on tweaks in his game targeting his serve, slice, and forehand.


He basically gets to continue to train on hard courts with i think the wimbledon balls and start training on grass in the next 7-10 days. He will be the freshest player out there not just during grass season but in the remaininig months of the season which has its advantages. Heck instead of playing 1-2 clay masters maybe he adds 1-2 out of shanghai, paris, montreal.


After the grass season I expect him to play Cinci, US open, basel and WTF. Maybe shanghai I dunno.

Whatever happens, i think it will keep federer fresh for the rest of 2017 and into the start of 2018.
 
#47 ·
We'll see. I think there were many opportunities to pick up points given the weaknesses with the other half of the clay draws.

He could have made a bunch of Fs here.

But being fresh for Wimbledon and grass season, he wins Wimbledon nobody will care about Clay season. Especially if someone likes Stanimal wins RG.
 
#48 ·
NO.
His great times on clay are already over and part of the past now, he basically has little chance of doing something on a surface that demands him to hit more winners than any other surface. So again NO, i am really happy he pulled out of RG.

Plus there are more surfaces than just 3 of them. The Australian Open surface is different to the Usopen one, despite both being hardcourts for instance. The indoor season is another dominant surface that you have to count to Roger's resume, and that is certainly not part of the hardcourt (outdoor) season.

Federer does not need anything from clay to solidify his status as GOAT, he just needs more slams and end up above Nadal to get that done, and definetly clay HAS NEVER been his best surface.

:wavey:
 
#51 ·
There is also other way about it, Fed didn't wanna concede any psychological advantage back to Rafa so in my view skipping Clay made a lot more sense and thankfully Federer's team made the right decision.

Wimbledon is not guaranteed but Federer will excel in the hard court season and USO.
 
#53 ·
No, but he should have tried his luck in Paris. Unexpected results are the only thing that can be expected this year, it seems.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top