apparently it's some kind of journalistic "experiment". what a stupid concept:
anyways, here's the whole article with source:
In light of his recent marriage to Mirka Vavrinec, tennis great Roger Federer has decided to walk away from tennis after the Championships at Wimbledon.
It is unknown if he plans to return to the pro circuit, but for now, he intends to focus his attention on his child-to-be and newly wed wife.
"Well, Tiger got to take a year off to be with his kid, why can't I?" said Federer today.
Roger intends to finish his scheduled clay and grass season, then withdraw from the ATP Tour.
Federer is currently one Slam title shy of Pete Sampras' all-time record of 14, and will try to equalize that mark at Roland Garros next month. But that won't be a small task, as four-time champion Rafael Nadal again figures to stand in the way.
Look for Andy Murray to also be a force, as he has had a terrific 2009 campaign thus far and has historically given Federer problems.
If you believed a word of this garbage, that is your decision. This was simply an experiment, to find out how many people actually read this because the name "Roger Federer" was in the title.
This is one of the worst pieces of sports journalism in history, yet it was read anyway. So here is my challenge to writers of the tennis community.
The tennis world consists of so much more than just Federer, Nadal, and Murray. And yet, those are the only players who ever get any coverage here.
Why is that? Nobody even bothered to write about Vera Zvonareva dominating Ana Ivanovic at Indian Wells.
And nobody wrote a darn thing about young phenom Victoria Azarenka winning the biggest title of her life at Miami until I took the liberties myself.
My point is, there is a lot more to the tennis world than what we see here. How about Jelena Jankovic reinventing herself at Andalucia? Or Lleyton Hewitt reaching his first clay final in a decade?
Let's branch out. Get it done.