Federer on the current state of tennis: boycott, season length, future of the ATP [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer on the current state of tennis: boycott, season length, future of the ATP

Arkulari
11-25-2011, 12:24 AM
beZY73dNE18

From 2.55

Next year's season is going to be shorter by 2 weeks, that's I think as much as we could squeeze it really because otherwise a lot of tournaments would have to go or we would have 4 tournaments the same week which I don't think it's a smart idea (to be honest) for the game.

(About the 2-year ranking system)

"I can't support it as the President of the Player Council.....I know it could be a good thing for me..we could stay at the top for a long time but for the lower ranked players it is not a good thing and that's why I can't support it."


I really like to hear him stating things about the game, he really knows what's going on :)

Roamed
11-25-2011, 12:27 AM
:yeah: Thanks for posting it in GM, I think people who aren't necessarily his fans should see it. Fantastic answers, I especially liked the one about the 2 year rankings issue.

Arkulari
11-25-2011, 12:31 AM
Yes, this isn't really about him alone but the actual state of the game, since he's the President of the Players' Council :)

Hewitt =Legend
11-25-2011, 12:36 AM
The Fedmeister is right here and good to see he is looking out for the lower ranked players there with the 2 year ranking crap.

alter ego
11-25-2011, 12:47 AM
Fed is fighting hard for the Edberg award. :superlol:

This was such a nice interview.

Pirata.
11-25-2011, 12:50 AM
Nice to see someone looking out for the lower ranked guys.

Action Jackson
11-25-2011, 12:56 AM
How about addressing the lack of diversity in surfaces.

As for the 2 year ranking system, they had it before and it was disgraceful then. It's just commonsense 52 weeks isn't that hard to understand, then again the ATP lacks commonsense.

alter ego
11-25-2011, 12:57 AM
How about addressing the lack of diversity in surfaces.

As for the 2 year ranking system, they had it before and it was disgraceful then. It's just commonsense 52 weeks isn't that hard to understand, then again the ATP lacks commonsense.

He did that in a USO conference.

Looner
11-25-2011, 12:57 AM
I can't wait for the (moronic) British press to spin this as an insult to Murray. Sue Baker just tries so hard to make it as if Fed cares about that brat with 0 slams. I also loved his answer No.3. 'I am getting closer? Didn't know that and don't care honestly'. 10/10 presser from the GOAT.

Action Jackson
11-25-2011, 01:00 AM
He did that in a USO conferance.

Nothing has happened has it, same old, same old.

sexybeast
11-25-2011, 01:01 AM
I dont think he can complain much about the surface diversity, he will have most top players and probably tournament officials against him anyway. Federer might be the only top player who would gain from having back surfaces like they used to be.

Arkulari
11-25-2011, 01:04 AM
Nothing has happened has it, same old, same old.

They can propose things but as Roger himself said, the board has the last word :shrug:

And he's right about #3, it doesn't change shit for the AO seedings so why would he care?

I dont think he can complain much about the surface diversity, he will have most top players and probably tournament officials against him anyway. Federer might be the only top player who would gain from having back surfaces like they used to be.

That's a good point as well.

alter ego
11-25-2011, 01:09 AM
Nothing has happened has it, same old, same old.

Here's the video.

HNAhNnHrEaA

From o:48.

Action Jackson
11-25-2011, 01:18 AM
They can propose things but as Roger himself said, the board has the last word :shrug:

And he's right about #3, it doesn't change shit for the AO seedings so why would he care?


Considering the board are about maximising their profits to fill their own coffers and not interested in furthering and benefiting the game. Then they might as well push through the 2 year ranking system.

Seedings are irrelevant.

sexybeast
11-25-2011, 01:18 AM
Here's the link:http://www.usopen.org/en_US/interactive/video/index.html?promo=topnav
He clearly says that "the game needs diffrent speeds on all the slams".

Damn, it dosen't work this way. Go to press confernces ->day 1, click on Federer's video.

Problem is we all know his main rivals will be hurt by this while he would thrive on faster Usopen/Wimbledon while still beeing good on slow claycourts, so he is not in a good spot to sound objective about this while he is still playing.

Sham Kay
11-25-2011, 01:19 AM
About the number 3 ranking- "it doesn't mean the world to me".

Yet another dig at Murray. When will it end. When I say.

(Great interview)

rocketassist
11-25-2011, 01:26 AM
About the number 3 ranking- "it doesn't mean the world to me".

Yet another dig at Murray. When will it end. When I say.

(Great interview)

How is it a dig? The clownish Murray-obsessed press brought it up and got the short shrift.

No difference between 4 and 3. As soon as one gets to 2 and stops these Djokovic-Nadal grand slam finals that's all that matters.

DDrago2
11-25-2011, 01:36 AM
Nice to see someone looking out for the lower ranked guys.

Fed always payed attention on lower ranked players, and expecially towards young players. You can be sure there is no young and promissing player who's progress is not closely followed by Fed and his camp.

Sham Kay
11-25-2011, 01:38 AM
How is it a dig? The clownish Murray-obsessed press brought it up and got the short shrift.

No difference between 4 and 3. As soon as one gets to 2 and stops these Djokovic-Nadal grand slam finals that's all that matters.

Let me try that again..

About the number 3 ranking- "it doesn't mean the world to me".

Yet another dig at Murray. When will it end. When I say. :p

---

Anyway. Charismatic stuff from the GOAT, almost more than usual.

Kat_YYZ
11-25-2011, 02:34 AM
Here's an excerpt from a recent article about changes to the ATP leadership:


Roger Federer continues to serve as president of the ATP Player Council and Rafael Nadal as its vice president.

“I’ve been impressed by their judgment,” Helfant said in a recent interview. “They are active participants in those meetings, and they care deeply about the governance of the sport. Their accomplishments on the court will speak for themselves over time and they’ll obviously be linked together forever in tennis history. But I would hope in the history of tennis, people will also remember all the work they put in off the court.”

Gimelstob said he was impressed by their attention to detail and staying power.

“We’re sitting there on a Friday night in a meeting room at the U.S. Open for four or four and a half hours with Roger, Rafa and Fernando González,” he said. “Speaking on everything from qualifying cutoffs, doubles and small stuff to prize-money allocation, to pensions, to real big issues. But the most impressive thing about Roger and Rafa in these meetings is that there is no less level of intensity and connection to the issues that don’t affect them.”
Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/19/sports/tennis/19iht-SRWTPOLITICS19.html?_r=2
:yeah:

Action Jackson
11-25-2011, 06:00 AM
Gimelknob at his best.

nobama
11-25-2011, 06:08 AM
He said he thinks a player strike would be nonsense. Let's see how long it takes the Brit press to report that as a slight against Murray. :lol:

nobama
11-25-2011, 06:12 AM
Let me try that again..

About the number 3 ranking- "it doesn't mean the world to me".

Yet another dig at Murray. When will it end. When I say. :p

---

Anyway. Charismatic stuff from the GOAT, almost more than usual.
Fed's great at tweaking the British press. I love it. :cool:

MuzzahLovah
11-25-2011, 06:36 AM
Did he manage an entire interview without passive-aggressively insulting his competitors?

Fed_Ds
11-25-2011, 01:46 PM
I can't wait for the (moronic) British press to spin this as an insult to Murray. Sue Baker just tries so hard to make it as if Fed cares about that brat with 0 slams. I also loved his answer No.3. 'I am getting closer? Didn't know that and don't care honestly'. 10/10 presser from the GOAT.

:worship:

MariaV
11-25-2011, 01:51 PM
How is it a dig? The clownish Murray-obsessed press brought it up and got the short shrift.

No difference between 4 and 3. As soon as one gets to 2 and stops these Djokovic-Nadal grand slam finals that's all that matters.

I agree.
I like Murray and feel sorry for all the :cuckoo: UK media nonsense. But it'll be sooooooooo fun to see should Murray finally win a slam, everyone will go bananas. :lol:

tyruk14
11-25-2011, 02:06 PM
Consummate professional.

nobama
11-25-2011, 02:57 PM
Did he manage an entire interview without passive-aggressively insulting his competitors?

http://inserteyeroll.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/crying-baby-300x300.jpg

Arkulari
11-26-2011, 05:20 AM
The British press is desperately trying to get an idol in a big sport, so they are putting too much pressure on Muzza and get too defensive when someone says something that is somewhat related to him :o

Pirata.
11-26-2011, 05:24 AM
Roger knows that it doesn't matter what his ranking is, his inevitable semifinal opponent will always be the same.

philosophicalarf
11-26-2011, 05:42 AM
Fed quote: "...or we would have 4 tournaments the same week which I don't think it's a smart idea"

Already happening this next season - the week after Wimbledon we have Newport, Bastad, Stuttgart and Umug all at once. 3 events the following week too.

atennisfan
11-26-2011, 06:28 AM
Fed always payed attention on lower ranked players, and expecially towards young players. You can be sure there is no young and promissing player who's progress is not closely followed by Fed and his camp.

can you be anymore tarder?
:rolls:

atennisfan
11-26-2011, 06:54 AM
Did he manage an entire interview without passive-aggressively insulting his competitors?

Only very insecure fans of insecure tennis players would think negatively over the interview. It reflects their own achievements, really.

:wavey:

tripwires
11-26-2011, 09:28 AM
Only very insecure fans of insecure tennis players would think negatively over the interview. It reflects their own achievements, really.

:wavey:

MuzzahLovah is to be ignored. :)

nobama
11-27-2011, 11:43 PM
Hmm...Fed claims he's the only one who wanted WTF to be best of 5.

http://www.tennisnow.com/News/Federer--Best-Of-Five-Sets-Should-Return-To-Finals.aspx

Despite going into a tough three-set match against Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Federer expressed that he would like to return to a best-of-five sets style at the ATP Finals to give the audience more. He said, “I think it makes for a great year end”

“We had the whole scenario today in today's match. But if I would have served it out, it would have been over in a hurry. I think I almost felt the spectators weren't quite ready for it to end quite yet, although many would have been happy for me, they would have loved to see more tennis,” recalled the former World No. 1, “I remember sitting in a room in Shanghai where players were asked, Would you like it to be five sets or three sets, the year end final? Kind of went in a circle. Everyone said best of three sets. I was the only guy that said, I think we should have best of five sets. “

sexybeast
11-27-2011, 11:51 PM
Hmm...Fed claims he's the only one who wanted WTF to be best of 5.

http://www.tennisnow.com/News/Federer--Best-Of-Five-Sets-Should-Return-To-Finals.aspx

Despite going into a tough three-set match against Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Federer expressed that he would like to return to a best-of-five sets style at the ATP Finals to give the audience more. He said, “I think it makes for a great year end”

“We had the whole scenario today in today's match. But if I would have served it out, it would have been over in a hurry. I think I almost felt the spectators weren't quite ready for it to end quite yet, although many would have been happy for me, they would have loved to see more tennis,” recalled the former World No. 1, “I remember sitting in a room in Shanghai where players were asked, Would you like it to be five sets or three sets, the year end final? Kind of went in a circle. Everyone said best of three sets. I was the only guy that said, I think we should have best of five sets. “

Federer is what you could call a conservative in tennis politics, he likes things like it used to be in the old days. Often the word "conservative" is loaded with negativity and a fear for change but I think most agree in this case that all radical change in tennis seem to come for the wrong reason and towards the wrong direction. It is nice to have someone dominating who understands what tradition means for the sport, when I hear Nadal talk about how serve and volleyers were boring and today tennis is more fun I get the feeling these guys simply dont appreciate the history of the sport.

tennisfan856
11-28-2011, 12:06 AM
Only problem pertaining to that five-set rule in the final is that the week is grueling enough as it is with the rr and semis, stretching it out to 3 out of 5 will just reduce the quality of the match. Most of the guys in the top 8 can't produce effortless tennis like Roger prides in.

Kat_YYZ
12-03-2011, 06:47 AM
this thread seemed like a good place to post this:
Tennis still has issues despite rise in net profits
By Simon Briggs10:30PM GMT 02 Dec 2011

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/8932151/Tennis-still-has-issues-despite-rise-in-net-profits.html

Any counting-house Scrooges working in the tennis industry this Christmas should be cackling and rubbing their hands with glee.

At the end of a riveting season, the receipts just keep flooding in. A quarter of a million spectators rolled up to the O2 Arena last week to watch the Barclays ATP World Tour Finals, and 7,000 more are due at the Albert Hall over the weekend to hear John McEnroe dust off his favourite epithets on the veterans’ tour.

Yes, the global economy may be teetering on the verge of another meltdown, but the timeless appeal of tennis, that most civilised of sports (at least until McEnroe blows his top), is more powerful than ever. Even as Marylebone Cricket Club scale back their vaunted Lord’s “Masterplan”, the All England Club are feeling so flush that they are considering investing another £100-odd million in a roof for Wimbledon’s Court No1.

But wait, what’s this? A vision of Christmas future, perhaps? A future where a floppy-haired Swiss fellow in a bandana is whooping it up with the vets in the Albert Hall. Where Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal are both in rehab after major operations (shoulder and knee respectively). And where Andy Murray has taken time off to travel around the world and seek inner peace.

Okay, so it’s a flippant suggestion, but the point is that men’s tennis can’t afford to be complacent. The ATP may be congratulating itself on a balance sheet that shows revenue up by 80 per cent over the last three years. But how much of that is down to its brilliant salesmanship and how much to the generation of geniuses who have emerged to contest some of the greatest matches ever played?

More importantly, how is the ATP going to protect its biggest assets, this gaggle of golden geese? The O2 tour finals might have been decorated by a majestic performance from Roger Federer. But they were also devalued by the fact that his main rivals were barely capable of standing up, let alone giving the 2011 season the send-off it deserved.

“Oh, diddums,” I can hear you saying. “Those poor multi-millionaires! And even if they all burn out, won’t there be another champion along in a minute?”

Well, there might be. But don’t bet on it, because there are precious few meteors to challenge the established stars. Whereas the ‘Big Four’ had all cracked the world’s top 20 before they were 20, today we have just two teenagers (Australia’s Bernard Tomic and Ryan Harrison of the United States) inside the top 100.

For all its wealth, for all the visibility of its core celebrities, tennis has issues to resolve. Perhaps Murray’s talk of strike action within the locker room was premature, but there is real discontent - not to mention disagreement - behind the scenes.

“The views of the two leading players are a long way apart,” says Nick Lester, a former pro who now commentates for Sky Sports. “Nadal wants to shorten the schedule and bring in a more forgiving rankings system that works over two seasons instead of one. But Federer, who spends far less time and energy on court, would rather keep the status quo.”

A similar gulf has opened over the appointment of a new ATP chief executive to replace the outgoing Adam Helfant. Nadal is understood to prefer Richard Krajicek, the Dutchman who won Wimbledon in 1996, out of a feeling that a former player should lend a sympathetic ear to the concerns of his footsore workforce.

But Federer questions whether Krajicek has enough business acumen for the job. The deadlock, which extends to the ATP board, is so severe that there is talk of beginning the recruitment process all over again.

Krajicek, as it happens, is one of the “legends” in action at the Albert Hall this weekend, where he is still pinging his serve down at up to 140 mph. “Tennis is doing well - it’s such a healthy sport,” he told me last week. But that doesn’t mean it’s all peace, love and harmony around the courts this Christmas.

nothing new here with regards to the players' positions on matters; interesting figures regarding the profitability of tennis.

Roamed
12-03-2011, 11:06 AM
Interesting stuff. I do tend to agree with Federer regarding the Krajicek issue I think... so many of the pros dropped out of school and didn't get a proper education, Krajicek started playing tennis at 4, and I'm sure they have lots of worldly experience etc but it isn't the same. I mean, take Federer himself - the guy usually gives diplomatic answers to questions regarding ATP politics but he'd never be suitable for a job as ATP CEO or something high in the organisation, as a CEO is going to face very different and more complicated challenges that probably require as he says a 'business acumen' and I don't know if, for Krajicek, just running a foundation and being tournament director of Rotterdam is enough to give him that.

nobama
12-03-2011, 04:05 PM
For all the players that want a shorter season what tournaments are they willing to kill to get it? Or do they seriously want 4 tournaments per week to cram everything in to a shorter season? Seems to me it's all much easier said than done otherwise it would have already happened.

Sunset of Age
12-03-2011, 04:13 PM
For all the players that want a shorter season what tournaments are they willing to kill to get it? Or do they seriously want 4 tournaments per week to cram everything in to a shorter season? Seems to me it's all much easier said than done otherwise it would have already happened.

This entire 'problem' wouldn't even exist if the ATP would be willing to cut down on the number of mandatory tournaments for the top players, so that each one of them would be free to construct his schedule the way he feels most fitting to be able to get his best chances at his best results. Which will most obviously mean more top players skipping certain events.

Unfortunately, this will never happen as it would immediately get the tournament directors' knickers in a twist, as none of them could be sure anymore of a number of big stars participating at "their" tournament - and it's those big stars that bring in the $$$$$$$$$. AJ once dubbed the ATP the "Association of Tournament Directors" and he was pretty much spot-on about that. It's all about the cash, it's the old story - Money Talks and Sh*t Walks. :shrug:

Midnight Ninja
12-03-2011, 08:45 PM
This entire 'problem' wouldn't even exist if the ATP would be willing to cut down on the number of mandatory tournaments for the top players, so that each one of them would be free to construct his schedule the way he feels most fitting to be able to get his best chances at his best results. Which will most obviously mean more top players skipping certain events.

Unfortunately, this will never happen as it would immediately get the tournament directors' knickers in a twist, as none of them could be sure anymore of a number of big stars participating at "their" tournament - and it's those big stars that bring in the $$$$$$$$$. AJ once dubbed the ATP the "Association of Tournament Directors" and he was pretty much spot-on about that. It's all about the cash, it's the old story - Money Talks and Sh*t Walks. :shrug:

If you count out it's roughly 21 weeks of tournaments (4*2 + 8*1 +2 (Miami & IW) + 2 (500's) + 1 WTF) which is not even half the year.

The more important issue rather than the number of tournaments is actually the spacing of the tournaments. It should be scheduled that you are not playing different tournaments in different time zones with barely a gap of a day or two.