Players Schedule / Season Length / Disagreements discussions [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Players Schedule / Season Length / Disagreements discussions

Pages : [1] 2 3

Pirata.
01-15-2012, 07:17 AM
http://www.tennisforum.com/images/smilies/oh.gif

Rafael Nadal has criticized Roger Federer for letting other players "burn themselves" by complaining about tour conditions while enhancing his own reputation by rarely making negative comments about tennis.

The pair have always been respectful rivals, but the ongoing debate about the overcrowded tennis calendar has exposed a difference of opinion on the eve of the Australian Open.

After telling a pre-tournament news conference Sunday he had no intention of being the frontman for the players' grievances because it has reflected badly on him in the past, Nadal was then critical of Federer in a Spanish-language interview.

Responding to the suggestion that Federer disliked players complaining openly about problems on the tour because it tarnished the image of tennis, Nadal said he took another view.

"No, I totally disagree," he said in comments translated from Spanish. "For him it's good to say nothing. Everything positive. 'It's all well and good for me, I look like a gentleman,' and the rest can burn themselves.

"Everyone is entitled to have their own opinions."

Nadal and No. 4-ranked Andy Murray are among the players who have been outspoken in recent months on issues including an overcrowded calendar and the scheduling of Davis Cup matches. Some players have talked of strike action as recently as Saturday's player meeting in Melbourne; Nadal has said players may have to resort to "strong action" if there isn't an "evolution" in the calendar.

Federer and Nadal, who has 10 Grand Slam titles, dominated men's tennis for the seven years before Novak Djokovic won three of the four majors in 2011 and passed them both for the No. 1 ranking.

They're both key ambassadors for the tour, helping with promotional work and appearances at tournaments around the globe.

Nadal thinks that when the majority highlight problems on the tour, the intention is to make it better, not run it down.

"He likes the circuit. I like the circuit," Nadal said. "It's much better than many other sports but that doesn't mean that it couldn't be better. It doesn't mean there are some things about the tour that could change. The tour is fine, but there are some things that are bad. That's all we're saying.

"And the vast majority of players have this same opinion. He's got a different opinion ... if the vast majority have one opinion, and a small minority think differently, maybe it's them who are wrong."

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/tennis/01/15/nadal.federer.australian.ap/index.html

Harsh words, Rafa :eek:
Can any Spanish posters confirm this, or have the original Spanish interview? Can't recall ever seeing Rafa say harsh words about Roger.

Topspindoctor
01-15-2012, 07:19 AM
Nadal :facepalm:

Complaining about schedule and then playing exhos and non mandatory clown events :o

viruzzz
01-15-2012, 07:21 AM
Ah, y?

rinnegan
01-15-2012, 07:23 AM
Their candlelight date at Doha didn't go well, huh?

That's why Roger looked angsty.
http://www3.pictures.zimbio.com/pc/Roger+Federer+Roger+Federer+Rafael+Nadal+Candle+Hu d7xTPrf7zl.jpg

paseo
01-15-2012, 07:24 AM
"vast majority"? which "vast majority"?

solowyn
01-15-2012, 07:25 AM
"vast majority"? which "vast majority"?
Him, Murray and Bogo are tying themselves to a fence outside RLA. That'll show em.

Pirata.
01-15-2012, 07:25 AM
Nadal, Murray and Bogomolov :shrug:

fast_clay
01-15-2012, 07:26 AM
i beat fed he cry, no? he pussy, no?

v-money
01-15-2012, 07:26 AM
"And the vast majority of players have this same opinion. He's got a different opinion ... if the vast majority have one opinion, and a small minority think differently, maybe it's them who are wrong."

I don't know if I believe this statement. Do many players, even lower ranked players, actually support a less busy schedule?

iriraz
01-15-2012, 07:26 AM
"vast majority"? which "vast majority"?

I can name Nadal,Djokovic,Murray or maybe Roddick.But seriously i don`t remember a Berdych a Ferrer,a Tsonga or any other top player complain.And the rest of the tour certainly won`t complain as they need lots of tournaments to get their paycheck.

fast_clay
01-15-2012, 07:30 AM
nadal like gold mushroom, no?

Mystique
01-15-2012, 07:31 AM
But this is GREAT!!! :D
Exactly what this rivalry needed...Now get angry Roger and lets see some trash talk ;)
(though unlikely as you may have to keep your gentleman image!)

On a serious note, cheap shot Rafa. First of all, its not the "vast majority of players" who have this problem, its "a few elite, big headed Top Ten players who want everything designed for and around their health and wealth" who have this problem. And secondly, to say Federer doesnt complain because he wants to pretend to be a gentlemen is really lame. Federer is many times the ambassador for this sport than Nadal has been. He has shown more concern for ALL players, higher and lower ranked notwithstanding and he is the guy who has so often tried to popularise tennis in nooks and corners of the world.

Raf, Roger is not a whiner unlike you. Just accept it and move one :p

solowyn
01-15-2012, 07:33 AM
Federer didn't say 'nothing', regardless. He said that he couldn't support a reduced schedule, even though it would benefit the top guys, because it wouldn't benefit the tour overall and 'he wouldn't be able to look people in the eye'.

Macbrother
01-15-2012, 07:42 AM
I like it, I like it a lot. Regardless of what he says about Federer is true (I could certainly see it) I'm glad he honestly gave his opinion. Curious as to whether the maestro himself will respond.

MuzzahLovah
01-15-2012, 08:02 AM
Their candlelight date at Doha didn't go well, huh?

That's why Roger looked angsty.
http://www3.pictures.zimbio.com/pc/Roger+Federer+Roger+Federer+Rafael+Nadal+Candle+Hu d7xTPrf7zl.jpg

God, what is that? Is Roger evolving into an asymmetric unicorn?

MuzzahLovah
01-15-2012, 08:08 AM
I will actually take Nadal's side against Federer! I mean Nadal is pretty whiney now that he's not winning so easily, but Fed is such a passive aggressive backstabbing bitch.

Mystique
01-15-2012, 08:18 AM
I will actually take Nadal's side against Federer! I mean Nadal is pretty whiney now that he's not winning so easily, but Fed is such a passive aggressive backstabbing bitch.

:facepalm:
Do you even have an opinion on stuff?
Or do you just suck up to the people who Murray dislikes less:rolleyes:

MachineGun
01-15-2012, 08:19 AM
Drama Queen this Nadal, seriously.

Yeah, and other users said it before me, the vast majority wouldn't be on his side here. It would only favour 3 or 4 guys in the Top 10 only.

dabeast
01-15-2012, 08:21 AM
The guy is just plain selfish. Who's the "vast majority" apart from Roddick and Murray??

What Fed has said in late 2011:

We now have many 28 [player] draws in the ATP 250 events, we don't play three-out-of-five-set matches in the ATP Tour anymore and we will end the season earlier next year.

We need to see what happens as a result of these changes before making any new changes.

we need to do what is right not just for the players but also for our tournaments, who are our partners in the management of the game.

Good riddance to Nadal as VP.

moon language
01-15-2012, 08:33 AM
+1 for sensationalism.

To be fair reporters and fans do this with Federer's comments as well. It seems Nadal is starting to find his own feet as an adult who thinks for himself. I don't personally care much about what he says on this matter because he complains yet still does exhibitions, but that is beside the point. Tennis is more interesting when the players speak their minds and stop adhering to the PR coaching.

Ash86
01-15-2012, 08:35 AM
People at MTF can't grasp the basic concept that shortening the calendar doesn't mean drastically cutting down on lots of tournaments. You can double up a few events & crucially, make a few Masters non-mandatory & change the ranking to perhaps only take account of your best 6/7 Masters results for example - so if you want to play 9 you can but for those who go deep in every tournament they may have more options...

A Spanish article with more quotes re: Federer:

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abc.es%2Fagencias%2Fnoticia.asp %3Fnoticia%3D1067671

"I say a lot of positive things about tennis, because thanks to this sport I have had experiences in my life I never could have dreamed of, but to finish your career with pain in all parts of your body is not positive. If Federer finishes his career as a rose it's because he has an extraordinary body, but neither Murray nor Djokovic and I will end up as roses.

"At what age we are going to end up in tennis?". To the 28, 29 or 30? Then you have left a lot of life ahead and it is also important as you are physically and now I have fear that then I can not go play football with my friends or skiing. "

FedvsNole
01-15-2012, 08:35 AM
Other things that show where a players true priorities stand. Nadal wanted a 2 year ranking system which in all honestly would be great for those in the top 10 and even better for those in the top 4. Federer says it in the big picture how it would make it very very hard for a lower ranked player to actually move up in any feasible way.

Nadal destroys his own body. He didn't have to keep playing davis cup every year on top of that playing exhos in abu dhabi and with djoker earlier in 2011 or even doha. I mean it seems really weird you talk about too many matches than you play when no one asks you to...

MIMIC
01-15-2012, 08:37 AM
Nadal's right. Fed thinks that just because this problem doesn't affect him that it's a nonexistent problem. But given Fed's overall attitude about other players in general, is anyone really surprised?

Kat_YYZ
01-15-2012, 08:42 AM
Nadal's right. Fed thinks that just because this problem doesn't affect him that it's a nonexistent problem. But given Fed's overall attitude about other players in general, is anyone really surprised?

7-time Stefan Edberg Sportsmanship Award winner... as voted on by the players.
Still hurts? :awww:

MIMIC
01-15-2012, 08:49 AM
7-time Stefan Edberg Sportsmanship Award winner... as voted on by the players.
Still hurts? :awww:

Was this supposed to invalidate my statement? :scratch: I'll say it again: Fed thinks that just because this problem doesn't affect him that it's a nonexistent problem. But given Fed's overall attitude about other players in general, is anyone really surprised?

No number of Sportsmanship Awards can make this statement false but thanks for trying to take up for him anyway :yeah:

DDrago2
01-15-2012, 08:54 AM
How right I was to dislike Nadal since the first day. His giant ego, selfishnes and contempt for other players are now easy for everyone to see.
But Federer will not respond ofcourse, he rather likes to hate Djokovic, alhough Nole never said one tenth of negative things towards him when compared to Nadal.

I see Nadal as a thug and Federer as a coward who is hiding the fear from him. Pathetic.

Pirata.
01-15-2012, 08:56 AM
He doesn't agree with striking etc. because it hurts lower ranked players. He's said multiple times that changes would probably benefit him as a top player but that he can't approve because of how they would hurt the lower ranked guys.

Chirag
01-15-2012, 08:58 AM
He doesn't agree with striking etc. because it hurts lower ranked players. He's said multiple times that changes would probably benefit him as a top player but that he can't approve because of how they would hurt the lower ranked guys.

simple fact cant seen by Muzzahlovah and Mimic :rolleyes:

Foxy
01-15-2012, 08:59 AM
Dodger is so selfish. Always says what people want him to say. He is a big hypocrite and finally he is exposed!

bluesoleil
01-15-2012, 09:03 AM
On one side we have Nadal saying that the "super majority" of players agrees with him (I don't know on which matters), on the other side Federer said recently (about the 2 year ranking system) that he sides with the majority of lower ranked players for whom the new system would be unfair, even if he would have benefitted from it.

So... who the hell is telling the truth?
I wish those players council meetings were televised :P

barbadosan
01-15-2012, 09:06 AM
Was this supposed to invalidate my statement? :scratch: I'll say it again: Fed thinks that just because this problem doesn't affect him that it's a nonexistent problem. But given Fed's overall attitude about other players in general, is anyone really surprised?

No number of Sportsmanship Awards can make this statement false but thanks for trying to take up for him anyway :yeah:

Oops! Guess Kat and others like me forgot one important fact> MIMIC has spoken, ergo what MIMIC says is true and irrefutable.

VolandriFan
01-15-2012, 09:06 AM
Their candlelight date at Doha didn't go well, huh?

That's why Roger looked angsty.
http://www3.pictures.zimbio.com/pc/Roger+Federer+Roger+Federer+Rafael+Nadal+Candle+Hu d7xTPrf7zl.jpg

It's almost like halloween with Rafa's wrathful comments and all those candles illuminating Roger's shiny carbunckle.

:eek:

MuzzahLovah
01-15-2012, 09:12 AM
:facepalm:
Do you even have an opinion on stuff?
Or do you just suck up to the people who Murray dislikes less:rolleyes:
Murray loves Rafa for some reason. I can't stand him- his gamesmanship, his style of play, his humble-itoness. On this issue though he's on the better end, not because Murray agrees, but because it's been widely acknowledged by people like McEnroe for years that the tennis season has major issues.

ossie
01-15-2012, 09:16 AM
well at least nadal still has murray :rolleyes:

MuzzahLovah
01-15-2012, 09:17 AM
simple fact cant seen by Muzzahlovah and Mimic :rolleyes:

When did we start talking about striking? What does Pirata's comment have to do with mine?

BroTree123
01-15-2012, 09:32 AM
There's no such thing as having rivals as best friends :p.

habibko
01-15-2012, 09:50 AM
coming from the one who supports a 2-years ranking, it's definitely better that he shuts up and leaves it for someone who actually cares about tennis rather than himself like Federer

ossie
01-15-2012, 09:52 AM
coming from the one who supports a 2-years ranking, it's definitely better that he shuts up and leaves it for someone who actually cares about tennis rather than himself like Federerfederer is the most selfish player on the tour :haha:

Ben.
01-15-2012, 09:53 AM
Nadal and Federer both have very valid points and the situation needs to be adressed taking both into consideration.

Just keep everyone happy, less mandatories, move the WTF forward but keep events running after it. Top players can finish up a bit earlier, lower ranked guys can keep playing. I think we can all agree that finishing up the last week of November then coming back the first week of January is ridiculous. Or they could push the Aussie Open to February, same effect. Seems like a happy solution all round, even brings the greedy suits at the ATP down a peg.

Or Levy
01-15-2012, 09:54 AM
Not surprised. At all. I had a feeling that the situation where Rafa goes on and on about changes that has to be made, with Roger saying nothing, is problematic.

Rafa is concerned about stuff the lower-ranked players are against - two years ranking system? Shorter season? DC change - lower-ranked players won't support any of that.

Roger believes the schedule is manageable, that 2 years ranking system is a bad idea, and I don't know where he stands on DC.

I haven't seen Rafa speaking about Revenues for lower-ranked players, either.

nobama
01-15-2012, 09:55 AM
http://www.tennisforum.com/images/smilies/oh.gif



http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/tennis/01/15/nadal.federer.australian.ap/index.html

Harsh words, Rafa :eek:
Can any Spanish posters confirm this, or have the original Spanish interview? Can't recall ever seeing Rafa say harsh words about Roger.
Sound very bitter doesn't he?

habibko
01-15-2012, 09:56 AM
"I say a lot of positive things about tennis, because thanks to this sport I have had experiences in my life I never could have dreamed of, but to finish your career with pain in all parts of your body is not positive. If Federer finishes his career as a rose it's because he has an extraordinary body, but neither Murray nor Djokovic and I will end up as roses.

"At what age we are going to end up in tennis?". To the 28, 29 or 30? Then you have left a lot of life ahead and it is also important as you are physically and now I have fear that then I can not go play football with my friends or skiing. "

he really said that? lol more bitterness I see

so he's already feeling the burning up in his body, good stuff, the sooner tennis gets rid of this whining bitch the better

habibko
01-15-2012, 09:58 AM
federer is the most selfish player on the tour :haha:

so a top player wanting a 2-years ranking is less selfish than another top player wanting to keep the 1-year ranking?

oh wait, you think Del Potro is the GOAT, on a second thought I don't care for your answer

nobama
01-15-2012, 09:59 AM
federer is the most selfish player on the tour :haha:
Based on?

duarte_a
01-15-2012, 10:02 AM
he really said that? lol more bitterness I see

so he's already feeling the burning up in his body, good stuff, the sooner tennis gets rid of this whining bitch the better

Ditto.

Also Roger isn't guilty of having such talent he doesn't need to grind it out in uber grindfests.
You are concerned about your body then retire or try playing a less taxing style. Although the 2nd option isn't available for talentless whiners. Nadal=less talented of the top 4 and one of the less talented in the top 10.

Players should take a poll to see who they supported on thes matter the president or the vice president of the players council.

nobama
01-15-2012, 10:05 AM
More from #2: http://www.abc.es/agencias/noticia.asp?noticia=1067671

I found this paragraph interesting (via translation). I hadn't heard about this association of Spanish players before. Is that aligned with the tennis federation in Spain?

On Saturday the first annual meeting of the Association of Spanish players was held and said that most of the players are in favor of improving certain aspects of the sport to not cause physical wear so important, but declined to speak on any time to go on strike.

Horatio Caine
01-15-2012, 10:05 AM
Nadal :facepalm:

Complaining about schedule and then playing exhos and non mandatory clown events :o

Verdad

rickcastle
01-15-2012, 10:06 AM
What a fool this Nadal, why does he play exhos and non mandatory events and then complain about the tour schedule?

Of course Federer haters will side with Nadal on this issue and call Federer selfish when it has been made clear that Nadal's suggestions would serve the top players more while doing a disservice to the lower ranked players. Nadal and co. who have this point of view are very self-serving fellows who have a very me, myself and I mentality. I've always been right to see through Nadal and his supposed humility, I always knew it's an act. And now that he is winning less, the facade is quickly dropping. Too bad the media and his fans are such dupes about this humble champion act that Nadal has pulled.

Dougie
01-15-2012, 10:08 AM
I´d say Rafa is well-compensated for some possible "skiing/football inconveniences". The problem with him is not primarily the calendar, it´s his own technique and playing style combined with the fact that he´s always been way dumber with his scheduling than Federer. I´m not saying every pro athelete should end up crippled, but Nadal sound pretty whiny, when you consider that many hockey players suffer permanent damage to their brains by constant hits. Many football players´ careers are ended by one horrible tackle that leaves their knees and ankles busted. Hell, show me a middle-aged man who has no pains or aches when he wakes up in the morning...it´s pretty hard to feel sorry for Rafa here.

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 10:11 AM
Federer was very strong Swiss ZDF (German Translation) 13/01/12

Demands must be privately and professional to the Board of Directors- only once an official request as been turned down do we ponder the public opinion arena and if its turned down are they saying no to hurt us or are there real logistical reasons and will it hurt the game in general.

As President I have consider all the player regardless of rank there has never been consensus on the length of the season - so if I use words like 'boycott' to the media I'm acting out of personal interest. Jarkko [Nieminen] and Peter [Luczak] have not said anything about the demands of the lower ranked guys and there is the demands doubles players to consider…

Speaking up without proper consultation is premature- if the season is shortened it should be done with most guys on board .. it’s easy for the top 10 we get offered exhibition matches and wildcards to shape our income and season how wish, that’s not a luxury afforded to everyone…. a lot of livelihoods are at stake.

EddieNero
01-15-2012, 10:14 AM
Nadal better stick to playing tennis and stop making this stupid interviews.
Like somebody said, the wall of fake humbleness is finally falling down.
Too bad he had to get into a serious decline to reveal his real face.

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 10:18 AM
I swear even If i wasn't a roger fan - I would take his side on this debate - Rafa's so unprofessional in his approach its so ME ME ME ...Roger's not even saying i'm against you he's saying wait till we know what everyone wants!

Kat_YYZ
01-15-2012, 10:21 AM
Nadal better stick to playing tennis and stop making this stupid interviews.
Like somebody said, the wall of fake humbleness is finally falling down.
Too bad he had to get into a serious decline to reveal his real face.

http://tennis.com/galleries/gallery/News/201201142148785371472-p2@stats.com.jpg
"what this mean 'fake humbleness'?"

:haha:

Ben.
01-15-2012, 10:22 AM
Got to love MTF, bunch of fangirls. Most of us would agree the schedule is less than optimum. We would also agree that the lower guys don't get enough money. We know that the ATP/ITF are compromising the sport to maximise their profits. Symptoms include the homogenisation of courts, the packed schedule, etc, basically milking the players as much as they can. Seems to me that anyone speaking out against them, regardless of motive (or whatever motive we want to baselessly assign to them) is something that should be celebrated. If the ATP are forced to budge and make some changes then it's a step in the right direction. Of course, logic flies out the window in favour of hero worship as per usual.

habibko
01-15-2012, 10:27 AM
Most of us would agree

We would also agree

We know

speak only about yourself

the schedule is fine the way it is especially for top ranked players who can pick and choose where and when they play, they can even skip mandatory tournaments if that's too much for them, it's not like they would be banned from the sport if they did, but when they play exhos on top of their schedule they have no right to whine

again, a top player who supports a 2-years ranking clearly only cares about himself

good_gambler
01-15-2012, 10:30 AM
Roger is a try hard arrogant assclown. Brilliant tennis player but what an absolutely arrogant clown.

solowyn
01-15-2012, 10:30 AM
Federer was very strong Swiss ZDF (German Translation) 13/01/12
Fed :hatoff:

Mystique
01-15-2012, 10:30 AM
Federer was very strong Swiss ZDF (German Translation) 13/01/12


Demands must be privately and professional to the Board of Directors- only once an official request as been turned down do we ponder the public opinion arena and if its turned down are they saying no to hurt us or are there real logistical reasons and will it hurt the game in general.

As President I have consider all the player regardless of rank there has never been consensus on the length of the season - so if I use words like 'boycott' to the media I'm acting out of personal interest. Jarkko [Nieminen] and Peter [Luczak] have not said anything about the demands of the lower ranked guys and there is the demands doubles players to consider…

Speaking up without proper consultation is premature- if the season is shortened it should be done with most guys on board .. it’s easy for the top 10 we get offered exhibition matches and wildcards to shape our income and season how wish, that’s not a luxury afforded to everyone…. a lot of livelihoods are at stake.




Roger:worship:
Thats why he is Mr. Sane

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 10:31 AM
Got to love MTF, bunch of fangirls. Most of us would agree the schedule is less than optimum. We would also agree that the lower guys don't get enough money. We know that the ATP/ITF are compromising the sport to maximise their profits. Symptoms include the homogenisation of courts, the packed schedule, etc, basically milking the players as much as they can. Seems to me that anyone speaking out against them, regardless of motive (or whatever motive we want to baselessly assign to them) is something that should be celebrated. If the ATP are forced to budge and make some changes then it's a step in the right direction. Of course, logic flies out the window in favour of hero worship as per usual.

roger's saying get an official consensus and recommendation and then submit that logic - preemptive moves via the media is selfish and unprofessional

Kat_YYZ
01-15-2012, 10:31 AM
speak only about yourself

the schedule is fine the way it is especially for top ranked players who can pick and choose where and when they play, they can even skip mandatory tournaments if that's too much for them, it's not like they would be banned from the sport if they did, but when they play exhos on top of their schedule they have no right to whine

again, a top player who supports a 2-years ranking clearly only cares about himself

exactly. as per FedererFan07 on twitter:
Basically, if you're a pro player and you think the tour is too long, play less. Don't overplay. #Federer's schedule is open book..copy it

habibko
01-15-2012, 10:32 AM
Demands must be privately and professional to the Board of Directors- only once an official request as been turned down do we ponder the public opinion arena and if its turned down are they saying no to hurt us or are there real logistical reasons and will it hurt the game in general.

As President I have consider all the player regardless of rank there has never been consensus on the length of the season - so if I use words like 'boycott' to the media I'm acting out of personal interest. Jarkko [Nieminen] and Peter [Luczak] have not said anything about the demands of the lower ranked guys and there is the demands doubles players to consider…

Speaking up without proper consultation is premature- if the season is shortened it should be done with most guys on board .. it’s easy for the top 10 we get offered exhibition matches and wildcards to shape our income and season how wish, that’s not a luxury afforded to everyone…. a lot of livelihoods are at stake.

that's more like it, I'm glad he's the president and not some self-serving whiner

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 10:34 AM
Roger is a try hard arrogantassclown. Brilliant tennis player but what an absolutely arrogant clown.


yep there's nothing more arrogant than a guy whose saying it shouldn't be just about the top guns! - the guys who are throwing their toys out the pram because they're not getting what they want are the definition of humble...

henke007
01-15-2012, 10:35 AM
Nadull:facepalm::o (Mugray)

Mystique
01-15-2012, 10:43 AM
Nadal :facepalm:

Complaining about schedule and then playing exhos and non mandatory clown events :o

:hatoff: props for this one

Ash86
01-15-2012, 10:45 AM
All you geniuses talking about Federer's schedule vs Nadal's - what tournaments did Nadal play last year that he should have skipped? What's he playing this year that he should skip? In the past he overplayed sure but right now he's playing mandatories, the minimum 500s he needs to & 2 250s as warm ups to a slam (Doha and Queens/Halle) - what is there to cut out?!

He's skipping Davis Cup this year too & skipped one tie last year. As for exos, as much as fans like to go on about them, they are not taxing at all for the players - for Nadal the exertion is less than his daily practice schedule. I'd rather he didn't bother but that's hardly what causes physical problems. Oh, and Fed's playing a lucrative exo in New York pre-US Open & then some in South America at the end of the year too, so he's hardly above it.:rolleyes:

Please do suggest the limited schedule that Nadal, Murray & Novak could be playing to save their bodies... I'd agree Federer's style and body (it's a combination of his style of play & his genes - not just the style imo) makes the game less taxing for him but not everyone can have that style. The game should take a long term view and not want its top players burning out. No one is saying halve the calendar - but to pretend there's no issue at all is silly. And the issues are diverse: schedule, Davis Cup, distribution of money, ranking, slam organisation e.g. US Open - to think that all players agree with Federer's views on all these issues would be a little silly. Unless Nadal's lying clearly he has support from players on some of those issues (I think scheduling & money are probably the 2 biggest things) - he obviously doesn't like this image that he's out there on his own complaining when privately others may say the same thing....

habibko
01-15-2012, 10:51 AM
All you geniuses talking about Federer's schedule vs Nadal's - what tournaments did Nadal play last year that he should have skipped? What's he playing this year that he should skip? In the past he overplayed sure but right now he's playing mandatories, the minimum 500s he needs to & 2 250s as warm ups to a slam (Doha and Queens/Halle) - what is there to cut out?!

He's skipping Davis Cup this year too & skipped one tie last year. As for exos, as much as fans like to go on about them, they are not taxing at all for the players - for Nadal the exertion is less than his daily practice schedule. I'd rather he didn't bother but that's hardly what causes physical problems.

if you can't see the problem with Nadal's schedule then ask him, he's the one complaining

he could skip certain mandatories if that's too much for him to play, plus always skip DC and all exhos and warm ups, the choice is his

Oh, and Fed's playing a lucrative exo in New York pre-US Open & then some in South America at the end of the year too, so he's hardly above it.:rolleyes:

what's wrong with that? he's not the one bitching about the schedule

Mystique
01-15-2012, 10:51 AM
All Federer is saying is to do this in the professional manner. He doesnt seem to be against all of Nadal's suggestions. Not make this a public debate and thus force the management into giving in to certain unreasonable conditions. It does spoil the image of tennis if the public finds different players want different things and public spats occur due to this.

And this really doesnt have anything to do with Federer's style of play or "extraordinary" genes. It was rather spiteful and childish of Nadal to say in that in the interview. This is not about Federer. And that is EXACTLY what Federer himself is saying

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 10:52 AM
"No, I totally disagree....For him it's good to say nothing. Everything positive. 'It's all well and good for me, I look like a gentleman,' and the rest can burn themselves.

"Everyone is entitled to have their own opinions."


That's the most fucked up schizophrenic shit I've ever read...

"Roger's entitled to have an opinion but he should've echoed mine"

Just like heaven
01-15-2012, 10:53 AM
Considering that many of Federer's titles from the past 2 years have come at the end of the season, when most of the top players were tired/injured, why would he want a shorter season? He's not stupid.
But this isn't just about the length of the season. Nadal also talked about the Davis Cup schedule, the US Open schedule, the fact that too many tournaments are being played on hard courts these days, etc. And I doubt he would be saying these things if other players wouldn't agree with him.

Just like heaven
01-15-2012, 10:55 AM
How come the world number one has nothing to say about these things?

scoobs
01-15-2012, 10:55 AM
The interesting thing here is that both sides do make valid points - although surprise surprise many posters on this thread see it as a binary choice and fall into line behind the player they support.

Federer is right that any solutions found to the season length issue needs to take into account the lower ranked atp guys, the challenger guys and the doubles guys, and he very correctly points out livelihoods are at stake - these guys can't top up their income with an extra ad campaign or exo. Any solution must not hurt their ability to earn enough to continue on tour - and there's enough of a problem with that already. More, not less, money needs to be filtering down to the lower ranks to make the burden of tour a bit fairer. The victors should get the majority of the spoils, that's only fair, but the tour would be a better place if players at the bottom of the top 100 and lower weren't living very financially constrained lives.

Nadal, however, is also right that perhaps Federer is not seeing that the demands of the tour schedule's compulsory events spread from January to November are tougher on most of the other top guys than on Federer himself - he can now set his own schedule as he likes and has repeatedly used the solution of preventative withdrawal rather than play the full schedule he really should have played in the past. This isn't really a solution, it still lets down tournaments and fans, even if it's wise from the point of view of his own health and body. Federer is an extraordinarily gifted athlete in that he has managed to juggle the demands of the highest level of competition year in year out with minimal impact on his body - I believe that some of this is down to his fitness and scheduling approach, but I also think some of it is just luck - lucky that he has the sort of playing style that is easier on the body (and that's not something you can really predict or work towards in advance, a player's playing style is not so easy to interchange). I also believe he's been lucky genetically perhaps - to have the type of physique that is more resistant to wear and tear injuries perhaps. All of these things have combined to produce the Federer that we know today - and not all of them are things he could directly control. Other players, no matter how hard they adapt their schedules or training regimens, are just not so lucky and the demands of a tour that expects them to play 4 slams, 8 masters 1000, 4 500 events and 2 250 events to fulfil their ranking requirements over 10.5 months in a time when tennis has got more and more physically demanding, increasingly on a surface that exacerbates wear and tear problems, is unreasonable and for the good of the long term health of the game, changes DO need to be made.

Any solutions here need to take into account all these questions and balance off all the needs of the individuals and groups involved.

A balance needs to be struck, and both sides acting as though their side is the only right side is pointless, as is bickering about whether it should be discussed privately or publicly, etc. Privately is obviously better but it's silly to expect the whole thing to be done in complete confidence in this day and age - things leak.

rickcastle
01-15-2012, 10:56 AM
Oh, and Fed's playing a lucrative exo in New York pre-US Open & then some in South America at the end of the year too, so he's hardly above it.:rolleyes:


So? He's not the one complaining about the tour schedule, is he? The problem is Nadal complains about the schedule but still takes the time to play exhos. Murray was complaining about tour schedule and then asks for a wildcard in Basel. If the schedule is grueling for you, take your off time to rest! Don't go off in a jet to play an exho or a small tournament somewhere and then complain about the schedule when you're the one not utilizing your off time properly.

habibko
01-15-2012, 10:56 AM
And I doubt he would be saying these things if other players wouldn't agree with him.

how many players outside the top 10 agree with him regarding the 2-years ranking?

that alone shows he isn't the voice of the majority

samanosuke
01-15-2012, 10:56 AM
I see fakito bothers things like this .It would be interesting if somebody mentions his faking :haha:

Ash86
01-15-2012, 10:58 AM
if you can't see the problem with Nadal's schedule then ask him, he's the one complaining

he could skip certain mandatories if that's too much for him to play, plus always skip DC and all exhos and warm ups, the choice is his


He's complaining because he has no choice but to play that many tournaments. You can't skip mandatories without penalties (he can skip 1 Masters as he's played over 600 matches) & clearly if the ranking counts a certain number of tournaments then players will have to play them to be competitive. The rankings should look at maybe the 7 best Masters - play all 9 f you want to but you shouldn't have to - if it counts all the results then clearly players like Nadal, Murray etc. will have to play most of them. That isn't a choice.

Skipping a warm up isn't a choice for him either - most players like to get some matches on a surface under their belt before a slam - Novak seems ok without it but most aren't - so Doha & Halle cannot be skipped.

These "choices" aren't really choices because of the way the calendar & the rankings work. But you knew that - you just seem to think it's a black & white "Federer's great, Nadal's an idiot" situation. :rolleyes:

Mystique
01-15-2012, 10:59 AM
Considering that many of Federer's titles from the past 2 years have come at the end of the season, when most of the top players were tired/injured, why would he want a shorter season? He's not stupid.
But this isn't just about the length of the season. Nadal also talked about the Davis Cup schedule, the US Open schedule, the fact that too many tournaments are being played on hard courts these days, etc. And I doubt he would be saying these things if other players wouldn't agree with him.

We know where Nadal is going with this. More clay tournaments.
Tell me, how many players will want this. Lets see if even Murray, Roddick and Djokovic will want this.:rolleyes:

Yes the Davis Cup Schedule IS a problem. This has been said over and over for years. There is a reason why so many top players skip it. Come to think of it, Nadal himself hasnt played a lot of Davis Cup ties offlate. He has been turning up only for the semis and finals for the last few years. But yes, DC needs improving.

And as for USO Super sat, even Fed agrees it is asking too much

decrepitude
01-15-2012, 11:00 AM
There are several issues involved, and it's hard to know which ones Nadal was claiming he had support for.

2 year ranking points - a big no-no as far as I am concerned.

Shorter season - I think here he has the support of most of the top players other than Federer. Surely it could be possible to cut down the number of mandatories, move Paris and WTF forward, and continue with 250s and Challengers after that for the lower-ranked players who want to continue playing. They already do it for Futures :shrug:

Percentage of income paid to players (if that is one of his points, I haven't actually seen his opinion on that) - now here the lower-ranked players do seem to be in agreement.

MachineGun
01-15-2012, 11:01 AM
Considering that many of Federer's titles from the past 2 years have come at the end of the season, when most of the top players were tired/injured, why would he want a shorter season? He's not stupid.
But this isn't just about the length of the season. Nadal also talked about the Davis Cup schedule, the US Open schedule, the fact that too many tournaments are being played on hard courts these days, etc. And I doubt he would be saying these things if other players wouldn't agree with him.

Demagogy at its finest.

1) Roger knows how to keep energy until the end of the year. If Nadal (and Djokovic) cannot be ready phisically, at the end of the season, that's not Roger's fault, but theirs. They could play less if they want to stay fit until the end of November.
2) There is too much clay and not enough grass and they should add more weeks on indoor hard and give up some weeks on outdoor hard.

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 11:02 AM
Nadal's right. Fed thinks that just because this problem doesn't affect him that it's a nonexistent problem. But given Fed's overall attitude about other players in general, is anyone really surprised?


Your beyond lost in this debate -

Nadal's championing the top guys! Should his demands be met he can subsidise his income through lucrative exho's and wildcards the lower ranked guys can't - he has not asked for price money to be increased for the lower ranked guys he's just asked for the season to be shortened he's leaving the journeymen players up shit's creek without a paddle...the only inconsiderate tool coming out this debate is Rafa!

and for the millionth time ROGER ISN'T SAYING THE SEASON SHOULDN'T BE SHORTENED HE'S SAYING FOLLOW PROTOCOL AND BE DEMOCRATIC IN YOUR DECISION MAKING AND ENSURE THE INTERESTS OF EVERY PLAYER IS PROTECTED BEFORE BITCHING TO THE MEDIA

I also think there's a cultural split in decision making Roger's taking a a very swiss approach to this matter we have more referendums than any country in the world tedious and irksome it might be but its fair!

rickcastle
01-15-2012, 11:04 AM
We know where Nadal is going with this. More clay tournaments.

Exactly :lol:

Nadal is a self serving individual of the first kind. Even if he may have some points worth of note in his complaints, it still sounds like a bunch of whining to me because he's not doing this complaining for the sake of the tour and the sport, it's for his own betterment and his own ploys in how he can win more, more, more and earn more, more, more.

habibko
01-15-2012, 11:05 AM
Nadal, however, is also right that perhaps Federer is not seeing that the demands of the tour schedule's compulsory events spread from January to November are tougher on most of the other top guys than on Federer himself

I don't buy into this, how compulsory is this? a player's priority should be his health rather than ranking penalties, if their body can't stand playing a full schedule they are free to skip as many events as necessary, mandatory or not

and I don't see how fans' disappointment from player's withdrawal play into this, I'm sure fans would be a lot more disappointed to see their favorites injured, plus fans at the end of the season aren't exactly thrilled to see walking zombies on the courts

scoobs
01-15-2012, 11:07 AM
There are several issues involved, and it's hard to know which ones Nadal was claiming he had support for.

2 year ranking points - a big no-no as far as I am concerned.

Shorter season - I think here he has the support of most of the top players other than Federer. Surely it could be possible to cut down the number of mandatories, move Paris and WTF forward, and continue with 250s and Challengers after that for the lower-ranked players who want to continue playing. They already do it for Futures :shrug:

Percentage of income paid to players (if that is one of his points, I haven't actually seen his opinion on that) - now here the lower-ranked players do seem to be in agreement.
And on this, it's one of the points I sympathise with Fed's point of view.

Some of this but by no means all is spilling out into the public arena but in a very disorganised, haphazard manner, and to be honest we really don't know properly WHO supports or opposes WHAT across the board. It's all very Chinese whispers and not helpful.

scoobs
01-15-2012, 11:11 AM
I don't buy into this, how compulsory is this? a player's priority should be his health rather than ranking penalties, if their body can't stand playing a full schedule they are free to skip as many events as necessary, mandatory or not

and I don't see how fans' disappointment from player's withdrawal play into this, I'm sure fans would be a lot more disappointed to see their favorites injured, plus fans at the end of the season aren't exactly thrilled to see walking zombies on the courts
If nearly all the top guys, speaking hypothetically, can't play a full schedule for 8 or 10 years without risking long term injuries that are going to hurt their quality of life severely post-retirement, does that not mean the tour is not structurally sound? That seems to me to be the crux of Nadal's point, and IF that is the case, IF the tour is too demanding over a career for the top guys and risks long term problems, then I would agree with his point.

Question is, is he correct on that or not? Not sure.

But I think most fans would rather see tennis as a contest where what mainly decides the pecking order is the action on the court, not that in the treatment room and the hospital and the withdrawal list from tournaments.

Mystique
01-15-2012, 11:11 AM
He's complaining because he has no choice but to play that many tournaments. You can't skip mandatories without penalties (he can skip 1 Masters as he's played over 600 matches) & clearly if the ranking counts a certain number of tournaments then players will have to play them to be competitive. The rankings should look at maybe the 7 best Masters - play all 9 f you want to but you shouldn't have to - if it counts all the results then clearly players like Nadal, Murray etc. will have to play most of them. That isn't a choice.


I agree partially. I am all for cutting down the number of mandatory masters. Maybe make 7 of them mandatory. even 6 if u want
But you have hit the nail in the problem I think when you talk about counting the "best results".
It really is a big no-no at the Masters stage. I think this may be what Rafa wants and I can see guys like Federer going against it.
There ARE too many points at stake and it works both ways. If guys like Murray and Nadal cannot skip them as it will be a competitive disadvantage for them, the same applies to guys who do not skip them but still dont get the points. Actually there IS a choice here and it is with the top guys to have the courage to take the backseat if necessary in a tournament even if your competitors play on

habibko
01-15-2012, 11:11 AM
He's complaining because he has no choice but to play that many tournaments. You can't skip mandatories without penalties (he can skip 1 Masters as he's played over 600 matches) & clearly if the ranking counts a certain number of tournaments then players will have to play them to be competitive. The rankings should look at maybe the 7 best Masters - play all 9 f you want to but you shouldn't have to - if it counts all the results then clearly players like Nadal, Murray etc. will have to play most of them. That isn't a choice.

Skipping a warm up isn't a choice for him either - most players like to get some matches on a surface under their belt before a slam - Novak seems ok without it but most aren't - so Doha & Halle cannot be skipped.

that's like saying a marathon should be shorter because not everyone can stay competitive at the end, the season is like a marathon and it rewards fitness, stamina and smart scheduling

and yes they remain his choice, especially for a player like Nadal whose ranking shouldn't be a priority any longer, certainly not any more than his health

These "choices" aren't really choices because of the way the calendar & the rankings work. But you knew that - you just seem to think it's a black & white "Federer's great, Nadal's an idiot" situation. :rolleyes:

I'd rather you address the points I make rather than get this personal

scoobs
01-15-2012, 11:14 AM
But the question we should be asking is - SHOULD the season be like a marathon? Yes, of course fitness and such should be a factor in a player's success but do we want it to be the main arbiter of a season? Wouldn't it be better that a season end ranking were settled MORE by how fit players were able to beat each other on court and LESS by how many limped through to November because the requirements of a normal season and successes in it left them with nothing left for the final stretch?

samanosuke
01-15-2012, 11:14 AM
too much serious posts in the topic " Shitman saying shits "

scoobs
01-15-2012, 11:15 AM
Speaking as no particular fan of Djokovic, I would rather have seen a situation where he was still competitive at the end of last season and seeing if any of the other players could dislodge him while he was still at his best, rather than see him collapse with injury and energy problems and have guys like Murray and Federer pick up the big titles almost by default as a result.

acionescu
01-15-2012, 11:15 AM
they both are right in their own way. Federer when he says that changes would not benefit less ranked player and nadal when he says that the calendar is long and busy.

the solution is less mandatory events for top players. Let the players build their own calendar upon their goals, game style, body issues, etc....without penalties. but of course, tournaments directors are much more influent than the players....

habibko
01-15-2012, 11:17 AM
If nearly all the top guys, speaking hypothetically, can't play a full schedule for 8 or 10 years without risking long term injuries that are going to hurt their quality of life severely post-retirement, does that not mean the tour is not structurally sound? That seems to me to be the crux of Nadal's point, and IF that is the case, IF the tour is too demanding over a career for the top guys and risks long term problems, then I would agree with his point.

Question is, is he correct on that or not? Not sure.

But I think most fans would rather see tennis as a contest where what mainly decides the pecking order is the action on the court, not that in the treatment room and the hospital and the withdrawal list from tournaments.

if a player isn't fit enough to play a full schedule then he should not play a full schedule, it's not like they are forced to play as much as they do at gunpoint

Maccie
01-15-2012, 11:18 AM
I understand why Nadal is complaining. His style of play is very physical and at the end of the year he can't keep up anymore with the rest of the field. Federer has a more technical game and will find it easier to go on multiple weeks in a row. In my opinion tennis is not a game of 'sprint' but more of endurance and that's why I think the schedule now is pretty much ok (maybe some changes in the DC schedule).

If nearly all the top guys, speaking hypothetically, can't play a full schedule for 8 or 10 years without risking long term injuries that are going to hurt their quality of life severely post-retirement, does that not mean the tour is not structurally sound? That seems to me to be the crux of Nadal's point, and IF that is the case, IF the tour is too demanding over a career for the top guys and risks long term problems, then I would agree with his point.

This works both ways of course. Can't they play a full schedule because of the atp demanding too many tournaments or because the players themselves are asking too much of themselves during those weeks.

scoobs
01-15-2012, 11:20 AM
if a player isn't fit enough to play a full schedule then he should not play a full schedule, it's not like they are forced to play as much as they do at gunpoint
You're not answering my point.

What if all the top players, bar one, cannot play a full schedule? And what if trying to do so will cause them long term injuries?

Is that ALL the top players (bar one) 's fault, or is it the tour itself?

solowyn
01-15-2012, 11:24 AM
Trust Matt Cronin to come up with the bitchiest write up of the story :lol:

http://tennis.com/articles/templates/news.aspx?articleid=15797&zoneid=25

Nadal criticizes Federer for 'burning' others
Ticker - Sunday, January 15, 2012

Rafael Nadal criticizes Roger Federer for not taking a strong enough stand on tour issues and for looking out too much for himself. After continuously stating in English at the Australian Open that he no longer wanted to discuss ATP politics because he was the only one out there taking a consistent stand, Nadal then said in Spanish that Federer's opinion that the sport is functioning well was off base and that it has more room for improvement.

"I disagree with [Federer]," Nadal said in quotes published by the new agency EFE. "It is very easy to say, 'I am not going to say anything, everything is positive' and come off as a 'gentleman' and burn the rest. But it is not like that. We each have our opinion and maybe he likes the circuit. I like it too and I think it's better than most sports, but that does not mean it cannot be better and you can't change things that are bad."
`
Federer is the head of the ATP Players Council while Nadal is the cice president. Nadal went on to say that he speaks positively of tennis, because thanks to the sport "I have had experiences in my life that I never could have dreamed of, but to finish your career with pain in all parts of your body is not positive. If he finishes his career as a rose, it's because he has an extraordinary body, but neither Murray nor Djokovic not I will end up roses."

Nadal also fears for his immediate future in tennis and afterward. "At what age we are going to stop in tennis? 28, 29 or 30? Then you have left a lot of life ahead and it's also important as you physically fit and now I fear that then I won't be able to play soccer or ski with my friends." - Matt Cronin

habibko
01-15-2012, 11:25 AM
But the question we should be asking is - SHOULD the season be like a marathon? Yes, of course fitness and such should be a factor in a player's success but do we want it to be the main arbiter of a season? Wouldn't it be better that a season end ranking were settled MORE by how fit players were able to beat each other on court and LESS by how many limped through to November because the requirements of a normal season and successes in it left them with nothing left for the final stretch?

it's fine the way it is as players aren't REALLY forced to play everything, getting some ranking penalties is meaningless for a player like Nadal, he can skip as much as he wants to fit his body's limited abilities, and it remains fine for other players that can be competitive and those who don't make deep runs at every single event

there is no reason to tailor-fit the tour based only on the grinder-type players at the top to give them more advantage

samanosuke
01-15-2012, 11:26 AM
don't see where is the problem . Nadal if he is healthy theoretically has to play 12 tournaments per year, if he thinks that because of overbooked schedule can't playing his best through the hole season in this 12 events he can win 12500 points, enough to secure the year ending #1, if his body can't stand neither 12 events per year he should retire . If he isn't that good to be the best with 12 tournaments per year he should train harder to be able to play 20 tournaments per year on highest level . He isn't that good to be the best with less tournaments neither his body is trained to stand 20 tournaments, clearly problem is in Nadal , not in others . He should stay quite or stop overrating himself. So the conclusion is another windmill fight lost by nadal. At the end his fans don't care for Barcelona, Doha, Tokyo etc... don't see why is he bother with it

Dougie
01-15-2012, 11:27 AM
Speaking as no particular fan of Djokovic, I would rather have seen a situation where he was still competitive at the end of last season and seeing if any of the other players could dislodge him while he was still at his best, rather than see him collapse with injury and energy problems and have guys like Murray and Federer pick up the big titles almost by default as a result.

I agree, Djokovic´s Paris and WTF were quite a letdown for fans. But then again, both Nadal and Djokovic have a history of illnesses and injuries dating back several years. Should the schedule really be restructured based on them? Besides, Nadal was being outplayed.

Maybe something could be done about Shanghai, Paris and WTF to make sure at least the WTF would be as competitive as possible. I just hate the idea that it´s only the top players whose interests are the issue when these big changes are discussed of.

bokehlicious
01-15-2012, 11:27 AM
Nadal being a whining little bitch again. The sooner he burns out and retire the better for the sport.

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 11:27 AM
the amazing thing is that most of the posts defending Rafa are of people saying that roger is against making the season shorter - he's not- he's saying

get a consensus - offer an alternative that protects all the players - present your case then take it "to the public opinion arena" - don't jump the gun

for some reason that logic is arrogant and selfish!

habibko
01-15-2012, 11:31 AM
You're not answering my point.

What if all the top players, bar one, cannot play a full schedule? And what if trying to do so will cause them long term injuries?

Is that ALL the top players (bar one) 's fault, or is it the tour itself?

you can ask that the other way around, if one player can play the full schedule, why handicap him to appeal for the rest that aren't as good?

the tour isn't just Nadal, Murray and Djokovic, I don't see other top players having problems finishing the season at their best and whining about it besides them, fans want to see all the top players competing at as many tournaments as possible and those mandatory tournament encourage their participation, however in the case they had a tough tournament they can always choose to rest enough till they are able to compete again, it shouldn't be a permanent change in the season but rather a player's individual decision to play or not

Mystique
01-15-2012, 11:32 AM
You're not answering my point.

What if all the top players, bar one, cannot play a full schedule? And what if trying to do so will cause them long term injuries?

Is that ALL the top players (bar one) 's fault, or is it the tour itself?

But even if you take 2011 as an example, who are ALL these top players who couldnt complete the whole schedule?

Djokovic? He paid the price for his own style of tennis. He played too much grinder tennis and won too much by the US Open. There was the emotional toll to go with. The tour was the same in 2006 (even harder considering the Masters tourneys had best of 5 finals) and Federer could compete in spite of dominating similarly. Djokovic of 2011 isnt the prototype to go by. Those kind of seasons dont happen all the time. Of course it would have been great if he had played just as well indorrs, but that would have happened in a perfect world. Novak only played the mandatory events (skipped a couple too) but still made no difference. As I said before, you cannot cite Djokovic of 2011 as the example of why things should change.

Nadal? He took 6 weeks off from Shanhai to WTF and still had nothing in him. He didnt do well in Montreal and Cincy so basically its the NY final that took the life out of him. So change the calender for THAT?

Murray? He didnt do a hell lot till the clay season and having won just a masters title of importance till USO, he llost his head playing 3 consecutive Asian events BOTH DOUBLES AND SINGLES!:rolleyes: He was litterally begging to get injured really.

acionescu
01-15-2012, 11:32 AM
The amazing thing is that, on MTF, you can't have a objective conversation without the respective set of tards jumping in the blinding defense of their idol position

Bobby
01-15-2012, 11:34 AM
It's obvious that Nadal should let others worry about the calendar, because he's only looking things from one perspective. He clearly enjoys the big money but fails to understand what happens behind the scenes.

acionescu
01-15-2012, 11:34 AM
Oh, please stop the their own style of playing tennis nonsense :rolleyes:

Everybody is playing now a very physical, hard on the body style of tennis, Federer is the exception not the rule :cuckoo:

samanosuke
01-15-2012, 11:36 AM
and that stupid excuse that the fans will lose if best players won't play tournaments is good laugh . like the best players playing minor tournaments for fans, they are playing for their pockets

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 11:36 AM
The amazing thing is that, on MTF, you can't have a objective conversation without the respective set of tards jumping in the blinding defense of their idol position

I just don't see how anyone can take offense from Roger's opinion that consensus and protection of all player rights should be considered in the decision making process

Mystique
01-15-2012, 11:36 AM
Oh, please stop the their own style of playing tennis nonsense :rolleyes:

Everybody is playing now a very physical, hard on the body style of tennis, Federer is the exception not the rule :cuckoo:

There are no exceptions. If there are, there is no rule

Bobby
01-15-2012, 11:38 AM
I will also add that with Nadal's style of play, injuries were always going to be an issue. If you choose to grind 7 metres behind the baseline with a very strange technique, that's his problem. Shortening the season won't solve this issue.

bokehlicious
01-15-2012, 11:38 AM
Oh, please stop the their own style of playing tennis nonsense :rolleyes:

Everybody is playing now a very physical, hard on the body style of tennis, Federer is the exception not the rule :cuckoo:

Not everyone is a grinding moonballing marathonian. As for Djoker, a few more sessions in that pressurized egg and he'll be fine...

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 11:39 AM
I will also add that with Nadal's style of play, injuries were always going to be an issue. If you choose to grind 7 metres behind the baseline with a very strange technique, that's his problem. Shortening the season won't solve this issue.

:worship:

Nirjhor
01-15-2012, 11:39 AM
I'm waiting for the day when Rafa will be 28 years old. At that time, there will be a big possibility that he will start to say he wants to play best of one set matches in GS because he has everything broken for playing long matches like best of three or five sets!! :superlol:

LuCC
01-15-2012, 11:41 AM
If he wants to talk about all these issues, he should make it official. Talk with board of directors, other players, meet and sit around the table and then make a debate. Even if it is neccessary, get an interpreter for him, because as far as I can see he is able to express his opinion only in his mother tongue.

His choice was to enter a professional sport with all its consequences. He has chosen this play style and now when he is realizing that it is destroying him, he wants changes.

Looner
01-15-2012, 11:41 AM
I'll quote my post from the other thread here (I think they should merged really) because it's more relevant to this thread.


Finally his true face shows up like the self-serving ass-picker that he is. Once he cannot coax Fed into his bullshit, he immediately goes and bitches to the press. Class all round, I tell you.

I think before judging people and complaining to the press (for the nth issue he's had, just like in kindergarten), he should make it clear what they want and who they are. If he's talking about reducing tournament numbers because the top50 want so, he can go and quit tennis for all tennis fans should care. If he wants a reduction in mandatory events for top players, that is a bit more sensible. If he wants an increase for prize money from GSs, especially for qualies and 1st 2 rounds (where the seeds do not meet), then I also agree but not where they want to hog even MORE money for the latter stages. For crying out loud, the people who work at Wimbledon (in their restaurants) get paid minimum wage and are there only for the tradition. What a spoiled little ass-picker Nadal is, if he wants even more money. (and Ash and all the Nadaltards whatever is, stop defending him as Nadal never makes any sense so before he wants to complain he better set out his objectives).

rickcastle
01-15-2012, 11:45 AM
His choice was to enter a professional sport with all its consequences. He has chosen this play style and now when he is realizing that it is destroying him, he wants changes.

Exactly. And this complaining about supposedly not being able to ski with his friends after his tennis career, he's such a drama king :lol:

Nadal is a guy who has amassed tens of millions of dollars from playing this sport, endorsements resulting from his success in this sport. And now we are hearing him lamenting about what a sad dreary life it must be for him after he finishes with this sport, as if this sport might have somehow ruined his life! :lol: There is such a weird irony about that. If these are not the cries of a whiny baby, I don't know what is.

bokehlicious
01-15-2012, 11:47 AM
Federer still has more fans that Djokovic, Nadal and Murray combined and do more for the sport than those three. ATP/ITF should think about that before listening to those divas.

Roamed
01-15-2012, 11:49 AM
Oh dear, this whole thing is just... :rolleyes:

Firstly, it shouldn't have leaked its way into the public arena, it makes the council and therefore the ATP look even more disorganised than it already is.

As for Rafa's argument, I think the fact that he's been hinting at it for a while yet he has suddenly had this outburst shows how seriously he views it and it's got to be more than just baseless whining. He says he has support, so he must do. What we don't know is from what quarters that support comes - I'm assuming it's from some guys like Murray and Djokovic and other big players within the support, not that there aren't some other guys lower down who also agree with it, but I think we can count those 2 in. Therefore, something does need to be done as they have a lot of power and a lot of presence, and their star-status brings revenue to the sport and helps the lower ranked guys, from some point of view. Say if one of them were to boycott a tournament, fewer people would come to watch it, the lower ranked guys might get less sponsorship money - like for example when they get sponsored to wear patches when they play the top guys as the sponsors know it will be televised widely.

However, I find it difficult to paint a comment such as this, by Federer, in the harsh light that Rafa does: “It’s not a good thing for the lower-ranked players. It's going to be a struggle for them to make a big breakthrough. The dream of [these players] of having one great tournament, then making a [ranking] move, is not going to happen. I can’t support it as the president and I have to look all the players in the eye. I know it could be a good thing for me or Rafa because we would stay at the top for a very long time. It would take something extraordinary for us to move down. For the lower ranked players it is simply not a good thing."

I mean, that's something that lots of people on MTF and in tennis generally can recognise and we don't need Federer to say it to agree with it.

Most of all, I want the reaction of the lower ranked guys to this. Nobody has really asked them in press conferences that I've seen, or if they have it hasn't been broadcasted, we only have Fed speaking for them. Hopefully the journos will ask the early losers at the AO and then we can get a clearer picture of how bad things really are.

finishingmove
01-15-2012, 11:49 AM
Federer is falling behind because he's too lazy to train harder.

Anyway, it's true what Rafa says. Federer is being smug here.

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 11:52 AM
If he wants to talk about all these issues, he should make it official. Talk with board of directors, other players, meet and sit around the table and then make a debate.

Rafa's could have avoided feeling like he left to "burn" had he delievered the statement throught the ATP Player Council - that's what its there for - instead he cut corners failed to consult everyone and went to the press as individual thinking that comradery and tranking was enough to make everyone jump on the bandwagon when Roger told him to pumb his breaks and don't make demands without a consensus, he bitched some more about Roger

Kat_YYZ
01-15-2012, 11:56 AM
Roger skipped Paris in 2006 and had to give a w/o there in 2008, so yes he can get burned out, too. But he's not complaining. And if you won 3 of 4 slams in a year as Roger did in 2006, you have nothing to complain about anyways.

Roger played only 16 tournaments in 2007 and still held a comfortable points lead over the others. In recent years, he's decided against killing himself just to meet the "4 500-point tournaments" requirement, yet he still maintains a very high ranking. It is up to each player to find the best schedule solution for himself.

Looner
01-15-2012, 12:00 PM
Federer is falling behind because he's too lazy to train harder.

Anyway, it's true what Rafa says. Federer is being smug here.

You can't be this simple, can you. Oh, sorry the bull already set a precedent for stupidity so it's not the first time.

Nadal should thank his God, whoever it is, that he is not working in a normal job. Because his inability to express himself and whiny character would probably leave him poor as hell as intelligence is not his strong point.

finishingmove
01-15-2012, 12:06 PM
You can't be this simple, can you. Oh, sorry the bull already set a precedent for stupidity so it's not the first time.

Nadal should thank his God, whoever it is, that he is not working in a normal job. Because his inability to express himself and whiny character would probably leave him poor as hell as intelligence is not his strong point.

u jealous bro ?

i'm sure nadal would rather be himself than some guy defending federer on a message board

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 12:07 PM
Federer is falling behind because he's too lazy to train harder.

Anyway, it's true what Rafa says. Federer is being smug here.

WTF? Surely the guy asking for the season to be shortened is lazy?

finishingmove
01-15-2012, 12:11 PM
WTF? Surely the guy asking for the season to be shortened is lazy?

No, just rational.

Federer knows he's finished, so he doesn't care. Thumbs down.

Lopez
01-15-2012, 12:11 PM
Federer does have a point that a lot has been done already and the off-season is actually now a few weeks shorter (starting this year I think?).

And what people are not considering is that instead of thinking the season as January - November/December, you can think of it as 4 separate "mini-seasons": The Australian HC season, the clay and grass season, the US Open HC season, the indoor season. Federer tends to have "mini off-seasons" before each of these as Nadal plans to do now as well after the AO. To me, that sounds like a MUCH better idea than to have a few weeks more just at the end... Isn't that a whole lot more taxing, playing more intensly over a shorter period than having breaks in between a longer one? People are so focused on simply the off-season that they can't see that breaks can be held, if one wants to do so, during the year as well...

Eden
01-15-2012, 12:13 PM
Speaking as no particular fan of Djokovic, I would rather have seen a situation where he was still competitive at the end of last season and seeing if any of the other players could dislodge him while he was still at his best, rather than see him collapse with injury and energy problems and have guys like Murray and Federer pick up the big titles almost by default as a result.

Sorry, but I find it quite disappointing that there are always excuses for Roger's results in the indoors season.

When he won WTF in 2010 people complained that Djokovic's mind was already into DC final, now Novak suffered from going deep in tournaments until September.

Novak has already proven that he can play a full season (with winning WTF and the DC). He surely wasn't that dominating in the other tournaments as he was in the last season but it's not that he lost in first rounds of tournaments back then.

Injuries and health problems are the price tennisplayers pay for their sport. Stich and Rafter had to retire early even though you can't say that they played grueling tennis.

The topplayers nowadays already get a Bye in Masters and don't have to play best of 5 finals there anymore yet many people miss those epic finals and want to have the modus back.

Looner
01-15-2012, 12:14 PM
u jealous bro ?

i'm sure nadal would rather be himself than some guy defending federer on a message board

Your comprehension ability is close to zero, I see. What I meant to say (hopefully you are able to understand) is that there is a probability very close to zero that Nadal will have any success in a normal workplace. So he should be thanking this overcrowded schedule he's complaining about because without it, he'd be stuck cleaning dishes at some restaurant in Mallorca.

If that is too much for you, I am sorry but you can't be helped.

Do you also have ANY view of what it is to be a professional sportsperson or tennis player? If not, then shut up. Most of them still carry injuries from their playing days and if the diva Nadal wants to complain about that he should either retire or should have stuck to kicking the bigger ball with 10 other people on a grass pitch.

finishingmove
01-15-2012, 12:17 PM
Your comprehension ability is close to zero, I see. What I meant to say (hopefully you are able to understand) is that there is a probability very close to zero that Nadal will have any success in a normal workplace. So he should be thanking this overcrowded schedule he's complaining about because without it, he'd be stuck cleaning dishes at some restaurant in Mallorca.

If that is too much for you, I am sorry but you can't be helped.

to me it sounded like you don't like to asslick your boss and are jealous of nadal being rich from playing tennis :confused:

correct if wronggggggg

SORRY IF I MISUNDERSTOOD

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 12:17 PM
No, just rational.

Federer knows he's finished, so he doesn't care. Thumbs down.


Roger didn't say keep the season as it is - he said if you do make sure get a majority vote....surely the prima donna whose scaled the heights of the ranking then decided to speak onbehalf of everyone without a mandate doesn't give a shit about anyone outside of the millionaire boys club

Matt01
01-15-2012, 12:23 PM
The interesting thing here is that both sides do make valid points - although surprise surprise many posters on this thread see it as a binary choice and fall into line behind the player they support.

Federer is right that any solutions found to the season length issue needs to take into account the lower ranked atp guys, the challenger guys and the doubles guys, and he very correctly points out livelihoods are at stake - these guys can't top up their income with an extra ad campaign or exo. Any solution must not hurt their ability to earn enough to continue on tour - and there's enough of a problem with that already. More, not less, money needs to be filtering down to the lower ranks to make the burden of tour a bit fairer. The victors should get the majority of the spoils, that's only fair, but the tour would be a better place if players at the bottom of the top 100 and lower weren't living very financially constrained lives.

Nadal, however, is also right that perhaps Federer is not seeing that the demands of the tour schedule's compulsory events spread from January to November are tougher on most of the other top guys than on Federer himself - he can now set his own schedule as he likes and has repeatedly used the solution of preventative withdrawal rather than play the full schedule he really should have played in the past. This isn't really a solution, it still lets down tournaments and fans, even if it's wise from the point of view of his own health and body. Federer is an extraordinarily gifted athlete in that he has managed to juggle the demands of the highest level of competition year in year out with minimal impact on his body - I believe that some of this is down to his fitness and scheduling approach, but I also think some of it is just luck - lucky that he has the sort of playing style that is easier on the body (and that's not something you can really predict or work towards in advance, a player's playing style is not so easy to interchange). I also believe he's been lucky genetically perhaps - to have the type of physique that is more resistant to wear and tear injuries perhaps. All of these things have combined to produce the Federer that we know today - and not all of them are things he could directly control. Other players, no matter how hard they adapt their schedules or training regimens, are just not so lucky and the demands of a tour that expects them to play 4 slams, 8 masters 1000, 4 500 events and 2 250 events to fulfil their ranking requirements over 10.5 months in a time when tennis has got more and more physically demanding, increasingly on a surface that exacerbates wear and tear problems, is unreasonable and for the good of the long term health of the game, changes DO need to be made.

Any solutions here need to take into account all these questions and balance off all the needs of the individuals and groups involved.

A balance needs to be struck, and both sides acting as though their side is the only right side is pointless, as is bickering about whether it should be discussed privately or publicly, etc. Privately is obviously better but it's silly to expect the whole thing to be done in complete confidence in this day and age - things leak.


Exactly. This, this and this.


if a player isn't fit enough to play a full schedule then he should not play a full schedule, it's not like they are forced to play as much as they do at gunpoint


Oh my, you simply don't get it. :facepalm: I thought scoobs' post wasn't that hard to understand.

Looner
01-15-2012, 12:24 PM
to me it sounded like you don't like to asslick your boss and are jealous of nadal being rich from playing tennis :confused:

correct if wronggggggg

SORRY IF I MISUNDERSTOOD

You are wrong. I am still a student. So there you go.

And I am not jealous. I am just pointing out Nadal is being an ungrateful brat as he does not realise what it takes for some to succeed as tennis players and in the real world where poverty is widespread and where jobs are being cut whilst his fees continue to go through the roof. That is why I am always respectful of Roddick because he knows how fortunate he's been to earn millions whilst doing what he enjoys.

Some people earn a lot (still less that miss Nadal here) and are miserable. Some earn a lot less but do it for a cause or because they enjoy their work. He has both and he still complains. What does tell you about him as a person? Also, I'd like to know what Nole thinks. I'm sure he won't be as disrespectful as this little sissy who started complaining after getting his arse kicked more frequently by a better version of himself.

Dougie
01-15-2012, 12:26 PM
Sorry, but I find it quite disappointing that there are always excuses for Roger's results in the indoors season.

When he won WTF in 2010 people complained that Djokovic's mind was already into DC final, now Novak suffered from going deep in tournaments until September.

Novak has already proven that he can play a full season (with winning WTF and the DC). He surely wasn't that dominating in the other tournaments as he was in the last season but it's not that he lost in first rounds of tournaments back then.

Injuries and health problems are the price tennisplayers pay for their sport. Stich and Rafter had to retire early even though you can't say that they played grueling tennis.

The topplayers nowadays already get a Bye in Masters and don't have to play best of 5 finals there anymore yet many people miss those epic finals and want to have the modus back.

Exactly, there is a price to pay for being a professional athlete. Your body is your tool, Nadal makes millions just with price money, let alone with starting fees, exhos and sponsor deals. And now the ATP should shorten the schedule so that he can play football with his friends when his career is over. Please...

The whole thing is lke Sidney Crosby would say to the NHL bosses: "Look, I´ve had a few really bad concussions, you think we could shorten the regular season to 45 matches so I can rest more"?

Matt01
01-15-2012, 12:26 PM
Federer still has more fans that Djokovic, Nadal and Murray combined and do more for the sport than those three. ATP/ITF should think about that before listening to those divas.


:stupid: :silly: :rolleyes:

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 12:26 PM
The interesting thing here is that both sides do make valid points - although surprise surprise many posters on this thread see it as a binary choice and fall into line behind the player they support.

]Federer is right that any solutions found to the season length issue needs to take into account the lower ranked atp guys, the challenger guys and the doubles guys, and he very correctly points out livelihoods are at stake - these guys can't top up their income with an extra ad campaign or exo. Any solution must not hurt their ability to earn enough to continue on tour - and there's enough of a problem with that already. More, not less, money needs to be filtering down to the lower ranks to make the burden of tour a bit fairer. The victors should get the majority of the spoils, that's only fair, but the tour would be a better place if players at the bottom of the top 100 and lower weren't living very financially constrained lives.

Nadal, however, is also right that perhaps Federer is not seeing that the demands of the tour schedule's compulsory events spread from January to November are tougher on most of the other top guys than on Federer himself - he can now set his own schedule as he likes and has repeatedly used the solution of preventative withdrawal rather than play the full schedule he really should have played in the past. This isn't really a solution, it still lets down tournaments and fans, even if it's wise from the point of view of his own health and body. Federer is an extraordinarily gifted athlete in that he has managed to juggle the demands of the highest level of competition year in year out with minimal impact on his body - I believe that some of this is down to his fitness and scheduling approach, but I also think some of it is just luck - lucky that he has the sort of playing style that is easier on the body (and that's not something you can really predict or work towards in advance, a player's playing style is not so easy to interchange). I also believe he's been lucky genetically perhaps - to have the type of physique that is more resistant to wear and tear injuries perhaps. All of these things have combined to produce the Federer that we know today - and not all of them are things he could directly control. Other players, no matter how hard they adapt their schedules or training regimens, are just not so lucky and the demands of a tour that expects them to play 4 slams, 8 masters 1000, 4 500 events and 2 250 events to fulfil their ranking requirements over 10.5 months in a time when tennis has got more and more physically demanding, increasingly on a surface that exacerbates wear and tear problems, is unreasonable and for the good of the long term health of the game, changes DO need to be made.

Any solutions here need to take into account all these questions and balance off all the needs of the individuals and groups involved.

A balance needs to be struck, and both sides acting as though their side is the only right side is pointless, as is bickering about whether it should be discussed privately or publicly, etc. Privately is obviously better but it's silly to expect the whole thing to be done in complete confidence in this day and age - things leak.

Federer said the season should be addressed but it should be done...


professionally
with consensus and
with tangible solutions


how more balanced can he be! Rafa on the othe hand is taking the bull in a china shop approach and saying "cut the season it's too long" with no consideration of how it could be fairly done and ramification of everyone in the game

rickcastle
01-15-2012, 12:35 PM
Exactly, there is a price to pay for being a professional athlete. Your body is your tool, Nadal makes millions just with price money, let alone with starting fees, exhos and sponsor deals. And now the ATP should shorten the schedule so that he can play football with his friends when his career is over. Please...

The whole thing is lke Sidney Crosby would say to the NHL bosses: "Look, I´ve had a few really bad concussions, you think we could shorten the regular season to 45 matches so I can rest more"?

It's really such bad whining, and I can't afford to not be annoyed when I'm working a desk job 9-5 every day and will never make more than Nadal even if I worked non stop for 100 years.

News flash, Nadal: You are VERY lucky to be retired at 30 and be set financially for the rest of your life. Other people don't get to retire until they're 60 and guess what? There's hardly any skiing and playing football for us at that age either, but what we also won't have is tens of millions of dollars to fall back on.

He is so whiny, it's like he doesn't appreciate anything this sport has done for him and only counts the bad things the sport has done to his body. This sport has made him very rich, but he still treats it like a chore and a burden. He always needs to win more and earn more to continue to enjoy the sport that has made him rich. I have no respect for this guy.

Mae
01-15-2012, 12:38 PM
Personally I find this interesting from a different viewpoint. Nole is #1 now. And the glory days of all the Rafa-Roger match ups on court have declined so why not spice things up a little with some different off court viewpoints?

nobama
01-15-2012, 12:40 PM
There are several issues involved, and it's hard to know which ones Nadal was claiming he had support for.

2 year ranking points - a big no-no as far as I am concerned.

Shorter season - I think here he has the support of most of the top players other than Federer. Surely it could be possible to cut down the number of mandatories, move Paris and WTF forward, and continue with 250s and Challengers after that for the lower-ranked players who want to continue playing. They already do it for Futures :shrug:

Percentage of income paid to players (if that is one of his points, I haven't actually seen his opinion on that) - now here the lower-ranked players do seem to be in agreement.
We don't know that Fed doesn't support item #2. I've never heard him talk about it one way or the other.

Matt01
01-15-2012, 12:41 PM
Federer said the season should be addressed but it should be done...


professionally
with consensus and
with tangible solutions


how more balanced can he be! Rafa on the othe hand is taking the bull in a china shop approach and saying "cut the season it's too long" with no consideration of how it could be fairly done and ramification of everyone in the game


OTOH, the ATP (and probably other players) agree with him because this year, the season IS shortened :shrug:

Matt01
01-15-2012, 12:45 PM
We don't know that Fed doesn't support item #2. I've never heard him talk about it one way or the other.


I remember him stating some time ago that he wants the season to be shortened so that he can practice and improve his game more in the off-season. Not selfish at all. :p Of course now that he's always winning the few fast indoors tournaments that are left and Rafa and Djoker tire out at the end of the season, he's singing a different song...

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 12:45 PM
OTOH, the ATP (and probably other players) agree with him because this year, the season IS shortened :shrug:

that bit in the bracet is what Roger's saying though...don't ASSUME get a solution-based mandate

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 12:46 PM
I remember him stating some time ago that he wants the season to be shortened so that he can practice and improve his game more in the off-season. Not selfish at all. :p Of course now that he's always winning the few fast indoors tournaments that are left and Rafa and Djoker tire out at the end of the season, he's singing a different song...
---qoute please---

nobama
01-15-2012, 12:47 PM
You're not answering my point.

What if all the top players, bar one, cannot play a full schedule? And what if trying to do so will cause them long term injuries?

Is that ALL the top players (bar one) 's fault, or is it the tour itself? what a silly hypothetical. The notion that Fed is the ONLY player able to play a full season is BS. And what about back in the day whenguys were playing just as many if not more matches plus doubles? The problem isn't so much the schedule as it is the grinding style of play and surfaces, especially the slow hard courts.

Matt01
01-15-2012, 12:50 PM
---qoute please---


I remember reading but I don't remember where it was. I guess you just have to believe me or not. :wavey:

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 12:52 PM
what a silly hypothetical. The notion that Fed is the ONLY player able to play a full season is BS. And what about back in the day whenguys were playing just as many if not more matches plus doubles? The problem isn't so much the schedule as it is the grinding style of play and surfaces, especially the slow hard courts.

exactly I wonder how rafa would react if officials offered the solutions of non-clay surfaces returning back to their 1990s/early 00's speed...meaning shorter points...fewer pro-longed baseline rallied...and better serving...it'll certainly be better for the body...Todd Martin played a seniors event said the grass of wimbledon was now nothing more than green clay

nobama
01-15-2012, 12:53 PM
I remember reading but I don't remember where it was. I guess you just have to believe me or not. :wavey:
NOT.

Shinoj
01-15-2012, 12:53 PM
Nadal is absolutely right about the schedule. if it is jam packed then he needs to speak it up and he did that. Only thing he might be wrong in here is why he participates in exhibitions etc. But then one joining one exhibition does not underline the fact that the Schedule indeed is over pouring.

And Federer is acting smug here because he now knows that he does not need to play in every tournament considering his age. So it doesnt really matter to him anyway. But if fellow Tennis Players are speaking up he should respect that.

duong
01-15-2012, 12:54 PM
The interesting thing here is that both sides do make valid points - although surprise surprise many posters on this thread see it as a binary choice and fall into line behind the player they support.

Federer is right that any solutions found to the season length issue needs to take into account the lower ranked atp guys, the challenger guys and the doubles guys, and he very correctly points out livelihoods are at stake - these guys can't top up their income with an extra ad campaign or exo. Any solution must not hurt their ability to earn enough to continue on tour - and there's enough of a problem with that already. More, not less, money needs to be filtering down to the lower ranks to make the burden of tour a bit fairer. The victors should get the majority of the spoils, that's only fair, but the tour would be a better place if players at the bottom of the top 100 and lower weren't living very financially constrained lives.

Nadal, however, is also right that perhaps Federer is not seeing that the demands of the tour schedule's compulsory events spread from January to November are tougher on most of the other top guys than on Federer himself - he can now set his own schedule as he likes and has repeatedly used the solution of preventative withdrawal rather than play the full schedule he really should have played in the past. This isn't really a solution, it still lets down tournaments and fans, even if it's wise from the point of view of his own health and body. Federer is an extraordinarily gifted athlete in that he has managed to juggle the demands of the highest level of competition year in year out with minimal impact on his body - I believe that some of this is down to his fitness and scheduling approach, but I also think some of it is just luck - lucky that he has the sort of playing style that is easier on the body (and that's not something you can really predict or work towards in advance, a player's playing style is not so easy to interchange). I also believe he's been lucky genetically perhaps - to have the type of physique that is more resistant to wear and tear injuries perhaps. All of these things have combined to produce the Federer that we know today - and not all of them are things he could directly control. Other players, no matter how hard they adapt their schedules or training regimens, are just not so lucky and the demands of a tour that expects them to play 4 slams, 8 masters 1000, 4 500 events and 2 250 events to fulfil their ranking requirements over 10.5 months in a time when tennis has got more and more physically demanding, increasingly on a surface that exacerbates wear and tear problems, is unreasonable and for the good of the long term health of the game, changes DO need to be made.

Any solutions here need to take into account all these questions and balance off all the needs of the individuals and groups involved.

A balance needs to be struck, and both sides acting as though their side is the only right side is pointless, as is bickering about whether it should be discussed privately or publicly, etc. Privately is obviously better but it's silly to expect the whole thing to be done in complete confidence in this day and age - things leak.

Quite balanced but the problem in my eyes is : what does the vast majority of the players think and want ?

We're talking about collective interests here, not only about Nadal's and Federer's, and this is quite pathetic that only those two's words are heard, and while discussing them, you mostly hear arguments about their "personal" situation.

This is not a proper way to lead an union.

The most important in my eyes being "what does the majority of the players think", it seems from what happened saturday and from what we've heard on MTF that they do have some complaints which they would like being defended, but we only know one of them : % of revenues for players in slams.

Then probably creating an union, which has been talked about already, would be good.

Nadal and Fed are too much talked about here.

And what I don't like in Nadal's words is that he says "the vast majority of the players thinks what I say to you", but :
- we never heard anything about other players supporting what he said
- some of his suggestions clearly go against the interests of the lower-ranked players, like the 2 years-ranking, and also the reduction of the number of mandatory events for top-players is clearly a top-players' problem and the effect of such a reform on lower-ranked players is not clear at all (remember the situation before 1990)
- he clearly said yesterday that he doesn't want to be a collective leader because when he speaks like that, in the end it goes against him and "I appear as the bad guy and Roger as the good guy" : clearly that's not a collective motivation

Furthermore my impression is that when he says "the vast majority of the players thinks what I say to you", actually he says that because he sees many players complaining and he thinks "well they complain ... just like me" without realizing that they may complain for something totally different. And he probably also thinks that because some players near him support him, like Ferrer or Murray.

From what I hear now, the players need a proper union and not a "media whining" about Nadal and Federer.

Federer thinks he does his job as the "president of the players' council" : from what we hear he does this job properly, and his words about the procedure "first express properly your complain and see the answer" are just the correct words such a president should say.

But maybe this is not the proper organization : players would need an union and not only a "council" :
if this union was created, like in the NBA, the situation would be more appropriate than the "media whining" about just Nadal and Federer which is just infantile.

Lurking
01-15-2012, 12:54 PM
Federer plays a full season? News to me.

He played 18/27 MS from 04-06 in the prime of his career.

Matt01
01-15-2012, 12:55 PM
what a silly hypothetical. The notion that Fed is the ONLY player able to play a full season is BS. And what about back in the day whenguys were playing just as many if not more matches plus doubles? The problem isn't so much the schedule as it is the grinding style of play and surfaces, especially the slow hard courts.


Or maybe it also had to with the game being more physical now, with the compeitition (especially among the lower ranked players) being harder. And also as you say with having more tournaments on medium paced HCs which Rafa is apparently against :shrug:

I state: Federer did not have as many injuries as Nadal or Djokovic when he dominated the tour, yes. But he didn't have because he scheduled more wisely. And that "scheduling more wisely" consisted (at least partially) of skipping mandatory tournaments. And that can't be the solution in the long run.

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 12:56 PM
"scheduling more wisely" consisted (at least partially) of skipping mandatory tournaments. And that can't be the solution in the long run.

how many mandatory events did Federer skip in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 when he was dominating the tour? Put a number to that statement!

MatchFederer
01-15-2012, 12:57 PM
These two sit atop the ATP Players Council (or whatever it's called) and recently tempers have flared over issues concerning the tour (at least from a certain Spaniard).

Should the tour wait longer to see how the current implemented changes work for the tour or is Nadal right in suggesting that things need to move along faster and that changes for the tour need to be made sooner?

This question is not about whether we should have a 2 year ranking system or not or specifically related to player pay, but more about should tennis wait or already be moving on, right here and right now, taking into consideration a combination of already suggested options or new ideas.

Case studies:

Rafael Nadal

"He likes the circuit. I like the circuit," Nadal said. "It's much better than many other sports but that doesn't mean that it couldn't be better. It doesn't mean there are some things about the tour that could change. The tour is fine, but there are some things that are bad. That's all we're saying.

"And the vast majority of players have this same opinion. He's got a different opinion ... if the vast majority have one opinion, and a small minority think differently, maybe it's them who are wrong."

(not sure what part to quote of Nadal's recent statements as they do come off as bitter, if somebody could point me to examples of where he states his opinion in a more reasonable manner then that would be appreciated).


Roger Federer:

Swiss ZDF (German Translation) 13/01/12

'Demands must be privately and professional to the Board of Directors- only once an official request as been turned down do we ponder the public opinion arena and if its turned down are they saying no to hurt us or are there real logistical reasons and will it hurt the game in general.

As President I have consider all the player regardless of rank there has never been consensus on the length of the season - so if I use words like 'boycott' to the media I'm acting out of personal interest. Jarkko [Nieminen] and Peter [Luczak] have not said anything about the demands of the lower ranked guys and there is the demands doubles players to consider…

Speaking up without proper consultation is premature- if the season is shortened it should be done with most guys on board .. it’s easy for the top 10 we get offered exhibition matches and wildcards to shape our income and season how wish, that’s not a luxury afforded to everyone…. a lot of livelihoods are at stake.'

nobama
01-15-2012, 12:58 PM
exactly I wonder how rafa would react if officials offered the solutions of non-clay surfaces returning back to their 1990s speed...meaning shorter points...fewer pro-longed baseline rallied...and better serving...it'll certainly be better for the body
I don't know how you can discuss this and not talk about the style of play and the slower surfaces. Go back to the 90s - weren't there years when guys play over 100 matches in a year? Of course the style of play was different and the surfaces weren't as slow.

nobama
01-15-2012, 01:03 PM
Nadal is absolutely right about the schedule. if it is jam packed then he needs to speak it up and he did that. Only thing he might be wrong in here is why he participates in exhibitions etc. But then one joining one exhibition does not underline the fact that the Schedule indeed is over pouring.

And Federer is acting smug here because he now knows that he does not need to play in every tournament considering his age. So it doesnt really matter to him anyway. But if fellow Tennis Players are speaking up he should respect that.
How does a shorter schedule help the lower ranked players who don't go deep in tournaments week in and week out? They have a living to make too. And how do you shorten the season without getting rid of tournaments? Schedule 4 per week? Who wants that? And if you do get rid of some, which ones? Everyone will have a different opinion on which tournaments deserve a spot in the schedule and which ones don't. Plus how easy would it be to get rid of tournaments? Look what it cost the ATP just downgrading Hamburg and moving it in the schedule. Not an easy thing to do.

rickcastle
01-15-2012, 01:04 PM
The thing is this isn't just about what Federer wants or what Nadal wants - Nadal is acting like tennis is just about the top players. He goes off and complains to the media (and in turn his numerous fans would agree with him) instead of getting a proper consensus and going through the proper channels. The top players have too much power in their hands in this case, and they can really ruin things for the lower ranked players if they get their way without consulting first the lower ranked players whose opinion in the sport is just as much valuable as those at the top.

It is then in the consensus and moral high ground of the higher ranked players to include those in the lower rungs in their thoughts when making complaints like these and proposing player strikes - and I'm not sure Nadal is considering the real vast majority of the tour when voicing his complaints.

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 01:06 PM
How does a shorter schedule help the lower ranked players who don't go deep in tournaments week in and week out? They have a living to make too. And how do you shorten the season without getting rid of tournaments? Schedule 4 per week? Who wants that? And if you do get rid of some, which ones? Everyone will have a different opinion on which tournaments deserve a spot in the schedule and which ones don't. Plus how easy would it be to get rid of tournaments? Look what it cost the ATP just downgrading Hamburg and moving it in the schedule. Not an easy thing to do.

the attitude of Rafa and his fans is "who the fuck cares" just accomdate my needs the hell with everyone outside the top 50!

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 01:07 PM
The thing is this isn't just about what Federer wants or what Nadal wants - Nadal is acting like tennis is just about the top players. He goes off and complains to the media (and in turn his numerous fans would agree with him) instead of getting a proper consensus and going through the proper channels. The top players have too much power in their hands in this case, and they can really ruin things for the lower ranked players if they get their way without consulting first the lower ranked players whose opinion in the sport is just as much valuable as those at the top.

It is then in the consensus and moral high ground of the higher ranked players to include those in the lower rungs in their thoughts when making complaints like these and proposing player strikes - and I'm not sure Nadal is considering the real vast majority of the tour when voicing his complaints.

:worship::worship:

Matt01
01-15-2012, 01:20 PM
how many mandatory events did Federer skip in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 when he was dominating the tour? Put a number to that statement!


Why don't you look up the numbers for yourself if you are interested? :rolleyes:

LuCC
01-15-2012, 01:21 PM
But who force Nadal to play all tournaments ? He knows the best how his body is doing and if he has some health problems so just don't play. Neither ranking nor money is important, it is health which could not be bought. He should know that, being a wise man is to set your priorities in a right way.
Some guys complain about Djokovic not being fit in the end of the season. Alright, he wasn't but whos fault is it? Obviously not schedule. He acted like a moron playing this DC match after so devastating USO final. Same applies for Nadal. He should never have gone to Asia, but do some essential rest and play in Paris.
I understand that he might complain, but why the fuck is he doing it this way ?Random interview, talking trash but not giving any specific details. I think if someone starts some issue which he doesn't like, claims it is a problem, then I would like to hear some solutions how to make it better.

Matt01
01-15-2012, 01:24 PM
How does a shorter schedule help the lower ranked players who don't go deep in tournaments week in and week out?


Shorter season = more rest for the top players.

More rest for the top players = less injuries for the top players.

Less injuries for the top players = more tournaments for the top players.

More tournaments for the top players = more fans at the tournaments.

More fans at the tournaments = more money for the ATP.

More money for the ATP = more money that can be distributed to the lower ranked players.

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 01:25 PM
Why don't you look up the numbers for yourself if you are interested? :rolleyes:

I don't think you know how debate work - you made the arguement not me - its up to you not me to back it up!

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 01:26 PM
I get the feeling a lot of the “cut the season brigade” have no grasp of just how monumental that move is for players who are just about breaking-even with their expenses year-in-year out.

The problem is that here in MTF we predominantly discuss the careers of the elites that we lose grasp with reality and just how expensive tennis really is…

I’d urge some people to watch the documentary “Journeymen” by Geoff Grant & Mark Keil and what the top tournaments mean for their earning and livelihood ..making it to Round 1 say in Miami ($7,000) might seem like pocket change for Rafa and Murray but for the lower players can cover their expenses …they live hand to mouth - bunk together in hostels -- and count every penny …and they have to stay longer in cities ‘cause they have to qualify to get into the tournaments …belive it or not majority of the players on the tour are not subsided by their federations or have endorsement deals with Nike and KIA

timafi
01-15-2012, 01:28 PM
Nadal has got to be out of his fucking mind to think that he can play every fucking week and run down every fucking ball to the point were he destroyed his knees all by himself and has to take daily care of those knees and then turn this around and blame his fuckery on Federer :rolleyes: :spit:

where is the fucking logic in playing every week when your body says NO MAS! At some point when do you put health and quality ahead of ranking points and money?

Shinoj
01-15-2012, 01:29 PM
How does a shorter schedule help the lower ranked players who don't go deep in tournaments week in and week out? They have a living to make too. And how do you shorten the season without getting rid of tournaments? Schedule 4 per week? Who wants that? And if you do get rid of some, which ones? Everyone will have a different opinion on which tournaments deserve a spot in the schedule and which ones don't. Plus how easy would it be to get rid of tournaments? Look what it cost the ATP just downgrading Hamburg and moving it in the schedule. Not an easy thing to do.

Make lesser tournaments mandatory then.

To me the ideal length of the season or the number of tournaments would be what happened till US Open last year. The Top players at that time Nadal and Djokovic were in top shape till that tournament. And they faltered after that.

Scrap Indian Well or Miami. Play the indoor leg after the US Open. End the Season ending before November and then give a two month off season. The non mandatory events can happen on or after November. The Top players can get a rest for two months and the lesser players can earn their dollars on the non mandatory events.

Matt01
01-15-2012, 01:31 PM
I don't think you know how debate work - you made the arguement not me - its up to you not me to back it up!


BS. I'm just posting my opinion and not doing a scientific reasearch. If you want the exact numbers, look them up for yourself or ask me politely.

Looner
01-15-2012, 01:32 PM
Shorter season = more rest for the top players.

More rest for the top players = less injuries for the top players.

Less injuries for the top players = more tournaments for the top players.

More tournaments for the top players = more fans at the tournaments.

More fans at the tournaments = more money for the ATP.

More money for the ATP = more money that can be distributed to the lower ranked players.

I know this point is lost on you and other Nadal fans with the same attitude but you're only talking about TOP players. Do you think you'll see a Federer or a Nadal if I don't know how many players in I don't know how many countries did not try to aim for the tennis top and compete therefore increasing the number of tournaments, the sport's popularity and giving the TOP guys the rewards they get. Seriously think about this or at least make an attempt to do so.


BS. I'm just posting my opinion and not doing a scientific reasearch. If you want the exact numbers, look them up for yourself or ask me politely.

Your opinion is exactly that. And without facts to support it, it is as uninformed as that of your idol and target of your wet dreams. You have no argument here. Post away BS but do not expect anyone to actually listen to crap like this, much like how Fed does not listen to your idol's BS.

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 01:32 PM
Shorter season = more rest for the top players.

More rest for the top players = less injuries for the top players.

Less injuries for the top players = more tournaments for the top players.

More tournaments for the top players = more fans at the tournaments.

More fans at the tournaments = more money for the ATP.

More money for the ATP = more money that can be distributed to the lower ranked players.

wouldn't make more sense to address court-speed and tournament profit distribution than pretend that Miami or Toronto is the straw that broke the camel's back!

Sunset of Age
01-15-2012, 01:32 PM
The thing is this isn't just about what Federer wants or what Nadal wants - Nadal is acting like tennis is just about the top players. He goes off and complains to the media (and in turn his numerous fans would agree with him) instead of getting a proper consensus and going through the proper channels. The top players have too much power in their hands in this case, and they can really ruin things for the lower ranked players if they get their way without consulting first the lower ranked players whose opinion in the sport is just as much valuable as those at the top.

It is then in the consensus and moral high ground of the higher ranked players to include those in the lower rungs in their thoughts when making complaints like these and proposing player strikes - and I'm not sure Nadal is considering the real vast majority of the tour when voicing his complaints.
I feel you're spot-on. Unfortunately.
Nadal seems to be losing grip on reality, and reality is that the lower echelons of players (whose needs are obviously different from the needs of the top players) DO matter, but he doesn't seem to realize that. The corruptive force of having 'power' rearing its ugly face? It makes me sad.
Hopefully some stuff he said got "lost in translation". I hope so.

ufiors
01-15-2012, 01:36 PM
Semi-final is just begin... I want blood

scarecrows
01-15-2012, 01:37 PM
playing 20 weeks out of 52 seems too much for Humbalito

Kat_YYZ
01-15-2012, 01:39 PM
that Google translation for Roger is not so great. we should wait for a better one, no?

Shinoj
01-15-2012, 01:39 PM
To me last season 2011 was the exact prototype which says what is wrong with Tennis.

Two Top ranked players,Rafa and Novak, played at a very high level till US Open. And after that they could not keep it up. To me the length of the season should stop somewhere after US Open. I think the season ending should happen before November. Give a two months off and the non mandatory events can happen in that period.

Roger clearly has to accommodate the majority of the Tour. Obviously if Rafa says that majority of the players want the Tour to be shortened then obviously he has some backing. And then if there is a majority and then there is no action being taken then obviously there is a problem.

As thing stands Roger is being too stiff. But then you cant complain that much as he is old and he is quite smart with his scheduling so it really doesn't matter much to him. The players are on one side and Roger is on one side. At least it looks like that.

bokehlicious
01-15-2012, 01:43 PM
The majority of the tour surely doesn't agree with selfish Rafito, get your fact straight.

zlaja777
01-15-2012, 01:45 PM
"...vast majority of players have this same opinion." I don't think Rafa would have said this if he's not completely sure it's true. Yes, only Murray, Bogomolov etc. talked about it publicly but I think that most of top 50 players would back him up. I think they surely made a step forward to a strike since Rafa have said something like this.

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 01:47 PM
BS. I'm just postingmy opinion and not doing a scientific reasearch. If you want the exact numbers, look them up for yourself or ask me politely.

Had you said Roger's style is more durable and stopped at that I honestly wouldn't have asked for evidence because you're voicing an opinion on his style but when you said - his domination was helped by him skipping many mandatory events during his peak years - you were validating your opinion with what you presented as FACT! So I called you out on it -

when debating be prepared to back up your arguments and don't take it personal when people challenge your views!

PS - how many mandatory events did Federer skip in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 when he was dominating the tour? Put a number to that statement!

You must be really sensative because I don't know why this question is impolite

Matt01
01-15-2012, 01:48 PM
I know this point is lost on you and other Nadal fans with the same attitude but you're only talking about TOP players. Do you think you'll see a Federer or a Nadal if I don't know how many players in I don't know how many countries did not try to aim for the tennis top and compete therefore increasing the number of tournaments, the sport's popularity and giving the TOP guys the rewards they get. Seriously think about this or at least make an attempt to do so.


I'm talking about the top players because this thread is about Nadal and Federer. And why don't YOU make an attempt to reply my arguments in this thread but apparently you are unable to do so...




Your opinion is exactly that. And without facts to support it, it is as uninformed as that of your idol and target of your wet dreams. You have no argument here. Post away BS but do not expect anyone to actually listen to crap like this, much like how Fed does not listen to your idol's BS.


Okay, this is the reason...
Your arguments are not even worth a serious reply because you have no arguments :tape:

Shinoj
01-15-2012, 01:48 PM
Murray does,Djokovic does, Roddick does. Most of the top players i think they do.

rinnegan
01-15-2012, 01:49 PM
Rafa. Just look at the number of players who retired/withdrew in the US Open last year.

neme6
01-15-2012, 01:50 PM
To me last season 2011 was the exact prototype which says what is wrong with Tennis.

Two Top ranked players,Rafa and Novak, played at a very high level till US Open. And after that they could not keep it up. To me the length of the season should stop somewhere after US Open. I think the season ending should happen before November. Give a two months off and the non mandatory events can happen in that period.

Roger clearly has to accommodate the majority of the Tour. Obviously if Rafa says that majority of the players want the Tour to be shortened then obviously he has some backing. And then if there is a majority and then there is no action being taken then obviously there is a problem.

As thing stands Roger is being too stiff. But then you cant complain that much as he is old and he is quite smart with his scheduling so it really doesn't matter much to him. The players are on one side and Roger is on one side. At least it looks like that.

think about how it was just 5 years ago, the players had to play a 5 setter in most of the Master Series finals, that's allready a step in the right direction, and if Nole and Nadal are really tired after the US Open, it's mostly because of their style of play, which is extremely physical compared to other players!

bokehlicious
01-15-2012, 01:50 PM
Murray does,Djokovic does, Roddick does. Most of the top players i think they do.

The Tour (and tennis) is not all about top 10 players is it?

paseo
01-15-2012, 01:52 PM
Murray does,Djokovic does, Roddick does. Most of the top players i think they do.

that's the problem. the top players are important, but tennis isn't just them.

Matt01
01-15-2012, 01:55 PM
Had you said Roger's style is more durable and stopped at that I honestly wouldn't have asked for evidence because you're voicing an opinion on his style but when you said - his domination was helped by him skipping many mandatory events during his peak years - you were validating your opinion with what you presented as FACT! So I called you out on it -

when debating be prepared to back up your arguments and don't take it personal when people challenge your views!

PS -

You must be really sensative because I don't know why this question is impolite


1. I did not say that Fed skipped many mandatories. At least quote me correctly and don't put words in my mouth.

2. If you can't se why the question was impolite then I can't help you. Bye.

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 01:57 PM
technically roger said get a mandate - that's not the same was wait and see

Sophocles
01-15-2012, 01:58 PM
The implication that Federer isn't voicing an opinion because he wants to "look like a gentleman" was rather unfortunate. On the main question, tennis has always been played most of the year round. The solution is to diversify & speed up the courts and regulate racquets & strings to discourage the tedious, injury-prone grinding style of play that has produced a monstrosity such as Nadull.

Bigselber
01-15-2012, 02:01 PM
Roger

Ububub
01-15-2012, 02:01 PM
Nadal has demonstrated that he does not have what it takes to be a leader of the tennis players union. What benefits you directly is secondary to what benefits the membership as a whole. His campaigns to institute a two-year ranking system, and to shorten the season benefits, oh, er, um - him. But in benefiting him, the "vast majority" gets screwed.

Who would have been #1 under the two-year system? Him. Who would have had to have waited another year for recent success to improve rankings, and in turn more lucrative tournaments? The "vast majority."

Who would have benefited from being able to avoid the hardcourt season and focus mainly on clay? Him. Who would have been harmed by the possibility of fewer tournaments, with reduced prize money because the crowd-drawing players are sitting home? The "vast majority."

Saberq
01-15-2012, 02:01 PM
You know I dont care about this debate but you should face it Fed fans....the only reason you dont like Nadal is not because he grinds,"cheats",takes time between points,complains it is because he owned Roger Federer in 8 GS finals and countless other matches.....

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 02:02 PM
1. I did not say that Fed skipped many mandatories. At least quote me correctly and don't put words in my mouth.

2. If you can't se why the question was impolite then I can't help you. Bye.
Translation : I can't back up my claims!

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 02:04 PM
You know I dont care about this debate but you should face it Fed fans....the only reason you dont like Nadal is not because he grinds,"cheats",takes time between points,complains it is because he owned Roger Federer in 8 GS finals and countless other matches.....

http://tulisandila.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/confused1.jpg
so what are you doing on a thread about it?

Sophocles
01-15-2012, 02:06 PM
Nadal has demonstrated that he does not have what it takes to be a leader of the tennis players union. What benefits you directly is secondary to what benefits the membership as a whole. His campaigns to institute a two-year ranking system, and to shorten the season benefits, oh, er, um - him. But in benefiting him, the "vast majority" gets screwed.

Who would have been #1 under the two-year system? Him. Who would have had to have waited another year for recent success to improve rankings, and in turn more lucrative tournaments? The "vast majority."

Who would have benefited from being able to avoid the hardcourt season and focus mainly on clay? Him. Who would have been harmed by the possibility of fewer tournaments, with reduced prize money because the crowd-drawing players are sitting home? The "vast majority."

A succinct demolition of Nadull's argument.

Looner
01-15-2012, 02:07 PM
I'm talking about the top players because this thread is about Nadal and Federer. And why don't YOU make an attempt to reply my arguments in this thread but apparently you are unable to do so...


Reading comprehension fail yet again, I see. This thread's topic is the rift between the Fed and Nadal which is caused by their diverging views on the season's length. And I did express my view earlier in the thread (page 6 I think it was).

My view is clear - I support Fed in that the calendar is good as it is because you can easily manage it. Like Fed has done for ages. Nadal wants more clay but DOES NOT talk about speeding up the surfaces that were fast to begin with where he got his behind handed to him by more aggressive players before those courts were slowed down and he started winning the big events. There is a thread here (http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=174951) demonstrates just how much these guys have to work for a living if they're outside the TOP100 (even then it's not that easy). Federer has stated that Nieminen, the rep of the TOP100 players, and the rep for the players outside the TOP 100 HAVE NOT stated their opinion on the matter. Which completely and utterly destroys Nadal's point about everyone wanting change. Do you want to say something about that?

I have also stated that being a pro sportsman carries its risks (you obviously failed to read my post but let repeat as you're finding it hard to go through a few posts). You earn your living for a whole life in the space of 7-10 years. It's obviously going to be tough on the body but do not blame others for your inability to manage your biggest sporting asset - your BODY. Why does Nadal not talk about the lesser players and how they don't have his physique and durability which will allow them to outlast opponents and win millions, eh? What do you have to say about that?

Finally, do you have any idea in what state pros in other sports finish their careers? They're always injuries after your retire as you overexert yourself but that is the price you pay for earning so much so quickly. And since you're probably not of an age where you are working (if I'm mistaken, it's even worse), there's hazards associated with sitting on a chair all day like back pain and also obesity, etc. etc.

Is this a good enough reply for you? Let's see you put some INFORMED opinions on the table otherwise you have ZERO arguments.

PS I also said it depends on what Nadal wants but he doesn't actually say anything about that apart from reducing the calendar so he can win more slams. He is not specific and in business (which is what this is all about) you have to be specific and stick to your guns. He' doing nothing of the kind so his opinion carriers no weight.

bokehlicious
01-15-2012, 02:09 PM
You know I dont care about this debate but you should face it Fed fans....the only reason you dont like Nadal is not because he grinds,"cheats",takes time between points,complains it is because he owned Roger Federer in 8 GS finals and countless other matches.....

The reason you djokotards hate on Roger is because he dared calling Nole's obnoxious parents for what they really are, and proved Dijana that the "king wasn't dead" in 2008. And also because you know Djoker will never remotely be as great as Roger.

nobama
01-15-2012, 02:09 PM
Shorter season = more rest for the top players.

More rest for the top players = less injuries for the top players.

Less injuries for the top players = more tournaments for the top players.

More tournaments for the top players = more fans at the tournaments.

More fans at the tournaments = more money for the ATP.

More money for the ATP = more money that can be distributed to the lower ranked players.

How do you figure more $$ if you shorten the season (I'm assuming to do so you'd have to get rid of tournaments), and/or have fewer mandatory events for top players. If the top guys aren't guaranteed to show up the tournaments won't shell out top dollar in prize money.

fmolinari2005
01-15-2012, 02:11 PM
Shorter season = more rest for the top players.

More rest for the top players = less injuries for the top players.

Less injuries for the top players = more tournaments for the top players.

More tournaments for the top players = more fans at the tournaments.

More fans at the tournaments = more money for the ATP.

More money for the ATP = more money that can be distributed to the lower ranked players.

Sorry, but I think it is strange. More rest to top players equals more tournament that top players can play?!!! I am finding it hard to understand.

First of all: in all fairness, it is good seeing Nadal voicing his opinion. I might disagree with it, but oveall it is good.

I suppose we are missing one thing when it comes to this debate that Roger himself didn't miss. Probably because he played throughout this transition (Nadal only did this on his first succesful season at 05). It is not as if the ATP did nothing to address player's requests. It just happened before the current top players started playing competitive tennis at the top level.

Remember the days when at the Masters Series the top seeds didn't have first round byes and the finals were best of 5?!!! This was a pretty neat reduction in mandatory total sets a top player needed to play, wasn't it?! And lets go to ATP 500 e 250: is it me or the top players actually also don't need to play from the first round onwards?! I also remember the bitching that went around here when the super tiebreak/ no ad rules were installed on doubles ...

So, it is not as if the ATP really doesn't care about tennis player's demands. Of course it sounds much cooler saying that all they care is money, how corrupt they are and blah, blah, blah. It makes you sound like a modern day Che Guevara- even if, in the end, it sounds a lot like naive teens that have issues with their parents. Of course their primary care is money- but, newsflash, it is the main concern of professional players too. Don't tell me that the top players are primarily concerned with the sanctity of the sport and their bodies. Shit ... everybody knows that ALL top athlets put their body to extremes. And they do so because of the prize at the end of the row (may it be money or glory).

Of course that Nadal is right when he says that it is not because it got better that things can't improve. IMO he is just choosing the wrong venue to do so. If today's economic settings weren't as bad, this could be a good move- going public and trying to "blackmail" the ATP bosses through the media. However, right now, people will think "shit, I have a hard time finding jobs and earning money through a regular job and those rich guys are complaining they play too much tennis".

We talk a lot about courts being slowed down. Here is where I think things could start slowly changing. Bottom line, if we had fast hard courts, players WOULDN'T earn a living by running marathons on tough surfaces. A lot of those top players that complain about overplaying wouldn't be suffering from this problem- because either they would have to adapt themseleves to winning on fast surfaces by attacking more and running less ... or they wouldn't go deep on tournaments.

I would love to ask Nadal, at the start of 2004, if he felt like the season should be shorter.

nobama
01-15-2012, 02:14 PM
Make lesser tournaments mandatory then.

To me the ideal length of the season or the number of tournaments would be what happened till US Open last year. The Top players at that time Nadal and Djokovic were in top shape till that tournament. And they faltered after that.

Scrap Indian Well or Miami. Play the indoor leg after the US Open. End the Season ending before November and then give a two month off season. The non mandatory events can happen on or after November. The Top players can get a rest for two months and the lesser players can earn their dollars on the non mandatory events.
Ok you say scrap IW and Miami. Why those and not, say, the events on clay after Wimbledon? And how would you propose scrapping them? Easier said than done. And as far as fewer mandatory events, that means less prize money as tournaments won't shell out the big bucks if they're not guaranteed top players. Or they'll just give the top guys huge appearance fees to show up.

Matt01
01-15-2012, 02:15 PM
Do you want to say something about that?

No.

What do you have to say about that?

Nothing.

Is this a good enough reply for you?

No. Because you quoted me first and did not in any way address my arguments. Address my arguments first and then I maybe reply to yours. Thanks.

Kat_YYZ
01-15-2012, 02:17 PM
You know I dont care about this debate but you should face it Fed fans....the only reason you dont like Nadal is not because he grinds,"cheats",takes time between points,complains it is because he owned Roger Federer in 8 GS finals and countless other matches.....
sorry but that has nothing to do with this argument. It's the farthest thing from my mind as I read this thread. Nadal is bad for tennis. If the changes Nadal wants were to be instituted, it wouldn't make Federer's remaining time on the tour any worse, but it would be terrible for the sport, including after Federer retires.

bokehlicious
01-15-2012, 02:18 PM
Matt01 getting pwned once again :awww: darling, you should avoid those debates when you have nothing to say apart from "I love Rafa he can't do no wrong, and also I hate Federer!" :hug:

Looner
01-15-2012, 02:18 PM
No.

Nothing.

No. Because you quoted me first and did not in any way address my arguments. Address my arguments first and then I maybe reply to yours. Thanks.

Nice to see you giving up already. Your idol has as well. Good day. (I addressed your arguments but if you can't be bothered to read, junior, so be it). :wavey::angel:

Matt01
01-15-2012, 02:23 PM
How do you figure more $$ if you shorten the season (I'm assuming to do so you'd have to get rid of tournaments), and/or have fewer mandatory events for top players. If the top guys aren't guaranteed to show up the tournaments won't shell out top dollar in prize money.


Good points. Shorter season and less inuries also means fewer withdrawals and retirements. With fewer mandatory tourneys the top player would be more guaranteed to play those tournaments then.

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 02:24 PM
Nice to see you giving up already. Your idol has as well. Good day. (I addressed your arguments but if you can't be bothered to read, junior, so be it). :wavey::angel:

don't try debating with him ask him a question and you'll get "ask nicely or I'm not playing"..."what do you mean I have to source information I'm qouting as facts"....;)

Matt01
01-15-2012, 02:26 PM
Matt01 getting pwned once again :awww: darling, you should avoid those debates when you have nothing to say apart from "I love Rafa he can't do no wrong, and also I hate Federer!" :hug:


If that is what you got from my posts in this thread then it only confirms your attitude which is "I love Rogie he can't do no wrong, and also I hate Nadal!" :hug:

Matt01
01-15-2012, 02:27 PM
Nice to see you giving up already. Your idol has as well. Good day. (I addressed your arguments but if you can't be bothered to read, junior, so be it). :wavey::angel:


Only in your wet dreams.

Lopez
01-15-2012, 02:33 PM
Shorter season = more rest for the top players.

More rest for the top players = less injuries for the top players.

Less injuries for the top players = more tournaments for the top players.

More tournaments for the top players = more fans at the tournaments.

More fans at the tournaments = more money for the ATP.

More money for the ATP = more money that can be distributed to the lower ranked players.

Wow this logic flat out sucks.

As said before, shorter season would not mean top players play more, they play less. They're more guaranteed to play some events, that's true, since there are fewer events. But your argument really falls flat on its feet when you don't really offer any proof of increased revenue. The revenue stream that vanishes from the ATP in the tournaments that are slashed should be offset by the increased revenue in the ones that are not slashed. Are you saying that the star power of the top 10 is enough to equal the lost revenue in many tournaments :scratch:? They might just have to raise ticket prices...

In addition, how is better for lower ranked players to have fewer tournaments with better fields? Their draws will become a lot harder and they will not reach the latter stages of tournaments as often.

Sorry but calling this an argument is an insult to a proper argument... You just offer wild conjecture, no solid evidence to back your claims.

Bobby
01-15-2012, 02:34 PM
It's really such bad whining, and I can't afford to not be annoyed when I'm working a desk job 9-5 every day and will never make more than Nadal even if I worked non stop for 100 years.

News flash, Nadal: You are VERY lucky to be retired at 30 and be set financially for the rest of your life. Other people don't get to retire until they're 60 and guess what? There's hardly any skiing and playing football for us at that age either, but what we also won't have is tens of millions of dollars to fall back on.

He is so whiny, it's like he doesn't appreciate anything this sport has done for him and only counts the bad things the sport has done to his body. This sport has made him very rich, but he still treats it like a chore and a burden. He always needs to win more and earn more to continue to enjoy the sport that has made him rich. I have no respect for this guy.

Couldn't agree more. Majority of the people work at offices, factories, drive a bus or whatever. They work for 40+ years, and their "off-season" is a couple of weeks summer holiday each year. Big part of them suffer from back pains, stiff shoulders, neck pains and so on. Can they retire? No, because they have to pay for their living, car, food and so on. When (if) they eventually retire, they don't have big savings and they may not be healthy anymore.

I'm one of these people. Obvioulsy someone is going to say "You are jealous at Nadal"! No, I'm not. I'm quite satisfied as a matter of fact. Many people have it much worse. Does Nadal's attitude make me angry? Sure does. He is a very lucky man and I'm sure he knows people who are in a much more dire situation. Especially considering Spain's huge problems at the moment. A lot of young, educated people unable to find jobs and so on.

In conclusion. Nadal should man up and play tennis. If it it such a terrible thing to do, then retire. But don't act as a victim here. Man up!

fmolinari2005
01-15-2012, 02:34 PM
As for the cheap shot Nadal took at Roger, for Roger being able NOT to be crippled at the age of 30. Here is what Agassi said about Nadal a couple of years back, when young Nadal was starting to make his mark on tennis;

Agassi on Nadal:" He is writing checks his body might not be able to cash".

We all know that Andre quit tennis with a bad back. But at the age of 35+ ... and when he became a top athlete sports medicine wasn't at the level it is nowadays.

Looner
01-15-2012, 02:34 PM
Only in your wet dreams.

You are as intelligent as your idol, I see. No surprises here , moving on :angel:.

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 02:39 PM
As for the cheap shot Nadal took at Roger, for Roger being able NOT to be crippled at the age of 30. Here is what Agassi said about Nadal a couple of years back, when young Nadal was starting to make his mark on tennis;

Agassi on Nadal:" He is writing checks his body might not be able to cash".

We all know that Andre quit tennis with a bad back. But at the age of 35+ ... and when he became a top athlete sports medicine wasn't at the level it is nowadays.

;) - but in defence of rafa he's now more attacking!

dodo
01-15-2012, 02:42 PM
Rafa. Just look at the number of players who retired/withdrew in the US Open last year.
Look at the number of players that retired in tournaments so far this year. Two weeks too long?
Just saying thats not necessarily a good indicator.

Sri
01-15-2012, 02:42 PM
It's a bad time to be in the Nadal camp:

* Lose ATP #1 ranking to Nole ... Check
* Your guy Richard Krijaeck loses ATP presidency ... Check
* Whine and cry in from of the press, look rather stupid and selfish ... Check

--

Here's what Federer is saying:
* We take this up in the proper channels, not spill it on the media
* We consider the interests of all players (lower ranked, doubles etc.) rather than just us top players

It's hard to find flaw with that stance, unless you're a Rafa tard.

Seriously Nadal is coming across as a bit whiny and selfish. This won't do him any favors.

And who made him the spokesperson for a "vast majority of players". LOL!

The prima donna must realize the business doesn't revolve around him. He needs tennis more than tennis needs him.

Matt01
01-15-2012, 02:44 PM
As said before, shorter season would not mean top players play more, they play less.


Not necessarily. If the "plan" worked, they would have to skip and retire from less tournaments and in the end not play much less. They would have less injuries and a longer off-season to regenerate.


They're more guaranteed to play some events, that's true, since there are fewer events. But your argument really falls flat on its feet when you don't really offer any proof of increased revenue. The revenue stream that vanishes from the ATP in the tournaments that are slashed should be offset by the increased revenue in the ones that are not slashed. Are you saying that the star power of the top 10 is enough to equal the lost revenue in many tournaments :scratch:? They might just have to raise ticket prices...


I'm not talking about many tournaments but just a few.

Lopez
01-15-2012, 02:51 PM
Not necessarily. If the "plan" worked, they would have to skip and retire from less tournaments and in the end not play much less. They would have less injuries and a longer off-season to regenerate.

I'm not talking about many tournaments but just a few.

They're already increasing the off-season by a few weeks.

As I said before, it is very possible for top players to have breaks in between the season which is a much better alternative to having an intense playing season and then a longer break.

Besides, they can skip mandatories, just have to take the mandatory 0... I just don't see the benefit of having less mandatories = less play compared to more mandatories but some are skipped... If you're saying that the points should count fewer tournaments, then that's in favor of the top players who go deeper in the biggest ones.

The top players hardly pulled out of any tournaments last year... Djokovic did it only at the end, with ret. in Cincy, WO in Paris and DNP in Shanghai. Nadal skipped just Paris IIRC?

thrust
01-15-2012, 02:52 PM
that's the problem. the top players are important, but tennis isn't just them.

I AGREE. Players can make their own schedules. If they are burnt out after the USO, that is due to their scheduling and style of play. Roger is correct here, Rafa is acting like a cry baby.

fmolinari2005
01-15-2012, 02:53 PM
;) - but in defence of rafa he's now more attacking!

Agreed. Nadal's game did evolve from that moment on. But I don't think it is only the running that does the damage to Nadal's body. It is even the way he hits his ground strokes. It is not very efficient "energy-wise". His ubber topspin game makes him less effective on using the opponent's power in his favor. He is always having to put a massive effort on his strokes. I mean, I remember the first time I saw him hitting that loopy forehand all the time ... I went to the courts and tried that. After a couple of strokes I was half dead and my shoulder was killing me (it is fun, though, trying to copy his style on clay courts! LOL).

To make matters worse, yes he is more aggressive. But, ironically enough, courts aren't helping him that much with this effort.

solowyn
01-15-2012, 03:08 PM
Steve Tignor: http://blogs.tennis.com/thewrap/2012/01/slow-burn.html

Slow Burn
01/15/2012 - 7:23 AM

MELBOURNE—It was the middle of the 2011 French Open and Rafael Nadal was in a press conference, talking at length about something that I couldn’t quite follow. I knew that winning this title meant a lot to him. It would be his sixth at Roland Garros, tying him with Bjorn Borg, and it would stop the slide that had begun with his four losses to Novak Djokovic that spring.

But Nadal wasn’t going on about his game, or his draw, or Borg, or Djokovic, or anything remotely related to the tournament. He was explaining a system he had devised to shorten the length of the season for the players who wanted it shortened—i.e., the top guys—while keeping it the same length for the guys who wanted it that way—i.e., everyone else. Nadal talked about ending the mandatory Masters 1000 events sooner and reserving the end of the year for the smaller 250-level tournaments. It got pretty complicated for a post-match presser after a routine win. On the one hand, you had to hand it to Nadal for actually trying to work out a way to change the sport rather than just lobbing out a complaint. On the other hand, you had to wonder why he bothered himself with it to that extent. Did he really believe tennis could be changed?

I’ve often wondered why Nadal, who isn't a politician, or a revolutionary like Billie Jean King, or even a rebel like Andre Agassi, has thought and talked so much about making changes to the tour. From the start, I'd thought of him as a kid wrapped up in a kind of competitive trance, who just wanted to play the game and leave the outside stuff to other people. But he's persisted, offering fixes for Davis Cup (make it a World Cup type of event every two years) and the ranking system (make it over two years as well, so players don’t hurt themselves trying to defend points). This week, in an interview with the Sydney Herald-Sun, Nadal seemed ready for a new quest, to reduce the number of tournaments played on hard courts. They’re killing his knees and he doesn’t want to have to retire at 30 and be hobbled for life.

It all came to a head over the last few days. First the London Times reported that Rafa was ready to resign his vice-president’s position on the ATP’s Player Council because he wasn’t getting anywhere with his concerns. Then, in a press conference at the Australian Open today he was asked about his role in the players' meeting that was held Saturday night, and whether he would be leading the charge on the issues he has championed. Nadal, with some agitation, said that he was tired of being a public face for the complaints, that a lot of players agreed with him, but that the “right guys” weren’t in the positions “to fight for us.” It seemed that he had finally had enough with politics.

As Nadal switched from questions in English to Spanish, you could see his agitation level rise. It turned out that he had at least one more public statement to make, and it was at the expense of his friend, rival, and the president of the Players Council, Roger Federer. Nadal criticized Federer for doing too little to improve the game and letting other players “burn” in public with their complaints, while he came off as a “gentleman" by comparison.

If [Federer] finishes his career as a rose,” Nadal said, “it's because he has an extraordinary body, but neither Murray nor Djokovic nor I will end up roses."

According to Nadal, a majority—“supermajority” in his surprisingly wonky term—of the rank and file agreed with his ideas (the ranking system, I'm guessing), but that “the structure” keeps it from happening. You have to wonder if, when he said that the tour didn’t have the right guys in there to fight for them, he meant President Federer. I’d never heard that a majority of players favored a ranking system change, or that most of them wanted the season shortened or Davis Cup revamped. A majority of top players, probably—but I assume Nadal has his reasons for saying that it goes beyond them.

This isn’t fair to Federer. While he may come across as above-it-all, Federer believes individual players shouldn’t go public with their grievances unless they’re shared by others, and as the top guy he has to weigh the concerns of everyone. Federer is also older than Rafa, and must see more limits to what can be changed by the players than the younger, reluctant firebrand. And Federer is a traditionalist at heart; he still looks at the otherwise universally accepted Hawk-Eye warily. As Nadal said today, both guys like the tour and have profited by it, but where Rafa sees ways to make it better, Federer sees negativity and bad public relations.

On the surface, you might say that Federer has the broader good in mind, while Nadal has Nadal and his knees in mind. But even while they were uttered in frustration, and will likely be regretted, Rafa’s words today did finally make me realize why he keeps tilting at windmills: He’s desperate to do anything to save his body and lengthen his career, even if he has to "burn" for it. To keep playing, he can't just leave everything else to other people and stay in his competitive zone. While Rafa was wrong to commandeer Murray and Djokovic in his cause and pit them against Federer and his “extraordinary body," Nadal does believe that he’s fighting for all players to have longer careers and, as he put it “be able to play soccer and go skiing with [their] friends” after they retire. Whether a supermajority of them agree with him as much as he thinks they do, I dont know.

Nadal has always played tilt-at-windmills, nothing is impossible tennis. He has been, for one, the only player not to accept defeat at some level to Roger Federer. But while he’s right to fight for his opinions—I agree with Rafa about the schedule and Davis Cup—he’s wrong to fight Federer this time, at least in public, and to characterize him the way he did. There’s only so much change the complex sport of tennis is going to take, no matter who runs the player council.

Besides, as much as Nadal should be able to say what he wants to say, and as much spice as a Fedal feud would bring to the Aussie Open, don't you want to see these guys get along? They can probably both agree that that's good for the game.

fmolinari2005
01-15-2012, 03:42 PM
Good article. Balanced. Nice to read that Nadal's plans involve making things better for the top players and the journeymen.

It is pretty clear that there is no simple solution to those problems. If you reduce the number of mandatory masters events, it still doesn't take away the number of points you win there. It is pretty hard imagining players letting go of points (and the money attached to it) though. It is not only the ATP team that is greedy, you know.

In the end I agree with Roger: top players are responsible for their schedule and should take the good and the bad that might come along with their decisions.

Mystique
01-15-2012, 03:43 PM
Sensible stuff from Tignor. The guy really is one of those rare analysts capable of sane writing.

rickcastle
01-15-2012, 03:43 PM
Nadal has demonstrated that he does not have what it takes to be a leader of the tennis players union. What benefits you directly is secondary to what benefits the membership as a whole. His campaigns to institute a two-year ranking system, and to shorten the season benefits, oh, er, um - him. But in benefiting him, the "vast majority" gets screwed.

Who would have been #1 under the two-year system? Him. Who would have had to have waited another year for recent success to improve rankings, and in turn more lucrative tournaments? The "vast majority."

Who would have benefited from being able to avoid the hardcourt season and focus mainly on clay? Him. Who would have been harmed by the possibility of fewer tournaments, with reduced prize money because the crowd-drawing players are sitting home? The "vast majority."

This. He should stop acting like a self appointed speaker for the "vast majority" as all his proposals are mostly self serving crap.

emotion
01-15-2012, 03:46 PM
Nadal is rapidly losing the fans he had among people who actually follow tennis

Mystique
01-15-2012, 03:47 PM
Federer. He isnt against bringing changes to the calender. He just wants there to be a consensus from all players and that it shouldnt just be about the top guys. He is just more sensible and less of a hypocrite.

nobama
01-15-2012, 03:47 PM
I wonder if #2 will ask for Fed to step down as President.

Sapeod
01-15-2012, 03:54 PM
So Nadal, of all people, is criticising Federer? Hahahahahaha. What a joke. At least Federer has some class, whereas you don't :wavey:

Sham Kay
01-15-2012, 03:54 PM
Nice to see Nadal being aggressive for once.

What we really need right now though is Novak's opinion. His words on this issue can only be influential and thought-provoking.



http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2011/08/19/1226118/467247-djokovic-sharapova.jpg

Looner
01-15-2012, 03:58 PM
Nadal is rapidly losing the fans he had among people who actually follow tennis

So tennis is starting to see the light at the end of the dark tunnel that is the period Nadal was present on the tennis circuit.

Kat_YYZ
01-15-2012, 03:58 PM
I wonder how Nadal would have reacted if Roger had suggested a 2-year ranking system when Nadal was desperately trying to catch him while only winning the French Open. :angel:

Orka_n
01-15-2012, 04:06 PM
Nadal :rolleyes: He has a playing style that is tough for his body, but instead of shaping it to fit tennis, he's trying to change tennis to fit his playing style.

And then he gets annoyed at Federer and others who do not share his self-created problems. :facepalm:

Stronga23
01-15-2012, 04:07 PM
Nadal :rolleyes: He has a playing style that is tough for his body, but instead of shaping it to fit tennis, he's trying to change tennis to fit his playing style.

And then he gets annoyed at Federer and others who do not share his self-created problems. :facepalm:

Well said my friend ;)

tektonac
01-15-2012, 04:08 PM
I will actually take Nadal's side against Federer! I mean Nadal is pretty whiney now that he's not winning so easily, but Fed is such a passive aggressive backstabbing bitch.

:lol:, pretty accurate observation.

Sham Kay
01-15-2012, 04:11 PM
Shit. This is no good. Now when they retire, the friendliest rivalry in the history of Tennis will have an asterisk next to its name.

Sham Kay
01-15-2012, 04:13 PM
Whoever gets to the Final in two weeks is right. If neither get to the final, whatever Tipsarevic thinks is right.

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 04:16 PM
It's a bad time to be in the Nadal camp:

* Lose ATP #1 ranking to Nole ... Check
* Your guy Richard Krijaeck loses ATP presidency ... Check
* Whine and cry in from of the press, look rather stupid and selfish ... Check

--

Here's what Federer is saying:
* We take this up in the proper channels, not spill it on the media
* We consider the interests of all players (lower ranked, doubles etc.) rather than just us top players

It's hard to find flaw with that stance, unless you're a Rafa tard.

Seriously Nadal is coming across as a bit whiny and selfish. This won't do him any favors.

And who made him the spokesperson for a "vast majority of players". LOL!

The prima donna must realize the business doesn't revolve around him. He needs tennis more than tennis needs him.

Exactly -If roger is saying keep it as it is and don't do anything fair enough...feel free to have a go - he's saying do it the right way - why are the rafaturds pissed with that logic?

hablovah19
01-15-2012, 04:17 PM
Rafa is such a whiner. :haha:

Jealous he won't be able to equal Federer's domination: the grueling schedule was the same when the Swiss remained #1 for such a long time. :help:

hablovah19
01-15-2012, 04:18 PM
Nadal :rolleyes: He has a playing style that is tough for his body, but instead of shaping it to fit tennis, he's trying to change tennis to fit his playing style.

And then he gets annoyed at Federer and others who do not share his self-created problems. :facepalm:

Exactly.

Saberq
01-15-2012, 04:24 PM
How old are you?

24

The reason you djokotards hate on Roger is because he dared calling Nole's obnoxious parents for what they really are, and proved Dijana that the "king wasn't dead" in 2008. And also because you know Djoker will never remotely be as great as Roger.

I could never hate Roger Federer ....I liked him a lot once ...now I am forced to root against him

So Nadal, of all people, is criticising Federer? Hahahahahaha. What a joke. At least Federer has some class, whereas you don't :wavey:


good argument

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 04:25 PM
- MuzzahLovah-I will actually take Nadal's side against Federer! I mean Nadal is pretty whiney now that he's not winning so easily, but Fed is such a passive aggressive backstabbing bitch.

Roger's only backstabbing if he promised Rafa he has his back in private than backtracked infront of the media - The only person doing anything behind backs is Rafa - who failed to consult everyone - before talking on behalf of all the pro's!

mystic ice cube
01-15-2012, 04:27 PM
Federer. He isnt against bringing changes to the calender. He just wants there to be a consensus from all players and that it shouldnt just be about the top guys.
^ This. And while I have empathy with Nadal & his issues, going public & using Federer as the scapegoat was unfair. I'm sure he might regret his words in time to come. It's not a big deal though.

juan27
01-15-2012, 04:35 PM
this is really funny : "If [Federer] finishes his career as a rose,” Nadal said, “it's because he has an extraordinary body, but neither Murray nor Djokovic nor I will end up roses."

federer base his game in technique and beatiful tennis.

nadal 99% in physicall.

nole forces his physicall to the limits for won everything in 2011 , his great changes was not the game , was the physicall.

and murray too.

if they play tennis like federer or more technical , physicall condition is not very very important.

but this guy who won everything forced his physicall and in easy matches needs 4 hours , it`s patetic

Egreen
01-15-2012, 04:39 PM
Claydal wants less tournaments in the schedule so he can play more exho$.:rolleyes:

Slice Winner
01-15-2012, 04:42 PM
The ATP should troll Nadal by replacing slow hard court tourneys with grass tourneys.

Nah that's just what I wish would happen.

Shirogane
01-15-2012, 04:44 PM
federer base his game in technique and beatiful tennis.

nadal 99% in physicall.

nole forces his physicall to the limits for won everything in 2011 , his great changes was not the game , was the physicall. A noble sacrifice, that won't be forgotten. :hug:

Saberq
01-15-2012, 04:45 PM
this is really funny : "If [Federer] finishes his career as a rose,” Nadal said, “it's because he has an extraordinary body, but neither Murray nor Djokovic nor I will end up roses."

federer base his game in technique and beatiful tennis.

nadal 99% in physicall.

nole forces his physicall to the limits for won everything in 2011 , his great changes was not the game , was the physicall.

and murray too.

if they play tennis like federer or more technical , physicall condition is not very very important.

but this guy who won everything forced his physicall and in easy matches needs 4 hours , it`s patetic


:facepalm:

tennis2tennis
01-15-2012, 04:46 PM
The ATP should troll Nadal by replacing slow hard court tourneys with grass tourneys.

Nah that's just what I wish would happen.

Ah that would be hilarious - they should speed up the rest of the surfaces too:cool:howdya like this for change:devil:

swisht4u
01-15-2012, 04:48 PM
Nadal has had poor scheduling for years.
Playing for points and money without regard to his body.

He's having a hard time doing it and it's wearing him down but it's his own fault for not scheduling properly.

He should be resting and working on his game instead of doing exos, skip a few tournaments here and there.

Why ask for the schedule to be changed when you can't manage your own schedule?

What he really wants is the tour to fit into his schedule. This would be fine but there are players who manage the schedule properly now, this would take away one of their advantages and give an advantage to Nadal.
Nadal knows this but doesn't care because it's to his advantage, that's all he cares about IMO.

He's had a great career so far, it would be too bad if that image is tarnished with self serving whining.

Kiedis
01-15-2012, 04:59 PM
Nadal and Federer both have very valid points and the situation needs to be adressed taking both into consideration.

Just keep everyone happy, less mandatories, move the WTF forward but keep events running after it. Top players can finish up a bit earlier, lower ranked guys can keep playing. I think we can all agree that finishing up the last week of November then coming back the first week of January is ridiculous. Or they could push the Aussie Open to February, same effect. Seems like a happy solution all round, even brings the greedy suits at the ATP down a peg.

+1

Fujee
01-15-2012, 04:59 PM
Why ask for the schedule to be changed when you can't manage your own schedule?


:worship:

Al_Loves_Tennis
01-15-2012, 05:00 PM
Nadal has had poor scheduling for years.
Playing for points and money without regard to his body.

He's having a hard time doing it and it's wearing him down but it's his own fault for not scheduling properly.

He should be resting and working on his game instead of doing exos, skip a few tournaments here and there.

Why ask for the schedule to be changed when you can't manage your own schedule?

What he really wants is the tour to fit into his schedule. This would be fine but there are players who manage the schedule properly now, this would take away one of their advantages and give an advantage to Nadal.
Nadal knows this but doesn't care because it's to his advantage, that's all he cares about IMO.

He's had a great career so far, it would be too bad if that image is tarnished with self serving whining.

I agree. The ATP Tour calendar is designed for EVERYONE, not just the top handful of players. Scheduling is EVERYTHING! Roger knows this. Rafa is starting to talk a lot of crap.

nobama
01-15-2012, 05:31 PM
http://www.thenational.ae/sport/tennis/roger-federer-sticks-to-schedule-while-fellow-tennis-rivals-complain

In slack moments at press conferences involving elite tennis players this year, a favoured line of questioning has been to inquire about the schedule.

It is a topic nearly certain to get a rise out of players who otherwise are plodding through another media session.

The schedule! Endless. Pitiless. Destructive. Certain to end more careers than tennis elbow.

In the past six months, Novak Djokovic has questioned the current calendar. Rafael Nadal deemed it "crazy" and "not possible", and predicted that "because of it, we will all have to retire when we are young". Andy Roddick suggested that players might need to form a union to stand up to exploitative tennis officials and tournament organisers. Andy Murray declared the schedule "messed up, and we need to change it".

Absent from the chorus of critics? Roger Federer, arguably the greatest - as well as most durable - player in tennis history.

On Friday, the Swiss for the fourth time plays in the semi-finals of the Mubadala World Tennis Championship at Zayed Sports City in Abu Dhabi.

In an electronic question-and-answer exchange with The National,he seemed to suggest that the schedule 'twas ever thus and that players control their own destinies.

"We have to remember that the season has always been long and gruelling," Federer said. "That's what makes tennis so amazing.

"Just imagine, in the old days most of the top players were also playing doubles."

He said the tennis calendar is not designed as an instrument of torture for elite players.

"I have always tried to make sure people realise that there are many players who are playing tennis and it's not just the top guys," he said. "There are other players who don't win every week and want the tournaments and need the jobs."

Players are obliged to play 16 tournaments (the four majors, the eight Masters-level tournaments and four of their choosing), and if they play fewer than 18 tournaments in a year they lose rankings points.

Certainly, Djokovic's schedule through the US Open, coinciding with his surge to the No 1 world ranking, was extremely rigorous (76 matches). But welcome to Federer's world: the 16-time slam champion has played at least 70 matches for 11 consecutive years, including 76 in 2011, when he turned age 30.

"I think the biggest challenge for the top players is managing our own schedules and not overplaying," he said. "This is key to health and long-term success."

He concedes that the issue warrants continued study, but said that some improvements already have been made. "We now have many 28 [player] draws in the ATP 250 events, we don't play three-out-of-five-set matches in the ATP Tour anymore and we will end the season earlier next year.

"We need to see what happens as a result of these changes before making any new changes."

He added that "we need to do what is right not just for the players but also for our tournaments, who are our partners in the management of the game".

He acknowledges changes in the game since his 1999 debut as a full-time player. "The slowing of the court surfaces, the string technology and the evolution of today's modern athlete has contributed to making tennis … more challenging for the athlete," Federer said.

tektonac
01-15-2012, 05:51 PM
rafa messing up with roger for the SF :lol: the next one is ... when was the last time you won a slam, 100 years ago?

bluesoleil
01-15-2012, 06:02 PM
Weird... Rafa has always been very careful and PR minded in his press conferences, and Roger has always been criticized for putting his foot in his mouth speaking his mind too much.
What's happening here???? 2012... the end of the world :lol:

BigJohn
01-15-2012, 06:13 PM
It has been a while now since Nadal behaved as the great ambassador for the sport he used to be.

Back then, he had a lot more people admiring him outside of his fan and tard base.

SERBINATOR
01-15-2012, 06:20 PM
I don't believe Federer is AGAINST shortening of Season

this was his Reply during WTF 2011

"Demands must be private and professional to the Board of Directors- only once an official request has been turned down do we ponder the public opinion arena and if its turned down are they saying no to hurt us or are there real logistical reasons and will it hurt the game in general.

As President I have consider all the player regardless of rank there has never been consensus on the length of the season - so if I use words like 'boycott' to the media I'm acting out of personal interest. Jarkko [Nieminen] and Peter [Luczak] have not said anything about the demands of the lower ranked guys and there is also the demands of doubles players to consider…

Speaking up without proper consultation is premature- if the season is shortened it should be done with most guys on board .. it’s easy for the top 10 we get offered exhibition matches and wildcards to shape our income and season how we wish, that’s not a luxury afforded to everyone…. a lot of livelihoods are at stake. "

Very Intelligent and Professional response!

Just like heaven
01-15-2012, 06:37 PM
In the past six months, Novak Djokovic has questioned the current calendar. Rafael Nadal deemed it "crazy" and "not possible", and predicted that "because of it, we will all have to retire when we are young". Andy Roddick suggested that players might need to form a union to stand up to exploitative tennis officials and tournament organisers. Andy Murray declared the schedule "messed up, and we need to change it".

Absent from the chorus of critics? Roger Federer

So Rafa was right. Many players share his opinion.
I don't believe the "I care too much about the lower ranked players" excuse. I'm sure they could find a solution to satisfy all the players, like having less mandatory tournaments for the top guys or changing the order of some tournaments.
The WTA season ends earlier, but some women still play Bali and some other smaller tournaments after the important ones are over. If it's possible for them, why isn't it possible for the ATP?
I think the problem here is money.

duong
01-15-2012, 06:40 PM
Tignor's article is interesting, as you may all know that he's a Nadal fan by heart and he really tries to understand him, and he gives an explanation about what's happening.

I think like him that Nadal is sincere in what he says, but that he's not in a position to understand the whole tour's concerns through his own problems.

His main concern is "be able to play for long". He even said that what people, the public like is oppositions between Nadal-Fed, Nadal-Djoko, Djoko-Fed, these "top-players" again and again.

He's sincerely worried and even anxious about his own future, and as he's a person full of heart and not a politician or this kind of person who looks at the grand scope of things, he thinks the other persons feel like him except "some exceptional body" (see Fed).

Hence the two-year ranking system for instance.

BUT if one looks at the current Tour from the outside as I do, what I see first is that :

- never have young players managed as hardly to emerge
- many old players manage to stay on top, see the results of the tournaments last week for instance
(I have stats to back that, will write them later)

Moreover, on the top but not only, the "Nadal generations" 1986-1987, and even 1985 and 1988, seem to be very good, whereas the later generations (1989 to 1991 esp) look very poor.

Then there's no real reason to think that some Djokovic or Murrays or even Tsongas or Gasquets or Berdychs would not be able to get great results late in their carreer. I actually do believe they may have these chances later, for instance Monfils to win Roland-Garros.

Actually from my outside eyes, the situation looks great for these generations, not that they will "burn early".

Why did Fed-Ferrer generations not burn early and his generation would burn early, while Fed-Ferrer generations had to fight against great 1985-1986-1987 young generations and the generational situation looks much better for them ?

Why does he think that ? because he's very much worried about his body. One can understand that, but why make conclusions for others ?

I think Tignor's view gives a good view about what drives Nadal here : his heart but not his reason and position of a player's representative. Fed knows that when he speaks of that, he speaks as a players' representative and someone who has a collective responsibility, he doesn't speak by his heart only.

As for "other players complaining", I'm sure there are many complaints among players, esp about the revenues given by slams, but certainly not about the 2-year ranking system (which would be a disaster for the young players who already have the highest difficulties to emerge). That everyone complains like you doesn't mean that everybody agrees with you, we see that all the time in our democracies nowadays.

And as a person who just looks at the Tour from the outside, my main concern to address would be helping young players to emerge more easily instead of "burning themselves", going intop despair and being lost for the future of tennis. Tennis needs Nadals, Djokovic and Murrays and even old Federers, but it also needs some renewal to happen in next years, anything else would be very worrying.