Did Roger's decision not to play DC make any difference to you? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Did Roger's decision not to play DC make any difference to you?

Rogiman
02-14-2006, 07:53 AM
Personally I'm glad he didn't play, he saved himself for the real ones and I don't care one bit about DC (which, IMO, is a lame attempt at making tennis look like a team sport, as I've said many times).
Roger has many other more significant goals to achieve that would make the swiss proud, and since he almost always wins anyway I always found it bizarre that he should spend all that energy only to end-up losing despite doing nothing wrong.

But I hear many people bitching about it, and I suspect the vast majority of them are just Federer-bashers looking for an opportunity to attack, so I post this thread/poll to find out what the fans think.

Go ahead, vote, express yourselves.

prima donna
02-14-2006, 08:02 AM
I'm not sure, there's a bit of indifference here and of course that has to do with the fact that I feel Roger would like to participate, it's just that the Swiss Team lacks the necessary talent to be considered an actual threat to win DC.

In any event, it takes a load of pressure off Roger's shoulders and gives him time to rest up, but with regard to the importance of DC - debatable and the opinion varies from person to person.

It's considered an intriguing event from my viewpoint, because of the simple fact that it's the only time you see how much passion these players have for their
countries or their nations as a whole, it's a thing of beauty.

Fact remains, Roger did need the time off and in the long run this is beneficial.

Puschkin
02-14-2006, 08:08 AM
Personally I'm glad he didn't play, he saved himself for the real ones and I don't care one bit about DC (which, IMO, is a lame attempt at making tennis look like a team sport, as I've said many times).

:yeah: I could not have said it better.

bokehlicious
02-14-2006, 08:12 AM
I suspect the vast majority of them are just Federer-bashers looking for an opportunity to attack

I suspect it too.

My swiss view is clear, I am a lot much prouder of Roger's personnal achievement, Slams victories and seeing the swiss flag next to the #1 is far enough.

Maybe in one or two years, DC should be a target for Switzerland, but we have to wait to see how great Wawrinka can really get, if he's able to spot the top 20, yes, we'll definitely have a big chance to win that event... But this year it was obviously too early, even if Roger played.

nobama
02-14-2006, 11:49 AM
Problem is people don't back themselves up with facts. Someone in GM said it was OK for Lleyton to miss DC because of all the times he's played, but it wasn't for Roger. But he didn't know that Roger and Lleyton have played the same number of matches. He just assumed that Roger skips out on DC a lot because that's the impression that's out there. If people are going to take a crack at Roger then they need to be fair and do the same to Nadal and Hewitt.

But really they need to be honest and admit that a player will be remembered more for #of GS wins and weeks/years at #1 than how many times they won DC. For some players DC is huge because they'll never be #1 and may never win a slam or certainly not more than one. If another player was in Roger's position with the possibility of winning a non-calendar slam AND a calendar slam I'm guessing that would be their main focus and everythingn else would be secondary, including DC.

1sun
02-14-2006, 12:00 PM
im not toooooo bothered but would have liked him to play. the quarters owuld have been belerus on clay so a nice easy win into the semis, and who knows what could have happened. they were in with a decent chance to win it all. and we all know that down line , when rogers greatest comes up, people will bring up DC and say 'well he never won that'.

nobama
02-14-2006, 02:17 PM
im not toooooo bothered but would have liked him to play. the quarters owuld have been belerus on clay so a nice easy win into the semis, and who knows what could have happened. they were in with a decent chance to win it all. and we all know that down line , when rogers greatest comes up, people will bring up DC and say 'well he never won that'.You really think it's going to matter? Of course his career isn't over yet so he just may win DC one day. But many consider Pete Sampras GOAT - I think Tennis magazine rated him #1 player in their top 40 of all time - and he never won the French. Andre Agassi has won all slams, Olympic gold medal and DC yet he's not considered GOAT. I'd love to see Roger win DC, but I'd love to see him win RG and complete a "Roger slam" even more.

bokehlicious
02-14-2006, 02:32 PM
they were in with a decent chance to win it all.

Even with Roger, Wawrinka would remain a weak link against teams like US on non-clay, Argentina on clay or Croatia on non-clay. Even France would be favorite on any surface too :shrug: .

I feel that we'll have much more chances in the next years, if Wawrinka keep improving.

SUKTUEN
02-14-2006, 03:20 PM
if He Feel Tired and Hurt, of cousre he not really to play.

RonE
02-14-2006, 03:38 PM
I second Rogiman's opinion- Davis Cup at this stage of Roger's career is more of an interference. I am personally happy at least that he will have the time to prepare for the claycourt season without having to worry about DC. At this stage of Roger's career I think improving his results on the clay and getting the French Open are much more important.

LCeh
02-14-2006, 04:11 PM
As a fan, his physical well being goes before everything else. If he felt he wasn't physically fit and ready enough to play DC, then he shouldn't play, and since he pulled out from Rotterdam, he probably needed a long rest. He said in his newsletter that it took a lot of energy out of him during AO, so he probably made the right decision.

I would like to see him win DC one day, cause I think he wants to win it too, and the atmosphere in DC is always great. But right now the rest of his team is not quite up there yet, they are improving, but they can't beat the top guys yet. But I hope Roger will play the one in September, or else if the team loses they will be out of the world group next year.

bokehlicious
02-14-2006, 04:53 PM
But I hope Roger will play the one in September, or else if the team loses they will be out of the world group next year.

I read an article on Monday in which he would have said he plans to help the team in September. Fortunately.

nobama
02-14-2006, 05:44 PM
I see Peter Bodo (I call him Bozo :lol: ) had something to say about those not playing DC: Granted, I haven’t watched many DC ceremonies lately, but the fact that Pat spoke, and the content of his remarks, were novel and welcome. As I wrote before the tie, I love Davis Cup and reject all this baloney about what a huge burden it is for the players. It's no more a "burden" than the schedule. If you want to play a schedule that doesn't kill you, and Davis Cup as well, you can. Just get your face out of the money trough.

Notice that the only players whining, protesting, or indulging in the “maybe I’ll play, maybe I won’t” game are the gazillionaires like Lleyton Hewitt, Roger Federer, and Andre Agassi. They can’t find room on the schedule for Davis Cup because it conflicts with . . . what, some bogus, meaningless and utterly forgettable tournament that happens to offer two or three hundred K in appearance money to top stars?

Please.

You don’t hear broke journeymen from Slovakia or Belarus or Finland whining about the “economic burden” or “scheduling hardship” of Davis Cup. So let us praise the John McEnroes and Andy Roddicks and Ivan Ljubicics who are there, always there, when Davis Cup calls. For there isn’t a better competition in all of sports; I’ll write another post on that subject for the next DC round in April.I'm sorry but I think this is a crock of shit. In case Peter didn't know, Roger didn't just skip DC but Rotterdam as well. And I'm guessing he gets decent appearance money to play there. It's not all about money. :rolleyes: And not everyone agrees that DC is the best competition in all of sports. Maybe he and JMac think DC is the greatest thing ever, but Pete Sampras is remembered more for his 14 GS titles, 7 Wimbledon titles and 6x year-end #1 than how many times the US won DC while he was playing.

I just get annoyed when these writers assume guys like Roger are just a bunch of greedy bastards. Because #1 I don't think they are and #2 in comparison to other sports tennis players don't make that much $$. I mean the average prize for winning a golf tournament (non-slam) is probably $500,000 to 700,000 USD if not more. This week in San Jose the payout for the winner is less than $60,000 USD. Roger maybe gets a half a mil fee to play in Dubai. Tiger Woods reportedly got $3 mil USD to show up there earlier this year. Roger would never get that kind of dough to show up anywhere. Last year Roger won 11 out of 14 tournaments including 2 slams. The earliest he lost in a tournament was the QF. He earned around $6 million USD official prize money. Compare that with Tiger Woods who won 6 tournaments (also including couple slams) and he walked away with over $10 million USD official prize money.

nobama
02-14-2006, 05:54 PM
I second Rogiman's opinion- Davis Cup at this stage of Roger's career is more of an interference. I am personally happy at least that he will have the time to prepare for the claycourt season without having to worry about DC. At this stage of Roger's career I think improving his results on the clay and getting the French Open are much more important.I totally agree with you but the DC jingoists never will. They think DC is more important than anything and you're just a selfish bastard if you don't play. Maybe if the Swiss had a really reliable #2 and a decent doubles team they'd have a better shot and wouldn't always have to rely on Roger. Wawrinka is definately getting better but as others have pointed out he's not a safe bet yet.

MissMoJo
02-14-2006, 06:31 PM
For there isn’t a better competition in all of sports;
mmkay,Bodo continues to make ridiculous statements with no rhyme or reason

Rogiman
02-14-2006, 06:44 PM
mmkay,Bodo continues to make ridiculous statements with no rhyme or reason
Yeah, hard to believe sombody pays this idiot to write such nonsense...

NYCtennisfan
02-15-2006, 01:05 AM
I totally agree with you but the DC jingoists never will.

Hey there, you are using my phrases. :)

In any case, I don't understand why people cannot abide different viewpoints. If somebody really loves Davis Cup and thinks that it is a big part of tennis and all...great. Good for them.

However, if someone does not care at all about an event that seems rather silly and nationalistic, then they shouldn't be thought of as "selfish" or "ignorant" about tennis or what not.

I'm sure Roger does care about this event and would one day like to win it, but in the grand scheme of things, Davis Cup is not what makes one's tennis legacy. The three greatest Davis Cup players, Borg, JMAC, and Becker are known for many things besides their Davis Cup greatness. Davis Cup simply added to their greatness, but they would've been great regardless.

There are a few basic reasons posters/fans and other like to bash players who don't play Davis Cup, Fed in particular.

1) It is a thinly-veiled attack on Fed because he doesn't seem to lose in any other tournament.

2) It is being "selfish" and apparently "playing for one's country" proves you are less selfish. Is not playing in a silly competition truly being "selfish" especially if one has played in that said competition multiple times? I guess it can be labeled selfish because you are not gaining ranking points, the event might drain you of energy from other tournaments, etc. but itsn't this a player's job? To stay in top condition so they can perform in tournaments around the world?

3) Some fans believe that it takes away from the competition i.e Davis Cup when the best players don't play so in theory, these players are hurting the game by hurting one of its core competitions. Maybe their country or favorite players are playing and so they want all the good players there to give meaning to a pretty irrelevant competition. Really now, does anyone really care that Federer or X or Y did not play Davis Cup? Does anyone really even care who wins? Croatia won this thing a few months ago and now it has all started again. Shouldn't there be some time for a country to enjoy their victory and to give it some deeper meaning?

4) They truly and earnestly believe in the competition and what it stands for.

Tennis is a sport that makes money for some and theoretically provides enjoyment for fans. It is up to these fans to find enjoyment where they will. If it is Davis Cup, fine. If it is clay court tennis or grass court tennis, or indoor tennis, then fine. If it is watching women's tennis or mixed-doubles action, fine. Whatever is your cup of tea, go with it, but don't shove it down anyone else's throat. If Davis Cup has meaning for you, great. Enjoy the tennis. It doesn't have any meaning or me and I don't pay much attention to it. A good match here and there is great, but the supposed spirit of the competition doesn't move me or resonate inside of me.

nobama
02-15-2006, 04:38 AM
Great post NYC. And we must point out that most of those ragging on Roger for not playing DC are NOT Swiss. On Roger's website, the Swiss fans (some of whom were there) totally understand why Roger didn't play and specifically said it has nothing to do with alleged problems between Roger and the Federation. Also one poster mentioned that Stan said that Roger was in contact with the team throughout the weekend. Also Stan said that he and Roger keep in touch throughout the year and Roger gives him advice on his game. And Roger of course had great things to say about Stan in his recent newsletter. So if the Swiss fans and the rest of the team understand and accept his decision everyone else should too.

My problem with Peter Bodo's blog entry was the insinuation that Roger skipped DC is because he's greedy and wants to save himself for smaller events where he gets large apperance fees. If that was really the case then why did Roger skip Rotterdam where he's defending champ? Seems to me Bodo doesn't understand just how much tennis Roger has played - going deep in almost every event he enters - and that he feels the need to listen to his body and save himself for upcoming important events like RG. Believe me Roger winning RG is far more important than Switzerland winning DC.

LCeh
02-15-2006, 04:44 AM
To be fair with Bodo, he was probably just making a generalization and made a list of top players who is not playing DC, and then pointing out some stuff they do instead. I don't think he was specifically attacking Roger, just that Roger happened to be a top player who didn't play DC.

But I have to say that this Bodo guy is very quick to pass judgements to players. When he is on the mark he is great, but when he is wrong it makes him look like a complete idiot. He pretty much leaves himself with no room for error when he writes articles this way.

bokehlicious
02-15-2006, 05:51 AM
Also one poster mentioned that Stan said that Roger was in contact with the team throughout the weekend. Also Stan said that he and Roger keep in touch throughout the year and Roger gives him advice on his game. And Roger of course had great things to say about Stan in his recent newsletter.

Have you also read that in a post DC match press conference this weekend Stan defended Roger when a Swiss journalist asked him if he were not a bit bitter that Roger was not there to help him ? Stan became angry and answered that he perfecty understood Roger's decision and that the journalists should give Roger a break with that ! :)

Dirk
02-15-2006, 09:14 AM
Roger made the right move. He has given himself fully to the team now they need to earn his respect by showing they will help him. Roger can't do it by himself anymore.

nobama
02-15-2006, 11:06 AM
I see James Blake lost R1 to a quali at SAP Open and in GM a few posters said it's because of DC and how DC takes a lot out of players. Ok, then I'm very glad Roger skipped DC. But Blake only had one match that meant anything. The 5th rubber was a dead rubber and they only played best 2 out of 3. So I can't believe Blake was that drained that it would be expected he lose a match like this. Seems to me Blake is still inconsistent. He'll never be top 10 with early round losses like this.

SUKTUEN
02-15-2006, 12:27 PM
I support Roger in all time