"Federer should do More" - Nadal

First topic message reminder :

It will be interesting to see how Fed responds to this:-

http://www.sportinglife.com/tennis/australianopen2012/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=tennis/12/01/15/TENNIS_Australian_Nadal.html&BID=23811

http://www.cbssports.com/tennis/story/16877372/rafa-roger-rift-emerges-at-australian-open

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10778931

Tenez wrote:

LuvSports! wrote:

Tenez wrote: In a way very similar to Armstrong who wanted to race for the TDF and World Champinship only. Why? cause it gives the advantage to the phyiscal player at the expense of the players who can pull winners more easily.

Armstrong never really took the other grand tours or the world championships seriously as he only competed in the giro and vuelta twice collectively and really just saved himself for the TDF but you can't compare road cycling to tennis.

And why do you think he did not take the other tours seriously? All past champions before him did.

In that respect it is similar to tennis. Lance was essentially betting and preparing everything for the TDF.

Have you heard about "cycling down"?

i phrased that badly. He had his own strategy that very few followed and he often got stick for but he consistently raced in the Dauphine Libere as a warm up event to the TDF and the odd spring classic and the tour de suisse. It was a high risk strategy as his season revolved around the tour but he was unbeatable with this continued method.
I can sought of see where you are coming from but again whereas Armstrong did a handful of tournaments with one maybe two of the biggest ones but rafa would still do over a dozen if the tour was shortened.
Yes i agree he did just prepare for the tour but it was also the sponsorship's and lucrative deals. No i havent heard of cycling down.

All this over Federer sticking to his beliefs and Nadal expressing unhappiness about it.

Federer is just saying things are pretty good as it is. Two are making noise because they struggle, one of whom has a history of playing lots of extra events and who took the game to unprecedented levels of physical stress. It's a lame whine about Federer, but he's free to say what he likes about the game.

"cycling down" is an expression used by professional cyclists to describe a periods in the year where they are cleaning their bodies of doping agent. In other words they need periods where they are not going to take any drug cause using epo and other substances all year round is harmful.

If you compete all year round at a high level and use doping agent you are going to have irregular results. Some periods where you perform extremely well and others with stricking poor result (cycling down). ...or you might choose not to compete at all.

so you believe hes a cheat ye?

The forum will explode if he says yes, so I suspect a sensible answer would be 'I couldn't possibly comment'.

the cycling forum would get less response than this one probs :P my article i wrote back in november i think is the last one created

A much bigger question would be whether there is any indications of cycling down in tennis.

bogbrush wrote:All this over Federer sticking to his beliefs and Nadal expressing unhappiness about it.

Federer is just saying things are pretty good as it is. Two are making noise because they struggle, one of whom has a history of playing lots of extra events and who took the game to unprecedented levels of physical stress. It's a lame whine about Federer, but he's free to say what he likes about the game.

He is perfectly entitled to his opinion and, were he not in a position of power, that would be the end of it. As it stands he needs to acknowledge the opinions of others in the game. Also, if Federer had never utilised the option of skipping events afforded to him by his posision as an elder statesman this it could be argued that he plays all the mandatory tournaments so why shouldn't they. This is not the case. It is not just some isolated complaining. Numerous tour coaches and pundits have discussed the tour and the detrimental effect it is having in terms of increased number of injuries or players unable to take the time to heal properly from minor injuries thereby exacerbating them. It has nothing to do with Federer personally and everything to do with the tour as a whole - personalities need to be left out of it.

Do we actually know what the majority of players outside the top 10 think? Fed is on the council not just to represent the top few.
And as Rafa is on the council as well (and higher-ranked), why does he need Fed to argue the case for him?
There are 10 players on the council - if they all agree with Rafa, I suspect Fed's opinion would be of little importance, so why mention Fed specifically? If they disagree with Rafa, why only mention Fed specifically?

JuliusHMarx wrote:Do we actually know what the majority of players outside the top 10 think? Fed is on the council not just to represent the top few.
And as Rafa is on the council as well (and higher-ranked), why does he need Fed to argue the case for him?
There are 10 players on the council - if they all agree with Rafa, I suspect Fed's opinion would be of little importance, so why mention Fed specifically? If they disagree with Rafa, why only mention Fed specifically?

Hear hear, this idea that Fed goes onto the Council to say what others think is absurd.

It's just a whine.

LuvSports! wrote:so you believe hes a cheat ye?

Who Lance? I don't know!

JuliusHMarx wrote:Do we actually know what the majority of players outside the top 10 think? Fed is on the council not just to represent the top few.
And as Rafa is on the council as well (and higher-ranked), why does he need Fed to argue the case for him?
There are 10 players on the council - if they all agree with Rafa, I suspect Fed's opinion would be of little importance, so why mention Fed specifically? If they disagree with Rafa, why only mention Fed specifically?

If it is just a few then fine but there have been a lot of rumblings from numerous parties. I am not sure of the heirarchy of the council. Do they all meet with ATP / ITF or just Fed as president? We need to know the full story really. It could just be a whine or it could go deeper. Either way something has happened in a recent meeting - interesting times.

Tenez wrote:

LuvSports! wrote:so you believe hes a cheat ye?

Who Lance? I don't know!

haha well player sir well played

I can see the cycling down theory might appear to fit better in women's tennis. In men's tennis you've got Nadal and Djokovic reaching the final and entering week after week so I'm not sure the theory fits all that well.

I think Nadal should just state his opinion and not have criticised Federer directly. Federer's possible opinion is that players have to manage their schedule. It's a fair opinion, although I do think there are too many mandatory tournaments at the moment. Never liked the idea of a mandatory tournament.

Hey what does Nadal make of saying that Federer is “physically privileged“. He is perhaps saying he is just lucky to have a body resistant to injury (rather than a better training regime or a game that doesn't rely on physicality or a better planned schedule).

Henman Bill wrote:Hey what does Nadal make of saying that Federer is “physically privileged“. He is perhaps saying he is just lucky to have a body resistant to injury (rather than a better training regime or a game that doesn't rely on physicality or a better planned schedule).

In his book Rafa makes reference to Fed having the perfect DNA for tennis, whereas others have to work at it - or something like that. Read it in the shop - I'll get the paperback when it's out. Anyone have the exact quote to hand?

But this is what's killing me. We watch sport essentially for those natural skills. Nadal is complaining cause he had to do it the hard way. It would not cross his mind that making ways for the physical game would be unfair to natural players.

We shoudl allow more MTOs, coahing on court, more time between points and a shorter season for a longer preparation. Anything that can favour the his game over the skilled talented players is good in his book.

Oh and yeah, let's make it a 2 year guarantee ranking!

No qualms!

Tenez wrote:But this is what's killing me. We watch sport essentially for those natural skills. Nadal is complaining cause he had to do it the hard way. It would not cross his mind that making ways for the physical game would be unfair to natural players.

If you take out all the players that have to work harder than Federer the game would be very dull. Unless he is fast enough to run round the net and receive his own serve!

carrieg4 wrote:

Tenez wrote:But this is what's killing me. We watch sport essentially for those natural skills. Nadal is complaining cause he had to do it the hard way. It would not cross his mind that making ways for the physical game would be unfair to natural players.

If you take out all the players that have to work harder than Federer the game would be very dull. Unless he is fast enough to run round the net and receive his own serve!

It's not as black and white: Federer and the rest. There are tons of very talented players out there. they are simply making little impression cause the physical side of teh game is what really makes the difference, especially at slams.

Well to be clearer, they all have a ratio talent/physique more lor less leaning towards one or the other. But in todays tennis those with the fitness advantage have a very big advantage due to the fcators discussed.

amritia3ee wrote:

sportslover wrote:

amritia3ee wrote:You're just some sadistic hatah who spends his life spreading hatred about Nadal.

Apart from the other Federer fanboys & girls I doubt if his views matter much at all to anyone else.

Too true.

Personally I'm interested in what Tenez has to say (despite not always agreeing with him). And I think others are too. He's one of the best posters, brings up interesting subjects and can argument his points very well, unlike some others.

But continue your mini-conversation with your Rafafriends, and keep spamming the :laugh:s at each other. I take more interest in what more serious posters have to say.

Are you hinting I am not a serious poster

I suggest you read these articles mate, before making attacking comments:
https://www.606v2.com/t20972-the-truth-roger-federer
https://www.606v2.com/t20845-is-our-great-era-really-debunked-point-by-point-dissection

You might not agree with me but I don't see how you can say I'm not serious/don't really believe what I say.

At the start of Nadal's career i found it difficult to understand the statements of team Nadal, but after years of practice it's actually quite easy:

Nadal: "i'm tired and i have pains" basically means: "i'm fine but i like to be the underdog"

So this interview should be read:
Nadal: "he is physically privileged" means: "he is technically privileged which benefits his physique"
and
Nadal: "but to finish your career with pain in all areas of your body is not positive" means: "they must change the tour because i'm not good enough to play a less demanding game"

The guy is an open book to me.

gallery play wrote:Nadal: "but to finish your career with pain in all areas of your body is not positive" means: "they must change the tour because i'm not good enough to play a less demanding game"

The guy is an open book to me.

Chymedron...thanks for your kind words. I don't usually read what amri writes. So I discover it when quoted and it comforts me in not reading it.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Henman Bill wrote:Hey what does Nadal make of saying that Federer is “physically privileged“. He is perhaps saying he is just lucky to have a body resistant to injury (rather than a better training regime or a game that doesn't rely on physicality or a better planned schedule).

In his book Rafa makes reference to Fed having the perfect DNA for tennis, whereas others have to work at it - or something like that. Read it in the shop - I'll get the paperback when it's out. Anyone have the exact quote to hand?

Here you go JHM-

"His physique – his DNA – seems perfectly adapted to tennis. You get these blessed freaks of nature in other sports, too."

But surely Nadal isn't saying he himself hasn't got natural talent... or is he?

It's amazing how the players that moan about the length of the tour etc manage to make it to a load of lucrative exhibitions...

amritia3ee wrote:I suggest you read these articles mate, before making attacking comments:
https://www.606v2.com/t20972-the-truth-roger-federer
https://www.606v2.com/t20845-is-our-great-era-really-debunked-point-by-point-dissection

You might not agree with me but I don't see how you can say I'm not serious/don't really believe what I say.

Nobody could ever match you for irony.

"Responding to the suggestion that
Federer disliked players complaining
openly about problems on the tour
because it tarnished the image of
tennis "

So Federer the president of the players council dislikes talks because it gives tennis a bad image? Another Sepp Blatter. Just a much thinner one. He must also be the reason doping in tennis is a sacred topic too. I thought the ITF was to blame.
Got to read on this and it seems there are problems a majority of players have agreed on but Federer is doing little to address this as president because he is busy protecting his legacy and image rather than seeing the game benefit in the long run and for future generations.
Don't see why Nadal will openly criticize him if he does not have other players agreeing with him.

Manadatory tournaments cannot be reduced, coz people go to ATP 250 when the big names feature in it, so if Roger doesnt agree with it thats wise, but on the other hand they could reduce the amount of masters played, so every country do get the fair share of players for their ATP 250's and 500's coz the game can only become global quantity if more top players play in different country.

Rafa's concern is genuine too, but he has the easy solution of skipping tournaments, no body is penalizing him, so till a solution is found he could stop playing tournaments which he deems as unfit for his health, but vociferous appeal like this is not gonna do any good to the lovely tennis community.

invisiblecoolers wrote:Manadatory tournaments cannot be reduced, coz people go to ATP 250 when the big names feature in it, so if Roger doesnt agree with it thats wise, but on the other hand they could reduce the amount of masters played, so every country do get the fair share of players for their ATP 250's and 500's coz the game can only become global quantity if more top players play in different country.

Rafa's concern is genuine too, but he has the easy solution of skipping tournaments, no body is penalizing him, so till a solution is found he could stop playing tournaments which he deems as unfit for his health, but vociferous appeal like this is not gonna do any good to the lovely tennis community.

I largely agree. Maybe they can reduce the number of mandatory Masters for each player without reducing the number of tournaments overall. A player can not skip one at the moment without losing both those points and the points from their next best on the the subsequent 12 months.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/Rankings-FAQ.aspx#injury

Seems harsh.

Simple_Analyst wrote:Got to read on this and it seems there are problems a majority of players have agreed on

You'll be giving us links for this, I presume? By 'majority', you mean at least 50-60 players out of the top 100?

Just heard the Europsort commentator gushing with praise over a Fed 202km/h serve, such is the man's god like grip on those in the Tennis world

Nothing wrong with this, we need out heroes and Fed is certainly one of them

But as SA implies the question has to be asked, why on earth doesn't he use his huge status and influence to make the tournament even better.

Nadal knockers can sniggger at Rafa's badly timed press conference as much as they want - the fact is Fed is culpable. A legend who these days moans about the court surfaces to suit his defeat or struggles (Paris 2010, US11) but stays strangely mute when he wins (Paris 2011)

Some may think, that he's more interested in his image away from Tennis than he is about influencing the next phase of the game

Tennis has never been so popular or as good (in my opinion). This is thanks to Roger whose sublime Tennis of the 2004/5 period, I doubt we will ever see again plus his admittedly justifiable (on the whole) good looking good guy image. He's the George Clooney of Tennis

Well like Mr Clooney does, maybe Roger should be also helping his industry to better itself and for that I support Rafa - no matter how desperate his words seemed

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Simple_Analyst wrote:Got to read on this and it seems there are problems a majority of players have agreed on

You'll be giving us links for this, I presume? By 'majority', you mean at least 50-60 players out of the top 100?

“The vast majority of players have this
same opinion. He [Federer] has got a
different opinion. If the vast majority
have one opinion, and a small
minority think differently, maybe it’s
them who are wrong.”

www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/atptour/9017148/Australian-Open-2012-Roger-Federers-role-on-Player-Council-under-threat-as-Rafael-Nadal-reveals-grievances.html

So Julius so why would Nadal say the above to the media? Just for the sake of it?

Perhaps Nadal said it because he is busy protecting his legacy and image rather than seeing the game benefit in the long run and for future generations.

Fact is, we don't know what the majority think. And if they do think that, then they've got 9 other players on the council to say it for them and Fed can easily be pushed to the side.

So after all the Fedworshipping on this thread, this is what another player had to say:

'Former No. 3-ranked Nikolay
Davydenko said he didn't understand
why the 16-time Grand Slam
champion wasn't supporting the push
to address player grievances,
including the schedule and the
distribution of prize money.
Davydenko's remarks came a day after
Rafael Nadal criticized his Swiss rival
for sitting back while others speak out
and "burn themselves."

"I don't know why Roger is not
supporting the players, " Davydenko
said. "Because he don't want ... any
problems. He's nice guy. He's winning
Grand Slams. He's from Switzerland.
He's perfect.
"He don't want to do anything, he just
try to be an outsider from this one."

www.espn.go.com/tennis/aus12/story/_/id/7466882/nikolay-davydenko-baffled-roger-federer-silence-grievances

So it seems there are lot of problems the president of the players council doing nothing about.
Davydenko however did not support a shorter season.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Perhaps Nadal said it because he is busy protecting his legacy and image rather than seeing the game benefit in the long run and for future generations.

Fact is, we don't know what the majority think. And if they do think that, then they've got 9 other players on the council to say it for them and Fed can easily be pushed to the side.

So it's OK for Fed to want to get involved in numerous projects outside Tennis - certainly more than any player I can remember, but he doesn't have a duty to use this influence for the industry that gave him his status?

Don't you find it a bit strange, how mute he is - except when it suits him? If it's a case of he's astutely aware that the game in it's current form, favours him - then fair play. But then let's not hear him moaning about court surfaces, as he sometimes does and then disappear. Either use your status on a consistent level for the good of the game or say nowt.

Read the article and the links.

I am with Rafa on this. Not that I agree with the 'fresh as a daisy' comment. all players have access to the same technology, physio's and dietary requirements out there. To dismiss this is sheer laziness on Rafa's behalf. Roger conditions himself better than the rest down to the tour? Think again.

However I am with him in regards to the length of the tour. This year with the Olympics is se to finish earlier than last year. I am not sure how in god's name they are going to be in a physical condition come the WTF which is nearly 2 weeks earlier than 2011. I think if Federer is to look out for the 'welfare' of the players, this should be something that he should give his backing to.

Before the Nadal fans bash Federer, they might want to cast their minds back to someone asking for 'Protected Ranking' which clearly was to the advantage of one player, and yet this had no backing what so ever.

banbrotam wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:Perhaps Nadal said it because he is busy protecting his legacy and image rather than seeing the game benefit in the long run and for future generations.

Fact is, we don't know what the majority think. And if they do think that, then they've got 9 other players on the council to say it for them and Fed can easily be pushed to the side.

So it's OK for Fed to want to get involved in numerous projects outside Tennis - certainly more than any player I can remember, but he doesn't have a duty to use this influence for the industry that gave him his status?

Don't you find it a bit strange, how mute he is - except when it suits him? If it's a case of he's astutely aware that the game in it's current form, favours him - then fair play. But then let's not hear him moaning about court surfaces, as he sometimes does and then disappear. Either use your status on a consistent level for the good of the game or say nowt.

This is nonsense. He speaks when he believes there is something to say. I'm sorry if you want to proscribe a rule where he has to come out and speak about everything or nothing, but there you are.

You assume that the good of the game is served by reducing events so players can prepare themselves even more intensively to make tennis an even more physically destroying sport than it is now.

Maybe, just maybe, Federer has a bit more intelligence than that and is able to figure three or more steps ahead and realise that the last thing the game needs is to encourage the balance yet further in the favour of the runners.

Simple_Analyst wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Simple_Analyst wrote:Got to read on this and it seems there are problems a majority of players have agreed on

You'll be giving us links for this, I presume? By 'majority', you mean at least 50-60 players out of the top 100?

“The vast majority of players have this
same opinion. He [Federer] has got a
different opinion. If the vast majority
have one opinion, and a small
minority think differently, maybe it’s
them who are wrong.”

www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/atptour/9017148/Australian-Open-2012-Roger-Federers-role-on-Player-Council-under-threat-as-Rafael-Nadal-reveals-grievances.html

So Julius so why would Nadal say the above to the media? Just for the sake of it?

Maybe Nadal should grow a pair and do his work on the Council rather than waiting for Uncle Roger to do it for him.

Free speech, and all that.

They have 4 and 5 weeks break all along the year. They hardly play from September to March. Sure they have the AO cutting those long breaks but they have also over 5 weeks after Wimbledon.

It's teh way Nadal plays that is wrong. He shoudl start to play within the rule to start with. Then he will realise he will have no choice but to go for more risky shots, then he'll realise he may not win as much and have plenty of time for himself. Haven't we heard Tni saying that they shoudl change the time rule too?

Egoism at its best.

It's a disgrace to not only impose a slow rhythm on court and then impose a shorter season to suit his "cycles"!

So Davydenko doesn't want a shorter season and Rafa does? And we can't be certain what the others think about it, because we haven't heard directly.
Davy wants to concentrate on prize money but Rafa makes no mention of it.
What is the players' main concern then? Season length, prize money?
Which side should Fed choose? Davydenko's? Rafa's? Rafa is more popular than Davy, so should Fed side with Rafa just to be popular?

I think Nadal and Federer should have a thumb war infront of the council to determine once and for all the future of the game.

When it was the 2 year protected ranking Federer's line was the need to consider the interests of lower ranked players. I thought he was right then - I don't know what the precise basket of issues is this time around and that's important. One of the troubles with the tour is that there are virtually no issues around which all interested parties can group together. Tournaments and lower ranked players want more participation by top players to increase income and interest, top players want less. Making less mandatory tournaments would probably greatly reduce the amount of money coming into tennis.

On the face of it Nadal's concerns seemed to be more for the benefit of the top players but Davydenko's intervention suggests it's wider than that. I want to know what the 'majority' thinks and why and what Federer thinks and why. If there's a disconnect he has his work cut out if he wants to continue to be their representative - particularly if he's pursuing his own agenda or wanting a quiet life - if there is not it's a shame that Nadal, and perhaps latterly Davydenko, have made this quite so personal. Whichever, these comments make it very difficult for Federer to ignore it publicly and I want to hear what he has to say.

Julius clearly two cases so far the president of the players council willing to do nothing about. Clearly there a few. Like Davy said, he is too interested in protecting his perfect image than the interest of the game. Unless he thinks it will suit him hence his consistent moaning about court surfaces. Didn't you see how muted he was at a Paris masters last year just because he won it? Despite it being way slower than 2010. A rather selfish interest one will conclude.

S_A should Fed side with Rafa or Davy (who disagree with each other)?

No it seems he is not siding with any of them. Infact, suprising as he was backing a shorter season at the end of 2010.
Clearly he is not willing to speak on anything.

I mean, who do you think he should side with - should Fed come out against Davy and support a shorter season? Would Davy then say "Well done Roger, I'm glad you've spoken out."?

Julius you clearly don't understand this. It seems he is not even addressing any of the issues raised. That is the issue here. Doesn't matter who he backs. Prize money and tour schedule are different topics.

Simple_Analyst wrote:Julius you clearly don't understand this. It seems he is not even addressing any of the issues raised. That is the issue here. Doesn't matter who he backs. Prize money and tour schedule are different topics.

Not speaking out publicly doesn't mean not addressing the issue. If he's got a group of players saying 'Shorter season', at least one of whom is on the council and can speak for that group, and another group saying 'not shorter season' then any public statement is going to cause even more division and disgruntlement. Maybe it's better to put the game first and sort it out behind closed doors. Or maybe he figure's he'll concentrate on tennis for the AO and consider it afterwards, the meanie!

Julius here is Federer backing a shorter season . No one knows what his views are on it now. We just know amongst other issuesz he is protecting his perfect image and telling others not to voice their opinions.

www.sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/news/story?id=5783753