Press Conference "Round Tables"

I don't know about you guys, but I do routinely follow the players' press conferences. Its more out of habit than design, as I'm hoping to hear some insight on how he feels he played, and how the tournament is going. However, you do tend to get the same stock questions from the press, and the same stock responses from the player ... and overall, their body language half the time just shows to me that that they'd really rather not be there. So is there a point to them any more?

Interestingly in Roger Federer's press conference yesterday, he raised the topic ...

You know, I wish we could mix that up a bit more, make it a bit different and bit more exciting for both ends. But that's the way it is and it's become. I can take pleasure out of them, as well, so it's all okay.

Q. How would you prefer to deal with the media?

ROGER FEDERER: Just, you know, different. Sometimes instead of always doing the classic press conference maybe throwing in the occasional round tables. Maybe after a routine match where, you know, the headlines maybe are on someone else, not have me do a press conference but maybe have me do more when there was more happening. Play it more by ear. But then I understand, you know, you have international press and they need something maybe every other day from a particular player they're traveling for.

So it's hard, but I don't know if it's ever gonna change because it's become a routine now for everybody.

So I guess what he's saying is that why interview him over a routine match when there's probably nothing really to say, when the press could be concentrating more on what's really making the tennis news elsewhere. Then perhaps moving back to the star players when they really do have something to talk about. I wouldn't mind seeing a new approach to these staid interviews, so what do you think? Does Federer's idea have some mileage, or what would you like to see happen to shake things up?

Quote taken from this link.

Yes it would be more interesting as usually Roger is an astute individual and he has probably done a few thousand meaningless interviews and given a lot of boilerplate answers. But occassionally you do get some controversial stuff. Like when roddick accused Djokovic of faking injuries, which I felt was pretty low. Or when after murray had beaten Fed in master's event and fed was asked if he was impressed with murray's game and he said "not really".

Sure, on occasion they do throw things up, so there is a point to them but its what do you do to shake them up to make them more interesting? Even Federer ends by saying will it ever change because they have become a routine.

Perhaps journalists should ask edgier questions. I mean yesterday Rafa was asked the question about the speed of the surface because Federer had said it was playing slow, like clay. But Rafa was vehement in his response about how he totally disagreed and that it played nothing like clay. It wasn't a fast surface or a slow surface, just a normal hardcourt, but never like a clay court. Made me raise my eyebrow with his reaction anyway.

That's an interesting proposition from Federer, though I always find his interviews interesting, cause he's asked all kinds of questions - and he has an answer for each one of them .

What bothers me about these press conferences is that the players have to answer the questions in English, even if they don't speak well the language... so most of them probably don't say everything they have to say because of that. I don't think that's fair.
That's why I mostly read/listen to Federer's, Murray's, Roddick's (he's funny!) and, of course, Novak's interviews (when I have time).

As for Nadal, I prefer reading his interviews that were translated from Spanish... :run2:

Well, you raise a point about them having to use English in which to conduct an interview. Federer is highly proficient in the language, and Novak has a good command. When it comes to Rafa, well he's certainly got much better over the past couple of years and to be honest, I haven't seen much of JMDP's, so I'm making an assumption that he too isn't as fluent. Employing a translator might make for more livelier responses.

A very interesting article. I just wish to comment on Rafaels reaction - "Rafa was vehement in his response about how he totally disagreed and that it played nothing like clay. It wasn't a fast surface or a slow surface, just a normal hardcourt, but never like a clay court. Made me raise my eyebrow with his reaction anyway."

He must have heard this claim a million times. He works his heart out to develop his game to be competitive on the hard and fast courts, and as soon as he starts doing well in these tournaments and actually wins them, his competitors and the journalists start saying that these courts are playing like clay. It is unfair and somewhat disrespectful and I can understand why he might become irritated with this question again and again straight after a match.

Well the journalists did their job yesterday to evoke two different reactions from both players. In the link in the article above, when asked about the court, Roger said that it was pretty slow and was building a case regarding points construction that was similar to how it goes on clay, but when asked, Rafa came out with a completely different viewpoint ...

Q. Earlier today Roger said that the surface is quite slow and it feels like clay. What do you think?
RAFAEL NADAL: Never. Never can be like clay on hard because the movements are completely different. So that's makes impossible have a similar than clay when you are playing in hard, because in clay you cannot slice and you have more time. For sure I am not agree on that. The court is not very fast, not very slow, is average court. I think is normal one like probably the rest of the normal tournaments on hard. So no, I feel that the court is like every year.

The whole court speed, purple clay, green clay thing does get on my nerves too. But at least we had some real comment in the pressers for once, with a bit of edge. Roger saying he wished the court was faster, Rafa saying its a regular hardcourt like all the normal tournaments. Does sound like a bit of an agenda though.