As a Fed fan, I've always defended his decision not to play too many DC ties, seeing as though Switzerland has little chance of winning the thing anyway, even with him.

However, I am beginning to wonder a little bit. Surely at the moment his #1 ranking isn't in so much danger that he couldn't, say, skip Dubai and play Davis Cup instead, if he is worried of playing too many matches?

I guess it shows that he's not taking his good results for granted, and knows how hard it is to keep it up. Nonetheless, I would have just liked to see him in the tie against Spain. :shrug:

What do you think? Is he making the right decision by staying out of the first round, or is he, to put it bluntly, just being selfish?

can of worms time MJT.......

I would suspect that Federer has found himself a winning formula - which includes his schedule - and would prefer to stick to it. I could be wrong, but considering that the players all complain about the lack of any time off, could it be that Fed is manufacturing that time off for himself? So he starts the season with the AO, wins (of course) and then goes off for another break before he starts the clay and grass season, which really don't give him the chance for another long break. If he puts the Davis cup in there, he's got to be at the top of his game, and probably playing 3 matches over 3 days. Federer must be as worried as any other player about injuries so is making sure he takes every precuation possible against it.

having said that, i would have loved to see him play Nadal this w/e :(

I think it's disappointing, but explicable and fair enough.

* In 2005 he had what could have been a career-ending injury. He knows from experience not to take his fitness for granted.

* It is probable that he has as good a chance as he will ever have of taking RG this year or next.

* He really needs to play at least 14 tournaments in a year (4GS, Masters Cup, at least 6 MS, and 4 others) - which for him on this form means 85 odd matches - about the same as Davydenko when a high proportion of Feds are stressful matches at the business end of a tournament against the best opposition

* He would carry the Swiss team on his own and a victory would be extremely unlikely - he is entitled to bide his time until Wawrinka et al are good enough for the Swiss team to mount a real challenge, by which time he should be right on Sampras' record.

* At the moment he always plays in the play-off/relegation tie to keep Switzerland in the World Group

* Come the end of 2008 (if he keeps up his form) he is likely to remain a none-too shabby player with, or close to, the GS and No. 1 records, possibly with an Olympic gold in his ass pocket when he may come fresh and enthusiastically to the DC Challenge

* It is hardly new for someone in his position to pick and choose, Agassi and Sampras both did whereas if they had played DC every year with the backing of the likes of Courier and Chang the US should have won pretty much the lot.

If i was Fed, i would want to win the Davis cup at some stage. If he is going to win everything else he might as well go for that too.

It is this selfishness and mindset MJT that has brought Federer where he is at the top. The Swiss should thank Fed and his selfishness as he is putting a Swiss flag wherever he goes and rewriting the tennis record book. Without being so single-minded it is almost impossible to achieve great things.

Putting a Swiss flag on a Grand Slam is probably harder and more valued than putting one on the DC.

But I am sure that in due course, he will want to get that cup too. I think the Swiss are the luckiest people tennis wise and should be the last to complain.

Did Sampras ever win davis cup i am not sure? :unsure:

Indeed he did Murraynator, almost single-handedly. USA played Russia in the 95 Davis Cup final in Moscow - the Russians chose a very slow clay surface. Not only did Sampras hammer the brilliant Kafelnikov in straight sets, but he also ground out a 5 setter against Chesnokov, and partnered Todd Martin to the vital doubles victory. Supposed clay expert Jim Courier actually lost both his rubbers (although I believe the final one was dead).

Well, Roger is very keen on playing in the Olympics, so I guess that he has no qualms about representing his country. :)

In fact I think that he has a particular soft spot for the Olympics as he actually met Mirka in the Olympic village when playing there, in 2004 I think..

I agree with Tenez. Federer's grand slam titles have done more for Swiss tennis than a Davis Cup title can ever do.
Regarding Sampras, I believe the main reason why his interest in the Davis Cup dissolved after 1995 was arriving back home in the USA and seeing that media didn't give a damn about the triumph. Tennis was significantly bigger in the States back then than it is now, and seeing that hia heroics had gone virtually unnoticed in his homeland must have made him question the point of continuing to play in the competition.

Hi Tenez.I agree with you about Fed's wise decision not to play the Davis Cup,especially as he's always played when necessary to keep us in the world group.Maybe thanks to Roger people might know where Switzerland is now and I'll no longer be asked if I speak Swedish when I say I live in Switzerland. :doh:

:D

As said, he will do his best to win the cup soon enough.....But this time only I will be rooting for France of course against Fed.

;)

I think he's being selfish. He's not playing in any tournament for a whole month after the Oz Open and he had ages off before that too. I hope he doesn't win any Olympic medal as he doesn't deserve to represent his country. He's not even there to support them. Rafa is sick and he's still there for his country with his physical presence. It's not like Roger has had to play gazillions of five setters either - he breezes through his tournaments. I don't get him at all!

:o

Once thing that annoyed me about Goran, though I was his biggest fan, was that when playing - especially at Wimbledon - he would wear his Craotian bandana and talk about how much he wanted to win for Croatia as his country was going through a war. That was the wrong attitude. He shoudl have been much more focused, selfish and fight his own war....then he would have probably won his Wimbledon earlier and then Crotia would have had a Wimbledon champion earlier.

A beautiful story that finished very well though.

I'm kind of ambivalent about the Davis Cup. It's on far too often, for starters, and clogs up an already busy season.

Also Roger fulfills pretty much all of his obligations each season.. and it's not as if he's made any false promises here.

It's his call.. I doubt that many people in Switzerland will hold it against him. fedrules has confirmed as much.. and I doubt that Tennis Veritas is too fussed either. They're too busy enjoying him breaking records left right and centre.. speaking of which, that record of consecutive weeks at number one is just about to be broken I would think.

Of course I disagree with your sentiments re: his Olympic medal. Of course he'd deserve one.

Maybe he's selfish, but any champion tennis player would tell you that this is a prerequisite for staying at the summit of the game as it's one thing to get to the top, but another thing completely to stay there for a sustained period.

And whether a month off is too much is completely his call. It does seem quite a lot to me and you, but then again having not played on the ATP tour (and I presume you ahven't too) what do we know? The end of season break is short as it is.. He is probably recharging his batteries further after a very long season last year, and regardless of the length of his matches, last year he played more than anyone else instead of Kolya Davydenko.

He usually gets things more or less right with his scheduling, so will need to have faith in his decision, I would say.

Look at Gonzalez who immediately got back into the saddle, only to fall off the other side!

Federer played something like 97 matches last year and if he had committed himself to Davis Cup, he risked adding perhaps another 8 stressful matches (plus doubles) which he simply doesn't need. Perhaps he could have played this week but has Switzerland won, could he have simply declined to play in the next round? Personally I think he did the right thing - you either commit yourself to the year or not at all.

Did FD Ended up playing more mtchs than davydenko?

Yes, he played about six more matches (ATP site isn't working so I can't quote the exact figures.)

I personally agree with most of what has been said. As I said in the beginning, I do usually support Roger's decision not to play (much) Davis Cup, at least in the beginning of the year.

He is playing so many matches; taking on more (when there is little chance of success) might well end up being his downfall. At the moment it may look unlikely that he really needs all the points from the non-required tournaments, but the #1 ranking is best not taken lightly.

However, I have a lingering queasy feeling about this. Why is it that the Davis Cup is held in so little regard overall, not just by players, but also by the people themselves? As you said, people in Switzerland probably prefer Roger keeping his #1 ranking, rather than bringing Switzerland one or two rounds further into the Davis Cup.

Even when a country wins the Davis Cup, it can hardly be compared with what happens in other sports. Germany won the handball world cup recently, and it was a big phenomenon apparently (I, of course, wasn't in Germany at the time, but it was well-covered in the German media). When Germany won the Davis Cup (I think in 1993), I seem to recall it being far less prolific. And I would say that, at least at the time (thanks to Boris and Steffi), tennis was a more popular sport in Germany than handball is now.

Some of it may well have to do with the fact that tennis simply isn't a team sport, but I don't think that's the only thing. It seems to me that the format is in urgent need for a re-think.

First of all, it is somewhat sad that there is a trade-off between playing Davis Cup and other tournaments; there really should be some reward in terms of ranking points in playing Davis Cup. Of course, it would be a little bit difficult to work this out in such a way that a) it is fair, and B) it doesn't simply add an additional burden on the top players. But I'm sure it's possible.

Also, as petalp has said, it seems to take place far too often. Also, I reckon it would benefit from being more of *one event*, rather than a few ties placed throughout the year. Of course if you wanted to do that, you'd have to re-think the format of the ties as well ... say have a round-robin stage at the beginning of the event, where every tie is just one best-of-five set match, but with different players playing the different sets. Then the RR stage could be done, say, within one week, in four groups of four countries. This would leave two semifinals and one final to be played, maybe with the SFs being best-of-three-matches, and the final being as it is now, best-of-five-matches.

Maybe tennis traditionalists (of which I sometimes tend to be one) would bark at these suggestions, but they seem to make much more sense to me than e.g. getting rid of deuce in doubles, and they bloody went ahead and did that, didn't they? Also, I'm sure there may be better ways of doing it than what I can come up with in a few idle minutes in front of a computer screen, but the current system doesn't really seem to do it imo ...

Anyway, back to work for me now. :( But GO GERMANY tomorrow! :)

Guy Forget has slammed Federer for not fulfilling his duties to his country.

"I believe Roger Federer has a duty to play Davis Cup and that the competition will suffer if all players had this kind of behaviour."

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story...3-23216,00.html

Wise i can see Forget point but at the end of the day Federer is world number 1 by a long way and i think part of him being able to do that is having the weeks of when davis cup is on so i can see both sides and i am sure Roger can see both sides.I do think though that Roger may well regret missing all these years of davis cup if he never wins one because i think if he commited to it for a year then the Swiss team would indeed be one of the favorites. :)

Wise..Now, let have a close look to this business

First, Mr. Guy Forget...Is a French right (OK he is also an ex Lions but this is another discussion roflmao ) and which is the main sponsor of the Davis Cup? ...Ahhh... it is BNP ParisBas, i.e. one of the main Banks in France...And BNP is the main sponsor of the Bercy Master. And who is in the comity of the Bercy Master: Guy Forget :yikes: ...

Conclusion: Guy is far from being the right person to have a objective opinion on this matter given the tied financial relationships with BNP :whistle: .

Second, as you know I am Swiss and I want to be very clear with you: Do you really believe that for us, Swiss Tennis fans, winning a David cup is most important than see FED winning a calendar GS :yikes: ?

Do you really believe that in a individual sport like Tennis the participation to an "old" (and you know my opinion about the DC calendar, i.e. an annual DC is just absurd) and "crap" event like the DC is more important than an additional GS title :yikes: ?

Give me a break Wise...Federer is relatively young so, he should be able to achieve some of the most important Tennis's records and might be still help Swiss Team for the Davis cup ( I guess in two three year time- who really cares a part Forget and you roflmao )...

Wise :coffee: : Fed is doing 10000000000 more stuff for the Swiss Tennis than any other previous Swiss player (which includes the two previous Lions Marc Rosset and Jakob Hlasek)...So give us a break.. :angry: .

PS: I still searching a Columbian player who is able to achieve any sort of Tennis' results...any news from that side Wise roflmao roflmao

I'll refer to my post above yours (which doesn't seem to have generated many replies).

Yes, it would be nice to see Fed playing Davis Cup, but it's not fair to lay the blame at his feet. In history, among players, for the fans, and even for the general public winning a slam (particularly, say, Wimbledon), or being world #1, counts higher than winning DC. Add to that the fact that Switzerland's chances are slim even with Roger, and you really can't blame him. It's not like football, where winning the world cup is the ultimate achievement.

Also, Wise, Sampras himself didn't play too many first-round ties, particularly during his time of domination.

Call it the "Tennis World Cup", have it only once every two or three years, preferably at the same time as the women's; make proper time for it in the calendar, and find some way to integrate it with the ranking system. Then things may change. Until then, we can't blame a top player, already faced with a gruelling amount of match play each year, for not playing in the first round of DC, imo.

That'll be Guy Forget added to Wise's list of "Credible tennis commentators" then - probably taking the place of Mats Wilander who was a permanent fixture on that list last year for his "no balls" comment about Federer, but has since been dumped after saying nice things about the world #1 at the Australian Open.

I have no doubt that Federer at some point in the next few years will want to have a serious shot at the Davis Cup - particularly if the other Swiss players continue to develop. At the minute he's just doing what he needs to do to keep the Swiss in the world group and in position for a shot at the title some day.

What a stupid thing to say, what has federer slams done for the swiss, its not like he and his team mates can say we won this for country. Federer is a bad role model, Sampras single handedly won the davis cup for the US as wise has pointed out. We cant say the same for the arrogant swiss, he would rather do attention seeking interviews about how he wants to take down a French open champion who is already down, than take his country to the next round.

Nice to see TV's post - as a card-carrying Swiss tennis nut he is better qualified than the rest of us to say how Federer's stance is viewed in the only place that it matters.

I have been ploughing a v. similar furrow on 606 - interested to see that TV comes to exactly the same conclusions about Forget as I did - I would add for good measure that since France has for years produced excellent players with good strength in depth, but not GS winners, the Davis Cup is always going to be more of a priority for them. Forget himself was an example of that (as well as being a wild untamed jungle beast of the Sampras Era)

True France has done pretty well on the DC and has not produced an outstanding Slam Champion for years.

I don't despair though the wheel turns (hopefully for Britain too btw ;-))!!!

Look at the USA....they were producing greats but now look at their prospect on the ATP tour...not much to be desired.

What a stupid thing to say. Sampras rarely played the first round in Davis cup during his time of domination, as you will see if you check his record. Fed played first round in DC up until 2004, and he only lost one singles match since the beginning of 2002.

Where did it get him? A single SF appearance in 2004.

Sampras didn't actually play in the first round from 1993 to 2001, including. (This includes 1995, when he 'single-handedly' won the DC.)

You know this, because I have pointed it out before. So stop trolling.

Yes, we certainly can't say that Federer has single-handedly won the cup for the US...

Incidentally - Sampras performed superbly well in the final in 1995 (that's undeniable), but to suggest he won the DC single-handedly is a bit of an insult to the rest of the US team given that

1) He missed the first round match

2) Only 2 of the 9 "live rubber" points required to get them to the final in the first place were won by Sampras.

This rather neatly illustrates the key difference between the Sampras situation and the Federer situation: Pete had teammates you could depend on to win matches and so simply didn't have to play and win 12 rubbers a year. Roger, as yet, doesn't have that luxury.

mightyjeditribble :bow: Fully agree with you...

barrystar :ok: Thanks...I really appreciate to be consider as a "Swiss tennis nut" by an tennis expert (and with a great sense of humour) like you :D

Andy1073 :ok: (as often..chairman is definitely fighting to touch the bottom of the famous chet's barrel roflmao )

Chairman...simply: No man is exempt from saying silly things; the mischief is to say them deliberately

PS: Tenez...The turning point might be not so far away: Gasquet should definitely be able to win a couple of GS at least :ok: (well Murray might prevent him...ohoh..a France -UK battle in the near future :yikes: :yikes:... roflmao )

In fact, in the last 15 years, only twice has a member of the winning DC team also won a GS in the same year - 1992 (Agassi/Courier) and 1995 (Sampras/Agassi). And in both those years the winning DC team had more than one GS winner so had a really strong team. For some reason, winning DC and winning a GS doesn't go well together.

Interestingly, the US DC captain in 95 was Tom Gullikson, twin brother of Tim who coached Sampras. 1995 was also the year that Tim was diagnosed with cancer.