Federer Winless Since Hit with Sampras
by Sean Randall | March 12th, 2007, 2:31 pm

So I come back from vacation – even though it was to visit the in-laws, going from Michigan to Arizona this time of year is usually a good thing! – and what happens? Roger  practices with Pete. Roger then loses his Indian Wells opener to Guillermo Canas. Coincidence? Hmm…

Actually I was back in time for the Guillermo Canas win yesterday, but like a lot of you readers I still don’t get the Tennis Channel. ADHEREL

As for the win itself, from what I remember of Canas pre-suspension and from what I’ve read today, it sounds like Canas is still the premier human backboard on the tour. And what happened to Federer usually happens when you’re making a lot of errors against a human backboard, you lose.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, tennis is pretty simple when you break it down to its core: If you can get every ball back you can’t lose, unless of course you are playing a duplicate of yourself.

So is this the beginning of the end for Federer? Is his dominating days over like his streak? Did Pete put a hex on Roger during their practice sessions last week? No, no and probably.

Who knows what went on during those practice sessions, but I doubt after yesterday’s result Roger’s going to be hitting with Pete anytime soon, especially before a big event. They might not all say it, but these guys are superstitious to some extent. And when your Roger Federer and you haven’t lost an opener at a tournament in 2 1/2 years (2004 Cincinnati) I’m pretty sure he’ll take a second look at his preparation and figure out what he did differently.

In the grand scheme of things, though, this loss isn’t going to cause Fed to lose a lot of sleep I don’t think. I know he had a streak on the line, but Fed’s eyes are still on the French, and better to lose to Canas at IW then at Roland Garros. (Yes, you could make the argument if Roger can’t beat Guillermo on hard court how the hell is he going to be him on clay. True, but we have a long way to go before that possibility presents itself, so for now I’ll avoid it.)

To follow-up on the Las Vegas round-robin debacle, after hearing from a few of the top guys during IW, looks like this thing is going to be six-feet under in a few weeks.

Said, Federer: “I just thought there was too many problems with the whole system, and so I’m happy it kind of arise a problem. And unfortunately, you know, it always takes a few players involved that everybody kind of wakes up. It took a half a year, not even, to get the problem because they already start in the beginning the year.”

Said Roddick: “Personally, I think we’ve seen the last of it. You know, I don’t see how you can get around, you know, pull-outs, going to a match and having to win five games and hit three dropshots to advance to the quarters and, you know, a million other things.”

Said Blake: “My personal opinion, [the round robin] shouldn’t be anymore. Leave it for the Master’s Cup and that’s it.”

Said me: It’s dead.

And that is hopefully the last we see of that format in larger fields. I think it works in an eight-man format, but anything over 16 players and I think you’re headed for trouble.

I applaud ET for thinking it up, but I also think he needs to read the rulebook before he puts his next plan into action.

Back to Tennis Channel. An old college buddy on mine who lives in Sacramento called me complaining that the Tennis Channel wasn’t showing any coverage Friday so he missed one of his all-time favs Guga in action. I told him he should be thankful that that he didn’t have to see Guga try to rekindle his past only to lose (again), and to remember that just because it’s called the Tennis Channel doesn’t mean that they show live tennis from all the events 24/7.

For the Tennis Channel to cover just about any event it will cost them money. Tournaments like Indian Wells, Miami, Wimbledon, etc, sell the rights to their coverage to TV channels for big bucks. They don’t give it away for free.

Optimally, the events want the most number of television viewers possible, meaning they’d love have networks like CBS, NBC and ABC telecast their tournaments because they are in the most households. But those networks clearly don’t think it’s profitable buying into tennis, so they pass. ESPN with its 1,000 or so channels then steps up and buys the rights to many of the big events like Indian Wells, Miami and the Slams. After that, at least here in the U.S., you get the lower tiers like Vs., Fox and the Tennis Channel battling it out.

As for the Tennis Channel, just look at the other major sports channels and compare. The Golf Channel just started coverage of early rounds from PGA Tour events this year (so I’m told). The NFL Network has shown a grand total of eight live regular season NFL games, or roughly 24 hours of live NFL coverage since its launch a few years ago. And does the NBA TV even show any live games? They probably do, but the bottom line is just because your channel is named after a sport doesn’t mean that you are going to be showing live coverage of that sport 24/7. It’s easy to make that mistake in thinking that they will, but in the end in order to do so those channels will have to pony up the cash just like everyone else to get the broadcast rights.

You Might Like:
Roger Federer, Pete Sampras End “Date” by Meeting Kobe Bryant at Lakers Game [Photos]
Pete Sampras: Murray Just Can’t Hang Back And Hope Roger Misses
Pete Sampras: Djokovic’s Season Best I’ve Seen in My Lifetime
Pete Sampras Has Lost His Tennis Trophies?
Federer Recovers to Spank Sampras in One-Hour Clinic in Seoul Exo

Don't miss any tennis action, stay connected with Tennis-X

Get the FREE TX daily newsletter

56 Comments for Federer Winless Since Hit with Sampras

Agassi fan Says:

That’s one bad day in 7 months. That’s OK. A confluence of factors – Canas playing bloody good (he’s no slouch – was a top 10 player once), Canas match fit from the qualies, Fed’s first match on those courts (match play is match play, practice is practice), plus Fed having a bit of an off day (heat, blisters – affects the movement, which is his main stay).

Though Fed does get a bit off on very hot days. That hurt him in the French finals last year (it was too hot). He has to toughen up a bit more since its more of an issue on clay. Canas is the ultimate grinder, so Fed got his trifecta. Canas deserved this win.

Last time someone won 40+ matches on the trot was in the early/mid eighties. That’s how rare it is.

Goes to speak about the depth in mens tennis today. With fitter players with better equipment, its so much harder to avoid upsets. Makes you wonder if anyone will ever go 247-15 again over three calendar years, as Fed did!

So much for lack of competition today!!

Nadal Says:

I am just waiting to hear which illegal substance Canas is on now. The guy has taken stuff on more than one occasion…I doubt anything has changed.

40 Love Says:

I was in IW for the qualies and early rounds. Roger keeps himself at the La Quinta Resort and doesn’t go out to the main venue to practice. Not sure if that really matters but thought I’d throw that out there. I know the fans really would have loved to see him there each day. Maybe it’s the “wake up call” that he needs every 2 1/2 years for a reality check.

Blake Fan Says:

2 of the many ways to guess what happened with Federer…

1. Federer was exhausted after beating Sampras and promptly lost to Canas. This is like the Federer who beat Sampras a long time ago in Wimbledon and we all know that Federer is long gone.

2. Federer was wrong in praising the quality of Sampras’ form post-retirement and came into the match with a false sense of preparation. Thus he came unprepared and promptly lost to Canas. Sampras is not up to the mark as Federer thought. This may be closer to the truth.

Regarding the level of competition now Vs. Sampras days, Agassi said it all…

I bet Sampras, in his heyday, would have found it hard to beat Blake, forget about Federer or Nadal.

backhander Says:

Nice headline lol.

Of all the articles I’ve read on the Federer loss none of them have mentioned that Canas basically vamos’d Federer out of the tournament. Canas beat him from the baseline and ran down every shot Roger got back. A very Nadal-like performance from Canas. It doesn’t bode well for Federer’s chances at Roland Garros.

It’s good that Federer lost, it’s good for tennis. Now the dynamic changes and the matches have become much more interesting and tense, and less predictable. It’s any man’s game now.

Canas did tennis fans a big favor. I’m going to enjoy Indian Wells more than usual this year.

TennisWatcher Says:

Roger went out and won a doubles match immediately after the loss. So, he is not winless. I doubt any superstitions will bother him much and find it very hard to believe that playing Sampras affected him one way or the other.

Everybody has to lose occasionally. I agree with Canas having more to do with it than Pete, Canas being VERY hungry for success. He’s an experienced, talented player (once top-ten or top-twelve, I think) to come up against so early and as mentioned, Canas had the opportunity to get used to the courts in qualifying.

Deuce Says:

Class act….
Roger made no excuses for himself after his loss to Canas. Canas was surprised even after he just won match point that he just beat the World’s #1.
Roger said that he did not play well and Canas played solid…nuff said. People dont realize that no matter who you are, the first match of any tournament is the most nerve wrecking. Most others would have come up with some half baked excuse ala Justine. In fact she would have tanked the match citing foot injury. Only a class person would accept defeat as graciously as he does in victory. One more thing, after just losing the first round, what does he do but sign autographs.

Smasher Says:

Imagine what it would it be like if Federer had proceeded to take the 2nd and 3rd sets from Nadal in the French Open final like he did the 1st…

Imagine what it would have been like if he proceeded to conquer Vilas’ record in IW this year…

He would have felt bored ala Borg and retired prematurely. I bet he realised that and thought it better to leave himself some records for later since he set his retirement date as 2012. I fully expect him to win the French Open this year. It was heartbreaking to see him gift it to Nadal last year.

Fan of Tennis Says:

Deuce said it well. Roger is a class act. People will lose! In fact, heck, Roger lost 5 times last year! I, as a fan, would want him to lose before the French Open and win that one. And sure Canas played solid, but this one win does not make him the ‘favorite’ of any tournament. Like Roger said in his interview – I have to see more of him first. He wasn’t a ‘lucky loser’ for nothing – he lost in the qualifiers so he’s not invinsible!

But back to Roger. He gave credit where credit was due – to Canas. He signed autographs for fans after he loss instead of just heading off the court. He answered all the interview questions (in 3 languages no less…try having to say why you lost over and over in different languages)! lol …yet he patiently answered every single question. Then what did he do?

He went out and played the doubles with his teammate and won. I think a show of hands should go to the crowd out at IW because I heard that when he was announced in the doubles, the fans gave him a standing ovation. Good job (especially after how they treated Venus and Serena)…but enough of that.

As a Federer fan, I can take him losing every once in a while. I know we’re so spoiled and want him to win everything (and he practically does!), but Roger is taking this loss with a grain of salt, and so am I.

If history is to repeat itself, then it tells us that Roger will win Miami. In 3 years, he has NEVER lost back-to-back tournaments not on clay. So that’s a good sign for the Miami tournament. I think he’ll be more focused and ready to go.

Sure, the tournament got a little dull for me with my favorite out, but I’ll just have to follow the doubles more as long as he’s in it! And as for singles now… I remember at the Master’s Cup when James Blake was talking about Roger. He said “If I’m out of the tournament, the next guy I’m pulling for is Roger”. So..on that note: Go James!

Saint Steve Says:

Roger certainly is a class act, and I too believe that he will go on to win the French Open.

I may get a better price for him to win the Grand Slam at Betfair now!

T.K Says:

I’m Roger’fan, I think i cannot write anything about Roger’s loss after I’ve read “Fan of Tennis”‘s words. You really are tennis fan, thanks for your fantastic comments.

But for “backhander” you should wake up now and be grown up, try not to show your pestimistic idea!

I’m glad to know that Roger signed autograph to
his american fans and even more when he played double and got STANDING OVATION from the audiences, HE DESERVED TO GET THAT.

For me, I’m so unhappy because this tournament was not broadcast in my country. So I think I’ll pray for Roger and his teamate to win double. Whenever Roger didn’t play the match, I think Tennis is quite dull, colourless and uninteresting. The way Roger plays tennis is so beautiful and flawless and I guess you (the real tennis fans) see some players try to imitate him.
It’s not easy, isn’t it?

Only Genius at a time, right!

sanirogers Says:

well, i skipped watching it anymore…i am not happy. The match should be played again. and more than that Canas should be checked for drugs. Rogers has taken the beauty of tennis with him. No more interest. Dull week. what a pity, how bad the vacation for someone eager to see federer liting the trophy. I hate the match in which federer loses. because thats like a cruel mind killing pleasant rose (Roger)….i hate Canas…I hate him more now. He should be there in prison inhaling cocaine from his own ass.

Roger this! Says:

Not much here to get upset about sanirogers. Federer will be back for Miami and he’s still alive in the doubles at IW as well.

But you’re right about there being less interest in IW now that Safin is also gone. It’s like half the stars are eliminated suddenly. Let’s hope Blake, Murray and Roddick give some competition to Nadal, etc.

Look at the positives for Federer – he gets more time to get ready for the upcoming clay court season. He needs fresh legs to win the Roland Garros trophy. Better lose in the preliminary round here and win the French Open in Paris, I would say.

allcourt Says:

Federer loses and says that all Canas did was keep the ball in play and that he — Federer — played badly. Funny how when other players say stuff like that, they’re called arrogant or cocky, even if it’s the truth and even if they made the usual he/she played well comment about their opponent, just as Federer did.

And what’s the big deal about going out to play his doubles match an hour after losing his singles match? Players are doing this all of the time. They’re just not big names, so we don’t hear people saying how wonderful it is. But I bet those unknown players find their first-round losses just as devastating as Federer’s was to him. Oh, I forget, he said the loss wasn’t such a big deal! Yea, right.

Leo Says:

Hey Deuce, I love Rog too. But in order to make him look better, must you diss Justine?

How many times in her career has she defaulted a match? See how many matches she has won, how many she has lost and how many she has defaulted and how many times she has come back to win from the brink of defeat.

I am not defending Australia. But lets not go into overdrive….

But that’s just my opinion.

Roger this! Says:

allcourt, other players are called arrogant, because they don’t have the stats to back them, not just because everyone is blinded by Federer’s genius.

baselinehack Says:

all court, great post and 100% right. The fanboys are once again overreacting to Federer’s supposed “classiness”.

>> other players are called arrogant, because they don’t have the stats to back them

baselinehack Says:

“other players are called arrogant, because they don’t have the stats to back them”

Hogwash. I’ve heard many players say similar things and they have been in the top ten for years with many titles of their own. In fact the Fedtrolls are the first ones to jump all over Nadal if he so much as points his finger.

I agree with backhander, Federer losing is very good for tennis.

Roger this! Says:

Look at Federer’s ranking points and compare with Nadal’s. Never in the history of ATP ranking system was a #1 with so many points and he’s almost double that of Nadal’s points, who himself is double that of #3.

Fedhaters are so stupid to not realise his genius.

Leo Says:

Fedhaters – I hope this loss is also good for Roger’s tennis!

You guys have been through so much these past few years, I am happy that you can finally watch tennis again.

zola Says:

I bet Sampras had something to do with it!

Federer calls Sampras and asks if he can hit with him. The guy is kind enough to say OK. Then Fed comes into a press conference saying
” Since I beat him in his own BAckyad in wimbeldon, I wanted to beat him at his house!”

then he says: ” he is surprisingly good, but not good enough to beat me!”

Well, apparently Canas was good enough to beat him.
Fed needed this reality check to put his feet on the ground. I say it will help him.

Decinnis Says:

Sampras lost to Federer who lost to Canas who lost to Moya. All this says is that Sampras was lucky to have played in an earlier era. If he was of an age to be competing now, he woudn’t be in the top 10 even. The level of competition is such that he would have been extremely lucky to win 1 grand slam, let alone 14!

Deuce Says:

Fed haters….
If it was not for the dominance of Roger, men’s tennis would not be as interesting. Couple with the fact that he is so fluid on the court makes him an absolute joy to watch. That is the problem with the women’s tour right now. It is fairly open as to who is the #1 player in the world but makes the WTA not as interesting.

To Leo…I respect your opinion and don’t want to get into a pissing match on Justine BUT she has a history of ‘questionnable behviors’. Beyond dumping the Aussie tournament last year, she had the ‘hand raising I am not ready to receive serve’ from Serena at the French which she later denied (and I am not a big Williams sisters fan but Serena got screwed). She strongly argued an out ball when she played Kim in a match at the Open which influenced the chair umpire (later replay showed that it was clearly in…. this is before Hawkeye). Not what I call a role model of a champion. Not taking anything away that for a women that small, she has extracted as much from her game as anyone and is always a #1 contender.

sensationalsafin Says:

federer said that he didn’t play badly but canas played very well. imo, the only explanation for 6-2 in the second set to the lucky loser is federer played bad if not terrible and canas played great. this isn’t a big deal. 41 in a row is not terrible, not by a long shot. i just think this is a really bad loss for federer. second round, lucky loser, straight sets, hard court. not a big deal in the big picture though. we’re still probably gonna see him hold up the trophy in miami and if he plays canas there, which i hope he will, i think the score will be a lot worse than 7-5 6-2. he may not be upset now but once he’s on the court he’s gonna get his revenge. as for Indian Wells now. it’s not terribly dull. there are still a lot of good players in the mix and i predict Murray to win his first masters shield. it’d be a great win for him and he’d burst into the top ten.

Leo Says:

Deuce – ‘Questionable behavior’ is one thing, to call her a quitter is another. I think there is just too much evidence of this woman being a fighter.

I think holding up the hand and not ‘owning up’ to it (I don’t think she was ever asked by the umpire… so you can’t say she ‘denied’ something) is definitely un-sportsmanlike. The rest, I am not so sure…

Sean Randall Says:

Some of you people are rough on ‘ol Rog.

First off, I think Federer is a rather classy guy, especially for a World No. 1. That’s not saying much considering he followed guys like Roddick, Sampras, Agassi, Mac, Courier, Muster, Hewitt and a many others who have held the top spot but certainly didn’t hold much in the way of “class”. (Agassi certainly became classy, but he wasn’t in his heyday)

As far as Sunday’s loss. It was nice that Roger signed autographs, honored his doubles commitment (and won!) and then spoke kindly about Canas. None of that surprised me and that’s why I didn’t even mention it in my initial post. That’s Roger being Roger. That’s what he does.

Now would Sampras, Agassi or even Roddick stuck around for that doubles match? I doubt it (I think Agassi one year didn’t even stick around for his presser after a loss!).

But one thing you have to remember with this event is that it is run by Roger’s management company, IMG. So I’m betting he felt a little more compelled to honor his doubles commitment than usual, whereas if such a loss had happened in Cincinnati or next week Miami, I think he may have pulled out. Plus he had his folks in town and for him, the schedule works in such a way that he will not have to play his first match in Miami for nearly two weeks, so what else is he going to do?

Again, I’m glad he stuck around for the doubles and yes, it was a classy move. But overall he’s a classy guy. Should we heap mounds of praise on him for doing it? Not really. Lots of players lose and then play doubles, it’s just a rarity that a top guy would even enter the doubles event let alone keep playing following a singles loss.

As some of you pointed out, with Federer gone the field is wide open, which is great for the sport and makes the event that much more interesting. If I had to bet on who will win the title I’d take Haas who’s been crushing everyone of late. And in the other half I’ll go Andy, though he plays Gasquet tonight in what should be a great matchup, but I just wonder if the Frenchman can return the Roddick serve. If he can then Roddick’s probably going home.

And Saint Steve, great point about the Roger odds. I wonder if this loss did have any impact on his odds to win the Slam which last I saw were around 3-1 after the Australian.

Bonitto Says:

Decinnis, who say Roger beat Pete??? are you so sure about that.

Decinnis Says:

Federer made it clear enough that he won over Sampras and only refused to say by what score. He shouldn’t have practised with Sampras. It must have been the equivalent of practising with someone playing junior tennis but since it’s Sampras, Federer overestimated and fell on the first hurdle at IW. What a farce! This should be a lesson to Federer to not overestimate past players or underestimate present players.

Deuce Says:

Food for thought for fellow posters…
Speculation abound about who would prevail in head to head matches between Sampras (in his prime) and FedEx. Arguments are strong for either one depending on who you talk with.
To me the more compelling head to head matchup would be Rod Laver (again in his prime) and Federer. Both have similar all-court styles but what would make this matchup more challenging for Roger is that the Rocket is a lefty and given Rog’s issues with Nadal last year, it would be an interesting hypothetical argument. Especially on grass where Laver won a lot of his grand slam tourneys (back then, Australian and the US Open were on grass) and given Rog’s dominance at Wimbledon.

I saw Laver play Ashe in Madison Square Garden many years ago and he was absolutely dominant. Amazing player given his small stature.

REM Says:

Well, Roger said that Laver will win with wooden rackets. Maybe Roger will win when they play with modern rackets on hard courts.

The only way to compare would be to see if Roger completes the Grand Slam or atleast wins the French Open twice. Then Roger could be legitimately given the label of Best of All Time. Till then Laver is the emperor to kings Sampras and Federer.

John Says:

I only saw the second set of Roger’s match. He was definitely off his game. Big time. And if my memory is correct, Canas had 9 unforced errors for the match. That seems impossible to me.

Also I was impressed when Roger signed autographs after his loss. I think the last person that I so do this was Safin, either in Las Vegas or at the SAP Open. I think it was in Las Vegas. I didn’t see his IW loss.

Shaun Says:

I love the Tennis Channel. I am a bit surprised that they are not showing any WTA matches for IW though. However I am happy with their coverage in the early rounds so far this week. Non stop when live matches are going on, then rerun at night for people like me who missed the day matches. love it!

John Says:

Sean said ‘Said Roddick: “Personally, I think we’ve seen the last of it. You know, I don’t see how you can get around, you know, pull-outs, going to a match and having to win five games and hit three dropshots to advance to the quarters and, you know, a million other things.”’

Could someone translate this? What do five games and three dropshots have to do with anything? Is Andy talking about the RR tiebreakers and then making up new tiebreakers as a joke?

John Says:

Shaun says “I am a bit surprised that they are not showing any WTA matches for IW though.”

They don’t mention the WTA players, matches or scores. That’s because the TC is using an ATP feed. On the plus side, coverage switches to ESPN2 on Wednesday morning and most likely this will all change. On the down side, live matches will be replaced with lots of “desk” time.

Agassi fan Says:

No disrespect, but Laver played 3 slams on grass, none on hard courts. Plus the number of players on the tour was far less, depth outside of top 10 was virtually non existent. Until the early 80s, the top players were virtually assured of reaching the quarters. Tennis is just a far more global sport today, instead of largely being an “Australia versus US” sport till Borg broke up the party.

Imagine if Fed had to play 3 slams on grass… wait, he’s STILL winning 3 slams a year, though on 3 different surfaces! Don’t remember anyone else doing that, do you?

backhander Says:

What exactly is so “classy” about Federer playing doubles after getting his ass handed to him by an Argentine drug cheat? He was just fulfilling his doubles obligation as any professional player would do.

The nauseating Fed worship by some of you is insane. Take your blinders off more than half of these fanboy posts belong on his official website not here.

sensationalsafin Says:

is he not a classy guy? did you read his post match interview? here i am sitting in shock and awe over his loss trying to think of the billion different reasons he could he lost. so i finally read what he says to see if he has some explanation and what’s he say? he didn’t play bad at all and canas played extremely well. trainer was called out twice, why? to fix the taping on his foot. so another words federer lost to someone better than him, according to federer. that’s what makes him classy. he gives credit where credit is due without making excuses. that’s what makes him classy.

Agassi fan Says:

Just shows the depth in mens tennis today. And how much harder it is to win 7 back-to-back best of 5 set matches in two weeks to net a grand slam title. You can have a bad day in golf and still win a tournament. Can’t have a bad day in tennis and still win.

BTW, I would now love to see women’s tennis move to best-of-5 sets too, at least in the grand slams – now that they are getting equal money, how about some equal work? Can’t understand why on earth do women NOT play best of 5 sets. They compete equally in other sports – hell, the marathon is no shorter for them, is it?

Fan of Tennis Says:

sensationalsafin and others… give it up. No matter what you say about Roger, some folks will always find fault in him.

Roger can donate every dime he makes to charity, build 1,000 houses for homeless, feed all the people in shelters, and will the grand slam this year…and people would still have a problem with him.! lol!

I swear, of all the #1 players we’ve had – not only in this sport – but in any sport – Roger is one of (if not the best) sportsman I’ve seen – yet some folks still have problems with him.

Of the group of current tennis players out there, I would put Roger up against anyone to conduct himself in a manner befitting a #1 player. He not only handles himself well, but he handles the press well; he handles his fellow co-workers well, his friends and enemies (if he has any)! lol!

Sure – we all are just fans here, but I think onen of the best ways to really know a player is by what his peers say. Roger has won the Stephen Edberg award for Sportsmanship (as voted on by his fellow tennis players) the last 2 years. So, inspite of him kicking their butts on the tennis court, and inspite of them really having a reason to just hate his guts – they have voted him as tennis’ best sportsman. Shouldn’t we take their word on this since they know him far better than we do? He must be doing something right. And, if he was as arrogant as some of the fans say he is – I can guarantee you the players wouldn’t (1) like him as they do – especially by him dominating on tour like he is; (2) vote on him as their very best sportsman – especially after he has kicked their butts on court as much as he has… Why can’t the tennis fans just accept what he is and move on…?

JCF Says:

It hasn’t been 7 months since Fed’s last defeat. In fact his streak didn’t reach 41 wins. He lost to Roddick at Kooyong in January this year.

REM Says:

Well, that’ll teach him to not lose even in exos. Ha ha ha!

Now he’s got to know that losing in exos and 1st and 2nd (even in Masters) is much much better than losing in the finals of a grandslam (especially at Roland Garros).

All this hullabaloo will only steel his determination to get his hands at the French Open trophy this year. …can’t waint to see it happen, it’s gonna one of the greatest moments in sporting history. :)

Shaun Says:

John says: “They don’t mention the WTA players, matches or scores. That’s because the TC is using an ATP feed. On the plus side, coverage switches to ESPN2 on Wednesday morning and most likely this will all change. On the down side, live matches will be replaced with lots of “desk” time. ”

I just checked the ESPN 2 listing. they are not showing and WTA events either (their coverage start today.) Tier 1 event, and no TV broadcast. Tennis is dying in America!

patrick Says:

Please check out the Indian Wells schedule on their website today. Their first match @ 2PM EST is a WTA match. Also, their match @ 9 PM EST is also a WTA match. ESPN2 comes on at both times. IF ESPN2 is not showing any matches, they must have made a last minute decision.

John Says:

Shaun says “I just checked the ESPN 2 listing. they are not showing and WTA events either (their coverage start today.) Tier 1 event, and no TV broadcast. Tennis is dying in America!”

1) It’s interesting that women won equal pay at Wimbledon and lost equal TV coverage at IW. Do they get equal pay at IW, too?

2) Even LiveScore.com separates the men from the women by calling the men’s tournament “Pacific Life Open” and the women’s “Indian Wells”.

John Says:

Patrick says “Please check out the Indian Wells schedule on their website today. Their first match @ 2PM EST is a WTA match. Also, their match @ 9 PM EST is also a WTA match. ESPN2 comes on at both times. IF ESPN2 is not showing any matches, they must have made a last minute decision.”

I just checked the ESPN website. It’s showing a repeat of the Roddick/Gasquet (7-6,6-3)match over a live match of Vera Zvonareva/Na Li (4-4 so far). For the 9PM slot, it’s Daniela Hantuchova vs Shahar Peer (unless something better comes along).

Rob Says:

Why does praise of one player almost always seem to come at the expense of another?

Fed is classy.
So was Pete.
Fed is an amazing player.
So was Pete – just in a different decade.
Fed playing Pete, regardless of the match score: Priceless.

johnnhoj Says:

Did the world end when Federer lost to Murray in Cincinnati last August? No. It would seem Canas outplayed Fed and that was that. Canas then pissed away his big-time-win momentum in the next round. Speculative tendencies lead me to consider that Fed blew this tournament (singles and doubles) so he could spend the extra time preparing for the clay season, but I’m only speculating. There are clay courts somewhere in California, aren’t there?

Prism Says:

We can never know what famous people are really like inside, but Federer is one guy who works hard at being nice or at least appearing to be :

Following his second round doubles match Tuesday, which he and compatriot Yves Allegro narrowly lost in the Match Tie-break, the ATP World No. 1 and UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador greeted the ball kids who had purchased Feder-bear Beanie Babies.

Federer, who was a ball kid at his hometown tournament in Basel, posed for pictures and collected the more than eighty Feder-bears to take back to his hotel room, promising the ball kids he would return all of them with his autograph.

From http://www.tennisnews.com/exclusive.php?pID=18318

John Says:

Sean Randall says “Said me: It’s dead.”

I was thinking about this statement last night after yet another hit to the challenge system.

IMO, the challenge system isn’t as bad as RR, but it’s close.

The Hantuchova/Peer match went to a third set tie breaker. The score was 5-5. On the next point Peer didn’t challenge and lost a point that she would have won. Then Hantuchova won the next point, winning the match at 7-5.

Why didn’t Peer challenge? I think it’s inherent in the system itself. The players are conditioned to not challenge and to save their challenges for late in the match. And then when it’s the right time they remain reluctant.

On the other hand, the challenge system during the Davis Cup had unlimited challenges just like clay. That was exciting. And no hesitation by the players.

But the ATP will never go that route, so I think the system as it stands should be chucked. Or screw it up even more and then bury it. Maybe by making the designated coaches make the call. That should kill it.

Return to the good old days with the players yelling at the ump.

sanirogers Says:

PETE won 14
He is the greatest labor of tennis along with Jimmy Conners

Fed is classic, pleasure, beauty, life, poetry, awesome, fantastic, and so….

JimT Says:

Sampras probably said to Federer, “look, you’re 25, you’ll be 26 in August and you’ve just won the AO. Do what I did when I was in that situation – lose the first match you play at Indian Wells to someone nobody would ever dream you would lose to – Oh and don’t forget to lose in straight sets” (Sampras lost in straight sets to Bohdan Ulihrach). Federer was just copying Sampras.

Agassi fan Says:

Fed hit with sampras and forgot how much tougher even the 100th ranked player on the tour is today! Would have loved to see SAMPRAS play Canas, boy, would that have been a double bagel.

Matt Says:

This insanity of PETE couldn’t win slams in todays game is nuts. NOBODY serves and volley’s anymore, especially with such power and athleticism. Everyone forgets in all sports how great previous champs were. Pull up some old film..petes game is impressive. He owned agassi(who as an old man pushed fed at the us open), owned courier, goron, becker, edberg you name it, pete beat them. Even on the decline at 30 his match with rodger was tight as it gets. Nadal, roddick and the rest of the crew would never be able to handle the serve and volley of pete…three of the 4 slams are fast surfices which are good for serve and volley. Nobody can honestly believe that laver and his wood raquet could play with pete or rodger. Rodger is doing just what pete did…dominate. Pete had andre to overcome..without pete..agassi is the all time slams leader. Nadal is NOT agassi to rodger. Rodger has no competiton…thats why he hit with pete..a desperate attempt to be challenged. Pete and rodger are the 2 best to ever play, petes game is well suited for 3 of the 4 majors because of serve and volley. Rodger now vs. pete in say 97..no way to know who would be the best, but I’ve seen em both play and i say out of 10 pete wins 6. Both were classy…pete was just very private which made him look snobby and dull. Rodger is more personable. Rodger needs an agassi to make tennis exciting again..sadly he will not get one and will break petes record. At least he is a class act and will deserve it. Whatever morons say pete couldnt win now is crazy though..old man andre hung around just fine the last couple years…better than roddick and the rest and he was old..and yet as a young man he was owned by pete…get real..petes top 2 in any decade you stick him.

Joanne Says:

How many of you guys are wondering if Roger ‘tanked’.I couldn’t believe he was capable of playing that badly.Either that or Sampras made him feel guilty about all the media hype.

Federer Foiled Again by Canas Says:

[…] Sharapova got an absolute ass-kicking from Serena Williams, showing again that Serena can just show up and win just about anything she wants to when she puts her mind to it. As for Federer, I guess Tiger’s not rubbing off on him. Two weeks after ending the Fed’s 41-match win streak, Guillermo Canas did it again yesterday winning a third set tiebreaker over the World No. 1. And this time Fed was playing some decent tennis. […]

sampras fan Says:

I really feel that some of these comments about Sampras are ridiculous. For starters the level of competition these days is not greater than when Sampras played. Sampras was known as a player with a lazy work ethic and he never was really pushed hard enough to really train hard. Sorry to burst your bubble Fed fans , but if you put Pete back in Rogers day, I know in my heart that Pete would have won more than half the time. And by the way Sampras would have had no problem with the likes of Blake or any other player like him today. And one last point, Fed never said exactly what happened with Pete. He simply said that Pete wasn’t good enough to beat him and then would’nt release any scores. But he did say there was tiebreaks involved. This from a player who is ten years older and way past his prime. Could it be that maybe Pete is in his head?

Top story: Kvitova Back in Doha Final After Barty Win, Sabalenka Next