Roger Federer: I Have No Hard Feelings Towards Rafael Nadal
by Staff | January 16th, 2012, 8:04 am

Roger Federer dismissed talks of an ATP player strike Monday at the Australian Open. The four-time champion in Melbourne added that he and Rafael Nadal are still on good terms despite reports.

Federer, who easily won his first round match, also said the back injury that forced him out of Doha was fine, but he cautioned he’ll re-evaluate tomorrow.

Federer’s full presser below:

Q. Everything fine, moving okay, twingefree?

ROGER FEDERER: Twinge means pain?

Q. Yes. Everything good?

ROGER FEDERER: Yeah. I mean, I expected otherwise honestly I would’ve been worried and I would have mentioned something. I’m not keeping secrets about that stuff.

But I’ve been feeling fine for three, four days now. Been able to practice full out. Today was fine. It was just tough against a guy who hits big and flat from both sides and takes a lot of chances.

In some ways, for the first match, it was a bit more how do you say intense, where I felt a lot of pressure. Because in Abu Dhabi they were exhibitions, and then in Doha, the first match with Davydenko was somewhat straightforward.

Then after that I got injured. So everything was a bit on a relaxeder [sic] mode maybe, or then trying to come through with injury or the matches were too easy, you know.

Here I really tried to put in an effort to every point play as hard as I could first to see how the back felt, try to get into it, hopefully win, and then see how I feel tomorrow.

I’ll get a lot more information tomorrow, but I’m sure I’ll be fine.

Q. Good day to play at night probably because of the heat.

ROGER FEDERER: No, I mean, I don’t mind the heat. Actually, I would have liked to play in the heat. It’s been a tricky week in terms of practice because there’s been a lot of rain. I practiced twice indoors.

This has definitely been the hottest since we’ve been here. When I was warming up, the ball was definitely flying much more than, again, tonight, because conditions get significantly slower in these types of conditions.

Look, I’m just happy to be on Rod Laver Arena. Sure, nights is always quite something. It’s electric and it’s nice to be out there.

Q. I’m sure you would have been made aware of some of the things that Rafael Nadal said in here yesterday. You could call it criticism of you, perhaps. Certainly the comments were quite outspoken. In those circumstances, do you have any response to what I’m sure you’ve been told he said?

ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I mean, I kind of heard it, you know. I saw him after he said the comments Sunday was it, I guess? I saw him Sunday afternoon. I asked him how the press went. I didn’t know he spoke to the press.

He said, Yeah, it was fine. Mentioned a few things here and there. I was, Okay, whatever. Then I read the comments. So things are fine between us, you know. I have no hard feelings towards him.

It’s been a difficult last few months in terms of politics within the ATP, I guess, trying to find a new CEO and chairman. That can get frustrating sometimes.

He’s mentioned many times how he gets a bit tired and frustrated through the whole process, and I shared that with him. It’s normal. But for me, obviously nothing changes in terms of our relationship. I’m completely cool and relaxed about it. He seemed the same way or at least I hope so.

Q. It’s fair to say you have differing views in terms of what should happen.

ROGER FEDERER: You want to know the issues or?

Q. He said you’ve got one view and the others have got something else.

ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I think that’s normal. We can’t always agree on everything. So far it’s always been no problem really. Back in the day he used to say, Whatever Roger decides, I’m fine with.

Today he’s much more grown up. He has a strong opinion himself, which I think is great. It’s what we need, especially on the council. It’s been nice working with him.

That he has a strong opinion also creates sometimes good arguments about where you want to move the sport forward to.

You know, we talked about that in London after we played at midnight before, I don’t know, my semifinal match. We called each other after Davis Cup, and then we met again here.

So we’re always constantly trying to get on the same page, or at least talking about it, so we can do the best for the sport. That’s at the end of the day both our goals.

Q. Specifically are you willing to talk about the point that possibly you sometimes stand outside the process, maybe not getting behind some of the top 100 players, or does that come back to the differences in points of view, for example, pushing for changes to prize money, things like that?

ROGER FEDERER: I was in the meeting, you know. I completely understand and support the players’ opinions. I just have a different way of going at it. I’m not discussing it with you guys in the press room. It creates unfortunately sometimes negative stories.

I think we’ve done really well over the years now since me and Rafa in particular have joined the council, and also Novak in the past. And when Adam led the ATP, I think we had a really calm relationship about politics and about, you know, dealing with you guys.

So I choose not to talk about those issues with you guys. That doesn’t mean I don’t support the players. I think of the players first. Usually when I take decisions, I think of the lowerranked players first. I hope they know that.

Otherwise I wouldn’t be sitting on the council, just trying to do what’s best for the top guys. I mean, I’ve been around for too long to just say, Okay, we need more stuff for the top guys. I’m very happy if the lowerranked players are doing better, too.

Q. Do you disagree with the concept of a strike in principle, or do you just think it wouldn’t work?

ROGER FEDERER: You know, it’s such a dangerous word to use. That’s why I always say, Let’s try to avoid it as much as we can, right? I think that would be the best for all of us: you guys, fans, tournaments, players. It’s not good for anyone really. We’ve seen it in other sports happening in the States. That’s why I’m always very careful about it.

If there’s no avoiding it, I’ll support the rest of the players. But I just think we have to think it through how we do it, if we do it, can we do it, whatever it is, instead of just going out and screaming about it. That’s not how I think you’re going to get results.

There’s been too many tries and too many things done in the past that haven’t worked. That’s where I just think we’re on the right track and things are under control, I think. I’m confident we’ll get to a good solution in the near future.

Q. There seemed to be so many mentions of so many different issues, bits of this issue here, that issue there, prize money, Davis Cup, whatever. How important is it that there is one argument from the players’ point of view?

ROGER FEDERER: One argument?

Q. Just one, a consistent view. Is that important, in your opinion?

ROGER FEDERER: I don’t quite understand. I just want to make sure I understand you.

Q. You ask 10 players, you might get 10 different issues raised.

ROGER FEDERER: Well, it’s not normally that bad, but…

It’s usually two or three. Well, there are more, many more, but they’re smaller problems.

Sometimes do you want to play white balls or yellow balls. Is that going to be a big issue? Sometimes yes; sometimes no. It depends on how big the issue is and how it impacts every layer of the tour. That’s sometimes how you go at it.

Obviously within the system, you can’t ask every single opinion, but you try to represent every opinion that you have and you try to work on all those issues.

I thought we’re going in a good direction. I thought the game was healthy. We’re in a golden era right now. Everybody is happy, talking positive. We’ve been able to sign sponsors. We’ve been playing well. Al those things.

But I understand we can always try to do better. It shouldn’t be just saying like, Things are great. Let’s not change anything. I think as a perfectionist, professional, whatever you do in the business or as a tennis player, I think you should always try to become as good as you can be or try to just, you know, change things to as good as they can be for everyone.

Q. Is it perhaps taking it too far to say this could be potentially a defining year in the relationship between the players, the tournaments, the Grand Slams?

ROGER FEDERER: Potentially. I don’t know. I really don’t have the crystal ball with me. I wish I knew. But, like I said before, I’m confident that we’ll manage the year in a good way and we’ll come to good terms with whatever it is.

Right now I don’t know what it is, but I’m sure it’s going to be okay.

Q. Do you feel extra pressure coming to this tournament since it’s been a while since you won a Grand Slam, almost two years?

ROGER FEDERER: Not really. I mean, I feel pressure coming out and seeing my girls on the other side of the court, seeing me walk on court. Maybe that makes me nervous, which was the case today.

But otherwise I feel not particularly more pressure. I’m always excited. I felt it, you know, actually walking down that Walk of Champions, getting out on court and feeling like, you know what, I have good intensity and I am really excited to see the Aussie crowd. Just go after another victory here hopefully in the first round, and then take it from there.

So I was anxious to find out how I was going to play, how my opponent was going to play me. So, yeah, I was really excited and a little nervous actually going into it, which was a good feeling to have. I’m looking forward to the other matches.

You Might Like:
Rafael Nadal: I’m Feeling That I’m Getting Better And Better
Rafael Nadal: Comebacks Are Not The Easiest At The Beginning, You Need To Suffer A Little Bit
Roger Federer: There Are No Hard Feeling Between Me And Stan, We Are Friends, Not Ememies!
Rafael Nadal: I Don’t Like Playing Indoors
Rafael Nadal Says Maria Sharapova Should Pay For Her Failed Drug Test, Says He’s “Completely Clean” [Video]

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

Get the FREE TX daily newsletter

76 Comments for Roger Federer: I Have No Hard Feelings Towards Rafael Nadal

madmax Says:

“I kind of heard it,” he said. “I saw him Sunday afternoon. I didn’t know he spoke to the press. He said, ‘Yeah, it was fine.’ Mentioned a few things here and there. I was, ok, whatever. Then I read the comments. So, things are fine between us. I have no hard feelings towards him. I’m completely cool and relaxed about it. He seemed the same way — or at least I hope so.

“We can’t always agree on everything. Back in the day he used to say, ‘Whatever Roger decides, I’m fine with.’ Today he’s much more grown up. He has a strong opinion himself, which I think is great. It’s what we need, especially on the council. It’s been nice working with him.”

Happy that Federer sees it this way. You can see the press want a fight, and Fed isn’t going to give them one.

Bravo Fed.

madmax Says:

I’m sorry everyone, but rafa really has to stop talking about his injuries. Only yesterday he was saying he was fine, perfect. Now, he is not so perfect? I can’t understand what he says anymore.

Brando Says:

Glad roger put the media in there place.

rogerafa Says:

Mature Swiss diplomacy!

Skeezerweezer Says:

Pure class Fed :)

“Usually when I take decisions, I think of the lowerranked players first…..”

Lets see, the top guys are proposing what and to whom does it benefit? Mmmmm…will be following this.

As Rafa said, best to have not mentioned anything, at least he owned up to it. Cats out of the bag though….

dari Says:

Both guys put a zip on it, good for them.
I get the feeling that a lot of Roger’s viewpoints are actually for the lower ranked players. The things ive heard him say before- two year ranking won’t allow any movement for the up and comers, season can’t be too short other wise the lowest ranked players can’t support their families, etc. may be going against what the other higher ranked players want, but its good for the BIG picture.
Ah, well, I could do without knowing all the politics, and I’m flag fed says it needs to stay among the players and out if the press. Rafa gave his own little “my bad”, too he he

Now we can focus on the tennis, I have not seen those misled of the night matches, will catch the dvr later. Go Rog!

dari Says:

There’s a lot of phone errors there, but you get my drift

Humble Rafa Says:

Pure class Fed :)

“Usually when I take decisions, I think of the lowerranked players first…..”

I throw the red flag on that one. The Arrogant One is too PR trained to say anything else. It means nothing. A lot of words, no real substance, then attempt to look like a gentleman in the end. Mission Accomplished.

Skeezerweezer Says:

“I throw the red flag on that one”.

You wish you could be a NFL coach? That, you will never be.

madmax Says:

Humble Rafa, you are out of order with your comment. You will have to change your name to Mumble Rafa.

I don’t understand what you say anymore. There is no way you can defend what Rafa said, nor what you think Roger meant. It’s clear to all Fed fans he is thinking of other players.

Twocents Says:

The sooner Fed steps away from that stupid Council, the better for him!

How much common/business sense one can expect from those super-rich super-successful super-young tennis bone heads?

Don’t waste your time, Fed. Go play with your girls when you’re not messing around on tennis court.

jane Says:

Twocents! Howdy partner. Hope all is well in your world. Y’all come back now, ya hear?

mem Says:


i guess the low ranked don’t need no more money, “pure class.”

tennisfan Says:

Federer is pure class. Whatever Nadal’s intentions were, one thing is for sure that Fed knows that this is something not be discussed in media and make it a big issue. Federer is really mature in this part. As for Nadal, he apologized to the media about his outburst and said he shouldnt ahve done it. But he will stick to his point. The more I think of it, the more i believe from one place that it was a strategy used by Nadal to put pressure on Federer : Nadal/Federer Controversy: Is There Something More To It?

Skeezerweezer Says:



RZ Says:

As much as I enjoy watching Nadal compete, I can’t get over the fact that he’s a complainer and many of his complaints are about elements of the tour that don’t work to his advantage, though they are advantageous to others. The ones I object to the most are:
– There are too many hard court tournaments (probably b/c he has a better track record on clay).
– The altitude at Madrid it too high (no other players have this complaint).
– The rankings should be based on 2 years of play (why, so Rafa could have stayed #1 despite Djoker’s incredible year?)

This all seems childish to me.

steve-o Says:

Diplomatic and classy response from Roger.

He’s right to say that player disagreements on the issues should be resolved privately. If everybody rushes to take their particular grievance to the media, it creates confusion makes it harder for the players to act as a united body.

And he did indicate he would support a player strike in the last resort, if it came to that. But they seem to be pretty far from that at the moment.

Twocents Says:

Hi, Jane. My world is as fine as fresh-cut rose, thanks! I’m so glad to see your Djok camp on the spot he belongs. Tennis is as beautiful as rose in May, too.

Relax, people. English is Nadal’s 2nd/3rd tonge. And I’m with him that Olderer should just let go — it’s Djok/Nadal/Murray time, long over dued. Just show up on court to entertain us fans, Fed.

mem Says:


what do you expect from a perfect like roger. he doesn’t make public remarks that stirs controversy. he always know exactly what to say and do, “pure class.”

i’m happy that i support a player(nadal) who has guts to take a stand despite the consequences.

talk is cheap! sure, it may sound classy and perfect to other chickens, but anybody can say, i’m looking out for lower ranked players, but that doesn’t pay their travel, hotel, food, etc. expenses, does it? if everybody became “pure class” by sitting by and doing nothing, then, we are all doomed to a fake of nothingness.

i didn’t know so many ignorant people were in the world until these blogs were created.

Ajet Says:

By advocating the tour to remain as it is so that the lower-ranked guys can earn more, one guy is actualy doing much as he can, too bad the guy-blind(like color blind) ones can’t see it! Moreover, to stand up against all these powerful young fellas and differ from them and advocate more for the lesser ones than the top ones, knowing the loneliness of his own self in this issue is called guts(it’s like the tiger standing up against the pack of murderous wild dogs; everybody knows that hyenas/wild dogs would always attack in pack while the tiger hunts lonely); and not to swing in the direction of the wind to praise a guy when he was winning everything to now denouncing, deriding, bashing, criticising, accusing him of being showy(now that the guy has not won a slam for two years!) is rather cowardice. To take coaching from uncle during matches, to whine about the altitude etc and to do many other bizarre things is real gutlessness! To advocate for a two-year ranking system to cement his own place, now this is selfishness! And to go mad in media against some guy to whom mucho respect was being pretended, this too is another form of classlessness. Too bad, the joke of fans of that particular guy cannot see this! And instead create hilarious stories about their favourite players opponents, to accuse a player (beating the daylights out of your favourite) of using performance enhancing stuff, to imagine the favourite player to be most unlucky while his rival to be lucky, to think of him/herself of being a know-it-all etc., these are the combination of ignorance, delusion, classlessness, idiocy, craziness, peacelessness, hypocrisy, moronity, narcissism, dream-world living, foolishness, patheticness, sickness, blindness, partisanship all rolled into one!

And such people’re ‘pure class’ jokes, hahaha!!

dari Says:

mem, what you’re saying does not make sense.
Two of the issues that rafa is taking a stand on- shortening the season, and two year rankings- are directly opposed to the lower ranked players paying their travel, food, etc. The shorter season gives them fewer opportunities to make the $ for those expenses, and the two year ranking impedes their progression up the ranking to get direct entry into tourneys, possibly getting some free travel or gear after a big move up the rankings.

What I can say is that maybe fed doesn’t need to be at the top of the player counsel. He’s older than the rest, hes been through it all and conquered the tour making the adjustments on his own when the tour didnt offer them. It’s called toughing it out. No.doubt fed has been outspoken about issues on the tour, too. But he keeps it behind meeting doors, I guess, or what we hear from him is more court surface, rules, technology, etc. I prefer it this way, and leave fans to just enjoy the tennis.

Cheers to Murray starting his campaign tonight! I’ll be glad if i dont hear a peep from him about this matter and he just plays great tennis and gets to the final!

Ajet Says:

the guy supposedly standing for the cause and venting out against the lonely tiger, knowing that there’s a whole pack behind him to isolate and suppress the tiger-hearted man on any issue is hardly selflessness or fellow-feeling or courage. A child could challenge mohammed ali to fight if he had 50 people with him to pounce on ali while the heavyweight was going to kick butt of the toddler! ;)

Ajet Says:

I also would be glad to see murray playing his best tennis at AO instead of siding with the humble one against the arrogant one, coz if he does that, it’d only be him who would lose by putting extra pressure on himself outside of tennis court and the benefit of such loss is only gonna go to the humble one as by talkng nice, he would again beat murray, should they meet in the final!

steve-o Says:

mem: Your argument is nonsensical. Shortening the season and decreasing the number of mandatory tournaments will hurt the lower ranked players.

The smaller tournaments don’t pay out that much money and it’s hard for them to attract fans, unless they can get a star player like Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, or Murray.

Decreasing the requirement for top players to play, will mean that the elite players will have more freedom to schedule, but it will also hurt the smaller tournaments who will no longer be able to attract the big names who are their meal ticket. Shortening the season too much will create scheduling conflicts between the big events (Grand Slams/Masters) and the rest of the tournaments, crowding out the smaller tournaments.

Lower-ranked players who depend on those smaller tournaments will suffer. Those tournaments provide them with a living and the ability to put food on the table. If the tournaments make less money, those players make less money, and they may be forced to give up tennis.

Nadal could forego prize money at every tournament he plays from now on and still live comfortably off his millions, but that’s a luxury the vast majority of players cannot afford.

They’re not like your man, who had all his needs taken care of by his rich family: he trained at home at facilities his own family built, and he was coached for free by his uncle. He was never in danger of starving during his early career.

Your man is on the wrong side of this issue. When he couldn’t get his way in negotiations, he tried to force the council’s hand by going to the media and spouting a lot of ill-considered nonsense. It backfired on him.

Federer is looking to protect the interests of those journeyman who play day in, day out to eke out a living. And it’s good that someone at the top of tennis is, otherwise the tour as a whole would suffer.

mem Says:


oh what i’m saying makes a lot of sense!

one main function of the council is for players to present ideas in an effort to address certain issues. nadal presented an idea of a 2-year ranking system. that’s what brave players do. they take a stand on what they believe is workable and they fight and fight to see it through. other players have the right to do likewise, if they so choose. it doesn’t mean that everybody will vote in support of that particular idea. what rafa presented IS AN IDEA, NOT A LAW! it is not written in stone as most of you seem to suggest. it is an idea!

you guys are harping on 2-year ranking as if nadal has forced others against their will to support that idea. he merely brought an idea to the table that he is passionate about. other players have the right to like it or not like it. you have the right to like it or not like it. it is a democratic process, not a dictatorship.

anyway, all i hear is talk from roger. apparently, davydenko share the same sentiments as voiced in his presser yesterday. he wanted to know why roger is not supporting players, particularly on monetary issues. personally, i’m more interested in lower ranked players getting more money than anything else because they need it and they deserve it. some have families and they do the best they can. i support anybody who speaks and take action on their behalf. doesn’t matter to me if it’s nadal, roger, djokovic, murray, roddick, whomever. it’s the right thing to do!

anyway, that’s my opinion on the subject. you may interpret it as nonsense, but i see it differently.

Skeezerweezer Says:

Davy? Really? He wants to talk monetary issues? Viva Las Vegas. Lol

Seriously, the Davy support talk is contradictory. Post the whole EXACT presser. I believe he was just supporting Rafa’s view with prize money, not all/any other issues, no?

mem Says:


what do you think “monetary” means? so what if davykendo doesn’t support nadal on all issues? i don’t recall saying he did. he has that right. after all, that’s the democratic way. there is no law that says he has to support every single idea that nadal comes up with. my goodness, can’t you draw inference sometimes without someone having to explain it. never mind, i seem to forget most of you can only see things one way.

below is the link referring to davydenko’s comments on the subject. is this link legitimate enough for you?

skeezerweezer Says:

The only thing this article said that Davy said ( which was not a direct quote ) in relation to specific topic of contention was;

“The Russian said he did not support the idea of a shorter season, a change that is backed by Nadal, Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray, but he agrees that prize money has not increased in line with growing profits at Grand Slam tournaments.”

In fact, according to this article, Davy actually disagrees with Rafa regarding a shorter season.

Like I said….prize money only.

Look, “all you hear is Fed”. Fed never was bringing it up solely on his own. Like others here, this stuff should stay in house amongst the players. He had say something in response to Rafa’s accusatory remark, the media asked, and, handled it with class.

Furthermore, this poster takes Davy’s remarks came with a grain of chili pepper as he had to add some “attitude” of unprofessionalism, saying;

“He’s from Switzerland. He’s perfect.”

Wow. What did Fed do to get that remark? Like…nothing? It just watered down is stance and sounds like he just doesn’t like Fed more than anything. He had to throw Fed under the bus, why?

The sarcasm is obvious, and every professional tennis player knows Fed is not Perfect. Silly statement really. Fed was and is professional because he didn’t bite on the lure and get hooked in. He takes the high road with his comments, as he should have, and stay out of public comments and keep the debate within the ranks.

Why should any player get money for a first round loss? If you want a novella on how up and coming players make it on the tour TV and I can write a novella on the subject. That is just flat out ridiculous suggestion.

Lulu Iberica Says:

All the players have a right to voice their opinions on these issues. The way I understand it, Nadal has advocated for fewer mandatory tournaments, increased prize money at the lower end of the scale, Davis Cup being every two years, and a two year ranking system. I personally think the two year ranking system is a terrible idea, but the rest of it is all debatable. There are definitely other players who support these ideas, but I have no idea if it’s a “supermajority,” as Rafa put it.

This is pure speculation, but I think that maybe lately Rafa has started to feel his own mortality and is motivated to try to protect himself and possibly others, too. When he was 19, even early 20s he probably felt invincible like most young tough guys. Also, it’s possible that all this physical sacrifice is a lot more difficult to take when he’s not winning so much. I just want him to be in a good place, physically and mentally and to show us awesome tennis! Vamos, Rafa!!!

Skeezerweezer Says:


Just me but this was mentioned a few years back. I know the ladies love rafa’s hot bod, but it is just not built for tennis. If you know american football, its like putting a linebacker in a wide reciever position.

With his body type, he is imho always going to fight the injuries. He is a power built athlete, short bursts, lots of strength. Not the normal flexibility of a regular built tennis bod. Wish we had a sport science type who could post and comment on the anatomy of the tennis player. But if you see the masses in the game, you’ll see by and large the physiques are the same. Basketball players, mostly very lean.

In his defense, he has taken this disadvantage ( yes, I called it that ) and managed to become one of the all time greats. Props to him, but just don’t see him having a long career in Tennis with his body type. Hope he proves me wrong, cause despite him not being my fav he brings excitement to the game on the court. I watch him for those monster FH’s :). He is…..uniquely gifted.

Leon Says:

Lulu Iberica: “This is pure speculation, but I think that maybe lately Rafa has started to feel his own mortality…”

Seems to be rather pure fact than speculation, and Nadal himself speaks just about that (post-football, -ski, etc). Well, if so, one can only feel for him, as to start seeing one’s own limits is a painful process for anybody, causing certain level of irritation almost inevitably. Any person faces that, sooner or later, the only difference is the manner of coping with that. “It depends”, as they say…
And it is the only excuse of otherwise a childish (very, very soft term!) trick with all those horrible personal attacks from Nadal (Kolya, a former extraordinary player and formerly “attractive inside” guy, alas, does not deserve even to be mentioned), stored, I suppose, for many years. Seems, it has in fact nothing to do with the ATP problems (which I am afraid are out enough of our comprehension to be seriously discussed here). Well, “rivalry” and so on, it happens. Some bitter residue, but Roger will overcome that quickly, I think. Let their rackets talk.

Skeezer, agreed on almost all counts.

Nims Says:

Changes which NAdal proposes are not easy to make. But for people who proclaim Nadal as brave for proposing changes should understand that Nadal is not brave enough to make minor changes in his game

a) Picking his butt
b) Positioning his bottles
c) Time delay between points

For a brave Nadal, it’s better he changes his attitude first before proposing changes to the tennis calendar.

NK Says:

“He’s from Switzerland. He’s perfect.”

Wow. What did Fed do to get that remark? Like…nothing? It just watered down is stance and sounds like he just doesn’t like Fed more than anything. He had to throw Fed under the bus, why?”

Skeeze: This from a guy who Federer bailed out from a betting controversy not too long ago.

Skeezerweezer Says:


Yeah ;)… And Davy of course mentions money issues hehe….go figger. Thanks Davy.

Michael Says:

Despite the provocation by Nadal, Federer has tried to cool this issue down. He is right when he says that he should look not just at the welfare of the top 10 players but also the other players in the circuit. The top 5 players wants the number of tournaments to be reduced and the whole thing rescheduled. Nadal in particular also wants the ranking system to be tinkered with. Whereas out of the top 10, players want the number of tournaments that is being played now to be continued which is understandable as they hadly go deep into the tournament and what they are particular about is the distribution of prize money to the early round losers. Federer is the voice of reason here whereas Nadal is the voice of outburst. There should be a balance of views between the top and the rest and that is what Federer is saying that things are difficult to reconcile and there should be more talks at the player level whereas Nadal is impatient and is blaming Federer for no rhyme or reason.

Addicted4444 Says:

You know, Federer is pretty damn good in understanding branding and image-building. Even his detractors won’t deny that.

Maybe the guy recognizes how the optics of a bunch of multi-millionaire tennis players going on strike will play out especially in this economic environment.

Michael Says:

Novak –
“But I prefer talking, you know, in details about these things more behind closed doors”.

on changes proposed in Men’s Tennis.

That is the sign of maturity which Novak has which Nadal doesn’t possess despite so many years on the circuit.

Skeezerweezer Says:

News Flash,

The NewYorkTimes, winner of all time news reportings, says

This imho raps up the topic so far. Right mem?

alison hodge Says:

michael dont get me wrong, while i agree novak is the worlds best player,and deserves credit for what was an amazing year last year,and he has matured as a person and a player,he is far from been an angel himself,and has done some pretty stupid things himself at times,was that gun incident a sign of maturity?easy to be all polite and friendly when things are going well for you, but lets see what hes like when hes faced with what rafa and roger are going through now,ok seems a way of but dominance is not a forever thing,ok i agree what rafa said was un called for,but to say he lacks maturity,when he has always said how amazing roger is,is rather unfair.

Ajet Says:

To take things in perspective, it really surprising how sure I sound, while blogging at the top of my emotions here that: its roger who actually is doing a far better job by opining against the shortening of schedule keeping playing messiah for the causes of the livelihood of lower ranked players, while nadal by voicing against the present schedule proves to be self-serving only considering the fact that a shorter schedule would keep him fresher and more ready to win more titles for himself only!

But the fact is I haven’t read the mind of either nadal or federer! Thus, even I can’t say that fed is voicing his opinion purely for unselfish reasons whereas nadal is the only selfish one!

But man, I at least know one place where I by being so vocal against nadal for him demanding a two-year ranking system while fed vehemently opposing it, am actually doing it for selfish reasons guided by the concern that such a two year system might have actually not only helped nadal to keep holding to the top place, but also would have gone against federer(to whom I exclusively support the most) in the sense that by coming into effect of a 2-year ranking system nadal woulda remained no.1 for two years instead of one, and thereby much lessened the gap between him and fed in terms of holding the record of top spot for consecutive weeks(relative to each other), to which my ego wouldn’t allow me to tolerate/accept!!! Wow, Thus, I’m utterly sefish to go all out against rafa. And may be the same reason also wants me for not supporting nadal for the shortened schedule, talking advantage of which he coul be able to play his best tennis for even a longer part of the year than at present, and that would mean more titles to him, about which I’d obviously not be happy! Fed’s on-the-paper explanation of the reason(which arguably is fed’s concern for the lower-ranked players) for his advocating the current playing schedule or fed’s another on-the-paper explanation(which is again arguably fed’s concern and also willingness to make it easier for the up and comers to break through the rankings) for him being against enforcement of two year ranking system aside, my own support to fed in these two matters is guided by a bit of love for tradition or humanitarian concerns(as fedfans would say, including myself); but it is also guided to a much larger extent in safeguarding roger’s legacy by not allowing to take avdantage of the changes that he is proposing so as to preventing him from breathing through the neck of federer(achievement-wise), the probability of which increases in case the changes nadal advocates are enforced in the tour!

So at least I’ve come to terms with the fact that I’m supporting roger with my selfish concerns actually playing a bigger part in it than anything else!
Now Can I assume that fed is not guided by any of these acting in his favour or disfavour, keeping in view his own selfish interests on tis matter while opining for or against the aforesaid two burning issues which I’ve dealt with in here???
I guess, at least wisdom says that roger’s human too and thus there has to be reasons for him being against the shortening of schedule(which cannot by any means purely humanitarian and filled with concern for lower ranked guys, as he suggests) nor his opposing the 2-year ranking system can be held to be solely the love for tradition an not anything concernng his own interest! I never thought it that way until now!

Man, I wrote posts supporting roger and criticising nadal on thse ssues as if I know about what exactly is cooking in the minds of those two guys, whereas all that I should have based my opinion on this matter is ONLY my perception/speculation of who’s noble or who’s more justified in making which demands or what might be cooking in the minds of each of this federer or nadal!!

But momentary heat and constant passion denied me from viewing each side more neutrally! Unbelievable this is, ain’t it so?
But well, that’s the price of being human I guess.
Sh#t must happen fromm time to time, hehe! :D

Ajet Says:

”And may be the same reason also wants”

typo error in my previous post 3rd para, it must read as ”And may be the same was the reason”

Michael Says:

There are two Michaels posti g on this forum it seems. You will know from my posts that I am a Rafa fan. So, to all u Federer worshippers, the guy is so CLASSY that he had to break down in tears during the Trophy ceremony in 2009 when Rafa won, much to the embarrassment of Rod Laver and company and last but not least Rafa himself. He did not allow Rafa to enjoy his moment of victory. Very classy Indeed!!!

alison hodge Says:

thats such a great post ajet,i guess all fans and all players,have selfish reasons a times,nobodys perfect,we are all human as you say.

alison hodge Says:

michael i too am a rafa fan hes a great player,but i also think rogers amazing,and i dont see the need to discredit one player because your a fan of another,and i dont see whats wrong with showing your emotions,it obviously meant alot to roger,as it did to rafa in 2010,when rafa beat soda to regain the fo,and i dont think rafa was at all embarassed anyway,as he said to roger when he got him in that arm lock embrace,your amazing sorry for today,and you will break sampras grand slam record,either way nothing wrong in crying its an involuntary human reaction.

Lulu Iberica Says:

Thanks for that post, Ajet! Very fair. Well, even as a Rafa fan I was annoyed with him last season when he started talking about the 2 year ranking idea, although I understand that he had advocated for it in previous years, before Djoko’s big run. I think it’s pretty obvious that Roger is better at public relations, and I do think Rafa shouldn’t have dissed Roger in the press like that, as he himself acknowledged. Yes, I figure they’re both acting out of a mixture of self-interest and concern for the whole tour.

Yeah, I’m aware that Rafa’s not built like a typical tennis player and of his physical style, all that. I just think maybe when he was younger he himself didn’t fully grasp the implications of that. He was so very young and really deferred to authority. I thought it was very revealing when Fed said, “Back in the day he used to say, Whatever Roger decides, I’m fine with.” I guess that was even after Rafa became VP of the council. Kind of amazing!

bj pearce Says:

I think the tv commentators on this tournament have been disgraceful. They are continuing to make a big deal out of Nadal’s comments on Federer’s stance regarding the players’ demands as far as wanting a bigger piece of the monies taken in by these tournaments. They should have more money, especially for the lower ranked players. after they pay for coaching, travel, medical expense, etc. they hardly have enough money to encourage them to even play. If they have to strike to obtain the increase the players share of the purse, then they should do it. the public will understand what it sometimes takes to beat “big business.” The commentators should stop trying to stir up a feud between Nadal and Federer and concentrate on reporting the matches. The Open is not a gossip show; it is a tennis tournament. The commentatators also show a lot of favoritism and voice it, which should stop. they should be impartial. they should also quit making fun of players and their injuries (whether imagined or not). it is not their place to ridicule the players and they have no way of actually knowing what the players injuries are. they are there to report! with the grueling schedule these players have, it’s a wonder there aren’t more injuries. the networks need to take a long hard look at what their commentators are doing, compared to what they are supposed to be doing. i don’t give a damn about all their speculation. i just want to watch the matches and draw my own conclusions! until then, I will just turn the sound off…

Michael Says:

@Alison Hodge. You don’t think Rafa was embarrassed? Have a look at the replay. I agree that there is nothing wrong in showing your emotions but why did it have to be at that precise moment when Rafa was receiving the trophy? When Rafa lost the 2007 Wimbledon final to Roger he was gutted. So, what does Rafa do? He cried in the locker room, not in public like Roger did.

Lulu Iberica Says:

@Michael — I just saw that match again recently, and I think Rafa was a bit embarrassed by Fed’s tears. Definitely the AO organizer people standing behind them looked embarrassed! BUT, I think what really got to Roger was the crowd cheering him so much. He was kind of tearing up from the beginning, but after some guy yelled “we love you Roger” very loudly, that’s when Fed really lost it. He couldn’t help it.

Nims Says:

I do not understand people not questioning Roger when he cried after winning the AO. It’s not like he is crying for the 1st time. He has done it before, which typically shows he is a emotional guy. It’s nothing to do with taking way the limelight from Rafa.

Ben Pronin Says:

I skipped over a few comments and somehow you guys went from discussing how classy or not Federer is to how embarrassed Nadal was when Federer cried…

Nadal took back his comments because he realized that it was dumb to say anything to the media. He’s been venting a lot to the press lately, for whatever reason, and he did it again and immediately regretted his decision because he realized the media is a bunch of idiots who now claim Federer and Nadal are feuding, even now when both have claimed that there is no problem between them personally.

The monetary issue Davydenko refers to could be that the players are trying to get a bigger cut of the pie from the revenue brought in by the slams. As of now, the prize money is about 10-11% of the total and some of the players feel they should be getting around 30%. Isner also mentioned that this is the biggest issue at the moment and the players have a legitimate complaint. Perhaps they do but a number of us saw the mess that resulted from greedy players wanting a bigger cut of the pie with the NBA and NFL lockouts this past year. And Federer even mentioned that he followed these particular events and he is very cautious with wanting to strike in order to get more money, especially when the top players like Federer, Nadal, etc aren’t exactly underpaid. But the lower ranked players are, big time.

Which is why I don’t agree with Nadal’s ideas. He very much wants to protect the top players, and he’s not wrong for wanting that, but it doesn’t help tennis in the long run. Consider that Melzer was in the top 10 for a good part of last season despite not putting up any good results. But his 2010 points carried enough weight for almost half the season. If there was a 2 year ranking, he’d still be in the top 10 despite not doing anything of value last season. Young guys like Raonic, Harrison, and Tomic would virtually have no chance to ever break through in the rankings. And add in the fact that low ranked guys are underpaid, this would ensure they would stay underpaid for an even longer amount of time than maybe necessary.

The thing is, Djokovic secured the number 1 ranking after winning his 3rd slam of the season despite winning 9 other titles, more than anyone else, beforehand. If there had been another big tournament that would’ve allowed Nadal to reclaim his ranking before the end of the year, I’m sure Nadal would not have complained about it and would’ve played all out. Nadal has also suggested having tournaments at the end of the year that don’t affect the rankings so that the top guys can rest while those who want to play can play. Unfortunately, that’s not still not fair to the lower ranked players.

The other thing is, Nadal still plays extra tournaments while complaining. When he won the US Open in 2010 then went to Asia to play a bunch of tournaments I said right away that was a dumb move but a bunch of his fans on here claimed that it’s no big deal since he’s young and is feeling good and wants to play. What happened next? He injured his shoulder. He apparently almost injured his knee again while not doing anything. So the reality is Nadal is prone to getting injured no matter how much or little tennis he plays.

I know I’m gonna get called out for “attacking” Nadal but he’s been by far the most vocal about this issue so it’s only fair that I have the most to say about him.

Kimberly Says:

Re: AO09 Trophy Presentation

Roger did not want to cry in public. He could not control it. He was upset by Wimbledon loss and had months to mull it over then the same thing happens again.He was used to never dominating GS finals other than the French, which he had sort of resigned himself to losing. Then to lose to the same guy on grass and HC with all of the legends there to give him the trophy for tieing sampras, he kind of lost it. He was later embarassed by it and definitely would take it back if he could. He wasn’t trying to get attention and I bet if he could have paid money for something to swallow him up and teleport him away from the podium he would have. I personally found it unwatchable, like someone scratching their nails on a chalkboard and left the room.

Kimberly Says:

forever not never

skeezerweezer Says:


Actually.. Great post. You did your research. If
they are sooo worried about having a shorter season, why are u playing exhos?

Lulu Iberica Says:

Eh, I don’t feel you’re attacking Nadal, Ben.

I’m just glad Rafa played well 1st round. He’s up early enough tonight that I might actually get to watch him!

Michael Says:


Federer cries even when he wins a match. So, I do not think these things should be taken seriously. It only goes to show as to how much that guy love Tennis as a sport. Ofcourse the mood of the occasion was disturbed due to the let out of feelings by Federer and I thought he could have contained it. But Federer could not contain his feelings especially when he lost a match he should have surely won in four sets. He knows it and Rafa too knows it. Perhaps he has no one itself to blame but himself for playing such a poor match and yet giving Nadal a tough fight. 37 break point opportunities is too much to be ignored. I would just say Nadal was lucky on that day and that is it.

Kimberly Says:

The two michaels debating, this is kind of weird yes?

Michael Says:


I am not branding Rafa in generic terms as lacking maturity. I said that only in specific term referring to the recent incident where Nadal unnecessarily vent out his views to the Presser on a volatile issue which is to be consulted only at the Players life and behind closed door. For some reason or other Nadal lost his cool and blamed Federer for the mess and that too in Press. That is not fair. Being a senior player on tour, he could have controlled himself and he has no business to let out his views to the Press what he thinks about it and also blame Federer for being non-cooperative. Djokovic on this particular issue has shown maturity and has also taken a class to Nadal that these things should not be discussed in public. Ofcourse, we have seen Djokovic also dicey on many occasions and for no reason he is called a Djoker. But I think he is maturing especially with the way he conducted himself on this issue.

Michael Says:

Kimberly, Name doesn’t matter. I have been posting in this forum for very long as Michael. Suddenly for the past two months, I see another Michael who is a hardcore Rafa Fan and prejudiced against Roger. I am not sure whether it is his actual name or he likes this name ?? Whereas though I am a Roger Fan, I have no hard feelings towards other players and I admire every one of them.

Michael Says:

In the name of protecting players interest overall, everybody wants to protect their own selfish interest. The top 10 players with the exception of Roger wants the tennis season to be shortened or rationalized. Whereas the rest are more concerned about the distribution of prize money to the players who do not go deep into the tournament and they are also hankering for an increase in prize money in that category. They also do not want the season to be shortened. Players like Nadal are particular about the first part whereas players like Davydenko are more particular about the second part. In this kind of volatile situation, how are you going to reconcile the interests of the two sections ?? As President of the Players Council, nobody Roger is having a big headache and after this Rafa’s outburst it will be fit and apt for Federer to resign the post and let Nadal himself who is now the vice-president to take care of the situation and see how he is going to reconcile the conflict of interest ??

Kimberly Says:

It’s just odd because you have to analyze the content of the post and try and figure out who you are talking too. I wonder why tennis x won’t refuse someone the name if there already is someone under that name, its confusing, on espn I go to basketball and football chats and I had to try like ten names beforeninfinally found one that was not taken.

Michael Says:

Kimberly, I understand your difficulty. May be Tennis X should consider implementing your good suggestion with immediate effect.

alison hodge Says:

michael and michael maybe one of you should just post under a different name,or decide between yourselves as michael 1 and michael 2.

alison hodge Says:

michael jan 18th 12.29am loved ajets post,jan 17th 7.12am,i agree rafa was wrong to say what he said about roger,but nobodys perfect we all make mistakes,and it does not matter who you are,and everyone is the same ,and at times everyone has selfish reasons for doing things,all part of been a human being,welcome to the human race,personally i would just rather watch them play tennis,and leave politics out of it.

Michaell Says:

Alison, Taken your point. I have been posting in this forum for many years now. But in the past two or three months, I am not sure, we have another Michael posting here. Might be it is his actual name or he wantonly wants to create a confusion or mischief. What ever it may be, I will post as Michaell to avoid confusion which I am doing now.

Michaell Says:

Alison, I have nothing against Rafa. I have acknowledged quite often that he is one of the GREATS and it is a real treat to watch his exploits on Court. But here in this issue, we are all expressing our views on what Rafa should not have said in the first place which is an insult to the Greatest player in history who has time and again placed Rafa on a high pedestal. I think a dinner meeting between them is essential to clear the misconceptions Rafa has on Roger.

Michael Says:

Alison, I have nothing against Rafa. I have acknowledged quite often that he is one of the GREATS and it is a real treat to watch his exploits on Court. But here in this issue, we are all expressing our views on what Rafa should not have said in the first place which is an insult to the Greatest player in history who has time and again placed Rafa on a high pedestal. I think a dinner meeting between them is essential to clear the misconceptions Rafa has on Roger.

Michael Says:

Alison, I am sorry. I tried posting under a different name as you suggested and it is not working and my view is not getting posted and await moderator comments. I have no other option but to continue only with Michael.

Ajet Says:

”I think a dinner meeting between them is essential to clear the misconceptions Rafa has on Roger.”

And let me make it clear that I won’t mind being a fly on the wall at that time in the dining hall to listen to their talk, and not to mention, sitting on the food unnoticably and tasting it first before roger or rafa could have it, hehe! ;)

Michael Says:

You have good sense of humour Ajet.

alison hodge Says:

michael i never said you did,and as i have said numerous times i agree rafa was out of order saying what he did,and yes people are here to comment no point having a forum otherwise.
ajet revolting post but also very funny though at the same time,but do you really want to give both men food poisoning before they play lol?ive waited months for humble rafa to say something as funny as that to be honest,nice to here such objectivity in a post,means like you say we are all human and all capable at times of making cock ups,im sure rafa and roger will sort this out,rafas apologised from what i can gather,and roger has said he doesnt hold a grudge.

alison hodge Says:

michael dont know which one this is to,but i think you have to re boot,clear the cache,change the password,something like that,probably best to ask someone with better computer knowledge than me,anyway good luck,sorry cant be more help than that.

alison hodge Says:

sorry michaell with the double l,just noticed your post,after id posted mine.

Michael Says:

@Michaell. I am not trying to cause any confusion or mischief. My name IS Michael. When I first started posting I did not notice another Michael. Anyhow no harm done.

max Says:

After reading all these posts one figures how great were those tennis players who managed to hold the #1 spot for years, most notably Sampras and Federer.
Now, the younger ones on the top are complaining about the calendar, the rankings etc, shame on them.
If I am correct, Sampras & Federer NEVER quit an on-going match in their carreers…in spite of the calendar and the ranking system. That is called GREATNESS.

Kimberly Says:

ok, so federer fan michael is now michaell and rafa fan michael is still michael?

Skeezerweezer Says:

Michael, the Jekyl and Hyde of Tennis X. Ok, not funny. Shoot an email to and tell em your situation. That should help.

Top story: Nadal, Djokovic Lead Their Countries In Davis Cup QFs