Roger Federer Doesn’t Care If He Ever Beats Nadal In Paris Because He’s Already Won The French Open!
by Tom Gainey | May 24th, 2013, 5:35 pm
  • 27 Comments

Roger Federer spoke to the press today at the French Open to address the state of his game. When asked if he would like to tell his grandchildren that he once beat Rafael Nadal at the tournament, Federer responded that it didn’t matter to him. Here’s why:

“Not very important,” Federer said. “Because I won the French Open already. So that’s what matters, not to beat him here necessarily. And I have done it elsewhere.”

Federer then talked more about Nadal’s level this year compared to the past.

“You know he’s not going to give you a match,” he said. “Because he plays with a lot of margin, a lot of topspin, a lot of pace, stands far behind the baseline, and is very focused. Overall, you know what you’re going to get, so you have to play a really good match against him to have a chance.

“And then you still might lose. So it’s amazing for how long he’s done it and for how consistent he’s done it, you know, to play at this high level on clay. He’s a little less dangerous on clay overall because of the speed of the surface.

“But nevertheless, it’s a great effort by him, mental side and physical side. So he’s done really well. His level of play compares to what he’s done always. I think the results show again this year how good he’s playing.”

Seeking a second French Open and with it a second Career Slam, Federer opens play Sunday or Monday in the first round against promising Spanish qualifier Pablo Carreno Busta.


Also Check Out:
John Isner Doesn’t Care That There Are No American Men In The Top 20
Serena Williams Admits She Doesn’t Like Playing Tournaments After The US Open
Stanislas Wawrinka Doesn’t Care That He’s Ranked Ahead Of Federer
Andy Murray On Who’s The French Open Favorite: I Don’t Know And I Don’t Care!
Henin, Sharapova Face Serbian Challenge at French Open

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

Get Tennis-X news FREE in your inbox every day

27 Comments for Roger Federer Doesn’t Care If He Ever Beats Nadal In Paris Because He’s Already Won The French Open!

RZ Says:

He may not care, but you know he’d love to do it!


tennis x hippy chic Says:

Not to take anything away from Roger or his RG win in 2009,but im sure he would have been doubly delighted had he took the title by beating Rafa,IMO i think it would have been pretty fitting after Rafa had beaten Roger the year before at Wimbledon.


Brando Says:

He’s right and love the respect Roger shows Rafa here.

Good luck Fed and Vamos Rafa!


M Says:

Nicely said, Brandon.
:-)


skeezer Says:

Fed won the French Open, and that it is all the matters. It helped cement his legacy. Interesting how he put it. That winning the GS FO in Rafa’s era was more important than beating the man himself. I mean who else has won FO in Rafa’s era?

It further proves that despite the Rafa fan hysteria, Pro players are more concerned about winning Slams than a H2H record. After all , you don’t get a trophy for that, do YOU?


nadalista Says:

^^^au contraire, it’s you Fedbots who are obsessed with the H2H, that’s the reason for your animus towards him.


Michael Says:

It would have been nice had Roger beat Rafa to win the title. If a Soderling can do it, why can’t Roger ? He could have on his day. But that never came because he always played below par in most of the finals against Rafa. In 2006, he had umpteen break point chances, but he never converted. Again in 2011, I thought Roger had the best chance to win against Nadal. He was 5-2 up and there was a break point and all that he had to do was to make a drop shot and the set was his. But that landed long by the tiniest of margins. There is that mental block which has prevented him from playing his best. But now, it will not be possible for Roger to beat Nadal simply because he is aged.


Michael Says:

Although Roger says this, I think in his heart of hearts, what would please him is beating Nadal at the French.


James Says:

Of course Roger would have loved to have beaten Rafa at least once at RG. But like he said, his main goal at RG was always to win the championship which he did in 2009. And yes despite the FeDal rivalry so dominated by Rafa, Roger did beat him 10 times, just not at RG.


WTF Says:

Winning it without beating Nadal is not the same, and people know it.

Nadal won Wimbledon by beating Roger.


Giles Says:

Me thinks he owes Sodapop big time.


tennis x hippy chic Says:

Giles Rafa wasnt good enough to make the FO final in 2009,Roger and Soda both were,so Roger beating Soda rather than Rafa doesnt make this win any less legit,sorry just saying.


skeezer Says:

“Fedbots who are obsessed with the H2H,”

LMAO that’ll be the day.


martin rivkin Says:

the only way to beat nadal on clay is to attack attack attack and keep going all way through till winning it only a young player can do it against nadal in best of 5 sets. still think the style of a player like stefan edberg would attack and beat nadal on clay and think thats only way to stop him


WTF Says:

tennis x hippy chic Says:

“Giles Rafa wasnt good enough to make the FO final in 2009,Roger and Soda both were,so Roger beating Soda rather than Rafa doesnt make this win any less legit,sorry just saying.”

He proved he was good enough to beat Soderling by beating Soderling the following year. Federer on the other hand lost to him the following year.

The win was legit, because that’s how the rules of the game work. If you’re injured and lose, too bad. But those who saw it have a mental asterisk in their mind for that year.

It’s still not the same as beating a fully fit Rafa, which Roger will never be able to do.


queen Says:

Ha ha. Of course he doesn’t care…he lost all hope of beating Nadal. He knows it ain’t gonna happen LOL


queen Says:

Vamos champ! El Bufon and The Arrogant One need some reality check.


Simon Says:

“It’s still not the same as beating a fully fit Rafa, which Roger will never be able to do.”

Really? did they change the rules at FO that a slam win is counted only if you beat Rafa at the FO? I remember Borg and Kuerten winning a bunch of FOs without beating a fit Rafa! According to your irrational logic – their wins count for nothing.

Fed owes no more to soda-pop than nadal owes to djokovic/youzhny for having to win the USopen without beating the greatest hard court player at the USo.

I don’t understand Rafa fans’ running away from the gauntlet that Djokovic/his fans have thrown. He is their real rival not Roger who is from another generation – hewitt/A-rod and Safin. The truth is Rafa got stalled at no.2 by a 5-year older guy from his previous generation. Imagine Federer being no.2 to kuerten/kafelnikov for 4 successive years and then being no.2 to hewitt for another year and so on.

Roger fans don’t gloat over his winning H2Hs over agassi/sampras. Heck they don’t even gloat about the way Roger surpassed his own generation – he beat hewitt 15times in a row. They talk about the real records – the slams and weeks at no.1, which I mentioned Djokovic is closer to overtaking Rafa than rafa is to overtaking Roger.

End of the day, Rafa is a spectacular clay-court player who was the no.2 grass court player of the Roger era, no.4 on hardcourts [maybe no.3, but murray has a better winning percentage and titles] and no.4 on indoors.

Compare that to Federer who is the no.1 player on all surfaces except clay – not just the last decade, but arguably all time! On his worst surface he is the 2nd best of his generation on clay.

I think we can all see which set of the fans will have to rely on H2H to try to conceal their favorite player’s shortcomings on the entire calendar and not just a 2 or 3 month part of the year.


Simon Says:

“It would have been nice had Roger beat Rafa to win the title. If a Soderling can do it, why can’t Roger ?”

That’s a real amateur question. Tennis, like a lot of sports, is about match-ups. Federer has never lost to players like youzhny/ferrer/blake [well, blake beat him once] but the players at their best give nadal all sorts of trouble.

You look at Fedalovic and it is like rock, paper, scissors. nadal enjoys the match-up with Fed and djokovic definitely prefers to play nadal/fed – he dismantled rafa 7 times in a row at rafa’s prime whereas Fed was the only guy who could win atleast 2 sets off djokovic (at slams) during his prime year, 2011. He did that at FO and USO and even won the FO match.

What is remarkable is Fed doesn’t enjoy the age advantage in his rivalry with Djokovic, yet it was he who wrestled the no.1 rank from novak [albeit briefly] and not nadal – who as I mentioned belongs to the djokovic generation rather than to fed’s generation.

Player/Team A beating player/Team B and player B beating player c, doesn’t necessarily translate to A beating C in most sports.


Okiegal Says:

Roger stated that Rafa was less dangerous on clay. Will someone who knows tennis better than I to explain thate statement? I thought that is why Rafa wins most of the clay court tourneys because that is his best surface. Would that not mean he would be dangerous? Just didn’t understand that statement.


madmax Says:

nadalista Says:
^^^au contraire, it’s you Fedbots who are obsessed with the H2H, that’s the reason for your animus towards him.

May 25th, 2013 at 1:54 am

Nadalista, you sure seem to like federer an awful lot. In fact that is all you talk about. We don’t go on about the h2h. You do. And contrary to what you believe, I have no problem with rafa. I did, at one time, enjoy the rafa/roger finals for a number of reasons. Call me sentimental, but these two really do like each other, have always been respectful towards each other (apart from last year when rafa talked about Roger’s role at the ATP), but generally speaking, these two are a great pair of guys. You are either for rafa or for roger, its impossible to be both.

And once again, count on two hands (and a bit more), how many tournaments are clay related. This is rafa’s strength, whereas roger is more of an all rounder in my eyes.

The h2h is deceiving.


singularity87 Says:

Okiegal,

I did a double take at that, then I took it to mean that he is trying to say (probably messed up translation) that Nadal is not as dangerous on clay this year as in the past.

Plausible given the return from injury, but not so much when you look at the results he’s had.

Though there was a certain Horatio Zeballos overcame him on clay not long ago. Perhaps a lapse isn’t totally impossible.


queen Says:

If 20/10 looks deceiving u fedfans must be crazy!


WTF Says:

“Really? did they change the rules at FO that a slam win is counted only if you beat Rafa at the FO? I remember Borg and Kuerten winning a bunch of FOs without beating a fit Rafa! According to your irrational logic – their wins count for nothing.”

Since reading comprehension is beyond you, I’ll just repeat what I said. “His win was legit. It’s just not the same.”

As for Kuerten, different eras.


WTF Says:

“Fed owes no more to soda-pop than nadal owes to djokovic/youzhny for having to win the USopen without beating the greatest hard court player at the USo.”

Unlike with Nadal losing to Soderling, Federer didn’t have injury problems to battle that year.

“I don’t understand Rafa fans’ running away from the gauntlet that Djokovic/his fans have thrown”

I don’t think they’re running away from anything.

“Roger fans don’t gloat over his winning H2Hs over agassi/sampras. Heck they don’t even gloat about the way Roger surpassed his own generation – he beat hewitt 15times in a row. They talk about the real records – the slams and weeks at no.1, which I mentioned Djokovic is closer to overtaking Rafa than rafa is to overtaking Roger.”

Each person defines greatness differently, but I’m not sure anyone here is disputing that Fed is the greatest. That’s just Fed fanatics reading too far into it.

“Compare that to Federer who is the no.1 player on all surfaces except clay – not just the last decade, but arguably all time! On his worst surface he is the 2nd best of his generation on clay.”

If you think he’s the second best because he won one FO when no one else managed to do it, OK. I personally don’t think his clay court “prowess” is second best though. More like third.

“I think we can all see which set of the fans will have to rely on H2H to try to conceal their favorite player’s shortcomings on the entire calendar and not just a 2 or 3 month part of the year.”

Probably the ones who need to get defensive because their player is over 30 and not the same as he was anymore.

“The truth is Rafa got stalled at no.2 by a 5-year older guy from his previous generation.”

Having 5 years more experience when being in your prime is an advantage not disadvantage to the guy who’s 5 years older. It’s when one guy is 27 and the other is 32 that it becomes a disadvantage.


Steve 27 Says:

Fed fans are so delusional. They know, but they never learn.


skeezer Says:

^they know 17. Even there great Rafa has said so. The best in History.

What else is there to learn?

Answer; nothing from Rafa bots. Who’s delusional?

#doh!

Top story: Federer Falls To Raonic, Slips Further Behind Djokovic In No. 1 Race; ATP London Field Set
Most Recent story: 2014 ATP Finals Field: Raonic, Nishikori, Cilic Make Debut
  • Recent Comments
Rankings
ATP - Oct 27 WTA - Oct 27
1 Novak Djokovic1 Serena Williams
2 Roger Federer2 Maria Sharapova
3 Rafael Nadal3 Simona Halep
4 Stan Wawrinka4 Petra Kvitova
5 Tomas Berdych5 Ana Ivanovic
6 David Ferrer6 Agnieszka Radwanska
7 Kei Nishikori7 Eugenie Bouchard
8 Andy Murray8 Caroline Wozniacki
9 Marin Cilic9 Na Li
10 Milos Raonic10 Angelique Kerber
More: Tennis T-Shirts | Tennis Shop | Live Tennis Scores | Headlines

Copyright © 2003-2014 Tennis-X.com. All rights reserved.
This website is an independently operated source of news and information and is not affiliated with any professional organizations.