Roger Federer: I Doubt All the Players Like the Idea of Having Combined Events [Video]
by Tom Gainey | August 15th, 2011, 2:27 pm

Speaking to the media today from the Western and Southern in Cincinnati, Roger Federer revealed that most players do not like the idea of having both men and women playing at the same event.

With tournament amenities, practice courts and locker rooms often in short supply, Federer said that things can become quite cramped at these combined events, but gives Cincinnati high marks nonetheless.

More importantly, however, for Federer is his match tomorrow against Juan Martin Del Potro in the second round.

Federer leads Del Potro 6-2 but the Argentine has won the last two at the 2009 London Masters and memorably in his five set win in the 2009 US Open final.

“I thought both matches were really good, they were both really close. There was a lot on the line in both matches,” Federer said. “US Open, obviously, having all the chances was a tough one to lose. Definitely one of the bigger losses in my career I think.

“He’s gone through a rough patch and hasn’t played at all,” he added. “He’s got 15 matches since, I’ve played like 80 I would just assume. So it’s been different roads but here we are.”

Del Potro won his match Sunday over Andreas Seppi when the Italian retired down 4-1 in the first set.

“It’s special to play against Roger,” Del Potro said yesterday. “I have already beat him twice and know how to beat him. But it is not easy.”

The third-seeded Federer has won Cincinnati four times in his career but this year his only title came at Doha in January.

You Might Like:
Novak Djokovic Says He’s “Neutral” On Combined ATP/WTA Events
Caroline Wozniacki: The ATP Has Roger, Rafa And Novak, But We Have Fans Too!
WTA Tour Announces 2011 Calendar, New Combined Events
Watch Murray Dominate Tsonga And Verdasco In A Game Of “Keepy-Uppies” [Video]
USTA, ATP, WTA To Announce Calendar Changes

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

Get the FREE TX daily newsletter

23 Comments for Roger Federer: I Doubt All the Players Like the Idea of Having Combined Events [Video]

madmax Says:

Good luck for tomorrow Roger.

The federer fans are with you all the way. Don’t lose this match to del potro, you hear?!!!!!

Brando Says:

Mmm, don’t know with this 1. I think del potro can beat federer- he has to beat a top 4 player some point in time! But maybe roger will win this 1- the 80 -15 matches is quite a big and important difference. I remember pat cash saying that usually it takes a players the same amount of time he is out of the game, back in it to recover so I expect we shal only see the best of del potro next season. Federer in 3!

Humble Rafa Says:

I like the Elf. He is humble like me.

madmax Says:


I don’t think that works, look at Serena – out of the game for 12 months and flying high!

Federer does have to win this match in my view. It’s about time he started to big himself up. I hope he doesn’t read the press right now.

Short memories are abound right now.

Annacone should put an exquisite game plan together to beat delpo.

Roge can then execute it.

alison hodge Says:

potential banana skins for roger when he faces delpo,and andy when he plays nalby,anything can happen,just like last week,both the underdogs with nothing to loose,and the big guns looking to bounce back with a vengance,some interesting games to look forward to,cant wait.

Tom Welsh Says:

I don’t know where this “15 matches” came from. Del Potro is 37-11 this year (38 with the Seppi non-match). Even on hard courts in the USA he has played way more than 15 matches…

Tom Welsh Says:

Actually I would expect Roger to win fairly easily. Everyone is talking about the two matches Delpo won against him, but they don’t seem to recall that at the Australian Open in 2009, Roger beat Delpo 6-3, 6-0, 6-0. Fairly conclusive.

Kimberly Says:

I always thought Delpo was a little over-hyped (and you can look back at my posts one year ago saying such) Had Roger won USO 09 as he should have, Delpo would be spoken of in a totally differnet light. Im still not sure what happened that match. i don’t think Roger is quite sure either. But I honestly thought Roger lost the match not vice versa. Just my opinion as I will liekly suffer for this comment!

El Flaco Says:

OT: I’m watching Ivanovic play right now and she has definitely lost some weight. I wonder is she is trying the same diet as Djokovic.

Kimmi Says:

roddick vs kohlshriber. Hard to call it since roddick is not “really” match fit.

Kimmi Says:

I hope he wins and give me a point on my bracket.

Kimmi Says:

yeah roddick, first set! go go go!

Lawrence k Brown Says:

As for Rodger’s comments, I fully understand what he is saying and I agree. As for the match with Delpo, to me it is a toss up, only because it is really up to Roger. Look, as much as Rodger’s forehand has been such a weapon over the years, the real key to this and most matches Rodger plays from here on out, is going to be his serve, particularly his first serve. He need to win free points or easy points off his serve, this keeps huge pressure on his opponents. Secondly, is his return game needs to be a little more aggressive, similar to when he ended the Djokovic streak earlier in the summer. Acourse no one stays on top forever, but I truly believe Federer still have some great tennis left in him. We got spoiled with the Super great Roger, way ahead of the pack. Today, there isn’t any Super Great players. Just great players, and Rodger is among them. Taking a tip for Serena return, Rodger needs just simplify his game & his approach. He has become overcoached. During his Super Great era, his approach was simple, precised. (By the way Tsonga is using that approached currently) So the bottom line is I do believe Rodger will beat Delpo, in a very close match.

Wheeler Says:

Delpo hyped? Are you high Kimberley? Or your Rafa fanboyism has made you blind? Del Potro is the real deal. He can beat any of the top 4 handily.

bstevens Says:

Tough loss for Roddick against Kohlshreiber. Haven’t seen much of Andy this year because either he is injured or loses early. Hope he makes a good run at the US Open where he hasnt fared well the last few years (3rd rd loss to Isner 2009 & 2nd rd loss to Tipsarevic 2010).

Dory Says:

I hate the combined events totally. Many times when I tune in on TV, I have to wait for some WTA match to finish. And cramping everything up in a single week makes the schedule even worse. I don’t even want to see the order of play littered with WTA amtches from which I have to locate ATP matches separately. The separate events were better.

vox777 Says:

Lawrence: Today, there isn’t any Super Great players. Just great players, and Rodger is among them…
Do you follow tennis at all :)?
How would you call Nole, who has done more in this season than your super great player ever did in one season, and season is still not over (and tennis is much more competitive sport today)… 9 of 10 BIG Tournaments! Or Rafa in 2009.? Are you serious?… Face it, Federer was only dominant because he had no real competition… I know you all like Rodic, but he was so one dimensional when he was on top… You can like/love someone as much as you like, but facts are facts… There are SUPER GREAT PLAYERS as you define it, but Federer is not among them now… but he is first behind

vox777 Says:

Rafa in 2010. Sorry :)

Skeezerweezer Says:

^errr…Daniel on the other thread posted this:

“Federer in 2006 won 12 titles, made 16 finals out of 17 tourneys, won 3 Slams, finalis in the other, 2 sets away from a Calendar Slam and undefeated in YEC.”

That is super duper.

Brando Says:

@vox777: federer in 2006 was ALOT better. Beyond that what about laver in 1968 winning all four slams? Nole’s got a long way to go before he could be compared with any of the all time greats since he isn’t there yet. Take a quick reality check- if possible- before you start typing and dissing the legends of the game.

madmax Says:


its rubbish what you saying:

‘Face it, Federer was only dominant because he had no real competition…’

This shows how low you will sink (below the word disrespect) for someone as great a player as roger. He has confounded tennis greats time and time again. Novak is NOT one of the greats, YET. He is a great player having a great season. Federer is ready to acknowledge that, because he has been there and beyond, a 92-5 loss in a season. And you think that he didn’t have to fight for that? You are mad.

Do not tell me that Hewitt was not a great player, or Safin. Safin was a great player but too busy with the womanising, drinking and staying out way too long to take tennis seriously. Safin was brilliant. He says he wasted too much of his time because he didn’t want to put in the hours on the practise court. I think you need to watch tennis more seriously before you start saying such ridiculous statements about Federer. It shows your ignorance.

The following comments include what Safin says about Federer along with many others, if you can be bothered to read it, perhaps you need to put other players down because you don’t have a good enough argument?

 We are witnessing history. This is the most dominant athlete on planet earth today.
 Jim Courier, former world No.1, while commentating on Australia’s Channel Seven in 2007 [4]
 For me Roger is the greatest player ever who played the tennis game. It’s always good to see him play and win and we are going to see so much more of Federer in the future, he is going to win more grand slam tournaments.
 Bjorn Borg, winner of 11 Grand Slams, after Federer winning 2009 French Open Final[5]
 It’s a combination of how many grand slams have you won, how many tournaments have you won, how many years you were number one and he’s got all those combinations. The body of work is phenomenal and now he has got that French Open and I think he can just go on and sip Margaritas for the rest of his life.
 Martina Navratilova, winner of 18 Grand Slams[6]
 What he’s done over the past five years has never, ever been done—and probably will never, ever happen again. Regardless if he won there or not, he goes down as the greatest ever. This just confirms it. Now that he has won in Paris, I think it just more solidifies his place in history as the greatest player that played the game, in my opinion. I’m a huge Laver fan, and he had a few years in there where he didn’t have an opportunity to win majors. But you can’t compare the eras. And in this era, the competition is much more fierce than Rod’s.
 Pete Sampras, winner of 14 Grand Slams, after Federer winning 2009 French Open Final[7]
 His win today at the French Open, tying Pete Sampras’s record for major titles and the completion of a career grand slam firmly places him in a special place as the greatest player of all time. He has earned his place and he has proven he belongs. Roger is a champion for the ages.
 Billie Jean King, winner of 39 Grand Slams, after Federer winning 2009 French Open Final[8]
 I never played anyone playing that fast. He doesn’t have any weaknesses at all. He really deserves to be called the best player of all time.
 Robin Soderling, after losing 2009 French Open Final to Federer[9]
 Roger Federer will undoubtedly become the greatest tennis player to have graced the sport if he wins the French Open. It ends the discussion of where he fits in the history of the game. If it wasn’t for (four-times champion Rafael) Nadal, he probably would have won a handful of these things. So nobody would underestimate where he deserves to fit in this game. He’s extraordinarily talented and talk about grace on court, watching him play is something special to see and if he does it tomorrow, he’ll know what an accomplishment it was.
 Andre Agassi, the day before Federer winning 2009 French Open Final[10]
 You guys are brutal. Absolutely brutal. The guy has only made two Grand Slam finals this year. I would love his bad year. I would love it.
 Andy Roddick, to the press, on what he made of press’ criticism for Federer’s dip in form in 2008 that saw him slip to No. 2 in the world; US Open 2008- Day 7 quotes [11]
 For me, in my prime, I felt unbeatable. In Roger’s days, he’s unbeatable. It’s really hard to put one guy over the other. Having said that, I think Roger is dominating the game much more than I ever did. I think he’s going to go on and pass 14 and win 16, 17, 18 majors. I think he’s going to break all records.
 Pete Sampras, before playing his third exhibition match with Roger Federer, Macau, China, Nov. 23, 2007. [12]
 I had a taste of what the best is tonight and I think Roger has that extra gear. He has good volleys and he has this little backhand flick that honestly, I have never seen before… it’s something that I didn’t have. I am happy with my performance tonight. I hung in there right until the end.
 Pete Sampras, after playing his second exhibition match with Roger Federer, Kuala Lumpur, Nov. 22, 2007. [13]
 If he is playing very good, I have to play unbelievable. If not, it’s impossible, especially if he’s playing with good confidence. When he’s 100 percent, he’s playing in another league. It’s impossible to stop him. I fight. I fight. I fight. Nothing to say. Just congratulate him.
 Rafael Nadal, after losing to Federer in the Shanghai Masters Cup semifinal, Nov. 17, 2007. [14] [15]
 In my opinion he’s the best player ever. When you play tennis, playing Federer is kind of a dream because you can see he does everything you would love to do on the court.
 Fabrice Santoro, played 20 of the 24 players to ever hold the No. 1 ranking.[16]
 He’s the most gifted player that I’ve ever seen in my life. I’ve seen a lot of people play. I’ve seen the (Rod) Lavers, I played against some of the great players—the Samprases, Beckers, Connors’, Borgs, you name it. This guy could be the greatest of all time. That, to me, says it all.
 John McEnroe, winner of 7 Grand Slams.[17]
 Roger is just the greatest player of all time. He is the most beautiful player I’ve ever seen and I don’t ever get tired of watching him. Rod Laver is my idol, Pete Sampras is the greatest grass court player ever, but Roger is just the greatest player of all. I think we can all appreciate how incredible he is even more lately, because he’s shown a bit more emotion on court and he’s become a father so he seems a bit more human, more relatable. That makes what he’s doing seem even more amazing.
 John McEnroe.[18]
 Federer is the best player in history, no other player has ever had such quality.
 Rafael Nadal, after winning French Open 2006.[19]
 Yes, I really hit with him when he was 15, during a tournament in Basel, and I knew then he would be good, but not this good. If he stays healthy, it will actually be a miracle if he doesn’t win more Grand Slams than Pete [Sampras]. The way he picks his shots is unbelievable. He is fast, he has a great volley, a great serve, great backhand, great everything. If I was his coach, what can I tell him? He is a magician with a racket. Even when he is playing badly, which is rarely, he can still do things with his racket nobody else can do.
 Goran Ivanisevic on the question if Federer is destined to become the greatest player of all time.[20]
 Well, I think when I look at Roger, I mean, I’m a fan. I mean, I’m a fan of how he plays, what he’s about, just the fact that I think he’s a class—I don’t know him personally, but seems like he’s a class guy on and off the court. He’s fun to watch. Just his athletic ability, what he’s able to do on the run. I think he can and will break every tennis record out there.
 Pete Sampras, winner of 14 Grand Slams.[21]
 I don’t see anyone with a big enough weapon to hurt him. They’re just staying back and Roger is able to dictate well enough. You just have to serve well and attack him.
 Pete Sampras.[22]
 I really consider myself top 5 player in the world, which it doesn’t mean that I am close to Roger.
 Ivan Ljubicic, at Indian Wells 2006.[23]
 Oh, I would be honoured to even be compared to Roger. He is such an unbelievable talent, and is capable of anything. Roger could be the greatest tennis player of all time.
 Rod Laver, winner of 11 Grand Slams, considered by some the greatest player to ever play the game of tennis.[24]
 Roger’s got too many shots, too much talent in one body. It’s hardly fair that one person can do all this—his backhands, his forehands, volleys, serving, his court position. The way he moves around the court, you feel like he’s barely touching the ground. That’s the sign of a great champion.
 Rod Laver, after 2007 Australian Open semifinal match.[25]
 The best way to beat him would be to hit him over the head with a racquet. Roger could win the Grand Slam if he keeps playing the way he is and, if he does that, it will equate to the two Grand Slams that I won because standards are much higher these days.
 Rod Laver, speaking ahead of the 2007 Australian Open final against Fernando Gonzalez.[26]
 He’s the best I’ve ever played against. There’s nowhere to go. There’s nothing to do except hit fairways, hit greens and make putts. Every shot has that sort of urgency on it. I’ve played a lot of them (other players), so many years, there’s a safety zone, there’s a place to get to, there’s something to focus on, there’s a way. Anything you try to do, he potentially has an answer for and it’s just a function of when he starts pulling the triggers necessary to get you to change to that decision.
 Andre Agassi, at US Open 2005.[27]
 He hits that short chip, moves you forward, moves you back. He uses your pace against you. If you take pace off, so that he can’t use your pace, he can step around and hurt you with the forehand. Just the amount of options he has to get around any particular stage of the match where maybe something’s out of sync is—seems to be endless. His success out there is just a mere reflection of all the things that he can do.
 Andre Agassi, at US Open 2005.[28]
 There’s probably not a department in his game that couldn’t be considered the best in that department. You watch him play Hewitt and everybody marvels at Hewitt’s speed, as well as myself. And you start to realize, `Is it possible Federer even moves better?’ Then you watch him play Andy [Roddick], and you go, `Andy has a big forehand. Is it possible Federer’s forehand is the best in the game?’ You watch him at the net, you watch him serve-volley somebody that doesn’t return so well and you put him up there with the best in every department. You see him play from the ground against those that play from the ground for a living, and argue he does it better than anybody.
 Andre Agassi.[29]
 He’s a real person. He’s not an enigma. Off the court he’s not trying to be somebody. If you met him at McDonald’s and you didn’t know who he was, you would have no idea that he’s one of the best athletes in the world.
 Andy Roddick, at Cincinnati 2005.[30]
 I think there’s—he’s the main guy and then there’s probably four or five of us that are—I don’t know. Maybe we need to do just a tag team effort or something, join forces, you know, like Power Rangers or something.
 Andy Roddick, after losing to Roger Federer at the final of Cincinnati 2005.[31]
 [In the modern game], you’re either a clay court specialist, a grass court specialist or a hard court specialist … or you’re Roger Federer.
 Jimmy Connors, winner of 8 Grand Slams.[32]
 He hasn’t changed a bit. He hasn’t been arrogant in the locker room. He never is. That’s great to see someone that does it with class. He doesn’t intentionally get in anyone’s face. He doesn’t put people down.
 James Blake, at Cincinnati 2005.[33]
 He is on his way to becoming possibly the greatest of all time. But he’s still human.
 James Blake, before he faced Federer in the Quarterfinal at the US Open 2006.[34]
 He put tennis, the bar very high—very high. It’s incredible what kind of game he can play.
 Marat Safin, at Australian Open 2005.[35]
 I’d like to be in his shoes for one day to know what it feels like to play that way.
 Mats Wilander, winner of 7 Grand Slams.[36]
 Roger Federer is the most talented tennis player I have ever seen. He has the capacity to become the greatest in history.
 Nick Bollettieri.[37]
 Roger is a complete player. What he has, and it’s not luck, is the ability to change his game slightly as to what his opponent’s doing to him.
 Jack Kramer, an all-time great of the game.[38]
 I thought Ellsworth Vines and Don Budge were pretty good. And Gonzalez and Hoad could play a bit, too, but I have never seen anyone play the game better than Federer. He serves well and has a great half-volley. I’ve never known anyone who can do as many things on a court as he can.
 Jack Kramer [39]
 I’m not sure if he has any weakness in his repertoir.
 Jonas Bjorkman, after losing in the semifinal of Wimbledon 2006 6-2, 6-0, 6-2.[40]
 Maybe Roger Federer will rescue tennis. He plays like we did in the past.
 Ilie Nastase, first ever World No.1 when rankings were introduced in 1973.[41]
 He is capable of hitting shots which other players don’t even think about trying. He has so many skills.
 Ivan Lendl, on the 25 Birthday Party of Federer in Toronto.[42]
 Maybe I could win more championships and prize money if Federer was not in the same age with me, but you have to know that there is something money can not buy—that’s playing against Federer.
 Ivan Ljubicic.[43]
 He is the best man in the game, on and off the court, and he has a great personality. I enjoy so much having opportunities to compete against him.
 Ivan Ljubicic.[44]
 I am so proud to have him around. It is very pity that I am not able to play with Pete Sampras, but it’s OK, I can see Federer on the tour. I could tell my grandson someday that I have competed against the greatest player on the planet.
 Ivan Ljubicic.[45]
 Today I was playing my best tennis, trying lots of different things, but nothing worked. When you’re playing like that and he still comes up with all those great shots you really have to wonder if he’s even from the same planet.
 Novak Djokovic, after Davis Cup match.[46]
 Roger is like a good red wine, he’s getting better with age…I think his big years will be when he is 26, 27, 28.
 Tony Roche, former coach of Roger Federer.[47]
 Roger hasn’t even started to use a lot of his game.
 Tony Roche, former coach of Roger Federer.[48]
 Just about everything he does is pretty impressive. So, yeah, 50 titles at any age is impressive. 50 titles at 26 is incredible. 50 titles with 11 of them being Grand Slams, and I think now 14 being Masters Series, that’s just phenomenal.
 James Blake after their final in Cincinnati 2007, when Federer won his 50th title in the ATP circuit. [49]
 I can cry like Roger, it’s just a shame I can’t play like him.
 Andy Murray, after losing to Federer in the Australian Open 2010’s final.[50]
 No way I would be a journalist. You guys have tried to kill Roger – often. But he’s always come back and proved you wrong. So one thing I would not do is make the mistake of saying Roger is dead.
 Rafael Nadal, when asked what he would write about Federer’s decline if he were a journalist. [51]

Federer is just a class athlete and we are lucky to have him still around.

Kimberly Says:

Delpo hyped? Are you high Kimberley? Or your Rafa fanboyism has made you blind? Del Potro is the real deal. He can beat any of the top 4 handily.

I believe Delpo is more in the league of Soderling Berdych Tsonga, someone able on their good day to beat any of the top 4, than in the league of Nadal, Fed or Murray, who have more consistency. But if I am wrong, than it is the Rafa blindness as I am sure I am not high!

Ben Pronin Says:

Kimberly, what sets Del Potro apart from Soderling, Berdych, and Tsonga is that when he got to a grand slam final, he was able to pull himself together and somehow eked out a win. I think a lot of people forget that Del Potro was leading the third set before getting tight and allowing Federer back in. but let’s say Federer had won it in 4 or 5 sets, Del Potro still would’ve ended up having put up a better fight than all those other guys. Throw in Murray who’s yet to make any serious impact in a slam final. Tsonga fought hard in the AO final but he’s clearly got some work to do mentally (like not giving up halfway through a match). And Berdych and Soderling are borderline jokes. It’s one thing to be a heavy underdog in a slam final, but then to just lay over and play your part?

No, Del Potro has yet to match the ridiculous consistency like the top 4, but he’s certainly in a higher league than everyone else. Also he only has 1 win over Murray (on clay) and 0 wins over Djokovic so I think it’s too soon to say he can beat any of the top 4 handily. He’s only been able to beat Nadal handily and that was, well, you know.

Madmax, why you spam?

Top story: US Open Looking At Drastic Measures To Hold Event: Held In NYC, No Fans, Charter Flights For Players