Yesterday, Roger Federer announced that he wouldn't be playing in the French Open after all, choosing instead to focus his energy on the grass- and hard-court seasons later this summer. When earlier this spring he announced that he'd skip all of the clay court season except the French, there was some speculation that he'd ultimately choose to skip the French as well. I didn't think that would be the case, a Grand Slam still being a Grand Slam, but apparently I was wrong.
The announcement on his website said, "I need to recognize that scheduling will be the key to my longevity moving forward. Thus, my team and I concluded today that playing just one event on clay was not in the best interest of my tennis and physical preparation for the remainder of the season." I have to admit, the decision makes sense. Clay tends to be the most arduous of the surfaces to play on. If Roger wants to maximize his chances of being fully rested for Wimbledon--obviously this is the case--then spending energy playing best-of-five-set matches at Roland Garros, where he would surely win several rounds just because he's Roger, isn't in his best interest.
I speak of this in part as introduction to what Rafa has just achieved and is threatening to achieve. I've already been talking about the possibility that he could sweep the tournaments in the European clay court swing this year. On Sunday, he took a step closer, beating Dominic Thiem 7-6 (8), 6-4 in the finals of the Madrid Open. Of the five main European clay court tournaments (Monte Carlo, Barcelona, Madrid, Rome, and Roland Garros), it's Madrid where Rafa has had the least success, Madrid being considered the fastest of the five, ostensibly because of the elevation there. (Madrid is just over 2000' high--not all that different from sea level, says the guy who lives in Colorado--so if it's really the altitude that makes Madrid play faster, it suggests just how fine the margins at the pro level really are.)
And just how impressive was Rafa's performance this time around? He went three sets against Rafa-killer Fabio Fognini in his first match, then whupped Kyrgios in straights, beat Goffin in straights, beat Djokovic in straights, before beating Thiem in straights in the final. So to answer my question: pretty damn impressive.
Which means that if you're making predictions for Rome and the French, you're definitely considering Rafa the prohibitive favorite. With Djokovic and Murray still far from their best (Andy lost at Rome today, in fact), it would seem that the only player capable of beating Rafa is … Rafa himself. The downside to winning all the time is that you play more matches than anyone else. Rafa is thirty now, and the otherworldly recovery abilities he demonstrated as a young man aren't quite what they once were. He's been pretty efficient through the clay court tournaments so far, but the wear and tear adds up. It would be pretty awful to see him run through Rome and then get injured in, say, the quarterfinals of the French.
But I sure hope it's otherwise. Just winning the French, which would be his tenth title, would be incredible. To pick up the Rome title just before it and end up sweeping the European clay courts would be simply incredible. Even he has never done that before. (The closest he's come was winning everything but Barcelona, back in 2010.)
The cost of all this clay-court dominance may show up later in the season, though. One thinks back to Dominic Thiem's tale-of-two-seasons 2016, when he played a zillion matches in the first half of the year, winning several titles and making the semis at the French, but then fell off in the second half of the year. With there being no evidence at all that Djokovic or Murray are likely to right their ships anytime soon, it becomes worthwhile to ask if Roger then becomes the favorite to win the at Wimbledon (surely yes) and possibly the US Open as well.
Exciting and interesting times are afoot in the tennis world.