!Fed by Pete Bodo
With a "buddy" like Ted Forstmann, Roger Federer needs no enemies. He's already had to make a public confession laying to rest rumors that he may have been somehow involved in gambling on matches he played against his rival Rafael Nadal. The headline on the Associated Press story the other day said it all: Federer Denies Involvement with IMG Gambling.
Forstmann, as you already know, is the billionaire chief executive at IMG. A lawsuit by a disgruntled former associate of his claims that Forstmann placed bets totaling $38,000 on Federer to beat Nadal in the French Open finals of 2006 and 2007—bets that Forstmann has acknowledged placing. So the first real question is, what was Forstmann smoking (if and) when he decided to put his pile of chips on the Federer square? I mean, didn't he ever see this Nadal guy play on clay?
The second and more intriguing question is, how could Forstmann make such a mess and leave Roger to clean it up?
Like his fellow icons and role models, Federer understands that it's not only important to avoid wrongdoing, it's equally critical to avoid the appearance of wrongdoing. And while nobody has hurled any accusations at The Mighty Fed, he's had to spend a few days explaining his position on gambling, his relationship with IMG, and the nature of his communications with Forstmann. Meanwhile, Forstmann dismissed legitimate questions about what information he may have gleaned from Federer before those finals with a cavalier comment of which the main import appears to be that Ted and Roger are tight—regular bros.
“I might have called Roger before the match in 2007,” Forstmann told the website The Daily Beast. “But Roger is a buddy of mine, and all I would be doing is wishing him luck.”
You know how these Wall Street alpha dogs are—if they're not on the horn with Roger, they're texting Tim Geithner, or, in Forstmann's case, scheming to sell a little tournament like, say, Indian Wells, to some sheik or other in the Middle East.
That's the bit that really irritates me about this not-so-little episode. Forstmann's acquisition of IMG, shortly after the unexpected death of IMG founder Mark McCormack, was a severe blow to the founders of the hugely popular and significant Indian Wells Masters 1000 event. Forstmann may be buddies with Roger, like he claims, but that didn't stop him from putting the proverbial gun to the heads of Indian Wells founders Charlie Pasarell and Ray Moore when Forstmann lost interest in the 50 percent stake in the tournament that was part and parcel of the deal for IMG. Forstmann wanted to cash out, and it took a concerted effort by dedicated supporters of U.S. tennis to prevent the tournament from being sold to the highest foreign bidder. This is a guy who loves tennis? (By contrast, McCormack was committed to Indian Wells, through thick and thin.)
While I'm at it, something else about all this annoys me. What the hail is a guy like Forstmann, who's got more money than godot, doing betting on tennis in five and ten-grand increments? Sheesh, what difference would it make if he won—or lost—in the big picture? It's not like he'd finally be able to buy that little two-bedroom house for his mamma if only he made one decent score. The lawsuit points toward other Forstmann habits and activities that can only be called "unsavory." So now it's understandable how some people, thinking about Federer, might wonder about the company he keeps. First Tiger, now Teddy.
Forstmann has been the beneficiary of excellent PR, and his Huggy-Bear charity tournament was an enormous hit with pro players and tennis insiders for a couple of decades. The guy has certainly spread his wealth around freely, supporting numerous charitable causes. But he's also earned unimaginable sums, and we all know that giving—especially the public giving of money—can be an act of shameless, socially approved egotism, or even hypocrisy, even if that doesn't taint the end result, which is helping others.
I have no doubts whatsoever about Roger's integrity or character, but it wouldn't upset me if he took this opportunity to cut his ties to IMG (while retaining Tony Godsick, a very decent individual) and get clear of Forstmann and company. It would serve Forstmann right, if only for what he's put Federer through.