Now a lot of top singles players would have used the foot problems Federer experienced (he called for the trainer to remove the tape on his feet and ankles, and he had a minor problem with a toe as well) as a perfect excuse for bagging the doubles, but TMF sees things through a prism that looks back in history aa well as foreward in his career. He said, of his decision to play the doubs: “Well, I mean I team up with a partner I like and face a few good guys, you know? I would like to play a good match. Especially shake it off after I lost in the singles. It hasn’t happened in a long time. People think I’m not going to show up for the doubles, you know?”
Federer didn’t do his presser until he was done with the doubles. He looked relaxed when he showed up, wearing a brown Nike Tennis t-shirt under a tan jacket, with an Adidas (hahaha!) baseball cap. It was a little surreal, like a scene from a parallel universe: Most of us have no idea what questions to ask TMF after loss, and he has no idea what to answer after a loss. Everybody was winging it; this was the wild blue yonder.
One thing I like about TMF’s pressers is that you can cherry pick them for interesting tidbits that shed light on his personality, or at least allow you to indulge your own Clouseauvian powers. Take that quote above, about the doubles. It’s classic TMF stuff: First, it shows that he’s a good guy who’s going to stand by his buddy, Yves, and show respect for the fellas they were paired against (Although I’m not sure Ferrer and Disco Tommy would have been too bent out of shape if they got that last minute stay of execution). Then it shows how much the guy likes to play tennis. His solution to a stinging loss is to go find somebody else to go beat up on – any port in a storm, right? This is not a guy who’s going to get the loss out of his system by ragging on his girl Mirka or sucking down 18 margaritas. Gimme the racquet, let the healing begin!
Of course, you also have Roger “Let’s not get all carried away with this losing thing” Federer lurking in his psyche like an omnipresent jack-in-the-box. Just wind the handle a little while and. . .. Note how he reminds us that losing “hasn’t happened in a long time.” (actually, I think it last happened in the Bronze Age, which is fairly recent, at least in geological terms). And finally, TMF is fully aware that his good name and reputation are at stake here; given the SOP of the tour these days, he’s going to be different and cowboy up to play the doubles.
Weave these threads together and this is what you get: a champion who’s good and isn’t going to play the role of the only fool who doesn’t know it, combined with a statesman who has ideas about professional conduct, and is going to make them known from his bully pulpit. Can you think of a more efficient and resonant way of declaring: Forget about the stupid loss to Canas, let's look at some other things you can appreciate me for, since I stunk the joint out today. . .
Respect means a great deal to TMF. That was evident in the pleasure and gratification he took from getting a standing ovation from the crowd assembled to watch his doubles. I imagine there was a good deal of relief mixed in with the respect, for those folks must have been braced for the announcement politely explaining that the warrior was too bloodied and broken to play doubles.
The bottom line: I’ve never seen a “shocking” loss handled better – not by the self-analyzing John McEnroe nor cool-headed Pete Sampras, nor open-hearted Andre Agassi. And none of this was, in my estimation, calculated. Shoot, when your name is Federer, you can say what you want, how you want, to whom you want. But let’s not tell him that, okay? I kind of like this version of the beast.
What Federer exudes these days is a striking, rare combination of well-earned entitlement and something approaching moral (although “ethical” probably is the better word) authority. To say he’s a diplomat is to short-change him; diplomats are compromisers, backslappers, flatterers and negotiators, and I don’t really see a lot of waffling or kowtowing in Federer’s statements or actions.
In fact, his citizen persona is exactly like his tennis persona: He’s elegant, measured, deft and economical, but he means what he says, his words penetrate, and, in his own quiet way, he says a lot. Consider his response to a rather benign question about the degree of surprise he felt at how far Guillermo Canas had come following his 15-month suspension (a sentence reduced on appeal) for doping.
Anybody questions about how Federer feels about the Canas case?
The number of “you knows’” in that reply are a pretty good sign of the care Federer was taking in his reply. But you can also take them as a sign of his commitment to saying what he really thinks, something he could have side-stepped, given the way the question was framed. And when Federer wants to make a point, it’s worth listening.
I wrote a playful item on the repercussions of TMF’s loss for ESPN a short while ago, although my opening observations there were not frivolous. Federer is playing doubles here, and I admire him for going out there to play a doubles match in yoke with Yves Allegro (is he the luckiest dude alive, or what?) after losing in the singles. They took it seriously too, hammering David Ferrer and Tommy Robredo, who must have been thinking, Man, what do I have to do to get out of this mad Swiss dude's crosshairs?
