Federer's Schedule 2018

[Andy22]

In your dreams. 2020 will be his last year on tour imo as it's an Olympic year. Why in the name of hell would he announce retirement after Wimbledon when he's the clear favourite at the USO if healthy?! He'll be here a while yet and hopefully keep making Nadal fans cry.

Edit: The only possible scenario I could see where he might consider retirement is if Nadal fails to win a single slam this year AND Federer wins both Wimbledon and the USO. But even if the scenario above happens I'd hope he'd have the sense not to retire and keep playing till 2020. A lot of other records to break, eg hitting 110 titles (to surpass the 109 of Connors) and winning more matches than Connors. Also, if Nadal returns to full health, Federer retired and Djokovic and Murray continue to either suck or not play at all, Nadal could clean up so 6 ahead would not be safe as mad as that sounds.

OK So you not buying in to the fact Federer crying at AO this year is a sign.

 

[Front242]

OK So you not buying in to the fact Federer crying at AO this year is a sign.

No. He cries often. 20 is a nice number so he was clearly emotional. He's already said he didn't realize he forgot to say see you next year.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/tennis...urn-to-australia-in-2019-20180129-h0ptu0.html

"Roger Federer has declared he will return to the Australian Open in 2019, just hours after claiming his 20th grand slam title.Admittedly very tired after only "a few hours of sleep," Federer said there was no reason he wouldn't try to do it all again in 12 months time.

"Yeah, I'd love to come back, I know I forgot to say that after the match. All I wanted to say (after the match) was a big thank you and that's it really, a lot of people to thank in a moment like this, but I hope I come back again next year."

 

[Andy22]

No. He cries often. 20 is a nice number so he was clearly emotional. He's already said he didn't realize he forgot to say see you next year.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/tennis...urn-to-australia-in-2019-20180129-h0ptu0.html

"Roger Federer has declared he will return to the Australian Open in 2019, just hours after claiming his 20th grand slam title.Admittedly very tired after only "a few hours of sleep," Federer said there was no reason he wouldn't try to do it all again in 12 months time.

"Yeah, I'd love to come back, I know I forgot to say that after the match. All I wanted to say (after the match) was a big thank you and that's it really, a lot of people to thank in a moment like this, but I hope I come back again next year."

I think should revisit this at the end of the year, but not by mad then I say I told so.

 

[Federberg]

I think should revisit this at the end of the year, but not by mad then I say I told so.

And what if Rafa decides to retire before Roger because of persistent injuries? I'm really confused why anyone thinks it makes sense to talk about the possible retirement of the guy who has won 3 of the last 5 slams (including the last one) and is currently ranked number 1 in the world. Surely you realise it makes you sound like it's what you're hoping for and not what you really believe?

 

[El Dude]

In your dreams. 2020 will be his last year on tour imo as it's an Olympic year. Why in the name of hell would he announce retirement after Wimbledon when he's the clear favourite at the USO if healthy?! He'll be here a while yet and hopefully keep making Nadal fans cry.

Edit: The only possible scenario I could see where he might consider retirement is if Nadal fails to win a single slam this year AND Federer wins both Wimbledon and the USO. But even if the scenario above happens I'd hope he'd have the sense not to retire and keep playing till 2020. A lot of other records to break, eg hitting 110 titles (to surpass the 109 of Connors) and winning more matches than Connors. Also, if Nadal returns to full health, Federer retired and Djokovic and Murray continue to either suck or not play at all, Nadal could clean up so 6 ahead would not be safe as mad as that sounds.

Sorry, Front, but this seems to be a classic case of a fan projecting onto Roger. What I mean by this is that I don't think Roger is quite as motivated by the Slam count and difference as you are. Sure, he wants to maintain his lead, and records are very important to him, but I don't think that is his primary motivation for continuing to play. Of course I don't know what is going on in his head and heart, but I think the main reason he plays is because he loves playing.

He also loves competing, so if he starts slipping significantly, he might call it quits. But my guess is that his playing priority is in this order:

1. Love of playing
2. Love of competition
3. Legacy (records, especially Slam count)

Your priority seems to be reversed.

 

[Federberg]

^and you could easily be the one projecting your opinions mate, which is something you often do. We've already seen the man make opportunistic decisions that change his schedule so obviously legacy and records are very important to him. So your putting legacy down at (3) is entirely your own construct. I'm not going to pretend to know what he's going to do, all I know is what I hope he does. But quite frankly he could just as easily have legacy as his top priority as he'll only continue playing if he still loves the competition. That stands to reason

 

[El Dude]

LOL, of course, Federberg - all opinions are just that: opinions. It is funny how I say "I don't know what he's thinking" and you feel the need to tell me that I don't know what he's thinking after I said that. That is why I said "I think" three times in that first paragraph.

 

[Front242]

Sorry, Front, but this seems to be a classic case of a fan projecting onto Roger. What I mean by this is that I don't think Roger is quite as motivated by the Slam count and difference as you are. Sure, he wants to maintain his lead, and records are very important to him, but I don't think that is his primary motivation for continuing to play. Of course I don't know what is going on in his head and heart, but I think the main reason he plays is because he loves playing.

He also loves competing, so if he starts slipping significantly, he might call it quits. But my guess is that his playing priority is in this order:

1. Love of playing
2. Love of competition
3. Legacy (records, especially Slam count)

Your priority seems to be reversed.

Who knows how his mind works but I'd hope he's enough of a champion that he wants to be remembered as the best rather than 2nd best so he knows damn well the slam count is not safe right now. There's an absolutely massive difference between best of all time and 2nd best. He knows it and his fans know it too.

 

[Federberg]

LOL, of course, Federberg - all opinions are just that: opinions. It is funny how I say "I don't know what he's thinking" and you feel the need to tell me that I don't know what he's thinking after I said that. That is why I said "I think" three times in that first paragraph.

Because you presumed to tell Front that you didn't think Federer was thinking what he believes. Your thoughts are no more valid than his. And frankly aren't really supported by what Roger has actually done

 

[El Dude]

Who knows how his mind works but I'd hope he's enough of a champion that he wants to be remembered as the best rather than 2nd best so he knows damn well the slam count is not safe right now. There's an absolutely massive difference between best of all time and 2nd best. He knows it and his fans know it too.

True, with the caveat that Slam count isn't the only factor in terms of the GOAT.

This isn't either/or, as I think I implied above. I just don't think "I must finish with the most Slams" takes up quite as much real estate in his psyche as it does yours. But as Federberg likes to point out, I could be wrong!

 

[El Dude]

Because you presumed to tell Front that you didn't think Federer was thinking what he believes. Your thoughts are no more valid than his. And frankly aren't really supported by what Roger has actually done

OK, buddy. Are we done now?

 

[Federberg]

OK, buddy. Are we done now?

I was done before. You felt inclined to respond as you always do. No doubt you'll do so again

 

[El Dude]

Federberg, I really recommend you consider seeing a shrink.

 

[Federberg]

 

[GameSetAndMath]

^link?

It is not anything he said in the last few months. I have posted links to those comments before in some other threads. Not in a mood to search for them again.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

OK So you not buying in to the fact Federer crying at AO this year is a sign.

Fed cried couple of days ago in Laures Award Ceremony. Fed cries almost everyday . It does not mean anything.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

As I already mentioned in other threads, Fed has a contract in Basel that ends in 2019. So, one thing we know for sure is that he is not retiring before Basel tourney in 2019. This is a fact and not a speculation. Of course, this does not mean he will retire right after that tourney. This is the tourney farthest in time to which Fed has committed at this time.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

How dare you go back on topic?

In all seriousness it looks increasingly likely he’ll have a shot at it. I’m sort of agnostic on it personally. Nothing wrong with a great like Pistol keeping some records. For me the priority remains another title at Wimbledon and perhaps more important finally getting another title at Flushing

I am OK with Pete keeping his most consecutive YE #1 finishes record. But, Fed should at least tie the record for most years finished as #1.
Wimbledon and Flushing Projects go hand in hand with this project. It is not either this or that.

 

[El Dude]

You gotta think that 110 titles is on his radar as well. He has 13 to go to pass Connors. He had 7 last year, 2 this year so far. Let's say he wins 4-6 more this year, that would leave him with 6-9 to go. He could theoretically do that in 2019, but probably needs 2020.

I'm not saying that he won't retire until he gets #110, but that three more years makes 110 a certainty (barring injury, serious decline).

Let's say it is the end of 2019 and he's got to 110, he's won a couple more Slams to get to a comfortable 22, he finished 2018 as YE1 and has 350+ weeks total. 2020 is looming and he's finding it just a bit more challenging to motivate to get out there and practice, and is enjoying life at home with the family...

Even then, I don't see him outright retiring. As he has said, he'll "phase out." This is totally conjecture, but I could see the following:

2018: almost full season, including a couple clay tournaments (~14 tournaments).
2019: Reduced season, similar to 2017 (~12 tournaments).
2020: Selective season, maybe three Slams, grass and favorite hard courts, Olympics (~10 tornaments).
2021: Slams, favorite tournaments only (e.g. three Slams, Halle, Wimbledon, Basel). (~6-8 tournaments).
2022: Retired.

Or something like that. That's just one hypothetical scenario I could see happening.

 

[Moxie]

^and you could easily be the one projecting your opinions mate, which is something you often do. We've already seen the man make opportunistic decisions that change his schedule so obviously legacy and records are very important to him. So your putting legacy down at (3) is entirely your own construct. I'm not going to pretend to know what he's going to do, all I know is what I hope he does. But quite frankly he could just as easily have legacy as his top priority as he'll only continue playing if he still loves the competition. That stands to reason

I have to agree with this. Before Montreal last year (a little) and Rotterdam (convinced) this year, I would have "imagined" that he had those same priorities. But that's kind of idealistic. Turns out, he's gaming for records. At this point, I'd put legacy at #1, based on his choices. #2: Competitiveness, because that's what got him there and see #1, and #3: Love of the game. I think he does still love it, but I don't think it's what gets him up in the morning.