Didn't you read the rest of the post? Playing on clay is different from playing on HC because of the weird bounces, those are easier to handle on slow clay, then don't forget the footing etc etc ..
Lol, the number of the finals doesn't mean anything . He was skipping MC regularly ffs. Also, don't forget he wanted to win Rome very badly so he gave extra effort there, but still got beaten by everybody and their grandmas:
"The
Rome Masters, as it's now called, is the world's second most prestigious clay-court tournament. For much of tennis history, it was widely considered the "fifth major."
Big Bill Tilden, the dominant player of the interwar years, won the inaugural event in 1930. Since then, every great clay-court player -- and, more to the point here, a fair number of great fast-court players -- have held up the trophy at the Foro Italico.
Lew Hoad. Rod Laver. John Newcombe. Pete Sampras. Andre Agassi. All Rome champions.
Federer, so aware of both tennis history and his place in it, surely recognizes that Rome represents a significant hole in his CV.
He should have won the thing in 2003. The tour's rising star, he rolled through his first five matches with the loss of just one set. But he came out flat for the final. His opponent, on the other hand, felt "like a gladiator in the Colosseum." The 29-year-old journeyman Felix Mantilla knew this was his last chance to win an important title. "I don't have the serve of Sampras or the volley of Rafter or the talent of Agassi, you know," he said afterward. "I must be very focus every point. I must be strong mentally."
He was strong mentally, and he beat Federer in straight sets. It was the last tournament Mantilla would ever win.
The next year, Federer was the number-one seed -- and a young Spaniard named Rafael Nadal wasn't in the draw. But another Spaniard, 2002 French Open champion Albert Costa, was waiting for Federer in the second round. The veteran Costa always ran hot and cold, and on this day, he was hot.
Then there's 2006 and the most amazing match Federer and Nadal ever played -- indeed, one of the greatest in tennis history. Attacking time and again, Roger earned a couple of match points in the fifth set -- but Rafa, entrenched behind the baseline, wouldn't let him hit the ball past him. Nadal ultimately won, 6-7, 7-6, 6-4, 2-6, 7-6. He was officially on his way to becoming the best clay-court player ever.
The next year, the tournament changed the format for the final from best-of-five sets to best-of-three, the same as the earlier rounds.
Federer hasn't had a whole lot of luck in Rome since. In 2007, he went out in the third round to favorite son Filippo Volandri. The next year, even more inexplicably, he let fellow fast-court player Radek Stepanek take two tiebreakers from him in the quarterfinals.
He'd make the final again, two years ago, and this time there'd be no drama. Nadal crushed him, 6-1, 6-3.
Federer considered bypassing Rome this year. He wants to make sure he's fresh for another shot at Grand Slam title #18 -- not at Roland Garros, but on his beloved grass at Wimbledon three weeks later.
He ended up deciding to play in Italy, and so far he's looking pretty good. He's already provided the shot of the tournament -- and we're confident it's going to stay the shot of the tournament no matter what happens the rest of the week. Watch it below:
So, can Roger Federer finally win this freakin' tournament?
Friday in the quarterfinals he defeated sixth-seeded Tomas Berdych, who played well but is the kind of big, lumbering guy Federer likes to face on clay.
Now, of course, Nadal and Novak Djokovic loom. Did you just hear the ominous boom of thunder, too?
Federer has bested Nadal only twice in 15 clay-court matches. And the last of those two wins, in Madrid, was way back in 2009.
But we all know Rafa hasn't been himself so far this year. "Obviously today I'm not as good as I (was),"
he said just a few days ago. "Today I'm not winning as much as I did in the past."
Nadal appears to be slowly rounding into top form, but if Federer presses him from the very first ball, and keeps relentlessly attacking, we very well could see more of those uncharacteristic shanks that Rafa repeatedly hit in the Madrid final against Andy Murray. An upset clay-court win for Federer seems a lot more possible now than it has at any time in the past half-dozen years.
And three-time Rome winner Djokovic? Federer's already beaten the World No. 1 this year, in the Dubai final. And Federer's the guy, let's remember, who ended Nole's famed gazillion-match winning streak in 2011 with a thumping clay-court victory in the French Open semifinals. Make no mistake: Federer would be the underdog to the Serb backboard in a Rome final, but Djokovic doesn't unnerve Federer like Nadal does. Plus, there's this: With the fast-approaching French Open foremost in his mind (it's the only major tournament he hasn't won), Djokovic might not be willing to lay it all out there in a tense, long Rome final. Federer isn't focused on Roland Garros -- so he might be more motivated to dig deep in Italy's red dirt.
Too bad Rome pulled the final back to best-of-three sets after that classic 2006 final."
not much to add, the icing on the Fedtard cake, a tourney which has the most blatant tankings, to the extent it's almost unwatchable and where only players who go for rankings care about giving a half-assed effort. Just lol!
