A Loss in Rome

‘Philosophical Federer accepts Rome reality check’ was one of the headlines summing up Roger’s 2-6, 6-1, 7-5 defeat to heralded talent Ernests Gulbis.

That’s certainly what he sounds like when you get to the quotes. Said Federer: “I’m not worried. It’s always like that when you touch a new surface and lose. I think there could have been some good tennis at the back end of the tournament if I’d made it through.”

Thinking about it, he’s right. There’s notable recent example of an early wobble meaning nothing when it came to the final result – Roger’s four-set victory over Igor Andreev in the first round of the Australian Open, where Andreev had a point to take the match into a fifth set. He was coming into that one with more match practice than here, too, having just played a warmup tournament in Doha.

Federer obviously knows what he needs to work on. “I wasn’t up to speed, my serve was poor and it was frustrating. I wasn’t good from the baseline. There was no rhythm in the match and I couldn’t build from deep or get the right height on the ball. Clay is great when you’re in a rhythm as it’s easier to move your opponent around, but I haven’t played enough on clay yet this year.”

The plan of action? According to @DrewLilley on Twitter, Roger is “going to work, practise on clay every day, work some more, play doubles here, Estoril and Madrid then head to the French Open.” And when it’s all laid out like that, it seems obvious he’ll get his match practice, one way or another.

Chin up, Fed fans. In moments like this, it’s time to slot in a DVD of the Australian Open final, and look forward to next week’s Estoril, a tournament boasting seven players inside the Top 50 on its entry list.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “A Loss in Rome

  1. Hey–you need to report tennis scores properly. The score was 2-6, 6-1, 7-5…just b/c you love Roger so much doesn’t mean you can list his scorelines backwards when he loses…..get some perspective as well, friend…there are only 4 tournaments a yr that matter to Rog at this point, and Rome isn’t one of them.

    • Hey, thanks for the comment. I’ve edited the post accordingly. The reason why I listed it like that originally was because that’s how the score was from his (losing) perspective, not from any sort of denial about the results – in his total match listings per year on Wikipedia, the scores are listed in the same way. But I took on board what you said, and changed it. Thanks for reading.

  2. Pingback: Tweets that mention A Loss in Rome « Roger Federer Live -- Topsy.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s