|
Friday June 8, 2007
Solitary refinement
Minus Roche, Federer looks to redeem difficult spring
By S.L. Price, Sports Illustrated
PARIS -- What has all that winning taught us about Roger Federer?
We know he isn't a loudmouth. We know he likes the release of a good
cry. We know he values good manners and the debatable virtues of a
cream sports coat. He's capable of great toughness, but we also know
he's fastidious -- what with that constant tucking away of his hair --
and foppish because he doesn't just hack it off. Excellence can
be thrilling, you see, but it doesn't always shed much light. But
lately, life hasn't been so easy for the game's sun king. This is
trouble for him, of course, but good for Federer watchers. Distress,
uncertainty and failure always prove illuminating. Yes, Federer
has now reached another French Open final, but at this point, only the
2007 title can redeem a dreadful spring. After winning the 2007
Australian Open, he took a relatively savage tumble, not only going
four straight tournaments without a win for the first time since
becoming No. 1 in Feb. 2004, but losing to clear inferiors like Guillermo Canas -- twice -- and a wild card named Filippo Volandri in Rome. Federer then fired his coach, Tony Roche: A cloud of panic hovered over the palace. Crushing a wearied Rafael Nadal
in the final of the Hamburg tuneup helped matters, but won't count as
much of a cure unless he consolidates. For the moment, the shivers from
Federer's cold snap linger on. So what has losing taught us
about Federer? We know now that, even though the timing couldn't be
worse, he'd rather solve a problem rather than cover it up. Roche was
only part-time and missed enough Grand Slam events to make that an easy
option; Federer could've waited until after the U.S. Open to fire him
quietly. We also now know that, like many great competitors, Federer
can be egocentric and oddly shy -- even to the point of destroying the
most important relationship of his professional life. Consider
Federer's own definition of the player-coach dynamic. "It's more
friendship than in soccer or other sports where the coach is the
absolute respect person," he said last Sunday afternoon. "In tennis,
you're more the boss and he's your friend and here to help you; you're
trying to go through something together. That's why when it ends it's
hard." Yet when Federer describes what went wrong with Roche,
with whom he won six of his 10 Grand Slam titles, we learn he's not
much for confrontation. Roche, a former French Open champion, is
famously tight-lipped. There's a near forty-year age gap between the
two men. From the end of the Australian Open in January to the moment
the two met up again in Monte Carlo in April, Federer said, the two men
didn't talk once -- a nine-week silence, just as he was preparing for
the pivotal clay season, that neither was willing or able to break.
"Look,
we didn't see each other from Australia to Monaco," he said. "Didn't
have a phone call in the meantime, even though I lost in Miami and
Indian Wells. I just think that's not the real way I wanted the
relationship to be. "We didn't say much in the beginning either, or by
phone. I remember at the [2005] U.S. Open I was asked, 'So has Tony
spoken to you?' I was laughing actually about it ... I didn't have
contact, remember? Back then it was funny, but in the end it got to a
point where I thought, 'This is not how it's supposed to be, but it's
too late to change it.' Then when he came to Monaco, I wanted him to be
really fired up and same for me, to see each other and work together
again. But you kind of part ways and all this time you don't talk; you
don't know where you're at." There have been vague reports that
a clash over Grand Slam bonuses caused the rupture -- something that
will cause hot denials in the Federer camp; messages left at Roche's
Sydney home were not returned. But for the moment let's take Federer at
his word. He's willing to take a share of the blame, and should: Why,
if he -- the boss -- was so concerned with communication, couldn't he
just pick up the phone and call Roche himself? "In Monaco, I
thought he was tired, and I had so many things going on," Federer said
of April's Monte Carlo tournament, where he lost to Nadal in the final.
"We had pretty good practice sessions, but then in Rome I just thought
communication was not there. It was disappointing. We just really spent
time on the tennis court and not on the private side, and it started to
bother me. I was like, 'God, I can't believe it's gone this far and
I've allowed it myself to happen. And I can't fix it.' And when I
thought about it during the [Volandri] match in Rome, I said, 'I can't.
This is my last chance to tell him before the French Open.'" So
Federer told Roche himself, the first time he's ever fired a coach
face-to-face. "I get emotional," he said. "And I was sad telling him,
of course." In one sense, you have to believe Federer. Because
we've learned something new through this episode: Federer simply
doesn't like to be alone. The fact is, no player has ever shown how
little he needs a coach; in 2004 Federer guided himself to three Grand
Slam titles. If he happens to win his breakthrough French this weekend,
someone will beg to know why hiring someone like ex-Andre Agassi coach Darren Cahill is even an option. But for Federer, this is not up for debate. He'd like to have someone by his side. He'll
explain that it's all just a matter of improving, of making the most of
his potential before time runs out. There's something to that. But when
you hear what Federer said about he and Roche not having a relationship
"on the private side", it gives a hint of what it's like to spend a
life checking into strange hotels and smiling at strangers, to walk
into player lounges and always be the center of attention, to always be
the man wearing the target. It's good to have a friend then, even if
you're paying him. "Myself, I'm wondering who it's going to be,"
Federer said. "Who do I want? Who do I need? What do I need? I need to
talk myself through it. What do I expect, what do I want, what would be
good now in this time of my career? It's interesting. I'm looking
forward to it." So is the entire tennis world. The choice alone will teach us just a little bit more.
|
