After a 3 hour and 36 minute encounter with German Dominik Kopefer in the third round of the French Open, 39-year-old Roger Federer announced that he was withdrawing from the event, citing an abundance of caution for his knees as he looks ahead to the grass court swing and ultimately Wimbledon.
Throughout the encounter with Koepfer, Federer appeared to be physically stable and moved around the court with no issues. The match featured 36 rallies over 9 shots and 117 rallies between 5-8 shots.
Despite advancing through to the fourth round and having done so with no discernible injury, Federer chose to pull out.
Federer’s withdrawal has been met with a range of reactions. Some believe Federer has earned the right to do as he pleases, while others feel Federer should have not entered the tournament if he wasn’t ready to go the distance.
Federer did not claim he was injured, but rather that he did not want to over exert his body. If Federer felt as if he was at risk of reinjuring himself, he would not have played a single match this clay court season. Federer is simply saving his body for the grass court season and Wimbledon.
Prior to the start of the French Open, Federer said “I’m just realistic that I know I will not win the French and whoever thought I would or could win it is wrong.”
Federer also discussed the French Open being a pathway to success at Wimbledon:
“For me coming back after many months or over a year of rehab, the light at the end of the tunnel or the measuring stick was always: Can I come back to a good level against good players? I hope Wimbledon is going to be that place. Maybe there's going to be even something here in Paris. We'll see.”
Everyone and their mother knew what Federer’s mindset was coming into Roland Garros. It was no secret. It only serves to heighten the criticism behind Federer’s withdrawal.
From Federer’s perspective, it makes a lot of sense. The reality is, that at almost 40, his chances of beating Djokovic, Nadal and Tsitsipas/Zverev/Medvedev on the way to a French Open title were slim to none.
His chances at Wimbledon, despite his age, are still probably pretty solid, especially when you consider that he was one point away from winning the tournament less than two years ago against Djokovic, who holds five Wimbledon titles.
Federer’s logic was to use the French Open as a means by which to get match tough for the grass court season. In a hypothetical world, if Federer won every match 2, 2 and 2, he’d in all likelihood still be competing. Of course, it was not that straightforward and Federer faced stern tests from both Cilic and Koepfer.
Federer is not violating any rules. He has every right to pull out and do what he feels is best for his body. Federer’s masterful decisions over the last 20 years have allowed him to maintain unprecedented longevity in the game. There is no denying that. He has always made the most prudent decisions possible when it comes to his schedule.
Federer is being criticized because he pulled out of an event appearing to be in full health. Additionally, Federer appeared to be using the French Open more as a practice arena than anything else.
The opportunity to play at an event the caliber of the French Open is one endless amounts of players are fighting their entire lives for. As a result, seeing Federer essentially use the event as a tune up for Wimbledon is going to rub some folks the wrong way. There is no way around it.
In my view, Federer should have never played the French Open to begin with. Transitioning to the grass may be harder now, and I’m of the mind that if you enter an event, you play to the finish, barring any significant injury. Looking ahead to the next tournament is not fair for other players who’d still be competing if they were in the same position.
Federer’s fourth round opponent was supposed to be Italian Matteo Berrettini. Berrettini will now automatically advance to the quarterfinals, to face the winner of Musetti-Djokovic. If the Musetti-Djokovic match ends up as an epic, the quarterfinal match will feature two players operating on far different levels of physical energy. Of course, the Berrettini-Federer match could have been a one-sided affair, but that will likely be of no relief to either Musetti or Djokovic.
Chris Evert, and others, argue that Federer has earned the right to do essentially do whatever he pleases.
The debate is not one of rule compliance. It is an ethical debate. Should Federer have entered the French Open, knowing that a mid-tournament withdrawal, for the purpose of preservation, was possible?
Share your thoughts below.
I agree that he should not have entered the tournament if he knew he would have withdraw at a certain point. I think he really didn't expect to even reach the 4th round. He probably could've worded his statement better and emphasized that his body wasn't recovering the way it needed to after the 3rd round win. Ultimately, it isn't that big of deal but people love to blow sports drama way out of proportion.
I like Robby's comment. RF perhaps knew the backlash from the withdrawal and so did his team. I do agree RF is at a position where people still love to watch him, besides his relentless passion, and that's the biggest advantage for him to continue playing.