Roger Federer is wise not weak by effectively retiring from clay

Perhaps American entrepreneur Bill Gates, the billionaire founder of Microsoft, repeated the famous quote oft attributed to him when he played a charity match with Roger Federer in his native Seattle a few weeks ago. The timing would have been apt.

In sport, there is a wisdom in withdrawal when you can save your ardour for another day. The beauty of professional sport tends to mean there is always another day.

But when you are the ongoing artful Roger, hitting 36 in August without any hint of decline, it is perhaps wiser not to overstretch the limits of your lofty ambitions.

Especially when you have the option of picking and choosing your days. Especially when you have earned the right to pick and choose your battles.

It is not sporting sacrilege to suggest Federer’s days on clay were over long before he decided to announce he was going to miss this year’s French Open at Roland Garros of his own volition.

In sport, playing the percentage game to your advantage is like money in the bank. Mastering it can reap greater dividends for great champions further down the road.

In his peak years on the red stuff, Federer was easily one of the best three or four dirtballers in the history of tennis.

It is unfortunate that his greatest moments on clay collided with Rafael Nadal, the greatest clay-courter in history, assembling his burgeoning cannon of nine titles in Paris.

Federer has lost four finals to Nadal at the French Open in 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2011. In 2009, the year he didn’t have to confront Nadal on clay, he carried off his solitary success at the event to realise his ambition of a career Grand Slam.

He should be thankful for the gone-but-not forgotten Robin Soderling doing the job for him against Nadal in the last 16 before he managed to usurp the Swede in the final.

There is no longer anything to see for Federer at Roland Garros. There has not been much to see since losing his last final to Nadal at the venue in four sets when he was aged 29 six years ago.

One wonders how much the upsurge in Rafael Nadal’s form on his favourite surface has contributed to Federer's thinking in effectively culling his clay-court career?

Nadal is a heavy favourite for a 10th French Open having won already in Monte Carlo, Barcelona and Madrid during the spring clay swing.

If Federer could not beat Nadal in his pomp, how will he be expected to beat him now when he refused to commit to the clay-court season after winning in Miami? Nadal is no longer his only obstacle on clay when you consider the defeats he has suffered in the French capital.

He lost in straight sets to Novak Djokovic in the semi-finals in 2012. He has been well beaten in the quarter-finals by the tennis muscle of Jo-Wilfried Tsonga and Stanislas Wawrinka in 2013 and 2015.

The unremarkable Ernest Gulbis also downed him in the last 16 in 2014. A year ago, he didn’t make it to the starting line at Roland Garros due to a back injury sustained shortly before on the clay of Rome.

It lived with him until he lost in five sets in the last four of Wimbledon to Milos Raonic.

It was the last time we witnessed Federer in 2016 as he took six months to recover from a knee injury he suffered at last year's Australian Open with the body in danger of conking out.

If the Swiss is going to suffer any side effects playing tennis, it is more likely to happen on the brutality of clay, a surface at odds with his classic sculpting, a tennis survival of the fittest that is not so much a different event, but a different sport.

Federer has played table tennis to win the Australian Open, Indian Wells and Miami before April. It is a ploy that can’t work on clay, but it can work for him on grass at Wimbledon and the US Open over the next five months.

Federer is not weak on clay, he is merely wise. Of course, the limbs are more languid the older we get, but modern medicine can tell athletes when and where they are likely to prosper.

In a world of diminishing returns, it is little wonder Federer does not see any wisdom in turning up in Paris for the good of his health.

"You have to be hungry. If I’m losing second round every week, yes it makes me happy that I’m healthy and I can play, but it’s not going to make me particularly happy as a tennis player," said Federer earlier this week. "I’ve had too much success for a second round to keep me entertained."

And there you have it. Paris won’t be an entertaining environment, but it could be a punishing one. The accepted narrative suggests Federer or Nadal will finish the year as number one. With Andy Murray blighted by inconsistency and Novak Djokovic struggling to rediscover his former self, Federer will be strongly fancied to add to his haul of 18 Grand Slams.

He also knows that he has Nadal’s number on faster courts having won the previous four meetings between the men, including breaking the ceiling of five sets to win in Melbourne in January. Why risk the psychological advantage for fulfilling his duties to please the hard-to-please patrons of Paris?

This could be a year that sees Federer win a record 19th Grand Slam. He could win a 20th. He could end the year as world number one.

But a trip to Paris makes little sense in trying to reach the palace of wisdom. Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth when the answer is as obvious as the Eiger. Federer seeks longevity rather than eternal life, but with this wish comes sacrifice.

Even professional sport's marvellous, miraculous composer must let reality take hold of his thought process every now and then. There remains method in his movement.