Anyone who's followed me for long enough on Twitter knows I don't root for Roger Federer.
With that said, the old man playing on clay was something I absolutely wanted to see again before he hangs it up, and he obliged.
Federer exits this clay season having:
-become the oldest semifinalist at Roland Garros since Pancho Gonzales did so at 40 in the first year of the Open Era, 1968
-won two matches in one day in Rome
-delivered thrillers in Madrid, going 7-6 in the third with both Gael Monfils and Dominic Thiem
Simply put, his clay season was an unqualified success. There are no drawbacks, no negatives, so long as his health is intact for grass.
And yet, through no fault of his own, I can't help but be a little disappointed.
Why? Because between the weather and his draws, the main question I was curious about remains unsolved: How good is Roger Federer on clay in this stage of his career?
For some time now, tennis pundits, some wearing Federer hats, others completely objective, have been quite ambitious about his chances in Paris.
In 2017, he was red hot and had just gone 3-for-3 against Rafael Nadal at the three important events before clay season. Once Nadal eviscerated everything in his path that spring, that talk died down.
However, it came up again in 2018, with Rafa considered more vulnerable due to the combination of his injury layoff and the earlier timing of his annual loss to Thiem, which came in Madrid instead of Rome.
Frankly, it seemed particularly preposterous last year, given how sharply Federer's form had dipped in the spring, evidenced not so much by his losses, but that he was fortunate to make the Indian Wells final in the first place, a reality he seemed as aware of as anybody.
Given Fed's form on the ground since the summer of 2017, as well as that his somewhat ambitious decision to push and play the 2017 Rogers Cup resulted in him getting injured, my hypothesis had long been that his clay prospects were being severely overvalued, that the surface would be too taxing on both his body and the weaknesses in his game.
After announcing his return to clay in February and then displaying his best form in ages en route to winning Miami, Federer began a clay season in which the conditions meant clear answers were never provided.
Madrid saw the aforementioned Thiem and Monfils matches, but also a glorified practice session against a rehabbing Richard Gasquet, and either way, it was amid the backdrop of the altitude, which we know doesn't translate to normal clay. After all, Kevin Anderson and Denis Shapovalov were defending semifinal points here.
In Rome, the complete Wednesday washout meant Federer understandably withdrew before facing Stefanos Tsitsipas, the exact caliber of player who would have been a good barometer of his clay level.
Finally, in Paris, the 2009 champ received (as did Nadal and Novak Djokovic, to be fair) a quite kind draw to get to the quarterfinals, including matchups against an injured Leo Mayer and lucky loser Oscar Otte, who came in with one career ATP win. Even the Casper Ruud match was a letdown, with the prospect clearly nervous in the first two sets, and playing with nothing to lose in the third, both polar extremes of his capabilities.
Unfortunately, his clay season finished with more external circumstances impacting his matches, fatigue for Stan Wawrinka, and then the tornado-esque winds against Nadal in the semifinals.
13 matches in total, and still we're left with more questions than answers. Does a fresh Wawrinka beat Federer? What would that Fedal semifinal have looked like in normal weather?
Twice we were denied a Federer/Tsitsipas match, and that's before wondering how Fed would have fared against Thiem outside Madrid, or the likes of Fabio Fognini, Juan Martin del Potro, or Sascha Zverev. Perhaps the match most indicative of his true level was when a rested Borna Coric - a top 10 player on clay by Tennis Abstract metrics, but top 25ish by actual results - squandered match points in Rome against Federer, who was playing his second match of the day.
Ultimately I'm left with the same conclusion I came to before Federer had even played a match at sea level: That I significantly underestimated what tier of player he would be, but that those bullish on him were dead wrong about him having a chance in Paris, given that winning there means going through some combination of Nadal, Djokovic and Thiem.
Here's hoping to Federer running it back in 2020...and the weather cooperating this time.