According to ESPN, Roger Federer recently announced that he will forgo the French Open and will start placing his focus on Wimbledon. There hasn't been a whole lot of pushback, and rightfully so. Federer has little to nothing to gain from playing in it for a plethora of different reasons. He has amassed an incredible twenty grand slam titles and even at his advanced age is still the second highest rated tennis player today.

What's in it for Fed?

First off, the overwhelming favorite is Rafael Nadal. Even if Federer were in the pool, Nadal still would be an overwhelming favorite and he has been an incredible favorite for a long time.

This is due, in large part, to the event being played on a clay course.

Clay is a softer surface and is less conducive to faster shots and higher bounce than grass or a hard court. Nadal has a defensive style of play that suits the course type, and while Federer is still quite good on clay, Nadal has won ten out of the last 13 French Opens. Also, clay courts are known to be more strenuous on the body. There's a decent amount of extra movement, required to play on the court since the ball doesn't move as much and the stop and go and change of directions are more tiring on the body. As a result, it makes all the sense in the world for the 36-year-old (which is ancient in terms of tennis) to skip a tournament that is particularly hard on his body and that he doesn't have a great chance of winning.

On top of all of this, he already has a french open title under his belt for the purpose of having a Career Grand Slam. So between the career Grand Slam, already having twenty career single's Grand Slam titles, and being ranked the best tennis player in the world for a record of 237 consecutive weeks and a record total 308 weeks, Roger Federer has certainly earned himself the right to sit out of a tournament where there is little to no upside for him.

Tennis fans are tending to agree with my logic in thinking that Federer has the right to sit out and that it is smart for prolonging his career and increasing his chances of winning other major tournaments in the future. Other sports fans sometimes get incredibly upset about NBA stars resting during a couple of regular season games per year, or when NFL players sit out an extra week to recover from injury, or they rest the week before the playoffs because they already clinched their playoff position, despite the fact that the player or the team is doing what's in their best interest.

Of course, there's the outlook that the fans are the driving force behind all sports since their patronage is largely what funds a lot of the player's income and attracts investors to sponsor the events. But seeing as how these things aren't going to make people come to a point where they're going to boycott, it's in the player's best interest to make these decisions, and tennis fans seem to know that.

Lastly, I feel as though that because of Federer's accomplishments and the respect he's garnished across the league, he doesn't really owe anybody anything and if anything we should all just be thrilled that we can still witness his greatness in whatever volume we're blessed with the opportunity to enjoy.

Evidence from the gambling world

For those who are interested in gambling or are at least intrigued by what goes into generating gambling odds, Nadal has incredible odds to win. According to Nadal is a 4/7 favorite and next is Novak Djokovic at 9/1 followed by Dominic Thiem at 10/1. For those not familiar with these gambling odds, the player with the lowest ratio has the highest odds. The difference between Nadal and the next two likely winners per these odds is pretty incredible. I would be slightly conjecturing by making this prediction, but it's my guess that if Federer were in the pool, the odds wouldn't have changed a whole lot.