So far, no one other than Roger Federer, Tony Roche, and those close to them know why the world no. 1 and a veteran coach parted ways last week, days after Federer’s surprise defeat at the Rome Masters to Filippo Volandri, a mediocre Italian who played the match of his life in his home country.

It’s fair, however, for Federer’s fans to wonder: Has our man hit the panic button? Federer turned to Roche at the end of 2004 not just because the 61-year-old Aussie was the sort of “old school” player Federer admires, but because he knew something about winning on clay as an attacking player (Roche, an expert serve-and-volleyer, won the French Open in 1966 and was twice runner-up). To end the relationship two weeks before Roland Garros is, to say the least, awkward and odd, especially since there was hardly cause for alarm in the Federer camp until the Volandri match.

Granted, Federer had not been his usual invincible self of late. Since winning the Australian

Open and a small title in Dubai, he lost to Guillermo Canas twice in the span of days and to Nadal on clay at the Monte Carlo Masters. That he reached the final of Monte Carlo was a good sign, however, as was his early arrival — before any other player — in Rome. Roche came, too, and Federer said his preparation had been perfect. In his first match, he showed good form in defeating Nicolas Almagro, a talented Spaniard who took Federer to three sets in Rome last year. Another meeting with Nadal was in the offing, a final preview to the real show at Roland Garros.

Then along came Volandri, an Italian with a rank of 53 and one of the weakest serves on the professional tour. In his worst loss in his time at no. 1, Federer managed 44 errors in two sets; 38% of the points the two men played ended in a Federer error. He only made 44% of his first serves and took advantage of one break point out of seven. His forehand, erratic in his other three losses this season, was consistent on this day: bad from start to finish. Nothing worked, and Volandri won handily, 6–2, 6–4.

Roche can’t be blamed for this. As much as one can debate, in the abstract, the importance of a coach to a top tennis pro, there’s never been anything to argue about in the case of Federer and Roche. Federer doesn’t need him, as he showed in 2004, when he won three majors on his own. Roche, to his credit, has never patted himself on the back for his work. He helped Federer with his volleys and his backhand slice, and advocated moving toward the net on clay, rather than trying to defeat Nadal’s defensive wizardry one tiring baseline rally after another.

Otherwise, Roche did what any good coach would have done with an athlete this superb: stay out of the way and count trophies. In all, Federer won six majors in nine tries with Roche and reached at least the semifinals in his three misses. On top of good results, the two seemed to have a perfect understanding of each other’s needs. Roche didn’t want to travel all year; Federer wanted a coach he respected, not someone who was in awe of him. In Melbourne, Federer said he did not see the relationship ending anytime soon, and Roche said he was happy to oblige. They couldn’t have started the year any better: Federer won in Australia without dropping a set and said he had never felt so comfortable in a major tournament.

Now, just three months later, Federer is the most uncomfortable he’s been in three years. He’s lost four out of his last 11 matches. On clay, he seems to be ignoring Roche’s wise advice (assuming Roche hasn’t changed his view, and it’s almost certain he hasn’t). Against Volandri, Federer rarely ventured to the net or changed tactics. He returned serve terribly, which isn’t to say he missed returns, but he hit them timidly, as he did against Nadal in Monte Carlo. Volandri showed no fear of Federer’s forehand, either. Federer missed too often to frighten him.

Forehands can be repaired with hours of drills and a few good matches, bad serves with a bucket of tennis balls. It’s a little more difficult to replenish what has been lacking in Federer’s last two losses: confidence, energy, and creativity. It’s one thing for Federer to slump his shoulders against Nadal, who has dominated him on clay. But he should never look so defeated against a player like Volandri. He didn’t shout at himself or try to fluster Volandri; he seemed more worried about practicing his strokes than winning. The final score is all that counts, and as pretty as Federer’s game is, no one has been better than him at finding ways to win tournament after tournament, no matter his form.

Federer’s lack of inspiration is, perhaps, the reason he decided to cut Roche loose. (The two might have “agreed” to split, as Federer’s Web site says, but it’s a safe bet that Federer initiated the conversation, and probably ended it.) Maybe he needs a bit of turmoil to rekindle his passion. It wouldn’t be the first time that Federer made an irrational move and benefited from it: At the end of 2003, after he clobbered Andre Agassi in the year-end Masters Cup, Federer fired Peter Lundgren, who had helped him win his first Wimbledon several months earlier. The following year couldn’t have gone better.

A final thought on Roche: Whatever one thinks of his role in Federer’s success, have some sympathy for him. Roche, you’ll remember, was the coach who taught Ivan Lendl to serve and volley at Wimbledon — and watched Lendl’s painful mishaps year after year. I’ve always seen helping Federer conquer his greatest challenge as another attempt to finish the job. Too bad he won’t get another chance.

***

As Federer searches for himself, Nadal continues to dominate. The Spaniard defeated Fernando Gonzalez 6–2, 6–2, in the final of the Rome Masters yesterday, as he became the first man to win the title three consecutive years. Nadal’s clay winning streak is now at 77 matches, and don’t be surprised if it stays put until Paris: I’m willing to bet he’ll withdraw from Hamburg this week (the damp, heavy conditions there are not well suited to his game, and he might want some rest after suffering dizziness and a stomach ailment this week). If he does play, don’t be surprised if the streak ends.

tperrotta@nysun.com