WIMBLEDON, England — Roger Federer needs no favors at Wimbledon. The four-time defending champion has lost five sets at this tournament since 2003, and has never had himself anything more than a mildly competitive match. Yet thanks to a rare combination of weather, injury, and a silly tradition, his fifth title might come easiest of all.

As a sunny day passed over the London area yesterday, the All England Club took its traditional day off. On three occasions Wimbledon has called matches on the middle Sunday of the tournament —1991, 1997, and2004—each time because it had fallen behind owing to rain in the first week. Officials might come to regret that this year wasn’t the fourth.

Although the tournament is only one round behind schedule, the forecast in the next three days calls for rain, and perhaps lots of it. If that happens, Federer, who advanced to the quarterfinals via walkover when Tommy Haas withdrew yesterday with a torn stomach muscle, would have a slight advantage over men in his half of the draw (he’s one round ahead of them) and a distinct advantage (two rounds ahead at the moment) over the bottom half anchored by no. 2 Rafael Nadal. As unlikely as it was for Nadal or anyone in his half to upset Federer before this tournament began, it might now take a miracle.

Had the tournament remained on schedule, both the men and the women would have completed the fourth round today. The women would have played their quarterfinal matches on Tuesday and the men on Wednesday, followed by the women’s semifinals on Thursday and the men’s semifinals on Friday. Because of Saturday’s rain, players in the bottom half of the men’s draw must play today, Monday (third round), and then Tuesday (fourth round), and Wednesday (quarterfinals).

That’s assuming the rain stays away. A rainout on Monday would force Nadal and company to play Tuesday through Friday. A rainout on Monday and Tuesday, which is a distinct possibility according to the forecast, might ruin any chance of a champion emerging from the bottom half if the tournament isn’t extended into a third week: The winner would have to notch five victories in five days, Wednesday through Sunday. Anyone who won that many best-of-five-set matches, with no tiebreakers in fifth sets, would assure his place as one of the greatest champions in the tournament’s history. Nadal, the fittest man on the tour, might be up to the task, but you can forget about everyone else. Heck, veterans Wayne Arthurs, 36, and Jonas Bjorkman, 35, might need two sunny days to finish their third-round match, which promises long stretches without breaks of serve. Unless the weather improves dramatically, they’re both done for.

Yet somehow the grim forecast couldn’t convince tournament officials that it might be a good idea to play yesterday. They decided against it just after noon on Saturday, before play was suspended for the day. The reasoning was simple: the tournament was “sufficiently on schedule” and in no need of a special session that would disturb the residents of Wimbledon, which is mobbed by visitors each year.

Why, though, can the tournament adjust to falling behind, yet not compensate in advance for almost certain chaos? If ever there was a year to look ahead, this was it. Since no one did, we could be in for a disaster of a second week, and you can bet the players will complain about it. Nadal, in fact, already has: on a blog he’s writing (or dictating?) for the Times Online, he wrote simply, “Not understandable!!!”

The women’s draw would suffer, too, and it’s conceivable, though still far-fetched at this point, that thewomen’sfinalwon’thappenon Saturday. The top half of the draw and two women from the bottom half, defending champion Amelie Mauresmo and Maria Sharapova, are into the fourth round. If no one plays today, the finalist from the bottomhalf might have to compete from Tuesday through Saturday. If rain washes out Tuesday, the tournament might have to move the final to give the bottom half enough time to work itself out, or require two matches in a day.

The point of this discussion is that the open middle Sunday at Wimbledon makes no sense, and never has. It’s considerate of the tournament to give the residents of Wimbledon some peace on their day of rest, but why, then, is it acceptable to be inconsiderate on the second Sunday, when the men’s final is held? If the residents of this charming, rainy village can stand one Sunday of madness, a second one won’thurt. Think peoplewould object if the tournament made the first Sunday “Village Sunday” and gave residents first dibs on tickets? Or if the tournament donated a quarter of its Sunday income to the public? Wimbledon Park Road could use some new sidewalks; let’s start there and work our way up to more ambitious projects, like a trolley to shuttle people up the mountain that separates the train station and the nearest entrance to the grounds.

It’s not as if this problem will disappear in two years when the retractable roof on Centre Court is finished. Depending on the circumstances, it might even get worse. The tournament can’t play a day’s worth of matches on Centre Court. For one, there aren’t enough hours in a day. More important, the increased volume of matches would destroy the court. If the tournament had completed five or six matches on Saturday rather than two, the situation described above wouldn’tchangegoingintothesecond week, except that higher seeds — that is, bigger stars — would have further advantages over their less heralded colleagues. If the weather is sufficiently miserable, one roof won’t be enough.

Perhaps the clouds will break for the best in the next few days. Perhaps someone will find the energy and array of shots to present Federer with a difficult match, or maybe his lack of play — he won’t take the court again until at least Wednesday — will soften his game. It’s only Monday, and there a lot of unknowns left to come in this tournament. One thing we do know is that the decision to keep the first Sunday open was the wrong one.

tperrotta@nysun.com