How important for tennis is the world's No. 1 losing?

	Roger Federer's loss to Guillermo Canas at Indian Wells was the No. 1's first defeat to a player outside the top 25 in nearly two years Matthew Stockman/Getty Images
	MAILBAG Jon Wertheim will answer questions from SI.com users in his mailbag every Wednesday. Your name: Your e-mail address: Your home town: Enter your question:

Admit it: Roger Federer losing is great for tennis. Look at all the excitement his first-round loss has caused. Suddenly the field is wide open and the title is anybody's to win. All hail King Canas, the savior of tennis! I'm actually looking forward to watching Indian Wells this week now, while before Federer lost I really wasn't. What a difference a day makes!
-- Jonathan, NYC

Calling Guillermo Canas' defeat of The Mighty Federer "great for tennis" is probably overstating the case. But I will admit, this result was something ... "refreshing," maybe? It was reassuring to know that, yes, Federer is capable of having an unsalvageably bad day. And it was reassuring to know that there are players capable of displacing him from his comfort zone.

We've discussed this before: Parity is overrated. Give me Federer's era of dominance over the "Any Given Sunday" era that beset men's tennis earlier this decade. (Note, for instance, the Grand Slam champs of 2001 and '02.) Still, I can still see how "engrave-the-trophy-now" lack of suspense could be a turn-off to some of you. You hate to attach too much significance to one match, but perhaps we have the perfect situation now: a clear-cut No. 1 that's beatable. And yes, it will be nice to see a new face deliver the winner's speech on Sunday.

Incidentally, a few of you complained about Canas being lionized so soon after his return from a doping suspension. As Nidhi S. of Berkeley, Calif., wrote: "Let me get this -- a player cheats (blood doping), gets busted and suspended. He returns to the tour well-rested and match-fit ...and beats the top-ranked player partly because he's unseeded and plays the guy early. What's an aspiring, impressionable young kid supposed to make of all the heaps of praise the doping cheat gets?"

No question, there's a certain irony (this is tennis after all) that the player to upend Federer and thwart his pursuit of Guillermo Vilas' record was not only Argentine but was competing his first Masters Series event since a drug suspension. Far as I'm concerned, Canas did the crime and he did the time. Not saying we all are obligated to root for him, but I think he has paid his debt and is owed a clean slate.

I feel like due to the round-robin fiasco, Justine Henin didn't get all the attention she deserved last week. I really think she proved once more that the women's tour is better when she's around. In my opinion, she is a more complete player than Maria Sharapova or most of the younger players, because she does not only rely on big ground strokes but also knows how to come to the net and what to do there.
-- Tatjana V., Heidelberg, Germany

Agreed on all counts. Though it would have been nice to see JH in the desert -- if I'm Larry Scott, I send the Indian Wells organizers a big Harry and David fruit basket when I get home -- give overdue props to the Belgian for the swatch of destruction she carved through the Middle East. Health is obviously a big issue, but when she is at full strength, she is, for my euros, the best player in the women's game. As is the case with Federer, a complete game often trumps brute power.