PDA

View Full Version : Have we seen the most of what Andy Roddick can do?


backhander
05-14-2007, 09:06 AM
I know that Andy Roddick has had a career that 95 percent of the tour would probably like to have as well, but I was just thinking, has he accomplished as much as he will?

He's won 1 US Open, and has gotten to a few other Slam finals, but over the last couple of years he's been trying desperately to get that 2nd Slam but to no avail. He's going to be 25 this August, and it looks like Federer and Nadal will be playing well during Roddick's prime and there are currently a lot of young talented guys that are beginning to make their moves. Where does this leave Roddick? He's still a top 5 player, but I just don't see that special aura to make me think that he will win again. I don't think longevity is at his side either.

Do you guys think he will win that 2nd Slam? I don't think he will, he's at an age where he will need to do it either this year or the next. There's always talk about him improving his net game and backhand, and though he's gotten it maybe more consistent, I don't think his net game nor his backhand are good enough to totally bring up his game.

I think Roddick will be a one slam wonder, kind of like a Kim Clijsters or Gabriella Sabatini, always a contender but probably not a favorite. I think he needs to make his move this year, so what do you guys think his chances are?

navratilovafan
05-14-2007, 09:07 AM
He wont win another slam. Federer and Nadal are too good for him and Djokovic and Murray are more talented.

CEvertFan
05-14-2007, 09:19 AM
We've already seen ALL that Roddick has to offer and it isn't enough for him to win another Slam, even with Connors' help.

ibemadskillzz
05-14-2007, 09:28 AM
rpddock can't even bneat djock or murrary so there is ur answer

chris1992
05-14-2007, 10:21 AM
with roddick, it is a tricky situation due to changes of coaches and the rise of nadal. He would have one 1 or 2 wimbledon titles now had it not been for federer, who is just genuinely a better player than him. Also, roddicks serve used to virtually win him every service game but over the years as he plays the same players, they now understand how to read it alot better. Once players know how to read his serve and get a good return back, there is not a lot roddick can do, as he relys on a weak return so that he can hit a huge forehand.

Unless roddick sharpens up his game and produces a better b/hand and volleys, it is unlikely he will even get to another slam final but with alot of hard work, anything is achievable.

Turning Pro
05-14-2007, 10:24 AM
Roddick 04 at Wimby is when i thought he peaked. He came back for a little while for a run to the US open finals 06 but......................

Eviscerator
05-14-2007, 10:31 AM
I know that Andy Roddick has had a career that 95 percent of the tour would probably like to have as well, but I was just thinking, has he accomplished as much as he will?

He's won 1 US Open, and has gotten to a few other Slam finals, but over the last couple of years he's been trying desperately to get that 2nd Slam but to no avail. He's going to be 25 this August, and it looks like Federer and Nadal will be playing well during Roddick's prime and there are currently a lot of young talented guys that are beginning to make their moves. Where does this leave Roddick? He's still a top 5 player, but I just don't see that special aura to make me think that he will win again. I don't think longevity is at his side either.

Do you guys think he will win that 2nd Slam? I don't think he will, he's at an age where he will need to do it either this year or the next. There's always talk about him improving his net game and backhand, and though he's gotten it maybe more consistent, I don't think his net game nor his backhand are good enough to totally bring up his game.

I think Roddick will be a one slam wonder, kind of like a Kim Clijsters or Gabriella Sabatini, always a contender but probably not a favorite. I think he needs to make his move this year, so what do you guys think his chances are?

Thoughtful thread, but your notion that he will only be a one hit wonder slam wise is premature. Much of it depends on varying factors, not the least of which is the draw. If you get a easy/lucky draw and are playing well, anyone with his game could make it. Granted he will be facing Federer/Nadal most of the time, but they are not guaranteed to always win and be in his way.

This discussion reminds me of Goran and his misfortune to be playing during the Sampras era. Had Pete not been around Goran would have reached #1 and won a few more slams. Likewise Roddick will be in the shadow of Federer unless something changes like an injury or lack of focus on Rogers part.

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
05-14-2007, 10:41 AM
sorry but, NO

Jonnyf
05-14-2007, 10:52 AM
No we've not, look at his advances since getting with Connors, he is now improving.

+HE SHOULD have beaten Fed at the Masters Cup last year,proving he CAN do it

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
05-14-2007, 11:05 AM
No we've not, look at his advances since getting with Connors, he is now improving.

+HE SHOULD have beaten Fed at the Masters Cup last year,proving he CAN do it
lol, but he still didnt beat roger, then they met at the AO, roger took andys so called gap, extended it, and beat him upside the head with, while also feeding him a bagel, then at the paclife, nadal called his buddy roger to borrow that gap stick to beat roddick upside the head with it. roddick wont win another slam because there are 2 legends in the game right now, even if those 2 goes out early in slams, there are other guys like nole, murray, gonzo, and gasquet, and many mroe like baggy and monfils. roddicks turf is hard, if he cant even beat nadal there, what chance does he have in the french? and cmon now, fed will just beat him again in wimby. im not trying to be an a-hole, but roddick winning a slam again is just like michael jordan dusting off his old baseball gear and trying out for a baseball team to win a world series. sorry mate.

Jonnyf
05-14-2007, 12:06 PM
lol, but he still didnt beat roger, then they met at the AO, roger took andys so called gap, extended it, and beat him upside the head with, while also feeding him a bagel, then at the paclife, nadal called his buddy roger to borrow that gap stick to beat roddick upside the head with it. roddick wont win another slam because there are 2 legends in the game right now, even if those 2 goes out early in slams, there are other guys like nole, murray, gonzo, and gasquet, and many mroe like baggy and monfils. roddicks turf is hard, if he cant even beat nadal there, what chance does he have in the french? and cmon now, fed will just beat him again in wimby. im not trying to be an a-hole, but roddick winning a slam again is just like michael jordan dusting off his old baseball gear and trying out for a baseball team to win a world series. sorry mate.


Haha no worries, theirs always a chance: Fed and Rafa are human afterall.

Roddick is the 2nd best Grass Courter in recent years,and no-one can doubt that surely. Whay happens if Fed slips up.? Look at what Roddicks done since his US Open win
Ao-isn't it 3 semi's and a 4th round
FO-Not commenting he's not consistant enough on clay
Wimbledon-03 Semi (lost to Fed) 04-Final (l.Fed) 05-Final (l.Fed) 06- 3rd Round
US Open-04-1/4 05-1st round 06-Final (l.Fed)


If Roddick Hadn't lost to Fed he'd have multiple Grandslams and have reached atleast a few more finals

Chadwixx
05-14-2007, 12:12 PM
Wait til he gets back on us soil where he gets the home cooking.

He is worse now than he was a few years ago thanks to connors. What makes this guy think he can change his game on tour? You got to where you are with a certain style of play and you change? Learn from lendl's wimbledon fiasco.

Its the same story with roddick, he only wins about 30% of his matches vs other top players. He needs to step up vs other top players to be considered one.

backhander
05-14-2007, 12:16 PM
I guess my point is that he will be 25 (in august?) of this year and 26 next year. Even if we see improvements which coaches such as Connors, I am not seeing enough improvement to say that he will peak again or do better than the year he won the US Open. Nadal (a claycourt specialist) beat him on hardcourts (Roddick's best surface) pretty convincingly a couple months ago. I beleive he was also beaten on grass (another of his best surfaces) by a newcomer (Murray) at Wimbeldon last year, while Nadal got to the final. So it's not just Federer who is in his way now, it is Nadal, and the young guns. And at 25-26, in today's game it is extremely rare to see someone improve his game to the point where we would see him winning slams again.

I think right now, it would be more of a shock to see him win another slam, than to see him not win one again. His game I feel has been the same for the past few years, and if he's incorporated a better backhand and a better net game, than his results should be better right? But they are not, his results were better during his peak year which was around the time he won the USO.

backhander
05-14-2007, 12:41 PM
Thoughtful thread, but your notion that he will only be a one hit wonder slam wise is premature. Much of it depends on varying factors, not the least of which is the draw. If you get a easy/lucky draw and are playing well, anyone with his game could make it. Granted he will be facing Federer/Nadal most of the time, but they are not guaranteed to always win and be in his way.

This discussion reminds me of Goran and his misfortune to be playing during the Sampras era. Had Pete not been around Goran would have reached #1 and won a few more slams. Likewise Roddick will be in the shadow of Federer unless something changes like an injury or lack of focus on Rogers part.

The situation also reminds me of Michael Chang, who was #2 behind Sampras for while, but just could not beat him. The other similarity to Roddick is that Chang was also beaten by other players as well which blocked him from getting that 2nd Slam, namely Becker at the Australian Open, and Rafter at the US Open.

I think Roddick is in that same situation, It's not just that he can't beat Federer, but Nadal is now a force as well, and he's getting beaten by peeps like Murray, etc. His ranking has gone down, not up. And so that's when age comes into play. I know it is premature to predict whether he'll be a one slam wonder, but like I said he's gonna be 25-26 soon, will he be able to improve his game, cause as his game is now, I don't think he can be a favorite anymore, besides Wimbeldon, but that is just because of his serve, which as pointed out people have figured out and is not as big as it used to be.

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
05-14-2007, 12:47 PM
whats sad is he couldnt even win at memphis, a tourney free of roger, raffy, nole, murray, gonzo, and even blake.

edmondsm
05-14-2007, 12:54 PM
Roddick will win Wimbledon this year.

little_e
05-14-2007, 01:23 PM
whats sad is he couldnt even win at memphis, a tourney free of roger, raffy, nole, murray, gonzo, and even blake.

beat Murray in Memphis this year lost to Haas in the final

WayneCM
05-14-2007, 01:37 PM
Roddick COULD... He seems to be lacking somewhat in the killer instinct and confidence in the latter stages, i think a win against fed in the masters cup and the sky's the limit confidence wise on court...
Loosing to Murray when he was in possibly the worst part of his slump is no sin, murray is top10 and everyone knew his potential do we forget he also beat Rog?
The fact is since the USO its taken top players to beat him but what worry me are poor performances against both nadal and haas, he went back to way behind the baseline and giving too much respect, those that say he was shown how much better rafa is on hard courts is a little much, can u honestly say his performance was even decent...??

I think a decent draw and a bit of luck and a slam could happen... He did make it to the final of the USO only to meet fed, if not for fed he could have up to 4 or 5 slams...

Baghdatis72
05-14-2007, 01:37 PM
Roddick will win Wimbledon this year.

:shock:

Why? How? He lost to Andy Murray when Murray didn't even have a coach last year and then Murray went on to lose in straight sets from Baghdatis.

WayneCM
05-14-2007, 01:39 PM
:shock:

Why? How? He lost to Andy Murray when Murray didn't even have a coach last year and then Murray went on to lose in straight sets from Baghdatis.

Wining maybe not but i see him reaching the second week, maybe semi's r final, i don't think rafa is gonna make the final, and i don't think ur boy is makin the semi's again, a couple of flukes there...

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
05-14-2007, 04:18 PM
Roddick will win Wimbledon this year.

and hitler will rise from the grave.

edmondsm
05-14-2007, 05:05 PM
:shock:

Why? How? He lost to Andy Murray when Murray didn't even have a coach last year and then Murray went on to lose in straight sets from Baghdatis.

Because Fed aside he's been the most dominant grass courter of the last four years, and because I said so.

and hitler will rise from the grave.

Woh man, keep your fascism in the Rants and Raves department.:)

Morrissey
05-14-2007, 05:25 PM
Roddick has one or two inspired runs in him at either Wimby or US Open because his serve is always going to be effective. It's how the rest of his game works out with it that will decide it. Does it mean he will win another slam? I don't think so, but it doesn't mean he can't make a SF or Final again. A big part of this is due to Fed still being the man on the surfaces that Roddick excels in. Now it's not just Fed he's gotta worry about, Nadal spanked him in IW, Joker and Murray are among others making moves on hard court. I give him a year or two to win one more slam. After that, he's only got one slam to his name. Connors won't be around much longer either, he's taken him as far as he could with his game. You can only do so much with Andy's limited style.

tricky
05-14-2007, 05:46 PM
Roddick is of course a legit contender esp. if they restore the Wimby grass to its rightful pace. His general net approach style is especially well suited.

It just takes one Fed upset to open up the whole field.

obsessedtennisfandisorder
05-14-2007, 05:52 PM
I think the whole issue with a-rod right now in his career is whether he wants to be a bonefied serve and volleyer or not....none of this Passive/aggressive..will i come in or not nonsense.

If Arod serves and volley and actaully goes away and constantly works on his serves and volley game...(forget about that sponsorship crap please..that is soooo american) i honestly see roddick doing some serious damage on the tour in 2009 and 2010.

This idea is not new Gilbert, Newcombe and Annacone talked about this in late 2005 after his Muller embaressment.

If not NO, his results will get only worse because opponents just gently chip the return to the corners where as the rally progresses roddick craps out.......
One slam wonder here we come.

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
05-14-2007, 05:54 PM
hahaha im jsut kiddin edmondsm, ur a good sport

Mr. Sean
05-14-2007, 06:07 PM
He'll win at least one more slam if he stays dedicated to what conners is teaching him. It will either be at wimbledon or the us open. It really all depends on how far federer goes in during a slam. If fed gets knocked out early roddick will definitely be there to win it. Murray is a like a british safin lately and djokovic doesnt have enough experience in the slams. We all forget how consistent roddick is during slams and usually makes the semis of most masters and slams as of lately. I don't know any other player besides nalby that can do that.

ubel
05-14-2007, 06:10 PM
No we've not, look at his advances since getting with Connors, he is now improving.

+HE SHOULD have beaten Fed at the Masters Cup last year,proving he CAN do it
I actually caught that match and some things of note about it: Federer was about as off as I'd ever seen him. He was asleep through most of set 1 and the majority of set 2, just could not seem to wake himself up at the important junctures. He was just WAY off from norm. Also, Roddick was serving absolutely nuts, aces were just rolling off his racquet; I distinctly remember one game of back-to-back-to-back-back nonreturnable serves, two of which were aces, which dug him out of a 15-40 hole after getting an early break. So even if he could produce a little brilliance, Roddick's serve was just taking the ball out of Federer's hands.

Anyway, my main conclusion is: if Roddick can serve lights out on a Federer off day, then yes, I'd say he is capable of beating Federer :p

Nextman916
05-14-2007, 06:12 PM
Roddick 04 at Wimby is when i thought he peaked. He came back for a little while for a run to the US open finals 06 but......................
Agreed Wimbledon 2004 to me was the best ive ever seen him play.
rpddock can't even bneat djock or murrary so there is ur answer
Where do these absurd statements come from, Roddick has and can definately beat murray. Murray is soo overrated, djokovic on the other hand may be able to take him, but considering their 0-0 in matchups there is no factual information to back this up. You can resign from the forums now, k thx.

drakulie
05-14-2007, 07:46 PM
Although his net game, backhand, return and court positioning have improved over the last 2 ??? years, his forehand seems to not be as powerful or imposing as it once was.

I agree with most others that we have seen the most (in terms of slam wins) we are going to see from Roddick. Personally, I think his best chance at a slam at this point is Wimbledon.

tennis_hand
05-14-2007, 07:53 PM
still just a serve in the ATP circle.

Kobble
05-14-2007, 08:53 PM
I thought about this last night. I think so. He was at his absolute best in those finals he lost to Federer. Now, the game has even more depth, and age never helps. I think this is IT, unless he takes a huge gamble in his training. His backhand is built on poor fundamentals, so that spells trouble. You can't tweak it; you must rebuild it.

tintin
05-15-2007, 04:37 AM
Roddick was thaught to just rely on his serves and forehand and be done with it.
The fondamentals of tennis,they skip with him and with Federer coming and playing all court,all surface player and trouncing Roddick boy;Roddick got stuck.
The notion that hitting volleys and moving forward wasn't going to hurt was a foreign concept to him.
He got obsessed with Federer and in the meantime players got to read his serve placement and figured that Roddick would serve
hit a forehand down to your backhand and then hit a backhand down the line.

Roddick is volleying right now and his volleys got a lot of hair in them so any good mover can hit passing shots from them(Federer) because they are not sharp enough.
he was never a good mover.
Roddick is almost 25 now and how can he improve anymore than that?
he's one handed slice will work against some and certanly hasn't work against the likes of Federer,Haas,Murray.

btw even if Federer goes out,that doesn't mean that Roddick will be in the finals at all so he can fight with the rest of the clan for the crumbs of Roger.Federer was bounced by the doper Canas and Roddick got crushed by Nadal no less on Hard courts in 2 sets

edmondsm
05-15-2007, 09:40 AM
I thought about this last night. I think so. He was at his absolute best in those finals he lost to Federer. Now, the game has even more depth, and age never helps. I think this is IT, unless he takes a huge gamble in his training. His backhand is built on poor fundamentals, so that spells trouble. You can't tweak it; you must rebuild it.

Spot on. If Fed is truly stumbling than Roddick might be looking at his one and only chance to win Wimbledon. His BH is ugly. I can't believe nobody fixed it when he was growing up.

Kobble
05-15-2007, 01:06 PM
Nobody fixed it because they were blinded by the serve. He had a guaranteed pro level game. I think people became complacent and never addressed it.

backhander
05-15-2007, 02:03 PM
Nobody fixed it because they were blinded by the serve. He had a guaranteed pro level game. I think people became complacent and never addressed it.

Yah, and I think that's the thing, he was complacent with the serve, and never bothered to better other parts of the game. I think it is too late now for him to improve his game. I'm sure he can get his backhander better and make more efforts to finish at net, but he is too old now to better these aspects of his game to a point where it will bring him better results.

People talk about his better backhand and better net game, but they are talking about it when he is playing against players that he SHOULD beat or have always beaten in the past. When he plays Nadal, Federer, Murray, and others that I can't think of, he hasn't improved to the point that he will beat them consistently.

I guess the consensus on this thread then is that we've pretty much seen the most of what he can do then right? It's either go for broke this year, otherwise his confidence will be even lower next year as he heads into age 26.