PDA

View Full Version : WhY do Federer's PROBLEMS SUDDENLY go AWAY against RODDICK??


wow246
04-17-2009, 07:04 PM
I mean all his problems hes been having lately against everyoen else.

eg. error count goes down, no back pain, first serve works again, don't shank the backhand, moves better, is more patient etc etc etc

Always something magical happens to him against roddick so no more using mono as excuse bs.

JeMar
04-17-2009, 07:31 PM
It's more like Roddick can't really do anything that bothers him much.

dincuss
04-17-2009, 07:35 PM
Because he has a 17-2 record with him

kfactor/all/the/WAY!
04-17-2009, 07:35 PM
i think that its like this

roger has beaten roddick so many times and knows roddicks game really well. this gives roger a lot of confidence when he plays him and knows he will win

prosealster
04-17-2009, 07:35 PM
he knows andy cant hurt him... and also he is always confident playing andy...unlike playing nads

quest01
04-17-2009, 07:37 PM
Its probably because Federer has played Roddick so many times and has been successful so every time they meet, everything just clicks. If it wasn't for Federer, Roddick probably would have won a few more majors.

helloworld
04-17-2009, 07:38 PM
Federer didn't play that well against Roddick in their previous 3-4 meetings, but Roddick just couldn't take advantage of it. Federer used to be able to return Roddick's serve like a piece of cake, but now Roddick's serve can actually hurt him a little bit, just a little bit.

helloworld
04-17-2009, 07:40 PM
Its probably because Federer has played Roddick so many times and has been successful so every time they meet, everything just clicks. If it wasn't for Federer, Roddick probably would have won a few more majors.
2 more at most. Without Federer, there will be other guys beating Roddick's *** instead. Roddick is not invincible to other players.

Tempest344
04-17-2009, 11:47 PM
Because Federer basically has the whip and roddick bends over for him

chiru
04-18-2009, 12:40 AM
2 more at most. Without Federer, there will be other guys beating Roddick's *** instead. Roddick is not invincible to other players.

when you have 1 major, nothing about 2 more 'at most' sounds bad. for that matter, when you have 13 majors, nothing about 2 more 'at most' sounds all that bad.

harrpau7
04-18-2009, 01:05 AM
Its probably because Federer has played Roddick so many times and has been successful so every time they meet, everything just clicks. If it wasn't for Federer, Roddick probably would have won a few more majors.

2 more at most. Without Federer, there will be other guys beating Roddick's *** instead. Roddick is not invincible to other players.

It would of been 3 more at least actualy, as they played in 3 slam finals.

shadows
04-18-2009, 01:35 AM
Confidence.

and they don't all go away really, there's no doubt he dipped in Miami when they play, he just had enough to pull it out at the end.

Chelsea_Kiwi
04-18-2009, 01:58 AM
Confidence.

and they don't all go away really, there's no doubt he dipped in Miami when they play, he just had enough to pull it out at the end. Exactly right, the mono is still there just Fed has confidence. Imagine how much he would be beating Roddick etc if he didn't have the mono.

Bud
04-18-2009, 02:04 AM
Exactly right, the mono is still there just Fed has confidence. Imagine how much he would be beating Roddick etc if he didn't have the mono.

Mono does not last for 2 years if your immune system is working.

So, let's drop that excuse, shall we?

Chelsea_Kiwi
04-18-2009, 02:06 AM
Mono does not last for 2 years if your immune system is working.

So, let's drop that excuse, shall we? But the aftermath does. If you break your arm do you play exactly the same right after? No. Exact same answer for Federer.

Bud
04-18-2009, 02:12 AM
But the aftermath does. If you break your arm do you play exactly the same right after? No. Exact same answer for Federer.

Wrong, the symptoms of severe mono are gone in healthy individuals within 3 months (max), after the chronic phase.

A bone break is physical damage to a body part and can't be compared to an infectious disease.

shadows
04-18-2009, 02:37 AM
But the aftermath does. If you break your arm do you play exactly the same right after? No. Exact same answer for Federer.


*facepalm*

I'm disgusted that you'd quote me and then attempt to crowbar Mono in as the reason. As someone who very much enjoys watching Roger play (when he's in full flow (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzqetD22lQs) at any rate) Mono is something that should have been left in a dark corner of a dark cupboard by now when discussing him, it's clearly not the reason for his poor form of late.

I'm not going to bother trying to put forward other reasons for the poor form, since everyone has their own take, but there's no doubting that when he plays Andy he's one of the guys who Roger really believes he'll beat no matter the scenario and it's that confidence that generally keeps his level up.

Leublu tennis
04-18-2009, 02:57 AM
There are posters here who apparently have never played tennis. Those who have, know that some players you beat all the time, even though they are close to your level of play. I know that when I play X, I will win and X knows that I will win, so its just a matter of time. I have confidence that I will win and he has confidence that he will lose. And it works.

Bud
04-18-2009, 03:27 AM
Looks like nice sunny weather, too.

Chelsea_Kiwi
04-18-2009, 04:10 AM
Ok what was the reason right after 2007 (a year he won 3 GS in) that he suffered in 2008 and now 2009. Mono was what happened between the end of 2007 and start of 2008. This started his downfall, any other things happen to him between 2007 and 2008 that could of caused this? How can you deny that after the mono he has played bad, its just complete stupidity thinking otherwise.

Btw I am not using it as an excuse but as a reason.

Fedace
04-18-2009, 04:26 AM
Because Roger can read Roddick's serve like a mirror