PDA

View Full Version : Roddick 09/10 off season improvement


MethodTennis
12-06-2009, 10:25 AM
Will Roddick improve as much in this off season as last time or was it mainly due to the weight loss last year. He has plenty to work on with his volleys etc. and the accuracy of his serve seemed to slim to wards the latter part of the season.

Will he hold onto a top 10 position. Will he catch Davydenko and Del potro. Has he got a shot at Wimbledon next year. Or is he done and on his way out.

Will he win his second slam or is he just not at that level of tennis any more.

I'm interested to see everyone on heres opinion.

Anaconda
12-06-2009, 10:30 AM
Why does he need to catch Davydenko? He is a better player - Roddick wan't to win another slam at least instead of trying to get higher in the rankings.

I predicted Roddick to fall from the game at this stage for the past 3 years; obviously i was wrong.

Since Wimbledon 2009 it has just felt like Roddick's heart and mind have gave up.

fps
12-06-2009, 10:35 AM
I think Roddick needs to maintain the level of fitness he established in the off-season last year. He's been injured a lot lately, after being shattered mentally and physically by his Wimbledon loss, a little like a "defeat" version of what happened to del potro after his USO win.

He will want to get his fitness back, do some serving, and continue to work on his all-court game as he did last year. While there is always something to improve, I believe in 2009 he showed that he has put himself in the position to challenge for the slams to a degree he hasn't for several years. I would change very little, I'd work my way back to full fitness and practise groundies, in keeping with his reinvention as a grinder with a big serve. other than that he should continue to progress with his approaches and volleying, two categories in which he improved a lot in 2009.

From the back of the court he wasn't outclassed by Federer or Murray at Wimbledon. It's been tough on the body, he should take all the time he needs to get fit again because for him to match 2009's standard will take just as gruelling an effort- it's not going to get easier to play this way, nor to stay in the top 6-10 players in the world. He needs to stay top 8 IMO or he's conclusively done at slam level.

Next year he again has a real shot at Wimbledon, where Novak and Del Potro haven't shone, Nadal is an unknown quantity at this moment, and Federer was taken to the brink this year. The AO is another legitimate possibility, since it is slow enough that he can track the ball down, chase and frustrate, but not too slow to negate that serve, or stop him, for better or worse (and it's now 60/40 where it used to be 20/80) coming into net.

Cfidave
12-06-2009, 11:47 AM
If he can stay in the top 8, he will be doing well. I don't see him rising above his current #7 ranking, the guys above him, with the possible exception of Davydenko, are just to far ahead in the rankings. As far as slams go, his best chance has come and gone, maybe quarters & semis from here on out. Even last year, except for Wimbledon, he didn't do all that well in the slams.

kishnabe
12-06-2009, 12:20 PM
I belive roddick will win wimbledon next year for senitmental reasons. It is annoying to see Roger take the cake from andy. That second set last year in wimbledon really ****ed me off. I mane roddick should have went for broke.

clayman2000
12-06-2009, 12:30 PM
He is a better player than Davydenko. Davydenko did play 22 tournies this year. Roddick only played 15, missing 4 Masters.

Del Potro is a better clay and HC player, but remember, he barely beat Roddick in their two meeting in the summer.

Roddick's thing is that ranking doesnt matter to him. He knows its unlikely hes be top 4 considering his weakness on clay, so now hes just focussing on the major events: AO, Wimby, USO.

That being said, he has expressed a desire to play at the next Olympics so i wouldnt be surprised to see him go full out in 2010

zapvor
12-06-2009, 01:26 PM
i think its clear he wants to win another slam. i predict ao or us open if it happens but i dont think so

MethodTennis
12-06-2009, 01:48 PM
If he can stay in the top 8, he will be doing well. I don't see him rising above his current #7 ranking, the guys above him, with the possible exception of Davydenko, are just to far ahead in the rankings. As far as slams go, his best chance has come and gone, maybe quarters & semis from here on out. Even last year, except for Wimbledon, he didn't do all that well in the slams.

Lol he had his best run at the FO semis at AO and final at wimby and thats not 'all that well'

Seany
12-06-2009, 03:02 PM
I don't like Roddick, but as a tennis fan it would make me happy to see him win another slam.

President
12-06-2009, 03:07 PM
Roddick has to work on his approach shot and volleys. He is coming into the net a lot, but he can't do enough with the volleys when he gets there. Most important, he is getting passed very easily because of crappy approaches.

I think that the improvements he made in 2009 were great, and I hope he can do even better in 10'.

dlk
12-06-2009, 05:42 PM
He is a better player than Davydenko. Davydenko did play 22 tournies this year. Roddick only played 15, missing 4 Masters.

Del Potro is a better clay and HC player, but remember, he barely beat Roddick in their two meeting in the summer.

Roddick's thing is that ranking doesnt matter to him. He knows its unlikely hes be top 4 considering his weakness on clay, so now hes just focussing on the major events: AO, Wimby, USO.

That being said, he has expressed a desire to play at the next Olympics so i wouldnt be surprised to see him go full out in 2010

I agree with you; with his serve he's still a threat.

thalivest
12-06-2009, 06:01 PM
He is a better player than Davydenko. Davydenko did play 22 tournies this year. Roddick only played 15, missing 4 Masters.

Roddick is not a better player than Davydenko right now, or really over the last 4 years. Roddick has had the better career since what he did in 2003-2005 puts him clearly above Davydenko's career up to now, but right now Davydenko is the slightly better player. Roddick is much better on grass, Davydenko is much better on clay, on outdoor hard courts Davydenko is just as good, and indoors Davydenko is hands down better. Davydenko has been ranked higher than Roddick in the year end rankings every year since 2006 now. That is not a coincidence. Roddick is the one who has reached 2 slam finals in that span, but Davydenko has won the year end Masters plus 3 other Masters to only 1 Masters title for Roddick in that time. Head to head since after the 2005 Australian Open is 1-1, with Roddick having a 3 set win and Davydenko a 2 set win.

Who cares if Davydenko played more tournaments as few of the smaller ones are counted anyway and ones Roddick missed like Monte Carlo, Rome, and the year end Masters he wasnt going to likely do well at anyway. Davydenko is the one who had to miss the first 3+ months of the year and the Australian Open, Indian Wells, Miami, events he had more chance to gain points at then the significant evens Roddick missed I mentioned. Yet despite that he still passed Roddick in the rankings.

dlk
12-06-2009, 06:13 PM
Roddick is not a better player than Davydenko right now, or really over the last 4 years. Roddick has had the better career since what he did in 2003-2005 puts him clearly above Davydenko's career up to now, but right now Davydenko is the slightly better player. Roddick is much better on grass, Davydenko is much better on clay, on outdoor hard courts Davydenko is just as good, and indoors Davydenko is hands down better. Davydenko has been ranked higher than Roddick in the year end rankings every year since 2006 now. That is not a coincidence. Roddick is the one who has reached 2 slam finals in that span, but Davydenko has won the year end Masters plus 3 other Masters to only 1 Masters title for Roddick in that time. Head to head since after the 2005 Australian Open is 1-1, with Roddick having a 3 set win and Davydenko a 2 set win.

Who cares if Davydenko played more tournaments as few of the smaller ones are counted anyway and ones Roddick missed like Monte Carlo, Rome, and the year end Masters he wasnt going to likely do well at anyway. Davydenko is the one who had to miss the first 3+ months of the year and the Australian Open, Indian Wells, Miami, events he had more chance to gain points at then the significant evens Roddick missed I mentioned. Yet despite that he still passed Roddick in the rankings.

Let's me, you, & Clayman judge, based on results of the majors this year between Davy & Roddick. Argument will settle & all is bliss.

thalivest
12-06-2009, 06:15 PM
Let's me, you, & Clayman judge, based on results of the majors this year between Davy & Roddick. Argument will settle & all is bliss.

Well 2 of the 3 slams they both played Davydenko went further.

clayman2000
12-06-2009, 06:39 PM
Well 2 of the 3 slams they both played Davydenko went further.

Davydenko -- 1 slam QF
Roddick -- 1 slam Final, 1 slam semi.

As for the USO, Marco Chuidinelli and John Isner arent even in the same league.

Im sorry Roddick doesnt play as many small events as Davy.
But like i said earlier, Roddick missed 4 Masters and the Masters Cup. Thats a total of 5500 possible points missed. Davydeko missed 2 Masters and 1 slam. Thats 4000 points missed.

Thus in the slams and masters, Davydenko had a chance to win 1500 more points than Roddick. He also played 12 smaller events, compared to Roddicks 5.

Face it, if Roddick played the same tournies as Davy hed be ranked above him

thalivest
12-06-2009, 06:49 PM
Davydenko -- 1 slam QF
Roddick -- 1 slam Final, 1 slam semi.

As for the USO, Marco Chuidinelli and John Isner arent even in the same league.

Im sorry Roddick doesnt play as many small events as Davy.
But like i said earlier, Roddick missed 4 Masters and the Masters Cup. Thats a total of 5500 possible points missed. Davydeko missed 2 Masters and 1 slam. Thats 4000 points missed.

Thus in the slams and masters, Davydenko had a chance to win 1500 more points than Roddick. He also played 12 smaller events, compared to Roddicks 5.

Face it, if Roddick played the same tournies as Davy hed be ranked above him

LOL you cant logically count Roddick missing events in Rome and Monte Carlo (or even the year end Masters when in crap form) as Davydenko missing regular hard court events he had a decent shot of going deep in. Sorry. If you want to talk about missing events Davydenko had to miss the Australian Open which is a slam on one of his better surfaces. Who knows how he would have done there, especialy if he avoided his personal nemisis Soderling who he ran into at both the French and U.S Opens. There is also no strong indication at all that Davydenko would have likely lost to Isner just because Roddick did. Isner beating either Roddick or Davydenko is an upset, and Roddick's tenative performance and inability on some days to outrally even relatively weak baseliners from the baseline (a problem Davydenko would never have) was what caused the loss. It is very unlikely Isner would have won nearly as many backcourt rallies vs Davydenko as he did vs Roddick. Another comparision is Soderling who Davydenko lost to there is a much better player than Isner. You are also wrong that Roddick missed 4 Masters events. He missed 3 plus the Tennis Masters Cup. So that is only 4500 points total including the Masters Cup, and even ignoring the fact one all 4 were events he had little chance to do anything at given surface or form that is only 500 points more than Davdyenko's 4000 you refer to, and less than the # of ranking points Roddick trails Davydenko by at years end (520).

The much greater likelihood is that if Davydenko and Roddick had played all the slams and Masters they missed, and if Roddick played 3 other puny events more, that Davydenko would be ranked over Roddick by even more points as Davydenko was certainly MUCH more likely to do better in Miami, Indian Wells, and Australia than Roddick was at events like Rome, Monte Carlo, Paris and TMC (the latter two while in crap form and not likely to do anything).

Roddick has had the better career due to his early success, but Davydenko is a better player than Roddick right now and has been equal or better to Roddick since the end part of 2005 now. The only surface Roddick is really better these days is grass. I doubt anyone would give Roddick a better shot in even an outdoor hard court event than Davydenko these days.

clayman2000
12-06-2009, 07:15 PM
LOL you cant logically count Roddick missing events in Rome and Monte Carlo (or even the year end Masters when in crap form) as Davydenko missing regular hard court events he had a decent shot of going deep in. Sorry. If you want to talk about missing events Davydenko had to miss the Australian Open which is a slam on one of his better surfaces. Who knows how he would have done there, especialy if he avoided his personal nemisis Soderling who he ran into at both the French and U.S Opens. There is also no strong indication at all that Davydenko would have likely lost to Isner just because Roddick did. Isner beating either Roddick or Davydenko is an upset, and Roddick's tenative performance and inability on some days to outrally even relatively weak baseliners from the baseline (a problem Davydenko would never have) was what caused the loss. It is very unlikely Isner would have won nearly as many backcourt rallies vs Davydenko as he did vs Roddick. Another comparision is Soderling who Davydenko lost to there is a much better player than Isner. You are also wrong that Roddick missed 4 Masters events. He missed 3 plus the Tennis Masters Cup. So that is only 4500 points total including the Masters Cup, and even ignoring the fact one all 4 were events he had little chance to do anything at given surface or form that is only 500 points more than Davdyenko's 4000 you refer to, and less than the # of ranking points Roddick trails Davydenko by at years end (520).

The much greater likelihood is that if Davydenko and Roddick had played all the slams and Masters they missed, and if Roddick played 3 other puny events more, that Davydenko would be ranked over Roddick by even more points as Davydenko was certainly MUCH more likely to do better in Miami, Indian Wells, and Australia than Roddick was at events like Rome, Monte Carlo, Paris and TMC (the latter two while in crap form and not likely to do anything).

Roddick has had the better career due to his early success, but Davydenko is a better player than Roddick right now and has been equal or better to Roddick since the end part of 2005 now. The only surface Roddick is really better these days is grass. I doubt anyone would give Roddick a better shot in even an outdoor hard court event than Davydenko these days.

How many slam finals has Davy made since 05? None. Roddicks made 3, loosing to the open era GOAT each time.
And if Roddick can play Federer tough on clay, he could surely do well at Rome, where hes made the semis twice. And Roddick pulled out of Shanghai in the 1st round, so I dont count that as playing. And hes had success there making the semis twice at the TMC. Hes also been a solid TMC player.

As i have stated earlier, Roddick year is about 4 events: AO, Wimbledon, USO and Davis Cup. Davydenkos year is about playing a crap load of events and doing nothing in slams.

If Roddick cared as much about small events hed have more titles

dlk
12-06-2009, 07:19 PM
Well 2 of the 3 slams they both played Davydenko went further.

Sorry, should've said based on 2010 results.

thalivest
12-06-2009, 07:27 PM
How many slam finals has Davy made since 05? None. Roddicks made 3, loosing to the open era GOAT each time.
And if Roddick can play Federer tough on clay, he could surely do well at Rome, where hes made the semis twice. And Roddick pulled out of Shanghai in the 1st round, so I dont count that as playing. And hes had success there making the semis twice at the TMC. Hes also been a solid TMC player.

As i have stated earlier, Roddick year is about 4 events: AO, Wimbledon, USO and Davis Cup. Davydenkos year is about playing a crap load of events and doing nothing in slams.

If Roddick cared as much about small events hed have more titles

Since late 2005 Roddick has been in 2 slam finals and Davydenko none yes. However each time Davydenko has reached the semis since then he has run into Federer. Roddick would also have been in 0 slam finals since late 2005 if each time he made the semis Federer was there waiting.

Davydenko in that span has won the Tennis Masters Cup and 3 Masters. Roddick has 2 slam finals and 1 Masters. I definitely wouldnt say losing a slam final is a great achievement than winning Tennis Masters Cup which is the biggest non slam event, while winning a regular Masters isnt far behind losing a slam final. Yes slams of course take priority over Masters, but winning also takes priority over just being in finals. You could say players careers arent revered for Masters titles, but they arent revered for their additional slam runner up finishes either.

You say Roddick's year is only about the 4 slams. Yet in the last 4 years Davydenko has gone further then Roddick in 8 of the 15 slams each has played in, so Roddick is not even really outperforming Davydenko at the slams.

tintin
12-07-2009, 07:42 AM
I still pray that he NEVER wins another slam again

heumy
12-07-2009, 06:25 PM
Roddick had a great year in '09, and I think the main thing that will stop him from doing well next year is his mental preparation.

It's obvious that the Wimbedon loss was hugely devastating for him, and for the rest of the year after that, he looked flat and lacked spirit.

For 2010, if he can stay mentally strong and try to put Wimby behind him, he can have some good achievements next year.

clayman2000
12-07-2009, 06:37 PM
Roddick had a great year in '09, and I think the main thing that will stop him from doing well next year is his mental preparation.

It's obvious that the Wimbedon loss was hugely devastating for him, and for the rest of the year after that, he looked flat and lacked spirit.

For 2010, if he can stay mentally strong and try to put Wimby behind him, he can have some good achievements next year.

I think that in hindsight, Roddick knows that Wimbledon ultimately showed him that he can win another slam. When he doesnt force approaches to net he can stay even with the big boys.

On a HC and grass, he can take out anyone ranked lower than him. hes proved he can beat Djokovic and Murray on the big stage, and hes played Del Po right to the end in their matches this year. With Nadal an unknown quantity right now, id say he just has to slove the Fed problem.

MajinX
12-07-2009, 07:05 PM
if roddick can get lucky and have fed on the other side of the draw, he def has a chance at the uso or wimbledon assuming nothing huge happens in tennis, like a total change in power or injury etc.

clayman2000
12-07-2009, 07:15 PM
if roddick can get lucky and have fed on the other side of the draw, he def has a chance at the uso or wimbledon assuming nothing huge happens in tennis, like a total change in power or injury etc.

Being completely honest, I think his best chance for a slam will be at the AO. Del Potro has shown that he can struggle on the low bounce surfaces (grass, indoor too), Nadal is out of form, Federer even has looked average. Djokovic no longer troubles Roddick, and Murray is scceceptible in slams

MajinX
12-07-2009, 07:37 PM
Being completely honest, I think his best chance for a slam will be at the AO. Del Potro has shown that he can struggle on the low bounce surfaces (grass, indoor too), Nadal is out of form, Federer even has looked average. Djokovic no longer troubles Roddick, and Murray is scceceptible in slams

hmm the thing with the AO is that so many random players have huge surges there, verdasco tsonga gonzales etc. Anyone in the top 50 who works super hard over the season break has a good chance to make the semis and some upsets and from there its a 4 man tourney and the AO is up for grabs.

Wimbledon is his big chance coz the top players, djokovic murray etc are better on clay than him and will make quaters and semis and this might tire them out for wimbledon, esp djokovic and murray who arent as fit as nadal/federer. And those 4 guys are usually the guy he gets taken out by, well mostly federer.

clayman2000
12-07-2009, 07:48 PM
hmm the thing with the AO is that so many random players have huge surges there, verdasco tsonga gonzales etc. Anyone in the top 50 who works super hard over the season break has a good chance to make the semis and some upsets and from there its a 4 man tourney and the AO is up for grabs.

Wimbledon is his big chance coz the top players, djokovic murray etc are better on clay than him and will make quaters and semis and this might tire them out for wimbledon, esp djokovic and murray who arent as fit as nadal/federer. And those 4 guys are usually the guy he gets taken out by, well mostly federer.

Problem for me with Wimbledon is that you will likely have to get past both Federer and nadal. I cant see Roddick doing that. But I can see this happening. Nadal goes out QF to a Davydenko or Del Potro. Roddick draws Djokovic or Murray, beats them, and Federer on the other half looses in the semis.

tintin
12-08-2009, 05:38 AM
Problem for me with Wimbledon is that you will likely have to get past both Federer and nadal. I cant see Roddick doing that. But I can see this happening. Nadal goes out QF to a Davydenko or Del Potro. Roddick draws Djokovic or Murray, beats them, and Federer on the other half looses in the semis.

you smoking or what?:shock:
Davydenko and Del Potro are no factors on grass:roll:

Djokovic is beatable on grass:roll:
Roddick is Roger and Nadal's biatch;no matter the surface

clayman2000
12-08-2009, 06:28 AM
you smoking or what?:shock:
Davydenko and Del Potro are no factors on grass:roll:

Djokovic is beatable on grass:roll:
Roddick is Roger and Nadal's biatch;no matter the surface

I meant at the AO.

Anaconda
12-08-2009, 06:56 AM
LOL you cant logically count Roddick missing events in Rome and Monte Carlo (or even the year end Masters when in crap form) as Davydenko missing regular hard court events he had a decent shot of going deep in. Sorry. If you want to talk about missing events Davydenko had to miss the Australian Open which is a slam on one of his better surfaces. Who knows how he would have done there, especialy if he avoided his personal nemisis Soderling who he ran into at both the French and U.S Opens. There is also no strong indication at all that Davydenko would have likely lost to Isner just because Roddick did. Isner beating either Roddick or Davydenko is an upset, and Roddick's tenative performance and inability on some days to outrally even relatively weak baseliners from the baseline (a problem Davydenko would never have) was what caused the loss. It is very unlikely Isner would have won nearly as many backcourt rallies vs Davydenko as he did vs Roddick. Another comparision is Soderling who Davydenko lost to there is a much better player than Isner. You are also wrong that Roddick missed 4 Masters events. He missed 3 plus the Tennis Masters Cup. So that is only 4500 points total including the Masters Cup, and even ignoring the fact one all 4 were events he had little chance to do anything at given surface or form that is only 500 points more than Davdyenko's 4000 you refer to, and less than the # of ranking points Roddick trails Davydenko by at years end (520).

The much greater likelihood is that if Davydenko and Roddick had played all the slams and Masters they missed, and if Roddick played 3 other puny events more, that Davydenko would be ranked over Roddick by even more points as Davydenko was certainly MUCH more likely to do better in Miami, Indian Wells, and Australia than Roddick was at events like Rome, Monte Carlo, Paris and TMC (the latter two while in crap form and not likely to do anything).

Roddick has had the better career due to his early success, but Davydenko is a better player than Roddick right now and has been equal or better to Roddick since the end part of 2005 now. The only surface Roddick is really better these days is grass. I doubt anyone would give Roddick a better shot in even an outdoor hard court event than Davydenko these days.


Everyone is tbetter than roddick right now. Invalid point.

NamRanger
12-08-2009, 08:08 AM
Hopefully Roddick has been working on hitting a bigger forehand during the off season, because he's going to need it. Against the top guys today I think the only way he's going to win is if he goes right through them with a hammer.

Anaconda
12-08-2009, 10:25 AM
Hopefully Roddick has been working on hitting a bigger forehand during the off season, because he's going to need it. Against the top guys today I think the only way he's going to win is if he goes right through them with a hammer.

Ha, Roddick lost that weapon in 2006, but managed to ressurect it at Wimbledon. Personally i think he is scared to hit big - unlike the fearless A-rod of 2003. No way Roddick will hit his forehand like that again; not because he can, but because he doesn't want to.