PDA

View Full Version : Will Roddick ever win a 2nd slam


davey25
04-04-2010, 01:43 PM
Do you believe Roddick will win a 2nd slam? I am not sure if I think he will but I hope he does. He deserves to surpass the careers of both Hewitt and Safin IMO which he clearly will do if he wins a 2nd slam but wont do without I feel. Hewitt. Hewitt was great for a few years but then fizzled out which greatly contrasts to Roddick's longevity of excellent play. Safin was far more talented than Roddick but put nowhere near as much into his career as Roddick has.

Tsonga#1fan
04-04-2010, 05:10 PM
Always a threat at US Open, and I think he'll get a Wimbledon.

samprasvsfederer123
04-04-2010, 05:10 PM
oh well only time will tell, he can edge out novak, murray, and even nadal, i feel he can edge out fed as well cmon andy.

Knightmace
04-04-2010, 05:11 PM
As long as Federer is on tour he won't.

Nextman916
04-04-2010, 05:16 PM
If Roddick met ANYBODY besides federer in last years wimbly final, he would have won, no debate.

samprasvsfederer123
04-04-2010, 05:17 PM
If Roddick met ANYBODY besides federer in last years wimbly final, he would have won, no debate.

and with better luck he would have won against fed...

rudester
04-04-2010, 05:21 PM
If he has a good serving run, which is the thing that keeps him in the match until his opponent makes a mistake on their serve.

kishnabe
04-04-2010, 05:25 PM
Well if Federer and the major seeds other than Nadal lose early like in Indian Wells and Miami....u know Roddick will be there to pick up the trophy. SO why not...anything can happen in a Grand Slam much like the past 2 MS series!

AM95
04-04-2010, 05:52 PM
he will.

he needs to get a good draw though, stay clear of Federer for sure, and maybe get a Nadal in a possible Semi.

gopokes
04-04-2010, 06:35 PM
Unfortunately, no...here's why - Although Roddick has shown a definite uptick, it also corresponds with a momentary lull in the men's game. Murray, Del Po, Rafa, Djoker, Davy, Tsonga, and Fed still stand in his way, not to mention Soder and Cilic among others. I think he'll have a tough time stringing 7 matches together in a best of 5 format. If the matches were 2/3 sets, he'd win another I think, because the margins are tighter and the serve means more in the sense that things can go quickly if ARod manages to break early. The bottom line is that day in, day out, there are 3 or 4 guys that have more game than Andy. Not that he can't compete, but winning a slam means you beat 2 or 3 marquis players, and I don't see him doing that. I'd love to be wrong though...

Vandalay Industries
04-04-2010, 06:41 PM
Unfortunately, no...here's why - Although Roddick has shown a definite uptick, it also corresponds with a momentary lull in the men's game. Murray, Del Po, Rafa, Djoker, Davy, Tsonga, and Fed still stand in his way, not to mention Soder and Cilic among others. I think he'll have a tough time stringing 7 matches together in a best of 5 format. If the matches were 2/3 sets, he'd win another I think, because the margins are tighter and the serve means more in the sense that things can go quickly if ARod manages to break early. The bottom line is that day in, day out, there are 3 or 4 guys that have more game than Andy. Not that he can't compete, but winning a slam means you beat 2 or 3 marquis players, and I don't see him doing that. I'd love to be wrong though...

I agree with you.

edmondsm
04-04-2010, 07:08 PM
Unfortunately, no...here's why - Although Roddick has shown a definite uptick, it also corresponds with a momentary lull in the men's game. Murray, Del Po, Rafa, Djoker, Davy, Tsonga, and Fed still stand in his way, not to mention Soder and Cilic among others. I think he'll have a tough time stringing 7 matches together in a best of 5 format. If the matches were 2/3 sets, he'd win another I think, because the margins are tighter and the serve means more in the sense that things can go quickly if ARod manages to break early. The bottom line is that day in, day out, there are 3 or 4 guys that have more game than Andy. Not that he can't compete, but winning a slam means you beat 2 or 3 marquis players, and I don't see him doing that. I'd love to be wrong though...

Dude was inches away from winning a Wimbledon against the GOAT last year, and he's looking even sharper this year.

Chace
04-04-2010, 07:15 PM
Dude was inches away from winning a Wimbledon against the GOAT last year, and he's looking even sharper this year.

I agree with you.
I think he has a good chance at Wimby or the US open this year

Commando Tennis Shorts
04-04-2010, 07:17 PM
Well...maybe.

His best chance will be at Wimbledon over the next 2-3 years. With his newfound fitness, he'll stay a top 10 threat for the next three years, and with a good draw at Wimbledon, I think he'll get a Wimbledon championship, especially if Federer starts to slow down. Who's gonna stop him on grass if he keeps his serve up?

He's still got a good chance. The way I figure, he's got quite a few more chances---Wimby '10, '11 and '12, maybe the Aussie Open those years if it gets hot enough. Maybe the U.S. Open if the crowd really gets into it.

There's a chance. If he can come within a whisker of a Wimbledon title in his late 20s (last year), he can stay relevant in majors for the next three years.

pmacino
04-04-2010, 07:50 PM
He can. I'm in agreement that Wimby or the US Open are his opportunities. (No surprises there).

bluetrain4
04-04-2010, 08:11 PM
I hate to be negative, because I like Roddick, and I think he's too good not to win a second Slam. But, I have to ask why? Why would he win another Slam?

He's had opportunities, but has never delivered. Yes, much of that has to do with his opposition, but still.

The same road blocks are still there. And, unfortunately, it's hard for him to build on his great Miami win because the season now switches over to clay.

That said, I do believe he is still good enough to win a Slam, but I thought that before Miami. Miami is a nice win, but it doesn't really change my perception of his chances.

TennisNinja
04-04-2010, 08:19 PM
Hard work pays off, I think he will.

World Beater
04-04-2010, 08:28 PM
the problem for roddick is that he has to go through a draw filled with guys who all have the capacity to beat him.

murray, del pot, djoko, nadal, fed..just too many landmines. i think his best bet is wimbledon where i think his main challenge will be to defeat federer.

if fed brings his A- game and roddick is streaking, watch out!!!

bjorn23
04-04-2010, 08:42 PM
Roddick will not win another slam. As long as Federer is around there's no chance. Roddick BLEW IT at Wimbledon. If he couldn't beat Rog then in a big match he NEVER WILL.

Besides his serve Roddick lacks the big game necessary. Uses too much slice, something that will be in Fed's wheelhouse.

RODDICK has tried every thing except the under handed serve and moonball against Federer. As long as Fed is around no slam, and Murray will be tough also. his toughest competition. 1. fed, 2. murray, 3. del po, 4. nadal, 5. djoko, 6. denko

cquandt
04-04-2010, 08:47 PM
andy will win another. he has shown he can finally change his game if need be, and he has been working hard. no matter what. he also has the american cockiness, which may be a bad thing in some aspects, but at this point he truly believes he can beat anyone at any time. that's quite a bit more than you can say about many guys on tour that are supposed to be more talented that he.

quest01
04-04-2010, 08:54 PM
He can. I'm in agreement that Wimby or the US Open are his opportunities. (No surprises there).

I agree unless he has to face Federer along the way.

JoshDragon
04-04-2010, 08:54 PM
He can. I'm in agreement that Wimby or the US Open are his opportunities. (No surprises there).

Yes, I agree. I think he can win another major but I'm not exactly sure if he will.

Overheadsmash
04-04-2010, 08:55 PM
He's playing great right now. In fact, I can't remember seeing him play with this much variety ever. he also is not afraid to hit his forehand, and has been doing some damage with it along with his serves. If he does not get hurt sure he can win another, maybe even multiple.

Feña14
04-04-2010, 09:42 PM
I don't think he will, there's a chance if the big players stay in this little slump they all seem to be in of late, but I get the feeling he'll retire with just the one.

AndyArodRoddick
04-05-2010, 01:06 AM
He will win, you'll see.

I mean he won one of the slowest HC tournaments of the year, thats got to show something.

Spider
04-05-2010, 01:11 AM
Never. In fact Nalbandian should have won US open 03, he was very unlucky against Roddick that day.

As long as Federer, Nadal and Murray continue to play, Roddick can forget about slam titles.

davey25
04-05-2010, 01:33 AM
Never. In fact Nalbandian should have won US open 03, he was very unlucky against Roddick that day.

As long as Federer, Nadal and Murray continue to play, Roddick can forget about slam titles.

Nalbandian is one of the most overhyped players on TW. Truth is that day Roddick had an off day relative to how he was playing that summer and an on fire Nalbandian still couldnt beat him.

AJK1
04-05-2010, 01:46 AM
I like Roddick, but he just won't win another slam while Federer is around.
He may be good at winning other tournaments, but slams are out of his reach.

christos_liaskos
04-05-2010, 02:07 AM
When Andy lost to Roger last year at Wimby it reminded me of similarities between himself and Ivanisevic. Both big serves, both are dying to win Wimby and have been beaten in the final 3 times.

Of course everyone can make the arguements that as long as Roger, Murray, and so and so on are still around that there are just too many players in Roddick's way to win Wimby or any other slam. But the same could be said of Ivanisevic in 2001 (and probably through much of his career), in fact at the time of his triumph there were over 100 players ahead of him rankings wise.

A bit of luck and a return to top form for just a few matches and Andy has as good a chance as anyone to lift the trophy.

Next year will be 10 years since Ivanisevic fullfilled his dream. Noone thought Roger could complete the career slam as long as Rafa was playing because he would always been in his way at Roland Garros, but it was on the 10th anniversary of Agassi's completion of his own career slam at the French that Federer came good. It would be awesome to see Roddick do the same. Things sometimes just have a funny way of falling into place.

(I know Wimbledon was Ivanisevic's first and only slam win which wouldn't be the case for Roddick, but if anything that win for him in 2003 could give him the bit of self belief that he needs to push him over the line)

PSNELKE
04-05-2010, 02:27 AM
i´m pretty sure his time will come and he´ll have a run like goran ivanisevic in 2001

Dilettante
04-05-2010, 02:30 AM
Nalbandian is one of the most overhyped players on TW. Truth is that day Roddick had an off day relative to how he was playing that summer and an on fire Nalbandian still couldnt beat him.

Agreed.

It's funny how Nalbandian "should have won" everything no matter if he was good enough or not at that moment, while players like Roddick were "lucky" no matter if Nalbandian AKA "should have won" was beaten along the way.

I call it "reverse logic", very common in some TT posters when it comes to Nalbandian, Safin, etc.

Gizo
04-05-2010, 03:16 AM
I really hope he wins a Wimbledon title before he retires. A second US Open title would be great, but it's Wimbledon that he desperately wants to win more than any other tournament. I really wanted him to pull it off last year and he was so close, plus he wasn't exactly far off in 2004 as well.

His biggest career goal initially was to win the US Open. Once he did that, his main goal became winning Wimbledon. In fact he set 4 career goals for himself at the start of the career, win the US Open, win Wimbledon, become world no. 1 and win the Davis Cup, and he has met 3 out of 4 so far. Hopefully when he retires he'll have achieved the missing link in Wimbledon as well.

valiant
04-05-2010, 03:30 AM
I doubt he will. But things happen and I will be happt to see him win.

Anaconda
04-05-2010, 03:35 AM
Why not? Roddick has more potential now than ever. He's got everything IMO. He has proven he can beat the best players and i wouldn't be surprised to see him win one more slam at the very least.

Cfidave
04-05-2010, 03:48 AM
Everything would need to fall into place: easy draw, injured top 5 players, slumping top 2 & 3 players. Federer upset early. It could happen, but unlikely.

Anaconda
04-05-2010, 04:07 AM
Everything would need to fall into place: easy draw, injured top 5 players, slumping top 2 & 3 players. Federer upset early. It could happen, but unlikely.

But even with a tough draw Roddick has the tools to win. People will ignore the fact he can beat Djokovic,Murray,Nadal. JMDP is tough, but Roddick nearly managed to beat him playing with no confidence after the Wimbledon final. Fed will be tough though.

thalivest
04-05-2010, 04:29 AM
But even with a tough draw Roddick has the tools to win. People will ignore the fact he can beat Djokovic,Murray,Nadal. JMDP is tough, but Roddick nearly managed to beat him playing with no confidence after the Wimbledon final. Fed will be tough though.

All those players you mentioned can beat him as well though, along with quite a few others you didnt list. Just look at the names of the players who have beaten him in slams.

The reason Roddick would definitely need a softened draw to win a slam is he would never beat 3 of the big guys in a row to win one. If he has to play 3 out of Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Del Potro, even Davydenko in a row to win a slam he wont do it.

Anaconda
04-05-2010, 04:41 AM
All those players you mentioned can beat him as well though, along with quite a few others you didnt list. Just look at the names of the players who have beaten him in slams.

The reason Roddick would definitely need a softened draw to win a slam is he would never beat 3 of the big guys in a row to win one. If he has to play 3 out of Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Del Potro, even Davydenko in a row to win a slam he wont do it.

Any player can beat any player. It's no different.

Nadal struggled to break Roddick serving at 60% on the slowest hard court. I'm thinking 75% on grass against Nadal would cut it. Roddick can beat Djokovic, Murray and Davydenko in slams. You would be nuts to put Djokovic or Davydenko a favourite over Roddick at Wimbledon or even the US open. Murray is tough yes, but Roddick can still win. Roddick with zero confidence very nearly beat JMDP playing awsome tennis. The only match that i wouldn't give Roddick 50% in would be against Federer. It's just a difficult matchup.

However i have learnt never to count Roddick out of any match because he has the tools to win. We had a discussion about the Roddick v Nadal match. You, and most people thought Nadal would roll over Roddick because Roddick isn't good enough. What did i say? I said Roddick has a shot because he has weapons and experience.

People can go ahead and say Davydenko and Djokovic are better players on hard and grass than Roddick. People can go ahead and put guys like Murray and JMDP ahead of Roddick at Wimbledon. At the end of the day Roddick is good enough to beat anyone at Wimbledon or US open. No matter if it's 3 people in a row. People gave Roddick his 3 toughest matchups in Hewitt/Murray and Federer and Roddick still came within points of taking home Wimbledon.

Markov
04-05-2010, 05:43 AM
Not in 2010. Maybe he could win the USO next year.

veroniquem
04-05-2010, 05:47 AM
Why not? But only one on fast surfaces. He was close to winning Wimbledon last year. The only thing he needs is Fed faltering a little bit and it seems Fed is ripe to start doing that. I think he deserves another slam. 1 doesn't do justice to his talent and consistency.

NamRanger
04-05-2010, 05:53 AM
All those players you mentioned can beat him as well though, along with quite a few others you didnt list. Just look at the names of the players who have beaten him in slams.

The reason Roddick would definitely need a softened draw to win a slam is he would never beat 3 of the big guys in a row to win one. If he has to play 3 out of Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Del Potro, even Davydenko in a row to win a slam he wont do it.



Roddick has owned Djokovic as of late, Murray and Davydenko are notorious for choking in slams, Roddick recently showed that he has the game to beat Nadal on a slow HC (let alone fast surfaces), and Federer is not the Federer of before.



The field is wide open, and as long as Roddick comes out with the correct game plan against his opponent of the day, he will do fine.

rovex
04-05-2010, 05:58 AM
Roddick has owned Djokovic as of late, Murray and Davydenko are notorious for choking in slams, Roddick recently showed that he has the game to beat Nadal on a slow HC (let alone fast surfaces), and Federer is not the Federer of before.



The field is wide open, and as long as Roddick comes out with the correct game plan against his opponent of the day, he will do fine.

So, Roddick wins a Masters event and now that means he's THE favorite along with Federer for Wimbledon and the USO? Please, we all know Roddick's dissapointing USO 09 campaign when many placed him as the 2nd favorite there. If Nadal and Murray and Federer are playing there best at Wimbledon then Roddick won't have much of a chance. Oh, i don't like Djokovic, but Roddick beat an out of sorts Djokovic their previous 2 occasions. So in essence, Roddick hasn't "owned" him.

NamRanger
04-05-2010, 06:00 AM
So, Roddick wins a Masters event and now that means he's THE favorite along with Federer for Wimbledon and the USO? Please, we all know Roddick's dissapointing USO 09 campaign when many placed him as the 2nd favorite there. If Nadal and Murray and Federer are playing there best at Wimbledon then Roddick won't have much of a chance. Oh, i don't like Djokovic, but Roddick beat an out of form Djokovic their previous 2 occasions. So in essence, Roddick hasn't "owned" him.



Out of form? Is that why Djokovic last year was leading the tours on wins?



Murray played very well at Wimbledon last year, almost as good as I have ever seen him play in a slam, yet he still lost. Murray used to be the best of 3 master, now he can't even beat a journeyman like Mardy Fish on what is statistically his best surface (HCs).


Nadal was playing pretty damn well in Miami, and Roddick managed to beat him. Hell, he managed to beat Nadal at Dubai during one of Nadal's best years and one of Roddick's worst.

rovex
04-05-2010, 06:19 AM
Out of form? Is that why Djokovic last year was leading the tours on wins?

Playing journeymen in smaller events. The upset at the French open is what really emphasises how poor he was and has been this year.



Murray played very well at Wimbledon last year, almost as good as I have ever seen him play in a slam, yet he still lost. Murray used to be the best of 3 master, now he can't even beat a journeyman like Mardy Fish on what is statistically his best surface (HCs).

Hardly, played far better at the USO 08 and Australia this year. Struggled against guys like Kendrick and Gulbis at Wimbledon. Murray seems to be having a dip in form, but lets not forget he's just reached a final of slam so he's obviously a strong contender for the USO and Wimbledon.


Nadal was playing pretty damn well in Miami, and Roddick managed to beat him. Hell, he managed to beat Nadal at Dubai during one of Nadal's best years and one of Roddick's worst.

I think it's more the fact that Nadal didn't have a plan B when Roddick started flattening out his forehand. He's going to have to have one if he wants to win another title let alone slam since everyone's figuring out how to play him.

obsessedtennisfandisorder
04-05-2010, 07:39 AM
Well Qdos for roddick keeping trying in his career and not taking it easy and
fading away ala hewitt/safin. He's a contender for wimby for sure, I'd put him 4th behind fed, nadal and djoko in my book(yeah don't write off novak just yet). I'm not convinced with Murray for some reason...his gameplans are too passive for grass.
But he'll(Roddick that is) need a bit luck...he'll need a draw where guys like cilic, delpo and djoko kill each other off before they meet him.
Cilic also impressed me in aussie but i don't know his movement on grass is like.

PSNELKE
04-05-2010, 07:59 AM
Well Qdos for roddick keeping trying in his career and not taking it easy and
fading away ala hewitt/safin. He's a contender for wimby for sure, I'd put him 4th behind fed, nadal and djoko in my book(yeah don't write off novak just yet). I'm not convinced with Murray for some reason...his gameplans are too passive for grass.
But he'll(Roddick that is) need a bit luck...he'll need a draw where guys like cilic, delpo and djoko kill each other off before they meet him.
Cilic also impressed me in aussie but i don't know his movement on grass is like.

IMO roddick is #2 in Wimby this year..
with a game like last year he would beat nadal in 5 sets on grass..
djokovic will not play a big role for the title.
Cilic says his favorite surfaces are hard and grass, but he also won the Roland Garros juniors title in 2005.
His movement on grass is still great.
He lost last year in the 4th Round against Thommy Haas who was totally on fire at Wimby.
JMDP and Davy are not that good on grass so I think they´ll loose until the quarterfinal.

forzamilan90
04-05-2010, 08:22 AM
i voted no, the duopoly will be revived this year (or a monopoly) and it will continue to be like that till Fed retires, and Roddick might retire before him actually

NamRanger
04-05-2010, 08:44 AM
Playing journeymen in smaller events. The upset at the French open is what really emphasises how poor he was and has been this year.





Hardly, played far better at the USO 08 and Australia this year. Struggled against guys like Kendrick and Gulbis at Wimbledon. Murray seems to be having a dip in form, but lets not forget he's just reached a final of slam so he's obviously a strong contender for the USO and Wimbledon.




I think it's more the fact that Nadal didn't have a plan B when Roddick started flattening out his forehand. He's going to have to have one if he wants to win another title let alone slam since everyone's figuring out how to play him.



LOL, Nadal and Federer are journeyman now? Since when? You realize that outside of the FO, Djokovic made multiple master finals (what was it, 5), a QF at Wimbledon, QF at the AO, SF at the USO, and a Master Series Title. He was the epitome of consistency throughout the entire year, having only small blips here and there. You call that a bad year? Really? I'm pretty sure most 99.9% of the tour would love to have that year.




He struggled with Gulbis? He CRUSHED Gulbis. Are you kidding me? He struggled with Kendrick because it was the first round, the grass still hadn't gotten chewed up yet so it was a very fast and slick day.




Nadal has never had a plan B; his plan B is to grind his opponent into submission.

cknobman
04-05-2010, 09:14 AM
Nope he sure wont. I wish he would but I think the lacks the mental ability to hold out long enough to win against a Nadal or Fed in a 5 set match.

Cyan
04-05-2010, 09:24 AM
Wimbledon.