PDA

View Full Version : Roddick's weaknesses


Surecatch
07-18-2006, 07:26 AM
I'm interested in what others think Andy's weaknesses are in his game. I see several things that lead me to believe he is only a top ten caliber player at best.

The thing that bothers me most about Roddick's game is that annoying habit he has of back pedaling so he can hit his forehand on a high bounce. Players who want to impose themselves through aggressiveness just don't do that. I see very few other top caliber players doing this. The other is running around the ball so he doesn't have to hit the backhand. Federer also does this but it's usually a calculated "guess" on his part while returning serve and does not smack of fear the way it does when I see Andy do it. Andy also stays too far behind the baseline for too long on rallies if you ask me. He seems hesitant or unable to take control of the point and it leaves him susceptable to a drop shot or a winner to the opposite side. I also don't like his recovery after hitting a rally...he seems to lag far too long on one side of the court instead of hustling back to the proper position. These are the obvious things I see, not even counting his lack of volley game and weak backhand. I hate to admit it but it appears to me that Andy excelled for a few years on a huge serve but now that people have seen him for so long and figured it out, it doesn't go as far for him anymore in the absence of other aspects of his game.

helloworld
07-18-2006, 07:34 AM
Poor backhand, poor volley, poor movement etc. We should be talking about Blake rather than this one-dimensional basher.

BabolatFan
07-18-2006, 07:44 AM
I'm interested in what others think Andy's weaknesses are in his game. I see several things that lead me to believe he is only a top ten caliber player at best.

The thing that bothers me most about Roddick's game is that annoying habit he has of back pedaling so he can hit his forehand on a high bounce. Players who want to impose themselves through aggressiveness just don't do that. I see very few other top caliber players doing this. The other is running around the ball so he doesn't have to hit the backhand. Federer also does this but it's usually a calculated "guess" on his part while returning serve and does not smack of fear the way it does when I see Andy do it. Andy also stays too far behind the baseline for too long on rallies if you ask me. He seems hesitant or unable to take control of the point and it leaves him susceptable to a drop shot or a winner to the opposite side. I also don't like his recovery after hitting a rally...he seems to lag far too long on one side of the court instead of hustling back to the proper position. These are the obvious things I see, not even counting his lack of volley game and weak backhand. I hate to admit it but it appears to me that Andy excelled for a few years on a huge serve but now that people have seen him for so long and figured it out, it doesn't go as far for him anymore in the absence of other aspects of his game.

Good input. The reason we're picking on andy is all of a sudden he's not winning big matches anymore. He's got one too many letdown games. It seems as though he lacks his big confidense when he needs the most in a match, so he's not quite able to construct winning points. Maybe he's way too aggressive in the back court but can't finish points at net.

TacoBellBorderBowl1946
07-18-2006, 07:45 AM
nothing is his weakness, he'll do good this summer.

byealmeens
07-18-2006, 08:14 AM
Andy's strategy: Stay well behind the baseline, hope the other guy misses. Get into trouble. Hit big serves to get out of trouble. Repeat.

Pretty easy to see why this isn't working.

baseliner
07-18-2006, 08:23 AM
Can't volley, weak backhand. Strategy to cover these glaring weaknesses nonexistant since Gilbert left his camp. Prognosis for this summer's hardcourt season? Poor!

Colpo
07-18-2006, 08:48 AM
Terrible thinker during a match. When things aren't going well, he just keeps plodding along. They keep talking about his big serve and big FH, meanwhile they all come back, or fail to make a difference in a lost match anyway. Bottom-line: one-dimensional.

jack mckinney
07-18-2006, 12:59 PM
His volley is poor at best. pushes his backhand. But I think the biggest weakest is his mental toughness. When he gets down he loses all faith that he can come back.

LeftyServe
07-18-2006, 01:08 PM
He has no return game whatsover. He may be the easiest player in the top 30 to hold serve against.

Spindarella
07-18-2006, 01:46 PM
Shot selection, volleys (especially forehand), and the preparation on his backhand.

theazneyes
07-18-2006, 01:54 PM
It's easily his return game. And the reason his return game isn't great is because the lack of a backhand and a decent volley. For someone with such a powerful serve, he sure doesn't know when to come up to net.

I think McEnroe got it right when he says Roddick tenses up way too much before every shot. Smaller guys than him can produce better, stronger groundstrokes than him, and it's because they're more loose. Roddick arms the ball way too much which is the reason his backhand floats around the court.

Once his opponent breaks him at least once a match, it's pretty much a tough win to get for Roddick, and I don't see him improving much in the near future.

MaxT
07-18-2006, 02:22 PM
He was lucky to win the U.S. Open, within points of losing. He then rode that fame pretty hard, made all the money he needs. Life is more than fair to him considering his abilities.

Dan007
07-18-2006, 03:25 PM
Horrible backhand and volleys, and not a smart player

siber222000
07-18-2006, 03:47 PM
his backhand is horrible, his forehand is so-so, his mental toughness is blah..., like that one guy posted, he hope opponent misses rather than hitting the winner often

Matthew
07-18-2006, 04:59 PM
I am pretty sure that EVERY member of this forum has posted an EXTENSIVE list of Roddick's weaknesses about TEN times.

Thank you.

MTChong
07-18-2006, 05:21 PM
He was lucky to win the U.S. Open, within points of losing. He then rode that fame pretty hard, made all the money he needs. Life is more than fair to him considering his abilities.

Yep, his abilities that allow him to beat everyone on this board 6-0 6-0.

quest01
07-18-2006, 07:54 PM
A problem with Roddick is that he plays to far behind the baseline, and that puts him in the defensive position. He needs to attack more and go to the net more often. He should think about serve and volleying on first serves only. Also his backhand is on par with a club player, and thats one aspect that he needs to improve.

federerforever
07-18-2006, 07:58 PM
Let's also not forget that Roddick became year end ranked number 1 in 2003 while beating Roger Federer in the process and by winning both Toronto Masters and Cincinatti Masters back to back without a week's rest and then won a US Open. No one this decade not even Federer has accomplished this. And then the following year Roddick had a year end ranking of 2 at end of 2004 and has won about the same number of matches as Federer for the whole year of 2004. So now how can anybody say that Roddick was lucky for over 1 year playing such great tennis. He was a truly great tennis player during that time span from summer 2003 to end of 2004. And all this talk of everybody playing much better today than in 2003 is a bunch of crap. Roddick in 2003 and 2004 was a completely different player mentally and physically. He was able to stay focused at every crucial point, almost like Nadal right now and that's what made his so great. Will he ever get it back we will have to wait and see. I really hope he does regain the form of 2003-2004 and then further improves on it. But that will probably happen in two years time at the earliest.

sandiegotennisboy
07-18-2006, 08:07 PM
And you're the oh-so-brilliant person who figures that they are inducting way too many people into the Hall of Fame. It isn't a Hall of Achievement. If we took it at word's worth, even, all who were in the top 10 in the world at one point would be there.

As for what I'm saying, you cannot be a player that reaches the top five without much abilities and all of you players are just degrading him. Although his game - right now - seems to be dwindling, he'd still crush any of us and that is that; I am just reminding you guys to keep you all in check before you guys get any insane notions of thinking you are better than the pro players.

Basically, we have too many arrogant people on this board that are bashful and without logic. So kill me then for pointing it out and trying to open your guys' and girls' eyes to the world. So kill me then for underlining some horrible traits; it seems you can't handle it for if that is the case, I'd gladly be a martyr to further the cause of human decency - not to mention intelligence (evidently).

let the gates of heaven open for you now, thy unopinionated-one. go f urself.

arosen
07-18-2006, 09:10 PM
Roddick's biggest problem is located between his ears. He loses focus easily, and while it's fun for me as a spectator to high five him after a good point, he obviously needs to focus on his next move, not on what snarky comment he is going to throw at the empire next.

callitout
07-18-2006, 09:23 PM
go f urself.

Brilliant.

Surecatch
07-19-2006, 05:12 AM
I am pretty sure that EVERY member of this forum has posted an EXTENSIVE list of Roddick's weaknesses about TEN times.

Thank you.

So do you go around to every one of them and give them a scolding?

helloworld
07-19-2006, 05:16 AM
I can hit a backhand better than Roddick.

Dedans Penthouse
07-19-2006, 11:07 AM
I can hit a backhand better than Roddick.
No opinion; no comment. You don't have to "i.d." yourself by name, but it does raise a few questions:

--If you're a professional, what are you ranked?

--If you are currently "playing college" what Division level (I, II or III) are you playing? Name of school?

Just curious to hear from a person with a "better backhand" than Roddick. Thanks for a reply.

helloworld
07-19-2006, 11:10 AM
DIV III Darthmouth, and I do have a better backhand than Roddick. ;)

Dedans Penthouse
07-19-2006, 11:23 AM
Not sure if it was a "typo" or not but did you mean "Dartmouth" College in Hanover, N.H. or Darthmouth College in Darthmouth, Mass.?

helloworld
07-19-2006, 11:46 AM
Not sure if it was a "typo" or not but did you mean "Dartmouth" College in Hanover, N.H. or Darthmouth College in Darthmouth, Mass.?
sorry, I was referring to Dartmouth College in New Hampshire. :)

Free_Martha
07-19-2006, 12:16 PM
let the gates of heaven open for you now, thy unopinionated-one. go f urself.
How often do you master-bate to Roddick? Weekly? Daily? Every hour?

Slice Approach
07-19-2006, 12:32 PM
I think Andy is going through a tough period right now. He has had some disappointing losses and people are questioning his talent. Andy is a very good player to be sure, but has some glaring weaknesses in his game for a top ATP player...namely his "push" backhand and return of serve (who is responsible for telling him to stand that far back to receive serve?). His style resembles that of a good junior tournament player rather than a well-rounded ATP tour player.
Obviously, I don't mean to imply that Andy plays at the junior level. He does, however, rely too heavily on his big serve and big forehand. These are by all accounts formidable weapons but it seems the rest of the tour has caught up and Andy is lagging behind. I think it might be too late to develope a backhand that is an offensive threat like Safin or Nalbandian. I wish him the best of luck.

clayman2000
07-19-2006, 08:36 PM
i agree..however his slice backhand is improving which can help him on grass...he has lost his agressiveness on his forhand....and has simply forgot how to volley...if he wants to playe the way he did in 2003/04, he should do 2 things....look at tapes of his 2003 us win....and 2004 wimby final

Bogie
07-19-2006, 08:58 PM
compared with expected top 10 standards: very bad backhand, worst volleys in tennis, mental game isn't very good, fairly one-dimensional dumb player. a huge serve and big forehand can only keep you at the top so far, and it has kept him there for longer than he should have been. his exit out of the top 10 is overdue and the top 10 is as it should be.

sandiegotennisboy
07-19-2006, 09:14 PM
god im so sick of this topic, but i love responding. lol.

anyway, i think that roddicks drop to the abyss makes for nice drama. maybe hell pull a capriati and shoplift from walmart or become a druggie for a year or two and have a major comeback. who knows... it would be the best comeback story weve had in a while though.

helloworld
07-19-2006, 10:28 PM
Roddick's volley is very poor. He can't really punch through the ball. His volley always got some slice in it and it just won't work. He really volleys like an amateur and i'm not kidding. I don't find it exaggerating or anything when people say his volley is as good as a club player. Some club player can even volley better than him.

jukka1970
07-19-2006, 10:34 PM
The only big weakness I would give him, is in adaptability. His serve was such a deadly weapon, and then people started figuring out how to get it back. I don't think his strokes are as bad as some are claiming. I mean yes, I don't think he'd be put in the top 5 on any of them, other then serve. But I really do think most of his deterioration is a mental breakdown of his serve not being as deadly as it once was.

If you want to consider weakness as far as not being in the top 20 of something, then I would say the volleying. I mean its not horrific, but it certainly needs some work.

SuperSaiyanSonic
07-04-2007, 05:50 PM
I think it is funny that when Roddick drops to like 15 in the world, he must suck. You have to be amazing to be in top 15. And now he is number 3.
Anyway, his biggest weakness was always his return game.

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
07-04-2007, 05:59 PM
he is ok, i guess his serve shines out, he can beat everybody, except federer or nadal.

ACE of Hearts
07-04-2007, 06:07 PM
Roddick was still getting beat by Roger even in 2003 and 2004.He beat him at wimbledon in 2003 when he was at his best.I agree about him using serve and volley at the net but he can really get passed by.He would have at least 5 to 6 slams if it wasnt for Federer, there is a reason Fed is the best.He likes to play big servers.

soggyramen
07-04-2007, 06:54 PM
i think roddick is actually doing better this year it seems his game has gotten better thanks to connors...this is coming from someone who hates roddick though

Mr. Sean
07-04-2007, 07:30 PM
Let's also not forget that Roddick became year end ranked number 1 in 2003 while beating Roger Federer in the process and by winning both Toronto Masters and Cincinatti Masters back to back without a week's rest and then won a US Open. No one this decade not even Federer has accomplished this. And then the following year Roddick had a year end ranking of 2 at end of 2004 and has won about the same number of matches as Federer for the whole year of 2004. So now how can anybody say that Roddick was lucky for over 1 year playing such great tennis. He was a truly great tennis player during that time span from summer 2003 to end of 2004. And all this talk of everybody playing much better today than in 2003 is a bunch of crap. Roddick in 2003 and 2004 was a completely different player mentally and physically. He was able to stay focused at every crucial point, almost like Nadal right now and that's what made his so great. Will he ever get it back we will have to wait and see. I really hope he does regain the form of 2003-2004 and then further improves on it. But that will probably happen in two years time at the earliest.

Great points. Roddick was a completely different player than he is now. Back then his forehand was a lot flatter so opponents including federer had a very hard time hitting offensive shots off of it. Back then roddick didnt have to worry about creating points or how close he had to stand next to the baseline. Really ahve to credit gilberts coaching abilities which obviously play to his players strengths and hides their weaknesses. Stuff would just come naturally. Big serve weak return big forehand then another weak response then finish it at net. Simple ball bashing tennis that worked with his big slow body. Now his forehand has way too much topspin so all he has left is his serve which people can bump back at times. Federer now has an even bigger advantage over roddick.

mavsman149
07-04-2007, 07:53 PM
The man is #3 in the world lay off. If his return game is so pitiful and all he does is rely on his serve than shouldn't pretty much all of his wins be 7-6, 7-6
He played Gimelstob who has a pretty solid grass court game with a nice serve and he broke several times. He broke Verdasco several times and Mathieu today. Playing well at big moments, how about being down 0-5 in the 3rd set breaker today and coming back to win 8-6? He also had a very solid hardcourt season last year. I expect him to repeat that this year. While perhaps he does have some weaknesses the only reason people talk about this so much is because of how amazing Federer is and that gets American fans frustrated. He will probably finish this year at number 3 and if he was on Nadals side of the draw I bet he would beat him on grass. Having said all this BO BAGHDATIS

Roger_Federer.
07-04-2007, 08:14 PM
I'm going to love watching Gasquet and Andy backhand rallying tomorrow.

phoony
07-04-2007, 08:29 PM
S**t @#$%^&* roddicks..........useless guy

superman1
07-04-2007, 08:30 PM
I'm going to love watching Gasquet and Andy backhand rallying tomorrow.

Yeah, Gasquet is phenomenally talented, and Roddick sucks so much, right? That's why he is 2-0 against Gasquet.

ACE of Hearts
07-04-2007, 08:33 PM
Fed is the only guy that can return his fastball.Some of these guys stand way behind the baseline against Roddick.

Defcon
07-04-2007, 08:39 PM
Gasquet and Roddick are polar opposites.

Riishaaaaard - talent without application. mentally weak. Can and does lose to nobodies.

Andy - has one great shot, but no feel for the game or ability to create points. solid and workmanlike, puts in the effort and it pays off against most.

FarFed
07-04-2007, 08:58 PM
On the contrary, I think Roddick's been playing well on grass till now. In fact his volleying has been alright, he seems to have been coming to the net quite often.

In general I think he does not have variety, and that's a problem with players like Federer and Nadal.

Gugafan
07-04-2007, 09:19 PM
In general I think he does not have variety, and that's a problem with players like Federer and Nadal.

Jeez, you guys make Roddick out to be some ordinary 1-dimensional player like Gaudio/Davydenko. Firstly Roddicks has added alot more variety in his game. Infact his slice backhand is better then the majority of players in the top 10, its deep and penetrating. Secondly he is willing to come in alot more, notably off the slice approach. I hardly see this tactic being employed by Nadal, Davydenko, Robredo, etc. Furthermore Roddicks movement seems pretty good to me, he seems sharp moving forward to drop shots and usually does something with the ball.

FarFed
07-04-2007, 09:22 PM
Jeez, you guys make Roddick out to be some ordinary 1-dimensional player like Gaudio/Davydenko. Firstly Roddicks has added alot more variety in his game. Infact his slice backhand is better then the majority of players in the top 10, its deep and penetrating. Secondly he is willing to come in alot more, notably off the slice approach. I hardly see this tactic being employed by Nadal, Davydenko, Robredo, etc. Furthermore Roddicks movement seems pretty good to me, he seems sharp moving forward to drop shots and usually does something with the ball.

Except that it isn't consistent and isn't working, many of his unforced errors lately are from that shot. I did mention that his net game is alright nowadays.

krprunitennis2
07-04-2007, 09:25 PM
I don't think Roddick's backhand is so weak anymore. I think it's getting better. And his return game isn't so bad.

But I do agree on the volleys and movement though. He should be able to put more volleys away faster.

But seriously, I think he's not one-dimensional all the time. He can change things and he will learn.

rommil
07-04-2007, 09:27 PM
Among other things pointed out, Roddick needs to lose weight.............seriously.

quest01
07-04-2007, 09:50 PM
I think Roddicks biggest weakness is his return of serve. He gets into to many breakers. Also his backhand can sometimes be a liability and his volleys are so so.

FarFed
07-04-2007, 09:59 PM
I think Federer needs to do that more than Roddick.:)
Among other things pointed out, Roddick needs to lose weight.............seriously.

MegacedU
07-04-2007, 10:03 PM
Andy Roddick has no business coming to the net as much as he does. He is more effective being a powerful baseliner. He certainly didn't volley his way to becoming #1 way back when.

pow
07-04-2007, 10:33 PM
As opposed to old Roddick, I think he has made his forehand slower and he moves slower on the court. He used to be a good mover when he was "at his prime".

The Gorilla
07-04-2007, 11:00 PM
andy roddick isn't hitting through his forehand anymore, he has no chance whatsoever against fed.

herosol
07-04-2007, 11:57 PM
prolly giving up
remember FO

man he looked like he was giving up
he just fell apart from his thinking then his footwork and that just destroyed everything else.

he needs to stay positive

Borat
07-05-2007, 12:38 AM
He has such weird technique....... everything seems very mechanical if you guys know what I mean. There are a lot of stops and pauses and then fast jerking motions. None of his strokes are very fluid. Also, he doesnt seem to have learned how to punch or defensive volley, he slices and takes full swings on volleys every time which seems very weird. Isnt that the first rule of successful volleying? Use you body momentum forward and dont swing the racquet unless on putaways where you swing very little. He seems to exagerrate all of his followthroughs and such as well. Also, he gives his opponent a lot of time to recover. Agassi was so great because he could take the ball on the rise and rob his opponent of set up time. Andy makes contact almost past the peak of the bounce when the ball is falling. Obviously his return game is very sub-par. People have gotten away with that in the past, without andy's serving prowess. It is almost as if someone needs to teach him the basics again. Never swing on volleys, use a fluid motion, take the ball at the peak of its bounce or on the rise so your opponent cant get back to position. I have a theory on Andy roddick that I dont think I can coherently explain in its entirety, so I hope that someone can help. Andy Roddick seems like the player who has taken 4 million practice forehands from a ball machine right in the center of the court. Why do I think this? He has a very exagerated loading position. He has his knees bent extremely wide open stance, his body is coiled back and he always pauses in that position and then explodes outward. When you take balls at the same speed at the same pace over and over at the baseline you can develop an exagerrated loading position because you have the time to do so on each shot: you know where the ball is going, you know how hard its coming. In real tennis you dont know. Every shot is different. Example: Return of serve. Andy sucks at returning serves. Why? He doesnt have time to coil back, bend his knees (to almost sitting lows), etc. He is forced to jerk the ball back awkwardly (with almost all wrist) with no consitancy in technique from one return to the other. To lower level players who hit the ball with less variety, pace, and precision he dominates. He can camp out in back of the baseline and hit his routine forehand. He has more time to load and set up. Now, you are probably thinking, duh, that is how you win, get your opponent out of position. That is why Roger Federer can win, he makes you out of position so you hit it out or so that he hits a winner. Now, think of Agassi. Very short compact (yet fluid) swing. He could play defensively and keep a rally going in which he is pust out of position. And because he had a compact swing and could hit a shot he is near diving for and turn it into an offensive shot BECAUSE HE DOESNT NEED A HALF HOUR TO SET UP FOR EVERY SHOT. Andy cant do this because when he is on the run, he cant do his crazy exagerrated loading process and use all of his strength to muscle the ball over. The ball goes into the net or is a flop that gets pummeled by his opponent. ANDY! you have a good serve that can get you far. String looser. Learn how to hit a 70% shot and dont load up so damn much and take so long to set up. Take a short compact backswing on your forehand and have a fluid motion that isnt so muscled. It is just like quarterbacks in football, who cares how accurate or powerful a passer you are. If you take so long to set up for and execute a good pass that you are sacked what is the point. You need a compact take-back. Take the ball on the damn rise you idiot! Does anyone hve any idea what I am talking about?

iamke55
07-05-2007, 12:43 AM
Wow... any player with major technical problems wouldn't be 5.5, let alone a pro at all, let alone a top 5. Last time I checked skill level depends on win-loss ratio, not on fluidity of strokes or how much a shot follows the rules taught by 5.0 hacks who have never been in the top 1000.

superman1
07-05-2007, 12:44 AM
When you're almost 25 years old and you're #3 in the world, you can't just suddenly retool your game and completely modify your bread and butter shot. When you're playing tennis at that level, you don't even think, you just automatically hit the shots. If Roddick changed the form on his forehand, he'd end up over thinking it every time.

His serve sets up easy forehands for him. That's how it works. When you get him on the defense, he will usually lose the point. Federer gets him on the defense when he stays at the baseline. However, when he comes to net off of good approaches (see: Master's Cup 2006), he gives Federer a lot more trouble. The best approach shot he can hit is his serve, so I don't know why he doesn't serve and volley more.

Borat
07-05-2007, 12:45 AM
Probably because he cant volley b/c he has absolute nil volleying technique.

Borat
07-05-2007, 12:46 AM
I know he cant retool his game, I just think this is all the reason why he has the weaknesses he has.

superman1
07-05-2007, 12:51 AM
Yeah, he's not great at net, but his serve will help him get an easy volley to put away, even for him. Federer is generally untroubled by Roddick's serve (though he did comment about how hard it was to return last year at the Master's Cup), but his return is really just a neutralizing one. He can't take a big swing and hit a winner off of it. So if Roddick's at net, it will greatly increase his chances of winning the point.

tennis_hand
07-05-2007, 01:12 AM
His serving motion, his movement on the court, from head to toe are very jerky.

tennis_hand
07-05-2007, 01:13 AM
Yeah, he's not great at net, but his serve will help him get an easy volley to put away, even for him. Federer is generally untroubled by Roddick's serve (though he did comment about how hard it was to return last year at the Master's Cup), but his return is really just a neutralizing one. He can't take a big swing and hit a winner off of it. So if Roddick's at net, it will greatly increase his chances of winning the point.

it doesn't matter given Fed's superb passing shots together with Roddick's poor movement. and a low slice block isn't the easiest to return well.

Cfidave
07-05-2007, 05:10 AM
His serving motion, his movement on the court, from head to toe are very jerky.

Absolutely correct. Roddick has a top 5 serve, and a top 30, rest of game. Shows you how important the serve is, in todays game.

rommil
07-05-2007, 05:35 AM
I think Federer needs to do that more than Roddick.:)

Nah I have seen these two upclose including at practice. Federer is thin, looks almost sickly thin, he doesn't even resemble a world class athlete, until he starts moving. Federer's physique helps him with movement and flexibility. Roddick on the other hand is thick. i know you guys will say the guy is fit. When Gonzo hooked up with Stefanki he was told to lose 15 pounds. I think Roddick can benefit from this.

DashaandSafin
07-05-2007, 07:22 AM
Idiots. Just about all of you are idiots. Do you relaly think you can hit a better volley than Roddick? Hit a better backhand? Please, go on the tour then you pitiful liars.


Im tired of Roddick bashing, seriously. If hes so "one dimensional" then I want to be one dimensional also, all the way to the bank.

Oh by the way, top 5 serve top 30 game? Shows how much you know about tennis. What about Ljubicic and Karlovic? Ljubs not in the top 10 and he has better strokes and arguably better serve than Roddick, yet hes ranked lower. Karlovic isnt even worth mentioning, best serve in the game and strokes that arent so horrible, I dont see him anywhere near the top 50.

Bottom line, all of you need to wake up and look at the rankings. All I see is no.3.

mavsman149
07-05-2007, 07:31 AM
Karlovic is 45th but I get your point

Morrissey
07-05-2007, 07:35 AM
Idiots. Just about all of you are idiots. Do you relaly think you can hit a better volley than Roddick? Hit a better backhand? Please, go on the tour then you pitiful liars.


Im tired of Roddick bashing, seriously. If hes so "one dimensional" then I want to be one dimensional also, all the way to the bank.

Oh by the way, top 5 serve top 30 game? Shows how much you know about tennis. What about Ljubicic and Karlovic? Ljubs not in the top 10 and he has better strokes and arguably better serve than Roddick, yet hes ranked lower. Karlovic isnt even worth mentioning, best serve in the game and strokes that arent so horrible, I dont see him anywhere near the top 50.

Bottom line, all of you need to wake up and look at the rankings. All I see is no.3.

Some people in here made good points but your´s was an even better counterpoint

Sup2Dresq
07-05-2007, 07:48 AM
Can't believe I'll say this, but Andy does deserve credit for staying in the top tier of the game. No matter how good your serve its still a feat.

However, Andy's demise and increased results is probably due to three things 1) Roger Federer, 2) major tournaments slowing the courts and balls, and 3) other players figuring out how to play him.

Mike_z
07-05-2007, 08:37 AM
One dimensional player... once the top guns broke his serve, that was it for this slam wins.

jgn1013
07-05-2007, 09:02 AM
Idiots. Just about all of you are idiots. Do you relaly think you can hit a better volley than Roddick? Hit a better backhand? Please, go on the tour then you pitiful liars.


Im tired of Roddick bashing, seriously. If hes so "one dimensional" then I want to be one dimensional also, all the way to the bank.

Oh by the way, top 5 serve top 30 game? Shows how much you know about tennis. What about Ljubicic and Karlovic? Ljubs not in the top 10 and he has better strokes and arguably better serve than Roddick, yet hes ranked lower. Karlovic isnt even worth mentioning, best serve in the game and strokes that arent so horrible, I dont see him anywhere near the top 50.

Bottom line, all of you need to wake up and look at the rankings. All I see is no.3.


great post!

Big Fed
07-05-2007, 10:45 AM
His backhand is poor. So is his movement. But he finds weaknesses pretty well.

Morrissey
07-06-2007, 05:14 PM
His movement and most of all his approach shots. He sets himself up to get passed, and often.

fastdunn
07-06-2007, 05:24 PM
Biggest problem is his service return. He won't win Wimbledon or another
slam with current return game.


His serves look potent but it lacks variety, accuracy and very predictable.
His motion is not so efficient and somewhat forceful and thus his serves
lose some zip toward the end of a match. That's why Gasquet hung in there
and started to break Roddick's serve from 3rd set.

So I actually think, in order to win another slam, he should improve
his biggest strength and biggest weakness:
1. serve
2. service return

TacoBellBorderBowl1946
07-06-2007, 05:56 PM
his serve didn't lose zip near the end of the match, from what I saw he was hitting aces and 135 bombs near the end of the fifth set.

I think the biggest thing he has to do is be more aggressive, go for his shots. Whenever he went into a long rally today, 9 times out of 10 he lost the point. He must make things happen early in the rally, and serve and volley more. It's a shame that he has the biggest serve in men's tennis yet chooses to stay back 90 percent of the time. I can recall at least 10 balls that Gasquet blocked back that Roddick could have put away if he came in after his serve. If you don't believe me, check out highlights here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BA9om9iy0c

I do believe that he will bounce back. We'll see if he learned his lesson from today when he plays in another slam, maintains a lead, and doesn't allow his opponent back into the match.

saram
07-06-2007, 07:46 PM
his serve didn't lose zip near the end of the match, from what I saw he was hitting aces and 135 bombs near the end of the fifth set.

I think the biggest thing he has to do is be more aggressive, go for his shots. Whenever he went into a long rally today, 9 times out of 10 he lost the point. He must make things happen early in the rally, and serve and volley more. It's a shame that he has the biggest serve in men's tennis yet chooses to stay back 90 percent of the time. I can recall at least 10 balls that Gasquet blocked back that Roddick could have put away if he came in after his serve. If you don't believe me, check out highlights here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BA9om9iy0c

I do believe that he will bounce back. We'll see if he learned his lesson from today when he plays in another slam, maintains a lead, and doesn't allow his opponent back into the match.

you are absolutely correct, but i think every coach has told him this. every commentator on every tape he has watched of himself has said this. he has said this. and today, he just sat at the baseline and was content to stay there. gasquet was on fire--no doubt. but, knowing your opponent is on fire should compell you to only approach the net when you know you have a deep and penetrating approach shot. it seemed as though andy was only going to the net when he remembered connors and everyone else had told him to get up there--regardless of his approach shot.

first two and a half sets--aggressive play, penetrating approach shots, solid volleys.

last two and a half sets--sat at the baseline for six or seven shots, approached at the wrong times--and was passed like 40 some odd times....

it was hard to witness....

BabblingPsychopath
07-06-2007, 09:12 PM
DIV III Darthmouth, and I do have a better backhand than Roddick. ;)

Yeah right.

You *might* be able to blame not being able to spell your own college as a typo, *but* anyone playing tennis at Dartmouth would know that all Ivies are Division I.

Tell us another one.

saram
07-06-2007, 09:47 PM
Yeah right.

You *might* be able to blame not being able to spell your own college as a typo, *but* anyone playing tennis at Dartmouth would know that all Ivies are Division I.

Tell us another one.

My daughter just asked me why I am laughing so loud....see, she was sleeping...but not after my reading this post!!!!!:p

The Gorilla
07-06-2007, 10:11 PM
I think, in all seriousness, roddicks movement is the one outstanding facet of his game.He was running down everything against gasguet

saram
07-06-2007, 10:14 PM
I think, in all seriousness, roddicks movement is the one outstanding facet of his game.He was running down everything against gasguet


except that one handed passing shot that went by him about 30 times. but i do agree that he has decent movement--especially considering his size and frame.

zpeed7
07-06-2007, 10:30 PM
Somewhere between that US Open win and the present Roddick's forehand changed for the worse and became some sort of whipy thing. I really hope he starts really driving it more, like he did before.

orangeblood
07-06-2007, 10:59 PM
I thought Roddick was punching his forehand through the ball a lot harder in this past QF match than he has this entire tournament. Just some stupid decisions in trying to go to net and hit to Gasquet's BH, which is his strength. If anything, his real weakness is mostly court sense and anticipation (that along with his mediocre footwork).

coolblue123
07-07-2007, 07:50 AM
Just like the tin man in Wizard of Oz... that's Roddick's weakness... he's got no heart....
I thought, someone with a heart of a lion as his coach, it'll rub off of Roddick.

Guess not...

With so many good tennis pro's nowadays, I don't think Roddick can get another slam w/o a good mental game... Connor's needs to have a talk with his pupil on determination...

Rodditha
07-07-2007, 07:58 AM
Roddick has mental weakness,stays too far behind the baseline,backhand sucks,loses concentration then give up a match........

Tennis Fan
07-07-2007, 08:03 AM
Every time Roddick & Hewitt lose, I'm so incredibly glad. Roddick is egotistical & smug & it's no surprise Connors is his coach. They're both one in the same.

rocky b
07-07-2007, 08:19 AM
I am no Roddick fan but he is number 3 in the world with all these bad strokes. What does that say about the guys ranked behind him. Who cares how you win if you win. We should give him credit for going so far with limited strokes. Look at Rios he had all the shots in the book and never won a grand slam. Roddick my have 2 wimbldons if it was not for Fed.

ElSuegro
07-07-2007, 08:30 AM
I'm with you rocky. I don't understand all the Roddick-bashing here. He's not perfect, but he's done quite well for himself, and is not even 25 yet. We will probably see more good things for him in the future.

The funny thing to me is that a thread titled "Roddick's weaknesses" is 5 pages long!