If the Federer-Roddick US Open 2004 final would have happened.

[Heuristic]

Does Roddick have a chance with the home crowd and his old style of play? I know you guys are asking, "Why on earth should he, look at the stats!"

Some points to put things in perspective.

*He was the defending champion and still had his mojo/confidence (see point below)

*Roddick hit his forehand flat, not like the loopy disaster in the 06 final.

*He put up a valiant effort in the Wimbledon that year

*He was in fantastic form. Destroyed Nadal, Canas, etc.

*The US Open courts back then were fast

* Their 07 encounter when both played at the top of their abilities ended 7-6, 7-6, 6-2 for Federer.

So... does Roddick have a chance if he wins the serving shoot-out against Johansson and beats Hewitt in the semis?

 

[J011yroger]

No.

J

 

[Heuristic]

No.

J

Still a bummer it didn't happen. I seriously doubt it would have ended 6-0, 7-6, 6-0...

 

[J011yroger]

Still a bummer it didn't happen. I seriously doubt it would have ended 6-0, 7-6, 6-0...

Might have been 2, 2 &2. Fred was invincible that day.

J

 

[Heuristic]

Might have been 2, 2 &2. Fred was invincible that day.

J

Easy to look invincible when your opponent lacks a punch. Roddick played just as well as the year before. And I mean better than what he normally does.

 

[JasonZ]

Roddick proved that he cant defeat Federer at grand slams, no matter how well he plays. He also cant win a tiebreak against Federer at a grand slam, and thats one of the main reasons he has no chance to win that match

 

[Pheasant]

2004 Roddick might beat 2007 Federer at the USO. But 2004 Fed was a monster. I still believe that Fed played a great chunk of his best tennis in 2004. None of the top-ranked players could beat him away from clay that year. His movement and insane forehand were at his very best in 2004.

 

[stringertom]

fedr total pwnage since 2001:

 

[Heuristic]

2004 Roddick might beat 2007 Federer at the USO. But 2004 Fed was a monster. I still believe that Fed played a great chunk of his best tennis in 2004. None of the top-ranked players could beat him away from clay that year. His movement and insane forehand were at his very best in 2004.

He lost to Berdych in the Olympics, Hrbaty at Cincinatti. Henman at Rotterdam.

 

[Heuristic]

fedr total pwnage since 2001:

Yeah because Roddick in the early 2000s was anywhere close to prime Roddick.... He lost to Rusedski at Wimbledon for cryin out loud

 

[Pheasant]

He lost to Berdych in the Olympics, Hrbaty at Cincinatti. Henman at Rotterdam.

True. He lost to some scrubs at that time. I think Fed didn't get up for those alleged "easy" matches. But he lost very few to players ranked in the top 10 that year. And he dished out 3 or 4 bagels to Hewitt.

 

[Heuristic]

True. He lost to some scrubs at that time. I think Fed didn't get up for those alleged "easy" matches. But he lost very few to players ranked in the top 10 that year. And he dished out 3 or 4 bagels to Hewitt.

Well his FH was every bit as good in 05...

 

[stringertom]

Yeah because Roddick in the early 2000s was anywhere close to prime Roddick.... He lost to Rusedski at Wimbledon for cryin out loud

You can’t deny this one point set the tone for their “rivalry.”

 

[Heuristic]

You can’t deny this one point set the tone for their “rivalry.”

I think Nadal had a bigger psychological edge on Fed, than Fed had on Roddick in 04. When some of the later matches, like the 07 quarters got close, Roddick had break points, he choked... Also choked despite being up in the tiebreaks. It was clear by then that he didn't believe in himself.

But 04.. defending champion. I don't know... He wasn't yet neutered.

 

[vaillancourt]

Roddick was playing some insanely good tennis prior to the quarters. I think he probably would have beaten Hewitt in the semis, despite Hewitt having a good record vs even prime Roddick. And he would have tested Federer somewhat, but with how Federer played the final vs Hewitt, I dont think he could have made it as competitive as their Wimbledon final, despite that up to that point I thought Roddick was going to be even tougher for Federer to beat than he had been at Wimbledon.

 

[NatF]

Roddick was playing some insanely good tennis prior to the quarters. I think he probably would have beaten Hewitt in the semis, despite Hewitt having a good record vs even prime Roddick. And he would have tested Federer somewhat, but with how Federer played the final vs Hewitt, I dont think he could have made it as competitive as their Wimbledon final, despite that up to that point I thought Roddick was going to be even tougher for Federer to beat than he had been at Wimbledon.

Roddick was great going into all his meetings with Hewitt in 04-early 05, Hewitt usually one though. Probably would have been a very high quality match, possibly sharpening Hewitt up somewhat for the Federer encounter assuming he won. No way does Roddick beat Federer in the final in any case, no sure any player would have. With his serve firing he probably makes it look more respectable.

 

[Heuristic]

Roddick was great going into all his meetings with Hewitt in 04-early 05, Hewitt usually one though. Probably would have been a very high quality match, possibly sharpening Hewitt up somewhat for the Federer encounter assuming he won. No way does Roddick beat Federer in the final in any case, no sure any player would have. With his serve firing he probably makes it look more respectable.

Pretty sure Roddick beats Hewitt in that semi. Joachim sure spoiled a lot of great tennis.

 

[SaintPetros]

Does Roddick have a chance with the home crowd and his old style of play? I know you guys are asking, "Why on earth should he, look at the stats!"

Some points to put things in perspective.

*He was the defending champion and still had his mojo/confidence (see point below)

*Roddick hit his forehand flat, not like the loopy disaster in the 06 final.

*He put up a valiant effort in the Wimbledon that year

*He was in fantastic form. Destroyed Nadal, Canas, etc.

*The US Open courts back then were fast

* Their 07 encounter when both played at the top of their abilities ended 7-6, 7-6, 6-2 for Federer.

So... does Roddick have a chance if he wins the serving shoot-out against Johansson and beats Hewitt in the semis?

I think its Fred's in 4 tight sets again. Fred's going to cruise on his serve so he can focus on Roddick's, and it's just a matter of time before he gets that one break he needs to open the floodgates into A-Rod's head.
If you were to give 2004 Roddick the fitness and backhand of his 2009 self, hell even his 2007 self, then I think it gets really interesting.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

This is a match that would have been interesting to see. Of course, Federer would win in the end. At the 2003 USO though, that might have gone for Roddick.

True. He lost to some scrubs at that time. I think Fed didn't get up for those alleged "easy" matches. But he lost very few to players ranked in the top 10 that year. And he dished out 3 or 4 bagels to Hewitt.

He actually lost NO matches at all vs the top 10 in 2004.

 

[martinezownsclay]

Federer was on fire in the final, probably one of his best matches. Serving Hewitt two bagels is unbelievable, even knowing Federer is an awful match up for Hewitt. So in that form, for sure Federer wins, even if he plays Roddick in the final, who was looking great until the Johansson quarter final. And even though before the tournament I thought Roddick had a semi decent chance, after pushing Federer hard at Wimbledon.

 

[martinezownsclay]

Roddick was great going into all his meetings with Hewitt in 04-early 05, Hewitt usually one though. Probably would have been a very high quality match, possibly sharpening Hewitt up somewhat for the Federer encounter assuming he won. No way does Roddick beat Federer in the final in any case, no sure any player would have. With his serve firing he probably makes it look more respectable.

Hewitt vs Roddick would have been a great match. And yes if Hewitt had won it would have benefited him, as he was clearly not ready for an opponent like Federer in that kind of form with his relatively easy draw to the final.

 

[HBK4life]

Might have been 3 bagels.

 

[Adriano Panatta]

Roger would won in 4 set i think,Roddick play very well in W F(Roddick W 2004>>Roddick Wimbledon 2009) but Roger was simply better

 

[mental midget]

nah...just a nightmare matchup for any version of roddick. fed was on to his serve (although if roddick served well he certainly could have got his share of holds) and once the point starts, massive advantage off the ground to fed. plus roddick's return isn't stellar and fed was so good at hitting his spots.

of course, maybe 1/10 matches, who knows, fed has a bad day and andy plays lights out...but chances are slim.

 

[RS]

Fed wins in 3 or 4

 

[Mustard]

The 2004 US Open final is probably Federer's greatest ever match performance. In that form, he batters Roddick.

even knowing Federer is an awful match up for Hewitt.

When Hewitt had once led Federer 7-2 in the head-to-head, i.e. end of 2003? Hewitt is a much tougher matchup for Federer overall than Roddick is.

 

[JasonZ]

nah...just a nightmare matchup for any version of roddick. fed was on to his serve (although if roddick served well he certainly could have got his share of holds) and once the point starts, massive advantage off the ground to fed. plus roddick's return isn't stellar and fed was so good at hitting his spots.

of course, maybe 1/10 matches, who knows, fed has a bad day and andy plays lights out...but chances are slim.

i think roddicks chances are zero. even on a bad day federer would make it to a few tiebreaks, and roddick would not win a tiebreak at a slam against peak federer in 1000 years.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Hewitt is a much tougher matchup for Federer overall than Roddick is.

Not much of a difference other than Hewitt peaking earlier. From 2004 it was basically the same for both. Both got two wins, but Roddick pushed him a bit more Bo5 than Hewitt did. And Hewitt got bageled a lot more.

He got 10 wins in a row vs Roddick and 15 vs Hewitt.

 

[mike danny]

I could see Fed winning in 4. Roddick in 2006 brought less offense and still made it a tight contest in sets 2 and 3.

 

[Mustard]

Not much of a difference other than Hewitt peaking earlier. From 2004 it was basically the same for both. Both got two wins, but Roddick pushed him a bit more Bo5 than Hewitt did. And Hewitt got bageled a lot more.

He got 10 wins in a row vs Roddick and 15 vs Hewitt.

Roddick seldom beat Federer, even a pre-prime Federer. Hewitt usually beat a pre-prime Federer, with their 2002 YEC semi final and 2003 Davis Cup semi final matches being all-time classics.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Roddick seldom beat Federer, even a pre-prime Federer. Hewitt usually beat a pre-prime Federer, with their 2002 YEC semi final and 2003 Davis Cup semi final matches being all-time classics.

Roddick is younger than Federer, not much of a use facing pre-prime Federer if he himself is pre-prime as well. He didn't have the luxury of facing a pre-prime Federer while him being in his prime like Hewitt had. When Federer was in his prime he dealt with both prime Roddick and prime Hewitt at a somewhat similar level, neither did particularly great against him. However, if push came to shove and I had to choose, I would say Roddick did slightly better, even if he was obviously very underwhelming against Federer.

 

[timnz]

Agassi pushed Federer to 5 sets at the 2004 USOpen. Do you Agassi then would have beaten Roddick?

 

[Mustard]

Roddick is younger than Federer, not much of a use facing pre-prime Federer if he himself is pre-prime as well. He didn't have the luxury of facing a pre-prime Federer while him being in his prime like Hewitt had.

Roddick lost all 3 matches that he had against Federer in 2001-2002. Their rankings were similar all 3 times, with Federer ranked a little higher (13 to 16, 13 to 15, and 8 to 12). It's daft in hindsight, but I remember Roddick being pretty favoured to beat Federer going into their 2003 Wimbledon semi final, even though Federer was ranked higher than Roddick (5 to 6) and both having won a grass-court warmup beforehand (Roddick at Queen's Club, Federer at Halle). Federer battered Roddick once it got to sets 2 and 3, but Brad Gilbert (Roddick's coach) kept going on about a first set netcord afterwards that he thought changed the whole match.

 

[Roddickulous1]

I think Roddick in the 1st 4 rounds of the 04 USO looked more dominant than I've ever seen him in a slam.

He wasn't going to beat Federer though but he could've def made it competitive with a respectable loss. His FH was lethal early in the tournament.

 

[Pheasant]

2003 Roddick was amazing. But I will take 2004 Fed 6-2, 4-6, 7-6, 6-4 over 2003 Roddick.

 

[Third Serve]

Roddick was scary good before the QF but even scary good won’t cut it against peak Fed on a HC. Certainly he could take the match to four though. Hewitt had a legit shot at the second set when Fed had a brief lapse.

 

[Gizo]

Ahead of the 2004 US Open, I recall McEnroe predicting that Federer would never win the tournament, as he thought that as with Borg he wouldn’t like the bright lights and noise of Flushing Meadows / New York.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

I think Roddick in the 1st 4 rounds of the 04 USO looked more dominant than I've ever seen him in a slam.

He wasn't going to beat Federer though but he could've def made it competitive with a respectable loss. His FH was lethal early in the tournament.

The performance against Nadal was incredible. Yeah, it was a "baby" Nadal, but he had already beaten Federer in straights earlier that year and soon after that almost beats Hewitt at the AO.

Roddick lost all 3 matches that he had against Federer in 2001-2002. Their rankings were similar all 3 times, with Federer ranked a little higher (13 to 16, 13 to 15, and 8 to 12). It's daft in hindsight, but I remember Roddick being pretty favoured to beat Federer going into their 2003 Wimbledon semi final, even though Federer was ranked higher than Roddick (5 to 6) and both having won a grass-court warmup beforehand (Roddick at Queen's Club, Federer at Halle). Federer battered Roddick once it got to sets 2 and 3, but Brad Gilbert (Roddick's coach) kept going on about a first set netcord afterwards that he thought changed the whole match.

I don't remember the netcord but I remember Roddick having set point. It would be interesting to see how the match would have unfolded had he converted.

 

[ChrisRF]

Easy 3 sets for Federer IMO.

I recently rewatched both the 2004 Wimbledon and US Open finals. Wimbledon was actually a worse match than I remembered and also worse that one could expect from 2004 Federer. Mid-match the 3 commentators all agreed that Federer certainly wasn't in top form that day.

However, 2004 US Open final Federer was absolutely crushing. One of the best performances from a player in tennis history, plain and simple.

Of course Roddick might hold serve a bit more than Hewitt, but I don't see any chance for Roddick to make it closer than let's say his loss to Sampras in 2002. Maybe it would even be similar to the 2007 AO SF.

If Federer has a great day, he will always make Roddick look very very ordinary. So why should his arguably BEST day make a difference?

 

[Mustard]

From what I remember of the 2004 Wimbledon final, Roddick largely bossed the first set to win it 6-4, but Federer ran riot at the start of the second set and was 4-0 up. Roddick still came back to 5-5 but Federer won the set 7-5. Roddick led something like 2-1(?) with a break in the third set when there was a rain delay. Roddick seemed to be the better player for most of the match up to this point. However, when they came back out, Federer was much more aggressive in his play and dictated the match from then on, and won in 4 sets 4-6, 7-5, 7-6, 6-4. Brad Gilbert said afterwards that Mirka had outcoached him in the rain delay. Federer did seem to stop waiting to defensively react to Roddick's power game after the rain delay, and attack/mix it up much more.

 

[FD3S]

From what I remember of the 2004 Wimbledon final, Roddick largely bossed the first set to win it 6-4, but Federer ran riot at the start of the second set and was 4-0 up. Roddick still came back to 5-5 but Federer won the set 7-5. Roddick led something like 2-1(?) with a break in the third set when there was a rain delay. Roddick seemed to be the better player for most of the match up to this point. However, when they came back out, Federer was much more aggressive in his play and dictated the match from then on, and won in 4 sets 4-6, 7-5, 7-6, 6-4. Brad Gilbert said afterwards that Mirka had outcoached him in the rain delay. Federer did seem to stop waiting to defensively react to Roddick's power game after the rain delay, and attack/mix it up much more.

Fed was smarter about his aggression too - there were multiple times before the rain delay where he tried to attack from the baseline with pace/depth but not a lot of angle or direction, which was arguably the worst way he could have handled a gripping and ripping Roddick considering how much larger his own toolbox was in comparison. He played a more intelligent and savvy match after the rain, moving Roddick more and using his variety to full advantage; with that said, I still wonder if he makes that adjustment on his without the rain coming down. For better or for worse, Federer showed repeatedly over the course of his career that he could be stubborn at times.

RE the bolded: I would not be at all surprised if the entirety of Gilbert's coaching session was 'bring the wood!' and 'FEARHAND!'.

EDIT: And to answer the question, I could see Roddick losing in four competitive sets. He was serving and hitting the FH like a monster but overall his BH wasn't as sharp as it was in the Wimbledon final and you'd better believe Fed would have exploited that. I don't see Roger having a fun time on return even considering the matchup issue (that surface was fast and Roddick was bringing it) but all he'd need is a few points strung together at the right time and he'd be more likely to be successful in that regard than Roddick trying the same on his return games.