Which Andy's career would you rather have?

Who's career would you rather have??

  • Roddick, because of Brooklyn, World #1, US Open

    Votes: 50 55.6%

  • Murray, Gold medal, and the possibility of winning grand slams

    Votes: 37 41.1%

  • Neither because well they both are disappointing

    Votes: 3 3.3%
  • Total voters
    90
  • Poll closed .
B

Babolatbarry

Guest
Roddick you have the one slam wonder, who will always best be known for his tirades and Wimby '09 BH Volley. But with the US Open

Murray you have his horrible performances so far in major finals. Criticized for lack of weapons yet has a Gold Medal. Plus his career is not over

Discuss :)
 
90's Clay

90's Clay

Banned
Neither?????


Both failed to live up to their billing at the slams.. I wouldn't want that tied to my back the rest of my life. The money would be nice of course though. But you can make a killing just going far in tournaments without winning any of them so that means nothing
 
Last edited:
D

Djoker

Rookie
A-Rod is a former no 1. He has a slam title to his name.
In no way is Murray guaranteed to do either of the above.
 
clayman2000

clayman2000

Hall of Fame
From a straight up Roddick fan, Murray is no doubt the better player.

But at this point you take the slam and the year end no 1. Murray could easily do both, but it not guaranteed at all
 
AnotherTennisProdigy

AnotherTennisProdigy

Professional
Roddick. Murray has the better career, but it sounds more impressive when you say to your friends "I won the U.S. Open!" than "I won a lot of Masters 1000 tournaments!".
 
veritech

veritech

Hall of Fame
as much as i like murray there is no way i can place his current career over roddick's unless he wins a slam. he can go on a tear at the masters events but as long as he doesn't win a slam his career is still a tier below roddick's.
 
N

NadalAgassi

Guest
I would rather be Murray right now than be Roddick right now since he will probably win a slam, and if he does his career easily beats Roddick even if Roddick has been #1, and there is a good chance he will win multiple slams if he wins the first anyway. However if Murray's career ended today or in the unlikely event he never wins a slam I would rather Roddick and his career.
 
L

Leto

Semi-Pro
I voted Roddick...

USO is huge if comparing where they are right now in their respective careers. In future, I still think Murray is destined to win multiple slams, however...

BTW...

Kim Spears >>> Brooklyn, IMO :)
 
batz

batz

G.O.A.T.
As of right now, you've got to go with ARod - although I'd like to think that Murray would at least match Roddick's slam count by the time he's 30.
 
Cormorant

Cormorant

Professional
When was the last time Roddick was in the top 4? 2006? Murray makes consistency look easy by comparison, but he can't touch the amazing highs enjoyed by the American over the years.
 
J

joeri888

G.O.A.T.
Roddick obv. Murray vs. Gaudio is hard, but this is easy. It's like asking which is bigger, Olympic gold or a slam, world no 1 and ye no 1
 
clayman2000

clayman2000

Hall of Fame
sonicare said:
How is murray a better player than roddick?
Click to expand...

Andy Murray has made the semis in 7 of the last 8 majors, and QF in all of those. The 7 semis losses were all to either Rafa, Novak and Djokovic, and his loss at RG this year was to Ferrer, who is top 4 on clay.

No offence to Andy, but Andy never had consistency like that, and even in his prime was not on the level of the big 3.

Murray has 8 Masters, and Olympic Gold, all in an era where he has to face the likes of Fed, Rafa and Novak. He will finish this season in the top 4 for the 5th straight year.
 
R

roberttennis54

Semi-Pro
clayman2000 said:
Andy Murray has made the semis in 7 of the last 8 majors, and QF in all of those. The 7 semis losses were all to either Rafa, Novak and Djokovic, and his loss at RG this year was to Ferrer, who is top 4 on clay.

No offence to Andy, but Andy never had consistency like that, and even in his prime was not on the level of the big 3.

Murray has 8 Masters, and Olympic Gold, all in an era where he has to face the likes of Fed, Rafa and Novak. He will finish this season in the top 4 for the 5th straight year.
Click to expand...

Murray is a more consistent player, but he is not the threat that Roddick is at slams. You can play a great match against Roddick and lose. It's easier to face Murray at performing well than it is Roddick.
 
wilkinru

wilkinru

Professional
Considering earnings increasing these days for the top players, Murray.

It's all about the upside there. Roddick's is done.
 
Z

zam88

Professional
roddick seems to have a much more dynamic personality that will translate into him being able to comment on tennis if he wants (when mcenroe no longer wants to) and to be a media person for years to come.

I don't get any sense of personality with Murray.

Tennis-wise, I expect Murray to have accomplished more when it is all said and done... and possibly earn more money.

but Roddick's nice looks and robust personality should be worth more long term.

oh, and i'd pay really good money just to motorboat his wife's cans
 
smoledman

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
zam88 said:
roddick seems to have a much more dynamic personality that will translate into him being able to comment on tennis if he wants (when mcenroe no longer wants to) and to be a media person for years to come.

I don't get any sense of personality with Murray.

Tennis-wise, I expect Murray to have accomplished more when it is all said and done... and possibly earn more money.

but Roddick's nice looks and robust personality should be worth more long term.

oh, and i'd pay really good money just to motorboat his wife's cans
Click to expand...

Please define exactly what that means... :shock:
 
sonicare

sonicare

Hall of Fame
clayman2000 said:
Andy Murray has made the semis in 7 of the last 8 majors, and QF in all of those. The 7 semis losses were all to either Rafa, Novak and Djokovic, and his loss at RG this year was to Ferrer, who is top 4 on clay.

No offence to Andy, but Andy never had consistency like that, and even in his prime was not on the level of the big 3.

Murray has 8 Masters, and Olympic Gold, all in an era where he has to face the likes of Fed, Rafa and Novak. He will finish this season in the top 4 for the 5th straight year.
Click to expand...

Roddick was taking sets off peak roger in slam finals. Same cannot be said of murray.

Frankly, I just dont see how murray is a better player than roddick.
 
90's Clay

90's Clay

Banned
THe problem with Murray is even though he is a better overall player then Roddick, he still can't manage to even win a slam.

I wouldn't want to be known as the guy who can win everything in sight except for the most important big ones.

Roddick, while less talented then Murray, at least managed to bring the good to Fed in slams more then Murray ever has.

But then again... Roddick was projected to win a lot too.. Yet failed miserably slam wise.
 
FD3S

FD3S

Hall of Fame
90's Clay said:
THe problem with Murray is even though he is a better overall player then Roddick, he still can't manage to even win a slam.

I wouldn't want to be known as the guy who can win everything in sight except for the most important big ones.

Roddick, while less talented then Murray, at least managed to bring the good to Fed in slams more then Murray ever has.

But then again... Roddick was projected to win a lot too.. Yet failed miserably slam wise.
Click to expand...

In all fairness, a lot of the people projecting Roddick to win a lot pretty went "OMG huge serve/forehand this guy's IT" without taking into consideration... well, a crapload of other factors. I think Roddick had talent, but the hype he was getting way back when was excessive.
 
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
sonicare said:
Roddick was taking sets off peak roger in slam finals. Same cannot be said of murray.
Click to expand...

Murray never played peak Fed in a Slam final but he did beat him at 2006 Cincinnati.

sonicare said:
Frankly, I just dont see how murray is a better player than roddick.
Click to expand...

It's a difficult one to quantify and Roddick does have the Slam and world #1 to his name which Murray has yet to achieve. On the other hand Murray is 9-8 in his matchup against Federer, the most consistent world #1 player for the last decade, while Roddick is only 3-21. Plus Murray is 8-3 v Roddick in their own matchup.
 
Last edited:
L

ledwix

Hall of Fame
wilkinru said:
Considering earnings increasing these days for the top players, Murray.

It's all about the upside there. Roddick's is done.
Click to expand...

But the top players play not for the money but to win. After all, what can you do for your family with 40 mil that you can't also do with 20 mil?
 
okdude1992

okdude1992

Hall of Fame
no question, as of right now. roddick was number 1 and has a slam. as well as more runner up appearances.

murray still has time, but right now roddicks career>>> murrays
 
T

tudwell

G.O.A.T.
90's Clay said:
Neither?????


Both failed to live up to their billing at the slams.. I wouldn't want that tied to my back the rest of my life. The money would be nice of course though. But you can make a killing just going far in tournaments without winning any of them so that means nothing
Click to expand...

You realize that, in the grand scheme of things, both Andys have done phenomenally well, right? They're incredibly talented tennis players who both played elite level tennis for years and competed for some of the biggest titles on the tour. Why do you even watch tennis if you hate everybody who plays the game now?
 
N

NadalAgassi

Guest
Mainad said:
Murray never played peak Fed in a Slam final but he did beat him at 2006 Cincinnati.
Click to expand...

Never played peak Federer in a slam but he didnt even take set off non peak Federer in slams until this years Wimbledon. So safe to say he is weaker than Roddick in that area, mostly dealing with the nerves and pressure of a slam final, moreso than actual playing ability IMO (but naturally some would disagree there too).
 
90's Clay

90's Clay

Banned
tudwell said:
You realize that, in the grand scheme of things, both Andys have done phenomenally well, right? They're incredibly talented tennis players who both played elite level tennis for years and competed for some of the biggest titles on the tour. Why do you even watch tennis if you hate everybody who plays the game now?
Click to expand...

THey have done well. No doubt relatively.. But did Roddick do AS WELL to what most expected of him? Not really.. I remember way back when they were saying this guy would be a multiple time world champ picking up where Andre, Mac, Courier, Pete, Connors etc.. left off.. That didn't exactly happen.


Murray.. Hes been projected to win a slam for a good 3-4 years now, yet has failed to do so. He still has time though.


So yes.. Both have done well.. Just not as WELL as people thought they would do.


They are talented but not INCREDIBLY talented.. Quit overrating both please. If they were incredibly talented they would have more then 1 slam between them.

I never expected Roddick be as successful as the american sheeple were expecting him to be (primarily because how some of the old guard was abusing him and exposing many of his weaknesses).. But I did expect Roddick to manage more then 1 measly slam.

I don't expect Murray to dominate on the level as some other guys have.. But I expected more from him then to fail miserably 4 times in slam finals only winning 1 measly set.. I actually expected Murray to have 2-3 slams to his name already.
 
Last edited:
Apun94

Apun94

Hall of Fame
Babolatbarry said:
Roddick you have the one slam wonder, who will always best be known for his tirades and Wimby '09 BH Volley. But with the US Open

Murray you have his horrible performances so far in major finals. Criticized for lack of weapons yet has a Gold Medal. Plus his career is not over

Discuss :)
Click to expand...

Hmmm... Interesting poll options... Though would definitely take Murray over Rod.

P.S. Yes Rod does have Brooklyn but Kim aint bad either ;) ;)
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Cormorant said:
When was the last time Roddick was in the top 4? 2006? Murray makes consistency look easy by comparison, but he can't touch the amazing highs enjoyed by the American over the years.
Click to expand...
It was actually 2007 when Roddick was last in the top four.
 
abmk

abmk

Bionic Poster
90's Clay said:
I don't expect Murray to dominate on the level as some other guys have.. But I expected more from him then to fail miserably 4 times in slam finals only winning 1 measly set.. I actually expected Murray to have 2-3 slams to his name already.
Click to expand...

more like you hoped against hope that he'd stop federer/nadal from winning more majors ......LOL !!
 
T

tudwell

G.O.A.T.
90's Clay said:
THey have done well. No doubt relatively.. But did Roddick do AS WELL to what most expected of him? Not really.. I remember way back when they were saying this guy would be a multiple time world champ picking up where Andre, Mac, Courier, Pete, Connors etc.. left off.. That didn't exactly happen.


Murray.. Hes been projected to win a slam for a good 3-4 years now, yet has failed to do so. He still has time though.


So yes.. Both have done well.. Just not as WELL as people thought they would do.


They are talented but not INCREDIBLY talented.. Quit overrating both please. If they were incredibly talented they would have more then 1 slam between them.

I never expected Roddick be as successful as the american sheeple were expecting him to be (primarily because how some of the old guard was abusing him and exposing many of his weaknesses).. But I did expect Roddick to manage more then 1 measly slam.

I don't expect Murray to dominate on the level as some other guys have.. But I expected more from him then to fail miserably 4 times in slam finals only winning 1 measly set.. I actually expected Murray to have 2-3 slams to his name already.
Click to expand...

Yes, they are incredibly talented. You have to be to win a slam or contest four slam finals or be ranked number one or number two like Murray or even just be in the top ten. Hell, being a consistent touring pro at any level is pretty damn impressive to me. Tennis is hard. Anyone who can win a slam is an incredible champion. Sorry Roddick wasn't as good as Sampras. Only a handful of people in the 100+ year history of tennis are. One slam is not "measly." It's jaw-dropping.
 
90's Clay

90's Clay

Banned
tudwell said:
Yes, they are incredibly talented. You have to be to win a slam or contest four slam finals or be ranked number one or number two like Murray or even just be in the top ten. Hell, being a consistent touring pro at any level is pretty damn impressive to me. Tennis is hard. Anyone who can win a slam is an incredible champion. Sorry Roddick wasn't as good as Sampras. Only a handful of people in the 100+ year history of tennis are. One slam is not "measly." It's jaw-dropping.
Click to expand...

1 slam is not "jaw dropping" when most of the tennis public expected you to win multiple. Its also not jaw dropping in the least when that guy was a top 10 player for almost 10 years and in the title hunt for at least 2 of those slams during that entire time (wimbledon, USO)


Theres a lot of not so great player in tennis history that have managed to win a slam too. For them.. Sure may be jaw dropping for The Guadio's and Johansson's of the world. No one ever expected them to win SQUAT. For Roddick it should be seen as nothing less then a disappointment
 
Last edited:
sonicare

sonicare

Hall of Fame
90's Clay said:
1 slam is not "jaw dropping" when most of the tennis public expected you to win multiple. Its also not jaw dropping in the least when that guy was a top 10 player for almost 10 years and in the title hunt for at least 2 of those slams during that entire time (wimbledon, USO)


Theres a lot of not so great player in tennis history that have managed to win a slam too. For them.. Sure may be jaw dropping for The Guadio's and Johansson's of the world. For Roddick it should be seen as nothing less then a disappointment
Click to expand...

If its so easy, why dont you go and win one? be nice to get the million dollar cheque and the trophy no?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Who's career would you rather have?
Replies
24
Views
2K
Mustard
Mustard
D
  • Poll
Nalbandian vs Del Potro,which career 'd you rather have?
2
Replies
65
Views
4K
fruitytennis1
F
S
Which career would you rather have?
Replies
28
Views
2K
C++ Primer
C++ Primer
E
  • Poll
Which career would you rather have?
Replies
10
Views
857
MonkeyBoy
MonkeyBoy
F
  • Poll
Would you rather have Courier's or Hewitt's career?
Replies
41
Views
3K
Laver777
L
Top