2004 Wimbledon Final Andy Roddick.

[ManFed]

I was watching yesterday all Wimbledon Fed Finals. My favorites because the level of the match in general was 2004, 2007 and 2012, not specifically in that order. 2009 was also great because of Roddick and how much Roger tough that match up when for the first time he had no idea of how to read Roddick's serve. One question came to my mind. Roddick played like I have never seen him before and I never saw him after at Wimbledon 2004 final. He could have defeated anybody even Roger, that match was like a coin toss that in the end Roger has to use his better Tennis to win.

I believe that 2004 Wimbledon Final Andy Roddick could have defeated any version of Wimbledon Nadal (2008 or 2010) if you like and could have easily beat 2012 Murray and take to 5 set and beat 2012 Roger Federer. His serve and forehand was just outstanding. His forehand would damage Nadal a lot in grass.

 

[Qubax]

Yah, I mean to be honest - few disagree. Just to bad Andy started hitting like my signature suggests.

 

[BigServer1]

Roddick from 2003-2005 had the biggest game on tour. His serve and FH were both so bad ass.

His level in the Wimby final would be enough to beat any player active today, including Fed. He was insane in those two tournaments. The rain in 2004 was probably the only reason Fed won that match. Before that, Andy was simply hitting him off the court.

His level in 03 in the SF and 05 in the Final were also very strong, but 2004 was something else entirely.

 

[helloworld]

How can Roddick defeat 2008 Nadal when Federer himself couldn't even managed to do so?

 

[kishnabe]

How can Roddick defeat 2008 Nadal when Federer himself couldn't even managed to do so?

Federer doesn't match up well against Nadal. Roddick was ripping the ball hard, which Nadal won't like!

 

[BigServer1]

How can Roddick defeat 2008 Nadal when Federer himself couldn't even managed to do so?

How did Roddick beat Nadal in 2008 in Dubai, or in 2010 in Miami, the two best seasons of Rafa's career?

Roddick had the kind of game back then that would trouble Nadal. Huge serve, huge forehand, first strike offensive tennis.

 

[sunof tennis]

How can Roddick defeat 2008 Nadal when Federer himself couldn't even managed to do so?

Match ups. Also, taking nothing away from Rafa, Fed's confidence was very low in 2008, after getting destroyed by Rafa at the French.

 

[ManFed]

How can Roddick defeat 2008 Nadal when Federer himself couldn't even managed to do so?

Federer himself was better in 2004 final than in 2008 final. For me, the level showed for both players (Federer and Roddick) in 2004, was out of this world. For me is the best final in terms of quality. 2008 is not even close, even 2007 was better.

 

[TMF]

How can Roddick defeat 2008 Nadal when Federer himself couldn't even managed to do so?

Because Roddick was playing Fed 04 version and not a Fed 08 version. There's no way of knowing for sure who wins.

 

[MichaelNadal]

I miss that Andy, that's for sure.

 

[krz]

Because rain delay.

 

[purge]

no no no. havnt you heard? its basically common knowledge that 2001-2009 was by far the weakest field tennis has ever had and everyone who did not win 20 majors during that time is basically better club level player. roddick has always been a joke of a player just like hewitt, safin, nalbandian, haas and others. no one wouldve ever heard anything about them if not for playing in such a horrendously weak era. how else could federer have won so many majors?

 

[roberttennis54]

How can Roddick defeat 2008 Nadal when Federer himself couldn't even managed to do so?

Without any bias it should be quite apparent Federer was ill and trying to recover for most of 2008. He got bagelled for the only time since he was 17 in a slam final no less, lost to Blake, Fish, Karlovic and Simon. The Wimbledon 08 final is greatly overrated in terms of quality. In fact the 09 Australian Open final was played at a much higher level.

 

[Mustard]

As well as Roddick played in the 2004 Wimbledon final, let's keep a sense of perspective here. Roddick had a close match against Ancic in the semi finals. There were a few controversial calls and no hawkeye back then.

 

[roberttennis54]

As well as Roddick played in the 2004 Wimbledon final, let's keep a sense of perspective here. Roddick had a close match against Ancic in the semi finals. There were a few controversial calls and no hawkeye back then.

Yep and Ancic was at worst the 4th best grass court player from 2004-2006. In 2006 he was probably the 2nd favourite for Wimbledon. He had a big serve and good volleys, but just was not athletic enough in the end. Still he was a very good grass player.

 

[zagor]

Roddick from 2003-2005 had the biggest game on tour. His serve and FH were both so bad ass.

2003 and 2004? Sure but not in 2005, that's when he started working with Dean Goldfine and started to play extremely conservative off the ground. Not saying Gilbert is world's best coach or something but I think he was perfect for Roddick and sacking him (possibly due to knee jerk reaction of not winning a slam in 2004) was one of the biggest mistakes of his career.

His level in the Wimby final would be enough to beat any player active today, including Fed. He was insane in those two tournaments. The rain in 2004 was probably the only reason Fed won that match. Before that, Andy was simply hitting him off the court.

Agree.

His level in 03 in the SF and 05 in the Final were also very strong, but 2004 was something else entirely.

His level was high in 2003 Wimbledon SF (it's just that Fed played one of the best matches of his career) but can't agree with 2005, throughout the whole tourney he was incredibly passive once the ball was in play, I expected Fed to routine him in the final.

As well as Roddick played in the 2004 Wimbledon final, let's keep a sense of perspective here. Roddick had a close match against Ancic in the semi finals. There were a few controversial calls and no hawkeye back then.

So? Nadal had a close match with Gulbis in 2008 Wimbledon, with Kendrick in 2006, Soderling and Youzhny in 2007, Haase and Petzhner in 2010, Delpo in 2011 etc.

This thread I presume was about Roddick's level in the final which was very high.

 

[BeHappy]

Roddick had more forehand winners than Federer in that match and broke Federer's serve so many times it was ridiculous. His movement was phenomenal too. Even his volleying was ok.

Such a waste.

 

[BigServer1]

2003 and 2004? Sure but not in 2005, that's when he started working with Dean Goldfine and started to play extremely conservative off the ground. Not saying Gilbert is world's best coach or something but I think he was perfect for Roddick and sacking him (possibly due to knee jerk reaction of not winning a slam in 2004) was one of the biggest mistakes of his career.

His level was high in 2003 Wimbledon SF (it's just that Fed played one of the best matches of his career) but can't agree with 2005, throughout the whole tourney he was incredibly passive once the ball was in play, I expected Fed to routine him in the final.

I feel like he was still solid in 2005 (and really until 2007 if we're being honest), but I agree that he abandoned the 100% offensive mindset in 2005, which hurt him, imo.

Still, his 2006 US Open and 2007 AO/USO were still showcasing incredible levels of talent. The 2007 USO QF with Roger and Roddick is one of the highest levels of tennis Roddick ever produced, he just happened to be facing Roger in absolute godmode. I'll never forget the 140MPH first serve that Roger returned on the baseline, drawing an error from Roddick. Fed just couldn't miss that day.

 

[BeHappy]

I feel like he was still solid in 2005 (and really until 2007 if we're being honest), but I agree that he abandoned the 100% offensive mindset in 2005, which hurt him, imo.

Still, his 2006 US Open and 2007 AO/USO were still showcasing incredible levels of talent. The 2007 USO QF with Roger and Roddick is one of the highest levels of tennis Roddick ever produced, he just happened to be facing Roger in absolute godmode. I'll never forget the 140MPH first serve that Roger returned on the baseline, drawing an error from Roddick. Fed just couldn't miss that day.

Roddick hit the ball hard in that 2007 match, but he lacked Brad Gilbert's point construction and he couldn't put the ball away. Lots of balls down the middle, lots of cross court approaches etc.

In 2004 he hit more forehand winners than Federer and broke him about 5 times.

 

[BigServer1]

Roddick hit the ball hard in that 2007 match, but he lacked Brad Gilbert's point construction and he couldn't put the ball away. Lots of balls down the middle, lots of cross court approaches etc.

In 2004 he hit more forehand winners than Federer and broke him about 5 times.

I agree. The 2004 Wimby final was Roddick's highest level ever, my only point was that he played at a really high level at times until 2007, and in patches into 2008-2010. I think each year that passed saw him get less and less consistent.

 

[Gizo]

Roddick only dropped one set en-route to the 2004 Wimbledon final as well, winning 16 sets in a row before losing the 2nd set against Ancic in the semis. He overcame dangerous opponents like Taylor Dent in the 3rd round and Schalken in the quarters.

Plus at Queen's a couple of weeks earlier a very good straight sets victory over a peak and resurgent Hewitt in the semis. Ancic had also given Roddick a very stern test in their R3 match at Queen's.

In 2005 he declined noticeably under Goldfine, being taken to 5 sets by Bracciali in R2 and Grosjean in the quarters and having a scare against Johansson in the semis.

In 2004 there's no doubt that Roddick was the second best player at Wimbledon after Federer. However in 2005 I think that Hewitt was better and would have reached the final instead, had the Wimbledon organisers not controversially tampered with the seedings and put Roddick at no. 2 ahead of him (Hewitt was the world no. 2 at the time).

 

[roberttennis54]

Roddick only dropped one set en-route to the 2004 Wimbledon final as well, winning 16 sets in a row before losing the 2nd set against Ancic in the semis. He overcame dangerous opponents like Taylor Dent in the 3rd round and Schalken in the quarters.

Plus at Queen's a couple of weeks later he enjoyed a very good straight sets victory over a peak and resurgent Hewitt in the semis.

In 2005 he declined noticeably under Goldfine, being taken to 5 sets by Bracciali in R2 and Grosjean in the quarters and having a scare against Johansson in the semis.

In 2004 there's no doubt that Roddick was the second best player at Wimbledon after Federer. However in 2005 I think that Hewitt was better and would have reached the final instead, had the Wimbledon organisers not controversially tampered with the seedings and put Roddick at no. 2 ahead of him (Hewitt was the world no. 2 at the time).

Have to agree with the last part. In 05 he was not playing the same power game and Hewitt would have beaten him.

I disagree with BigServer1 about changing his game, though. On grass Roddick was 2nd best and had he continued probably could have taken slams of Federer, but not so much on hard courts. Worse still on hardcourts Hewitt could beat him too. I think if he knew Hewitt would virtually be finished after 05 US Open he may not have made the change.

 

[zagor]

I feel like he was still solid in 2005 (and really until 2007 if we're being honest), but I agree that he abandoned the 100% offensive mindset in 2005, which hurt him, imo.

Solid maybe but IMO nowhere near the level of tennis he displayed in 2003 and 2004, especially regarding Wimbledon.

Still, his 2006 US Open and 2007 AO/USO were still showcasing incredible levels of talent. The 2007 USO QF with Roger and Roddick is one of the highest levels of tennis Roddick ever produced, he just happened to be facing Roger in absolute godmode. I'll never forget the 140MPH first serve that Roger returned on the baseline, drawing an error from Roddick. Fed just couldn't miss that day.

You see, that 2007 USO QF against Fed (with Agassi commentating which was awesome) is the way IMO Roddick should have played every match from QF onward in big tourneys in his whole career.

Of course there were still some flashes of brilliance here and there (2006 Cincy and USO, 2008 Dubai, 2007 USO, 2009 Wimbledon etc.) but Roddick wasn't fully dedicated 24/7 to the type of playing style which was IMO most suited for Roddick as a player and which brought him by far the most success.

 

[roberttennis54]

Solid maybe but IMO nowhere near the level of tennis he displayed in 2003 and 2004, especially regarding Wimbledon.



You see, that 2007 USO QF against Fed (with Agassi commentating which was awesome) is the way IMO Roddick should have played every match from QF onward in big tourneys in his whole career.

Of course there were still some flashes of brilliance here and there (2006 Cincy and USO, 2008 Dubai, 2007 USO, 2009 Wimbledon etc.) but Roddick wasn't fully dedicated 24/7 to the type of playing style which was IMO most suited for Roddick as a player and which brought him by far the most success.

Ultimately it is hard to change what kind of player you are at heart. Roddick was a grinder as kid and it is probably the tennis he loves to play most.

As I said before the change he made in his game backfired, but it seemed kind of necessary at the time.

Hewitt had got to the finals of the finals of the US Open, finals of the Masters Cup, finals of Australian, semis of Wimbledon and the semis of the US Open. Whilst Roddick's power game worked great against the rest of the field including peak Safin, it did not work too well against Federer and Hewitt on hardcourts. These two were ever present and Roddick needed to find a way to beat them. It backfired big time and made him easier for Federer to beat and the rest of the field, but I respect him for trying.

 

[Mustard]

The Federer vs. Hewitt quarter final match at 2004 Wimbledon was a lot closer than the 6-1, 6-7, 6-0, 6-4 scoreline suggests. Federer won virtually all the longer games and recovered from a break down at 3-4 in the fourth set.

 

[Sid_Vicious]

I believe that 2004 Wimbledon Final Andy Roddick could have defeated any version of Wimbledon Nadal (2008 or 2010)

 

[USOpenfan]

I am not a big Andy Roddick fan but after watching most of the 2004 Wimbledon final I am very impressed to say the least. He was in "God" mode for awhile and looked almost unbeatable. When that serve is on it is unmatched(Isner perhaps). The problem with Andy Roddick is he is isn't consistent. Championships are won with consistent play not just power serves and this shows in Andy's records in GS finals. He is still a fun player to watch I must admit.

 

[akv89]

No better way to judge a match than to watch it again:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubX07SIRbsA

 

[Joseph L. Barrow]

As well as Roddick played in the 2004 Wimbledon final, let's keep a sense of perspective here. Roddick had a close match against Ancic in the semi finals. There were a few controversial calls and no hawkeye back then.

Ancic had previously beaten Federer at Wimbledon, was coming off a straight-sets quarterfinal win over Henman when he played Roddick, and would later go on to reach two more Wimbledon quarterfinals, losing to Federer both times. Two of his three career titles were won on grass. He was a legitimate force on the surface, and at Wimbledon.

To get more perspective, here, note that Roddick only lost one set before the final at Wimbledon 2004, and had just won the title at Queen's Club-- beating Hewitt en route-- while dropping only one set (also to Ancic, interestingly enough). In fact, note that from 2003-2005, Roddick's record on grass was 32-3-- the only losses were to Federer in Wimbledon semifinals and finals.

 

[Heuristic]

Very few men would have beaten 04 Roddick in that final.

 

[Red Rick]

Yah, I mean to be honest - few disagree. Just to bad Andy started hitting like my signature suggests.

After the grave of Ghenghis Khan, the 2nd most sought after place is the final resting place of Roddick's aggressive forehand.

 

[Heuristic]

After the grave of Ghenghis Khan, the 2nd most sought after place is the final resting place of Roddick's aggressive forehand.

So painful watching the tributes to Roddick retiring all about his serve.. One just wants to scream at the television AND FOREHAND when he had BALLS LEFT.

 

[KINGROGER]

04 Roddick >>>>> 14/15 Fed

 

[Nadal_Django]

Very few men would have beaten 04 Roddick in that final.

04 Roddick against 18 Anderson could be a cracker of a match.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Wins on grass over top10:

Murray 13
Djokovic 12
Nadal 9
Roddick 2

 

[Deleted member 757377]

04 Roddick >>>>> 14/15 Fed

top10 beat on grass:

2014 Federer 2
2015 Federer 1
2004 Roddick 0

Career:

Federer 19
Roddick 2

In summer 2015 Federer won 61 sets to 2 excluding slam finals against Djokovic.

 

[Red Rick]

I've always argued Murray was greater than Djokovic

Thank you

 

[KINGROGER]

top10 beat on grass:

2014 Federer 2
2015 Federer 1
2004 Roddick 0

Career:

Federer 19
Roddick 2

In summer 2015 Federer won 61 sets to 2 excluding slam finals against Djokovic.

04 Roddick played better and would’ve been a bigger threat to Djokovic.

Federer could win 1000 sets playing at his 2015 level, 2004-2009 level was still higher.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Grass wins over top10s:

federer 19
murray 13
djokovic 12
nadal 9
roddick 2

wimbledon finals:

2011 djokovic-nadal
2012 federer-murray
2013 murray-djokovic
2014 djokovic-federer
2015 djokovic-federer

Roddick would have reached zero of these Wimbledon finals.

 

[KINGROGER]

Grass wins over top10s:

federer 19
murray 13
djokovic 12
nadal 9
roddick 2

wimbledon finals:

2011 djokovic-nadal
2012 federer-murray
2013 murray-djokovic
2014 djokovic-federer
2015 djokovic-federer

Roddick would have reached zero of these Wimbledon finals.

If you swap him in for Murray he probably wins 2013, reaches 2012 final and reaches 2014/2015 SF.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

If you swap him in for Murray he probably wins 2013, reaches 2012 final and reaches 2014/2015 SF.

If you say so.

But the huge gap in wins over top10 is real.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

If you say so.

But the huge gap in wins over top10 is real.

Roddick would probably at least make 1-2 finals, maybe not the extra SFs because he wasn't as consistent but when he was on he was unplayable to the lower players.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Roddick would probably at least make 1-2 finals, maybe not the extra SFs because he wasn't as consistent but when he was on he was unplayable to the lower players.

If you say so.

But the huge gap in wins over top10 is real.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

I've always argued Murray was greater than Djokovic

Thank you

 

[Deleted member 77403]

I remember watching that thinking Roddick is manhandling Federer, and this was peak Federer who was getting blown off the court in the initial stages of the match. Federer had to pull a rabbit out of the hat to clutch out that second set.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

If you say so.

But the huge gap in wins over top10 is real.

Top 10 wins don't mean crap. It's about level of play.

Let's look at the 2004 Year End top 10 and see if any of them could beat Roddick on the way to the final.
1 - Federer (he did beat him but he was on the other side of the draw).
3 - Hewitt (he beat Hewitt at Queens in straights so nope).
4 - Safin (he was horrible on grass).
5 - Moya (see above).
6 - Henman (I'd back Roddick over Henman due to him having more power).
7 - Coria (not great on grass again).
8 - Agassi (wasn't as good on grass past 2001).
9 - Nalbandian (wasn't that great on grass outside maybe 2002).
10 - Gaudio (not a great grass player AGAIN).

So who out of them would beat him besides Fed who is on the other side of the draw? Not his fault they lost earlier.

 

[Red Rick]

Top 10 wins don't mean crap. It's about level of play.

Let's look at the 2004 Year End top 10 and see if any of them could beat Roddick on the way to the final.
1 - Federer (he did beat him but he was on the other side of the draw).
3 - Hewitt (he beat Hewitt at Queens in straights so nope).
4 - Safin (he was horrible on grass).
5 - Moya (see above).
6 - Henman (I'd back Roddick over Henman due to him having more power).
7 - Coria (not great on grass again).
8 - Agassi (wasn't as good on grass past 2001).
9 - Nalbandian (wasn't that great on grass outside maybe 2002).
10 - Gaudio (not a great grass player AGAIN).

So who out of them would beat him besides Fed who is on the other side of the draw? Not his fault they lost earlier.

Yeah.

Roddick went something ridiculous like 32-3 in 2003-1005 on grass with all 3 losses being to Fed at Wimbledon. Didn't lose to anyone else on grass between 2002 and 2006.

Like show me any player who goes 32-0 vs the field - one player on a surface who hasn't won a Slam on that surface.

It's as high as Fed's best streak vs non Nadal on clay.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Yeah.

Roddick went something ridiculous like 32-3 in 2003-1005 on grass with all 3 losses being to Fed at Wimbledon. Didn't lose to anyone else on grass between 2002 and 2006.

Not to mention he wasn't half bad in 2009 either. I liked that 2009 run in retrospect because it was like 2004-2005 all over again. Roddick was a great player when he was on.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Top 10 wins don't mean crap. It's about level of play.

Let's look at the 2004 Year End top 10 and see if any of them could beat Roddick on the way to the final.
1 - Federer (he did beat him but he was on the other side of the draw).
3 - Hewitt (he beat Hewitt at Queens in straights so nope).
4 - Safin (he was horrible on grass).
5 - Moya (see above).
6 - Henman (I'd back Roddick over Henman due to him having more power).
7 - Coria (not great on grass again).
8 - Agassi (wasn't as good on grass past 2001).
9 - Nalbandian (wasn't that great on grass outside maybe 2002).
10 - Gaudio (not a great grass player AGAIN).

So who out of them would beat him besides Fed who is on the other side of the draw? Not his fault they lost earlier.

You wrote it. The top10 were terrible on grass, so he had an easy way to the final.

 

[Deleted member 757377]

Yeah.

Roddick went something ridiculous like 32-3 in 2003-1005 on grass with all 3 losses being to Fed at Wimbledon. Didn't lose to anyone else on grass between 2002 and 2006.

Like show me any player who goes 32-0 vs the field - one player on a surface who hasn't won a Slam on that surface.

It's as high as Fed's best streak vs non Nadal on clay.

1 win out of 32 were over top10.

And you can't look at one 3 weeks surface only. On hardcourt Roddick was nothing special, on clay terrible. Far from a real champion overall.