A Federer fan and a Djokovic fan rewatch the 2009 Wimbledon final

[Third Serve]

So it’s no secret that the 2009 Wimbledon final between Federer and Roddick (yes, another Roddick thread) has gained somewhat of a controversial reputation around here, at least in the past year or so. Some hail it as one of the greatest matches of all time, others label it a glorified servefest. Whichever opinion one holds seems to be contingent on which fanbase they belong to. @The Guru and I felt that it was about time for a rewatch of the entire match and so we did exactly that and compiled a bunch of notes on the final. Our opinions of the match differ in some respects as he’s a Djokovic fan and I’m a Federer fan but I like to think this was a pretty honest and genuine way of approaching the match and I hope our analyses will lead to some interesting discussion on its merits and faults. We wrote a lot, though, so I understand it’s a tricky read. If you want to watch the final for yourselves, it’s available in full on the Wimbledon YouTube channel. Without further ado…

Third Serve’s Analysis:


Overall Summary:

This match hangs on two distinct aspects: the serve-return complex and the big points. Everything else comes secondary, and not by a short distance either. That's not to say that things like forehands, backhands, movement, and volleys are unimportant here but much greater emphasis than usual is placed on those first two areas of the game. A part of it is because of the surface (which, to my eyes, seems a little quicker than 2007 or 2008) but part of it comes down to the players themselves.

Let's get the obvious out of the way first. Both players serve very well. This is one of Federer's finer serving performances at Wimbledon. He bangs down aces and unreturnables at a high frequency, his serve percentage is pretty good (64% for the match), his placement is solid, his second serving is even weapon-level strong most of the time, and he still keeps the double faults low. But while Federer serves great, Roddick serves amazingly. He serves at 70% which is a stunningly high number by anyone's standards. One might think Andy took a little bit off the serve to get his numbers up that high; he most certainly doesn't. Roddick's first serves regularly hit the 130mph mark and a not insignificant number of them cross 140... even his second serves clock in at the 110s. Good placement on them too.

In fact, let's talk about the placement for a second because it partly explains a curious statistic: Fed's ahead in the ace tally by a massive margin, 51 to 27. I mean, he does serve well, but on that shot alone, Roddick clearly does better. So why are the ace counts the way they are? Part of it has to do with the placement of the serves from both players. Fed goes out wide or down the T roughly an equal number of times, and he does so well that it's often tricky to get a racket on them. On the other side, Roddick employs a relatively high proportion of body serves--he hits about as many of those as he does wide serves, just looking at the numbers. About midway through the second set, my feed pulled up a graphic showing that Roddick did change his serving patterns from the 2004 final. There, he went wide most of the time, but here there are far more body or T serves. Fed does get his racket on these body serves (of course) but they either go unreturned or they extract weak responses for Roddick to punish. This explains the ace differential a little bit.

The other thing that explains it is that Roddick does not return well at all. Granted, he's up against a tough serve and anyone would struggle with that, but let's just say that Roddick was dealt a bad hand here and played it meekly. Fed's serve is a little closer to the mortal realm than Roddick's and a decent portion of his serves are at the very least returnable. Still, even when it's those serves that come into play, Roddick hits a high number of return errors, many of them very clearly unforced. There's also a good bit of what I'm inclined to think is tanking on the return. Once down 30-0 or 40-0, Roddick occasionally just stops trying to go for it and lets aces slip by. He's not a natural returner in the first place but I will say it's a little disheartening to see how that part of his game has fallen from the balls-to-the-wall second serve returning he put up in the 2004 final. This won't be the last comparison to that match. One more thing is that Roddick doesn't move very much on the return. Fed at least glides around the court somewhat to line himself into position and give himself a puncher's chance at returning the serve, but Roddick's feet are essentially cinder blocks a good majority of the time.

Fed doesn't return super well either. Unlike Roddick's which is decidedly below par, however, Fed's return is just pretty average. He's up against legitimately GOAT-tier serving which has to factor into the analysis and given that, in a vacuum he doesn't return badly: there's just some room for work. It's a little bit better than I remembered but not by much. I am pretty confident now that the returning he displayed in this final was at least a half-step up from that in the previous year's final, though. It's mostly due to the significantly fewer F-ups on the second serve.

Now I say "in a vacuum" because by Fed's personal standards this is a bad returning-the-Roddick-serve day. Throughout his career, Fed possessed a truly uncanny ability to read Roddick's serve in a manner that I don't think anyone except maybe a peak Djokovic (and we never really saw Roddick vs. Djokovic peak to peak so even this is unproven) could equal. It didn't really matter whenever Roddick had a good serving day (2004 final) or a not-so-good one (2003 semifinal). Fed would consistently return his serve back with interest and neutralize much of the advantage Roddick was supposed to have obtained. Here, though, it seems like he's forgotten his magic. Of course, Roddick is serving at pretty much his absolute best here, a step over their previous encounters at Wimbledon, but the difference is not so significant as to excuse Fed not breaking Andy's serve all the way up until the penultimate game of the match. One does wonder if Roddick's change in serving pattern had to do with some of it, though, given the graph from earlier.

Speaking of breaks, what's up with Roddick breaking the Federer serve twice in two separate sets? He was supposed to have the worse return, correct? Well, that is undeniably true, but what's also true is that Roddick plays a clutch match on the whole. With one infamous exception, he takes his opportunities wherever he finds them, so if Fed slips up just a little bit during his service games, Roddick almost invariably pounces. On the reverse side, whenever Roddick has the rare prolonged service game, he weathers the storm with perfect, clutch serving and denies Fed a break (there's a small bit of Fed making errors in those moments but the outcome is mostly on Roddick). Even the one break he does surrender at the end comes down not to mentality but to stamina. Were it not for Roddick absolutely bombing serves down throughout the whole ordeal and playing the big points well, this match would likely have been a straightforward (something like the 2006 US Open final I imagine) win for Fed... because aside from those two things, Fed leads Roddick in pretty much every aspect of the game, and not by small margins either.

 

[Third Serve]

The baseline play, whenever it's given the opportunity to feature, is mostly decent stuff. It's a clear step down from the brilliant shotmaking of the 2007 and 2008 finals but I think it's still solid enough and it features a few nice shots and rallies. There are some clear wrinkles, though. Let's get those out of the way first.

The most obvious one to me is that Roddick's BH is the clear weak link of the four groundstrokes on show, with some caveats which we'll get to in a second. Fed's slices continue to work it over all match and Andy makes some fairly cheap errors on that wing all the way from the first to the fifth set. Curiously enough, though, the Roddick BH also happens to be maybe the clutchest single shot of the match. When a big point occurs (and by that I mean any time one of the two serves gets remotely close to being broken), Roddick hits some legit zingers off the BH wing and especially on the pass. This is what probably leads people to view this as one of his best BH showings when I don't think this is quite the case except for the big points. But it is true that the big points were particularly big in this match so I can understand having a more positive rating of the shot based on that. On average, though, Roddick's BH is not good at all.

Federer's backhand doesn't have a lot of time to shine here and frankly I can't remember any particularly memorable shots off of that wing. At the same time, I don't recall it being weak either. Essentially, it does what it's supposed to do and not much more than that. Holds steady in the rallies and Fed effectively uses the slice to draw errors from Roddick (although I'd say those errors are generally more on Roddick than on Fed). Not much to add.

This is a good showing from Roddick on the forehand. It's not quite the elite weapon it was in 2003 or 2004, but he keeps the errors low for the most part and feels quite comfortable trading blows with Federer's forehand. His problem lies in generating consistent offense. It's a strong forehand, but just barely below weapon-level strong and this is a general issue with Roddick's post-2004 gameplan. He's trying too hard to be a counterpuncher when that just isn't his natural style of play. Still, for not being his best gameplan, it's still pretty decent and he makes some good rallies with the forehand. It just needs that extra power.

Federer's forehand is by far the best groundstroke of the match. He dictates play pretty well with it and lands some nice point-finishers in addition. A good chunk of Roddick's forehand winners come from putaways or serve+1s while Fed manages those and also plenty of winners off of neutral rally shots. A solid showing on the whole. However, in the context of Fed's other forehand displays in this era, he's a little reserved. He uses the forehand more to work over Roddick's game and pressure the American into errors rather than by painting the lines. In other words, safer tennis. When he does go for the kill, however, he's very effective. I can't recall very many occasions on which he goes for one of his trademark Federerian winners and messes up. Smart play on the forehand from him, I have to say, but given how different it is from his norm I wonder why he opted for it this time around. It's not like his typical aggressive tennis isn't already effective at dealing with even a good Roddick's game, as we've seen numerous times.

At the net, Roddick suffers from the usual post-2005 problem of picking the wrong times to approach. Here, he does it often to Fed's forehand which leads to passes much of the time. As far as his actual net game goes, though, he's pretty decent... again, with one notable exception. Fed on the other hand doesn't go up to net often which is fairly unusual for his Wimbledon matches against Roddick. I assume he feels comfortable enough from the back of the court, so fair enough. Once he's in the forecourt, though, he manages okay but Roddick's passing is brilliant. Either way, the net game is really not all that important in this match.

Stamina plays its part in how the match turns out. Fed does well on this front, Roddick not so much by the end of the fifth set. It's why he surrenders the crucial break and the match there.

 

[Third Serve]

First Set: 5-7
Roddick Comes in Clutch

TL;DR: This set has some of the finest two-way serving I've ever seen.

Fed serves at around his best for the match (only matched by set three) with a very sexy 72.4% first serve percentage. Absolutely beautiful stuff, and those serves aren't soft by any means. Even many of his second serves do real damage. But however well Federer serves, Roddick thoroughly outclasses him with an almost unheard of 77.5% first serve percentage. This is amazing given how hard he bombs down those serves. Plenty in the 140mph range which is nearly unreturnable. And his second serves, which are definitely stronger than Federer's, are also deadly. He hits no double faults too. Simply marvelous stuff.

Fed returns about as well as one could realistically hope to return against that serve. Not many complaints here. Given the quality of Roddick's serve, he's left to just praying for a dip in Andy's level to break.

And that does almost happen. For the first ten games, it's easy holds all around--understandable. On the eleventh, though, with Roddick serving at 5-5, Fed gets several chances to break. This happens because Fed's able to string just a few decent returns together and Roddick chucks in a couple of UFEs. Some of the break points he obtains, though, are seized with good baseline play of his own. When he starts facing those crucial points, though, Roddick puts up some very clutch serving and eliminates all but one of Federer's chances with huge serves. The last one I speak of is a putaway forehand into the open court that Federer surprisingly misses after wresting control of the rally. It's the type of shot he rarely misses, and I've spoken before in this thread about how Fed hardly ever messes up when attempting winners like this one throughout this match. If that ball lands an inch away from its true destination, this set almost certainly turns out to be 7-5 Federer. But it is what it is and Roddick holds with a few more excellent serves.

A tiebreak would be all too fitting for this type of set. So why does Roddick of all people end up breaking serve at the end to win? Well, like Fed in the previous game, he strings together a few decent returns, plays some solid points (including an incredible forehand on the run), Fed makes a couple of iffy errors... while Fed had four break points in the previous game, though, Roddick has just the one and he takes it with an impressive backhand down the line that forces an error from Fed's forehand. I give him full marks for the clutch play in this set. Fed's probably the slightly better player overall, but Roddick takes his opportunities where he finds them and also keeps the Swiss from returning the favor. A fine set all in all.

Second Set: 7-6
Server Versus Baseliner

This set is a bit of a step down from the first. Not necessarily from Roddick: he serves just as good as (and possibly even better than) in the first set which is really quite shocking. His first serve percentage is 78.9% and you'd be hard-pressed to find better stats from any of the great servers in a big stage like this. Most of the dipping is done by Federer whose serve is at its worst in the match. It's still very solid but he serves better in other parts of the match and I'd say here it's more like a good serve than an amazing serve. Some discredit to Roddick's return game for failing to reach a break opportunity, but Federer's struggles on the return are much more understandable given the quality of the serves he's up against.

For much of the set, Roddick's first serve percentage is even better than that 78.9% number suggests. I had to look back at the point-by-point description on Tennis Abstract to confirm this but up until the tiebreak, Roddick misses all of six first serves. This is important to remember later.

I didn't get a chance to talk about the baseline action (aside from the last two games) in the previous set because the overwhelming serving left precious little room for it. Here, because Federer's serve is "down", speaking relatively, we get to see a few more rallies on his service games. They're mostly decent stuff, but Roddick's backhand proves a liability here. A few rallies have the makings of great points but are sometimes interrupted by neutral errors from Roddick's side. Here, Fed gets to demonstrate his comfortable baseline supremacy which is why he still holds quite easily even though his serve is more returnable than in the previous set. Between Andy's monster serving and Roger's solidity off the baseline, the set is about even until the tiebreak which probably deserves its own section for three reasons: because of its iconic status, because it's perhaps the most intriguing part of the match, and because the actual tennis takes a noticeable departure from the trends seen throughout the rest of the set.

Second Set Tiebreak:
Equal Parts Clutch and Choke

When I first saw this match I definitely came away with the impression that Roddick choked the heck out of this tiebreak. On subsequent viewings of the tiebreak, however, I've come to emphasize Federer's clutchness more than any choking Roddick may have made. On this most recent rewatch, though, it seems clear to me now that both aspects came into play in roughly equal amounts. Held at gunpoint, I'd probably give slightly more credit to Federer for clutching it out than discredit to Roddick for choking but it doesn't do much good to downplay either factor.

Let's start with how Roddick got to an impressively dominant 6-2 lead in the first place. That there is kind of surprising to me given his struggles against Federer's serve and baseline game all set.

Dominant serves keep Roddick safe from mini-breaks while a bad forehand error from Federer leaves him down one to start the breaker. The second mini-break Roddick obtains is won with, I kid you not, a Djokovic-like backhand down the line that draws the error. Yet another example of the Roddick backhand drastically improving in the big points.

At 6-2, Fed seizes one of the mini-breaks back with an even better backhand, this time a deft half-volley winner off of a hard-hit forehand from Roddick. If I were nitpicking I'd say Roddick goofed a little with the short slice he hit earlier in the rally but it doesn't really amount to a choke and Fed deserves a ton of credit for taking the point. Couple more great serves bring it to 6-5, Roddick serving.

Here, Roddick hits a rare fault. Yes, it's big news that he hits a fault because he had very rarely been hitting them all set. And then, in the next point, he hits another fault. Two second serves in a row. These wouldn't stick out if it was any other player serving, but given Roddick's impeccable record throughout the rest of the first two sets, this is not really the best time to be hitting them, no?

Still, in the first point, the second serve is pretty hefty and tilts the point firmly in Roddick's advantage. Fed mishits a forehand, it loops up and there's some weird spin on it, then Roddick reaches up high for the backhand volley and completely botches it. It's not exactly the easiest volley to put away, sure, but it's one that I would expect Roddick to make far more often than not. Now, if we want to compare shots, I think Fed's forehand error on break point in the first set was a worse miss, but that's just me.

Second point also begins with a second serve, but it's a really good second serve to Roddick's credit. Andy manages well in this point but makes a questionable approach, doesn't cover the net well, and gets burned by a Federer backhand pass to give the Swiss a mini-break lead. Fed consolidates that lead and steals the set.

Fed plays a solid tiebreak overall with some clutch serving and some nice shots like the backhand half-volley winner. But Roddick does also choke this a fair bit with the first serve briefly abandoning him and the dubious net play. It's really the only instance of his choking throughout the whole match. It would have to be, seeing as he made it all the way to 16-14 in the fifth despite being outplayed in almost every department.

 

[Third Serve]

Third Set: 7-6
Thoroughly Outplayed, Yet a Tiebreak

I think this is the only set in the match where I can really say that Fed outserves Roddick. And that's because Fed's serve rebounds to its first set level while Roddick's hits its low point for the match. Again, I should emphasize that in no way does Roddick's serve even come close to bad, but here it's just at its least amazing. A clear drop-off from the otherworldly serving of the first two sets, I'd say. He doesn't make anywhere near as many first serves and I think (but I can't substantiate this claim) that he takes a little bit of the mph off of the shot. Tricky to prove this for sure but that's just the impression I have. He's still clocking 120+ most of the time.

In fact, as a whole, I think this is the set where Federer most clearly outplays Roddick. He serves a bit better, he returns better, he's better at the baseline, etc. Probably his best set as well. On serve, he loses just two points before going into the tiebreak.

In the end, though, it comes down to a tiebreak because Federer's lead over Roddick, while clear, is not enough to guarantee him a break. I think his still average (not bad) return can be blamed for this. He does get an opportunity, though, and that comes about five games in. Roddick bangs down a hefty first serve to eliminate the threat and throws in a couple of nice points at the net to hold. Full credit to Andy for this one, no shame in Roger not breaking here on this particular instance. I'd say this is one of the higher-quality games of the match (it's the 2-3 game btw).

Not much to say about the rest of the set that distinguishes it from the other two. It's a decent one, about as good as set two, not quite at the level of set one. The tiebreak is mainly a continuation of the play we see throughout the rest of the set but at a higher standard of play. Fed makes some good returns and comes up with nice shots, Roddick coughs in an error or two, and he's down 5-1. Some inspired tennis helps him close the gap somewhat but not enough to steal both mini-breaks back. Fed wins it 7-5. Good tiebreak overall, probably better than the one in the second set.

Fourth Set: 3-6
The Serves Step Down a Bit

The fourth set is probably the least servebotty set of the bunch. Both players' serves, while still great, fall short of the nearly unbreakable quality that dominated much of the first three sets. As such, action shifts a little more to the return and the baseline game. I think it's fitting, then, that the scoreline ends up being 6-3. It's the fact that it's 6-3 Roddick that makes it interesting.

The exact baseline action in question is kinda meh. It's worse than in the first three sets (though our sample size for those sets is a little smaller) and the errors start creeping in a bit. First few games are quite ugly. Action does pick up a bit midway through the set, though, and some legit good points occur, but what does remain constant is that the returning isn't good. I noticed several instances of the players struggling against second serves (which, while damaging given the quality of the servers, are generally at least returnable). Still, this set ends in a break and it's Roddick who manages it. How exactly does that happen for the second time this match?

Well, in the 1-2 game, Federer serving, the Swiss chucks in a few questionable points (one bad slice error and another point lost because of a forehand mishit that tilts the point to Roddick's favor) quickly bring him down 15-40. He saves one of them with an ace. But then Roddick yet again brings his backhand up a notch and hits two good passing attempts on that wing to force an error from Federer at the net. It really is remarkable how much better the Roddick backhand gets on crucial points as opposed to the whole rest of the match. By far, it's the thing that sticks out the most to me on this rewatch.

Federer's service games go back to being easy holds, while Roddick's routinely go to 30 and even deuce on one occasion. Play definitely picks up a bit after the rough initial games and there's a nice rally at 4-2 deuce which Roddick wins by forcing an error. Still, though he makes some inroads on return, Fed can't even reach a break point and so Roddick serves it out. We're heading into the fifth set here and Federer has yet to break the Roddick serve. From the man who used to be able to read that serve like a book, this seems ominous. I can't really blame him for not breaking Roddick in sets one and two, but Andy's serve did dip just a little bit in sets three and four and I would expect Fed to at least grab one. Not a huge black mark, but definitely some discredit to his returning.

Fifth Set: 16-14
Serves and Stamina

Stamina is ultimately what decides this set and the match, largely because the players are nearly dead even throughout. To their credit, they do beef up their serves again for the decider... Roddick hits an impressive and hard-to-break 74% first serve percentage. Unlike in the first two sets, though, he does take a little bit of speed off the shot to get that high number but it's still quite fast. Strong serving from him. Federer's serve is clearly the weaker of the two but it holds up quite well and it's better than in the fourth set. Should note that as the set goes on, the serving--as well as most other aspects of these players' games--deteriorates. With the exception of Roddick's returning, it doesn't ever reach "bad," but the decline is noticeable.

Fed starts the set brightly with a break opportunity gained by a beautiful backhand half-volley pass that clips the net cord. Roddick saves it with an unreturnable first serve and serves the game out. Simple stuff.

It's pretty much easy holds for the next twelve or so games. At times, Roddick even straight-up tanks returns when already down 30-0 or 40-0, almost certainly in an attempt to conserve energy. This set is where Federer's ace count really flies away from Roddick's, and the languid returning from the American is much to blame for this. The tennis is at least decent which is a welcome change from the fifth set of the 2019 Wimbledon final (the other notable match I recently rewatched)... but it doesn't ever reach beyond decent except in one-point bursts. That is, outside of one great game.

Skip ahead to 8-8. Here, Roddick plays several great returns and wins some nice points, ultimately gaining two break points with an incredible--you guessed it--backhand winner. Unfortunately, there's nothing he can do about the two excellent first serves Federer bangs down to save them both. There is some room for improvement on the next two points though. First, he misses a fairly returnable first serve. Second, he hits a slice approach shot that bounces long--a UFE. Still, it was a nice effort from him to get to that position.

Rest of the set continues like the first half, but with a lower overall quality, again wrought by fatigue.

This whole fifth set is a test of endurance: who will break down first? Roddick's stamina ultimately lets him down at the end of the match and he becomes essentially an error machine while Federer holds steady and consolidates to break the Roddick serve for the first and only time in the entire four-hour final at 14-14. There's nothing he does particularly outstanding: all six of the points he wins are won with neutral unforced errors from Roddick, some of them dreadful. Match does end on a whimper.

So what do I think of the match?

I think it's good on the whole, unlike the 2019 Wimbledon final (again, I bring this match up because it's the other one I've rewatched most recently). But it falls short of truly great. There's a question as to whether the excellent serving makes up for the good but somewhat spotty rest of the action, and that's the question upon which the debate over this match's quality rests.

For much of the first three sets, it absolutely does. The first set in particular features some of the finest two-way serving I've ever seen, and the next two, while generally contained to one of the two players, are still great on the serving front. The fourth set is a definite dip, though, and while the fifth set features generally better serving (at least at the start) it falls a bit short of the first half of the match.

The way I'd categorize the sets (just like I did for the 2019 final) would look like this:

Great first set, good second and third sets, meh fourth and fifth sets. The second half of the prolonged fifth set dips dangerously close to ugly.

Again, I'd say it's a good match on the whole, but it hits its peak early on and then slowly declines, a bit like both players' serves. Certainly a worse match than the immediately preceding 2007 and 2008 finals. Also worse than the (excellent) 2004 final in which Roddick also gave Federer a good fight. But it's not a bad match at all.

 

[Russeljones]

I almost didn't read this as I have been thinking about watching the match again. All in all a decent tactical analysis. One thing that I think Federer had that he might not have had 5 years earlier, was better serve disguise. It all came together for him in a cruel and beautiful way to deny a tremendous Andy. Absolute classic.

 

[StrongRule]

I see you decided to start a new career recently. Maybe you should also try to publish real articles.

 

[The Guru]

The Guru's write-up:

Match Summary:
The 2009 Wimbledon Final was a match that was completely dominated by the server. So much so that despite Federer being the better player in play for the vast majority of the match it doesn't really help him much in terms of giving him opportunities to win the match. Fed gets 4 games where he has a BP chance Roddick 3. That's 7 games out of 75 where a BP chance is created. And that's appropriate. Deuce games are rare and nearly half of all serves don't come back. In short despite the fact that Federer does pretty much everything except serve better than Roddick all that doesn't add up to enough to give him an appreciable advantage over him in this match. This match was decided on the margins and in the big points and while historically that has been a disaster for Roddick against Federer in this match he holds up. While Fed does get the better of him just barely in the big points Roddick holds his own and plays many great points in big spots. He also throws in just enough clunkers to end up on the wrong side of things here. Though as we'll get into things could've easily swung the other way.

Match Overview:

I'm gonna start by covering the in play dynamics then move on to the serve-return complex.

Roddick's game plan in play was to get to the net if possible and do whatever he could possibly do to not hit a backhand if he couldn't. I was surprised initially by this as you often here about how good the Roddick BH was in this match (and there's a reason that impression sticks in the mind I'll get to that in a minute) rest assured it was not. In fact it took me a little while to realize this but Roddick almost never attacked with forehands down the line just to avoid the eventual BH CC reply from Federer where now he would have to move and hit a backhand. He does hit a couple early and gets a slice or rolled BH reply cross court which Roddick then followed with a miss and he almost never does it the rest of the match. Roddick probably hit less than 10 attacking forehands down the line in the whole match. And this was a looong match. Instead the vast majority of Roddick's offense from the back of the court was directed at Federer's forehand. Yes you read that right Roddick's strategy was to attack the Federer forehand with forehands cross court and the occasional backhand down the line. Even when he worked himself into an inverted court position he would largely choose to hit inside in FHs again attacking the Federer forehand instead of going inside out to the Federer BH. Again this seemed to be because he favored getting the CC reply so he would have another FH.

Even weirder is that this strategy also bled into his approach shots. While more diverse in his attacking to the net again the majority of his approaches were hit to the Federer FH despite actually having a lot of success when approaching the Federer BH. I have no explanation for this. Perhaps his gameplan from the back caused his brain to go on autopilot and stick to the same approach for his approaches but it really is a curious decision. Considering how average his volley is this could've and probably should've gone much worse for him. For the most part he gets away with it as Fed does not have his best day with the passes though not bad either. He does pretty well at the net and it's a fairly reliable way for him to finish points for most of the match.

In this match Roddick's FH is largely very solid. Not a lot of UEs but not doing much damage either. From a consistency point of view his FH actually stands up to Federer's. He does a reasonable job trading and for most of the match doesn't offer up many attackable balls or cheap errors. His FH lacks the bite of his younger years and as a result he struggles to generate consistent offense but it's also clearly not a weakness. The pushdick moniker is harsh but fair. Again it's the Roddick BH that absolutely kills him in play and it's the only groundstroke that I would say was truly bad in this match. It doesn't take much to coax an error out of this side. Federer gets the better of BH to BH exchanges largely due to ineffectiveness of the Roddick BH rather than the quality of the Federer BH. Roddick struggles mightily with the CC BH slice (at times even completely changing his swing technique to try to avoid an error) and BH to BH rallies are sure to turn into Federer forehand's very quickly. Mild inside out FHs were often enough to draw an error and this really hamstrung Roddick in play. Roddick's gameplan was to stay as solid as possible from the back but with his BH constantly leaking Federer held a massive edge once a point got to neutral. Roddick had success driving the BH CC into the Fed BH which would often be enough to get the error but obviously he does not have the BH to consistently do that however it does make it even more curious that he chose to direct so much of his offense at the Federer FH. It seemed to me that Fed's shot tolerance of the BH was merely ok but it was tested so infrequently that it was never a problem. Which brings me to Federer's in play game plan.

Unlike Roddick, Federer did not often look to get to the net and surprisingly that's largely a credit to Roddick who passed outstandingly well throughout the match especially off (again surprise) the BH wing. This great BH passing from Roddick is one of the two reasons I think his BH is called good in this match. He hits a few great winners from defensive positions that stick in the mind. More on the other reason later. Anyway, as a result as the match went on Federer only looked to go forward in obvious situations or as an occasional mix up.

The other reason he didn't press to go forward as much as he normally does was he clearly had the better of things from the back of the court. The Federer FH is best described as solid. Federer outside out of a couple contained periods of the match he really was not looking to dominate with his FH. More on that later. For the most part, he was content to trade making safe shots and wait for the error or short ball from the Roddick BH. A critic would say that Fed was missing too much when he tried to dictate early so he went away from that because he didn't have his FH that day and didn't want to risk errors in big moments given the tightness of the match. A more generous interpretation would be that Fed realized that his contained baselining was good enough to give him the edge in play so he just decided not to risk errors going for his FH. The truth is it's probably some of both, but, in my opinion, it's mostly the former. On the BH side again Fed was just looking to be solid and while he was obviously not as good off that wing as his FH for the majority of the match he achieved that. This is not a Fed "bad BH" match. He keeps the errors manageable and does damage with the slice. Solid stuff. However, this could largely be a product of Roddick's confusing game plan.

Historically a lot of players have had success either hitting hard into the Federer BH or grinding down the Fed BH (the Nadal game plan of locking him in BH jail). Part of what makes this strategy effective is that Federer has to adjust his court positioning to protect his BH giving opponents an opening and causing a much higher share of the forehands he hits to be on the run. Federer had no such problem in this match. He was able to be in position with his feet set for most of his forehands and as a result mainly was able to make his next ball (wherever it was) a forehand. On the rare occasion Roddick was able to actually attack the Federer BH it worked pretty well but it didn't happen nearly enough for it to be a concern for Federer.

In sum Federer clearly has the better of the points in play but the points in play are decidedly mediocre which gets us to the meat and potatoes of this match. The serve-return battle. This is where the real controversy of this match takes place. The case for this as a great classic match is essentially that the serving was so good even compared to all time standards that the in play stuff doesn't really matter and the quality of the match is evident in its brilliant serving. There's a case to be made for this. Both men serve at a very high level and are dominant on their respective serves. Again we see 3 breaks out of 75 service games. This is also a very challenging thing to evaluate. A few inches over, a little more RPM, a couple extra MPH make a huge difference in the effectiveness of a serve. I'm only human there's only so much accuracy I can have evaluating how well placed and how hard and with how much spin these serves that are flying over 100 miles an hour actually are. Not to mention how challenging it is to try to pay attention to all of those things for every serve in a 4+ hour match that I was watching for the 3rd time. This is the part of my analysis where I have the lowest level of confidence but I do have my impressions that I will mostly go over in the set by set breakdown. Briefly, in sum, there are parts of the match where the serving lives up to the hype and there are parts where it does not. At no point in the match is the serving less than good but I'm expecting it to reach a higher standard than just good, keep that in mind. In my opinion, great serving is not the only big story here subpar returning is also a big story of this match.

 

[The Guru]

(cont)
On that note, it's clear that at no point during the match does Roddick have a read on the Federer serve. This combined with his not exactly quick twitch movement makes him late to a lot of serves. There are a few cases of wide serves that land in the middle of the box flying by him for aces. Despite no results vs the Fed first serve Roddick never guesses to give himself a better chance as for some reason he's content with his 12% of return points vs the Federer first serve. Even the Federer second serve does damage as the average second serve return (that comes back) leaves Federer squarely in advantage. Federer's second serve is solid but shouldn't be damaging especially given how predictably it goes to the Roddick BH. Again Roddick never looks to shake things up and run around to attack with a FH, content to start most second serve points in disadvantage. Despite Roddick having the bigger serve (average 127 to 118) Federer ends up with almost double the amount of aces. As I said this is a discredit to Roddick's movement but it's also a credit to Federer's movement on return. The fact that Roddick goes for raw power over spot serving and attacks the body more both also play a role but generally Federer does a better job of getting into position for returns. His results after though are spotty which is something I'll elaborate on in the set by set breakdown. Versus the second serve Federer's returns are mostly solid. He's not doing damage and more often than not his returns are not quite neutralizing but Roddick fires big second serves and unlike Fed his second serve is truly weapon level so with that considered he's doing well enough. Federer's average reply is a floating slice return which generally Roddick struggles to produce big much offense off of. Fed does enough on second serve return to get into most points and as discussed if he's in the point he's got the advantage on winning it. Now on to the set by set breakdown.

Set 1:

In my opinion this is the best set of the match from both men. Roddick is bombing the serve and making the vast majority of them and Fed returns about as well as can be expected. Federer also has the first serve going and they both hold with ease up until 5 all. Roddick (the server) starts off the game with a couple errors. A couple big first serves and a long rally where Federer teases the error out of the Roddick BH brings it to BP. Fed probably sensing his moment starts one of the two periods in the match where he lets his forehand go. Some solid back and forth ensues including a couple Fed second serve returns on BP that float just a touch long but the most notable thing for the rest of the match is Fed's FH he hits some good ones including an awesome inside in winner but he misses a FHDTL winner attempt on BP and an attacking inside in on deuce and Roddick goes on to hold saving 4 BPs. Next game Roddick hits his shot of the match on a running FH CC winner from way off the court to get it to 15-15. Fed follows with another missed FHDTL winner attempt 15-30. Ace 30-30. Next point Fed makes the first serve and gets an attackable return which he answers with a BHDTL which Roddick defends with a FH slice. Roger looks to attack the resulting FH (again down the line) and come in but gets it wrong and backs off. Roddick sends the reply BH CC and Roger off balance retreating misses the BH slice. Set point Roddick. Remember how I said there were two reasons the Roddick BH leaves the impression of being good. Well this is the other one. He hits his best ones in the biggest moments. Roddick drives the 4th ball BHDTL and forces a Fed FH error. Great game from Roddick to take set 1. Fed after this moment decides to put the aggressive dominating FH back in his bag presumably deciding that in a match with this small of margins the risk of a few errors was too great especially considering the success he was having just staying solid.

Set 2:

We see a dip from both men in this set and Federer especially is there to be had. This was Roddick's best chance where his serving was still top notch and Federer wobbled but he couldn't get it done. The serving from Roddick in this set is awesome. Like the 1st set he's hitting his spots and barely missing serves and it's still early in the match so all his power and spin is still there. He's really in quite the groove. Federer however is all out of sorts. Federer's returning dips not that it much matters considering Roddick is serving out of his mind so a break would've been taken perfection. More concerningly his serving craters and worse it's the only period of the match where Roddick actually has the initiative in play and this is largely due to the passivity of Federer. In all other periods of the match Roddick is relegated to mostly counter punching but here the points are mostly on his racquet for better or for worse. And unfortunately for Roddick it's not enough for better and too much for worse for him to get a break or even a break point. Roddick's second serve returning really let's him down. If Roddick could return at his first set level there's a real chance he gets the break here. If Roddick could return at his 04 level with the way he attacked second serves he certainly gets a break here. He doesn't and we're on to the infamous 2nd set tiebreaker. The TB continues as the set has been to 6-2. Roddick is serving like a beast and Federer is not his usual self (Roddick also has good BH in a big moment number 2 to get to 5-1). The question often asked about this moment is did Roddick choke or did Federer just up his level. The answer is both. Roddick plays a good point at 6-2 (though small nitpick he should've gotten around for a first ball FH instead of slicing to the Fed FH) but Fed plays an ever better one ending with a beautiful BH winner. Two good first serves and it's 6-5. This is the start of the slow decline of Roddick's serving and general game through the rest of the match. To this point he's barely missed a first serve and he's played all the big points well. He misses the first serve and loses the point on the infamous BH volley error. Misses the next first serve loses that point too. A BH unforced error and from 6-2 SP to go up 2-0 its now 8-6 Fed 1 all. Credit to Fed for stepping up when he needed to but still a choke from Roddick.

 

[The Guru]

Set 3:
Now that he's stolen the second set Federer decides now is a good time to pull his pants up and play better tennis. He serves much better and regains control of the points in play. At this point a better Federer has probably broken Roddick but no breaks through the first two sets considering Roddick's serving is far from embarrassing. Now that starts to change. Roddick is still serving well, obviously, but his serving has dipped from monstrous to returnable. It's certainly no longer all time outlier level good. He misses the most serves he'll miss in any set this match and his serve starts to lose a bit of its bite. He should've managed a break in this set. He doesn't. Luckily he's still clearly the better player in this set. And he holds with ease all set long partially due to improved serving on his end but also due to some pretty woeful returning on Roddick's end particularly off the second serve. A break would've been tough to manage but Roddick wins 2 points on Fed's serve before the TB. That's rough. Fed plays a clean mistake free Djokovic 2019 esque TB. He sticks to the being solid gameplan doesn't take risks builds a 5-1 lead and closes it out 7-5. If Roddick had won this set it would've been a robbery. A just outcome that Fed won as he was the clear better player throughout.

Set 4:

This is another set where Federer should break. Roddick's serving is still on that steady decline and like Set 3 the percentage isn't as great as the 1st two sets. To Roddick's credit after a two set period where his return was nowhere to be found he returns alright again in set 4. Though the break was largely a gift Roddick does his part and again comes up with a clutch BH in a big spot hitting a nice second pass at 30-40 BP. Down a break in the 4th Federer enters the second period where he lets his forehand go this time to better results. I assume since he's down a break he decided he could play with more freedom. Roddick does a good job holding on so it's not enough to get the break and the aggressive Fed FH goes away permanently (outside of the odd lashing every few games) for the 5th set.

Set 5:

This set is pretty rough. You know how I said both guys plan was just to stay as solid as possible from the baseline. In this set they barely manage that. In play this is the worst it gets. Roddick is tired. The net has been his main source of offense and he almost never gets to it. While he makes a high percentage his serves are the weakest they get and get weaker as the set goes on. Federer's serve is also no longer as good but he manages his highest ace % because Roddick goes from slow footed on return to statuesque. Wonder why Fed has such a huge ace advantage? Check out serves like the 7-7 40-15 ace from Fed. Federer should be absolutely dominating in play but his game also takes a dive. His groundies and return are the worst they get and it's still enough for him to be the solidly better player. There's a brief reprieve from the crapfest in the middle of the set where out of nowhere there is some genuine unmistakable high quality stuff including some great return points from Roddick with yet more clutch BHs to get BPs but Federer saves them with great serves and quickly it's back to the crapfest. Instead of some good returning it's only pure exhaustion on Roddick's end that ends the match. By the end Roddick is nothing but a serve but Federer can barely make enough returns to take advantage of it. It mercifully ends at 16-14 in the 5th on a game where every point Fed wins is a Roddick unforced error and every point Roddick wins is a missed Federer return. While the rest of the set isn't quite that bad it's a fitting end. Not getting a break in the first two sets was understandable, the next two sets questionable, this last set not getting one until it was gift wrapped is inexcusable. It's a big discredit in my eyes that Federer was never actually able to break Roddick he had to wait for him to be so tired that he broke himself.

Even as someone who was never a Roddick fan and was rooting for Federer at the time it's pretty heartbreaking to watch. Really hard not to feel for the guy with how close he came and especially knowing in retrospect this was his last chance. A monumental win for Federer to get the all time GS record. In sum, it's an ok match with some solid stuff from mainly at the start of the match but it's a far cry from the 04 final and a farther cry from the classic it's made out to be though I'm sure Third Serve (among others) will disagree. A more apt comparison would be the 2019 final where both guys had their ups and downs through the first 4 sets and then the 5th set was largely pretty rough. Thanks for reading I'm glad Third Serve agreed to do this with me hopefully it will start some fun discussion. I will probably only reply sparingly given the general toxicity of discussing this match especially when holding the viewpoint I do but anyone who wants to have good faith discussions about it can PM me and I'll respond.

Hope you all enjoyed!

The Guru

 

[InsuranceMan]

Quality content

 

[metsman]

I think the 5th set was the highest quality set of the match apart from the last 2-3 games or so. Yeah Roddick let a few aces go by, big deal. Fed's serve+1 was so strong that it would have been a waste of time to try on 40-0 or 40-15, and Roddick did make his push when he could, but he was denied. Both the 04 and 08 final had two sets worse than even the fourth set of this match (by play dynamic), but the base level of both guys was higher in 04 to make up for that. Can't quite say that in 08.

 

[jl809]

I really like this as a premise, nice job guys. These long reads with in depth analysis is nice to have on the site for sure and something missing from Reddit / MTF etc. Will check this out once I’ve had a chance to rewatch it myself

 

[RS]

No out of 10?

Good job lol

 

[abmk]

I stand by what I wrote while actually taking down the stats:

Comments :

1. 1st set, Federer was dominant on serve for the 1st 5 service games, losing only 3 points on serve till then. Roddick also held serve without too much trouble.
Then there was long Roddick service game where Federer had 4 BPs. Roddick survived , including one easy missed FH error from federer that should have been a winner. (I think Roddick saved the other 3 BPs with some clutch play)
Then Federer's level dips, Roddick plays an inspired game and breaks to get the set.

2. 2nd set, both hold comfortably till the TB. Roddick's best set serving wise. I think his serve% was close to 80 or slightly above in this set. Federer was slightly subdued on the return in this set.
TB, Roddick goes up 6-2 , Federer saves 3 SPs with a great BH half-volley flick, an unreturned serve and an ace. Then at 6-5, Roddick serving, Federer mishits the passing shot, Roddick is unsure of whether to hit it or leave it and ends up flubbing the volley. Federer then takes the next 2 points to win the TB 8-6 and complete a miraculous comeback.

3. 3rd set, both hold on till the TB. Roddick's 1st serve% dips to 56% in this set, but he's playing well enough off the ground to continue holding.
Federer plays a near perfect TB to win it 7-5.
he gets 2 mini-breaks with great play, roddick gets 1 back with great play of his own, but federer serves it out.

4. 4th set, Federer plays slightly loose and gets broken. He has 30 all, 15-30,0-30 in the last 3 service games of Roddick, but Roddick comes up with the goods and Federer is not able to come up with inspired play to cluster the points for a break.

5.Then we go onto the 5th and final set. Federer has a BP early on, but Roddick saves it with an unreturned serve.
Then Roddick has 2 BPs at 8 all, but Federer saves them both - with an uneturned serve and a swinging FH volley

6. Towards the end, from 12 all or so, Federer is holding serve comfortably and Roddick's service games are getting tougher.
Finally in the 30th game of the set, a game where Roddick gets 7/10 1st serves in, in the last 2 points, Federer dropshots a BH return and Roddick misses a makeable FH, then Federer drives his BH to force a mishit from the Roddick FH and clinches the match.


7. The W/UE stats for the Roddick BH are quite misleading. He forced quite a few errors from federer with BH.
Especially killed Federer with great BHs on almost every crucial point. (both the break points and one of the mini-breaks in the 2nd set TB)

8. Overall, Roddick won clearly less% of return points, but clustered them better to get the 2 breaks as compared to just 1 for Federer.
But honestly, Federer should've taken the 1st set with that easy FH and roddick should've taken the 2nd at 6-5 in the breaker with a volley.

[[[Federer return points won : 68/239 (28.45%), Roddick return points won : 42/197 (21.32%). Notice that Roddick had to serve 42 points more , with having to serve just one extra game ]]]]

9. The returning from both wasn't great, but they were better than what I remember seeing the 1st time live. The serving was just exceptional from both and the weather being hot helped make the conditions faster.


10. Overall, a prime performance from federer, not peak level, coz' returning was just decent, not as sharp as it used to be at his peak (& did not cluster them well) and some slightly sloppy play at crucial intervals. Still , great serving, moved well, hit his FH well (esp. in the 2nd half of the match), BH was working fine, came up with some amazing shots.

Roddick did almost everything well - serve, FH, BH, net play and was moving really well and really kept his cool. Only down point was slightly below par returning. But he truly gave it his all.

I think a factor in Roddick keeping Federer honest in this match he used the body serve really effectively (more so than in their other matches)


-----

11. And please,no, Roddick did NOT outplay federer from the ground. Federer still outplayed Roddick from the ground to some extent, just that the Roddick got closer than he had ever before (save maybe wimby 04) and stayed with him in the rallies.
This included some amazing BHs and unexpected hustling &retrieving.

Total points won :
Points :Federer : 223
Roddick : 213

All unreturned serves:

Federer : 89/197 (45.18%)
Roddick : 99/239 (41.42%)

4 DFs each

So points apart from on serve :

Federer = 223-93 = 130
Roddick = 213-103 = 110

 

[metsman]

10K or whatever words here and no mention of the playing surface?

It's hard to take people who talk about this match seriously when they wax poetic about the mug level on return and ground without bringing that up. Which isn't even true, yes, Roddick's standard of returning on average wasn't that great, but he was clutch enough to generate solid chances in 3 different sets, taking two. What's the excuse for GOAT returns Djokovic and Murray being completely schooled by old Federer's serve in 5 of those 8 sets in 2012?

 

[RS]

I might try this sometime.

Just need to find motivation lol.

 

[The Guru]

10K or whatever words here and no mention of the playing surface?

It's hard to take people who talk about this match seriously when they wax poetic about the mug level on return and ground without bringing that up. Which isn't even true, yes, Roddick's standard of returning on average wasn't that great, but he was clutch enough to generate solid chances in 3 different sets, taking two. What's the excuse for GOAT returns Djokovic and Murray being completely schooled by old Federer's serve in 5 of those 8 sets in 2012?

Thought you could figure that one out for yourself given it’s you know a Wimbledon final.

 

[abmk]

10K or whatever words here and no mention of the playing surface?

It's hard to take people who talk about this match seriously when they wax poetic about the mug level on return and ground without bringing that up. Which isn't even true, yes, Roddick's standard of returning on average wasn't that great, but he was clutch enough to generate solid chances in 3 different sets, taking two. What's the excuse for GOAT returns Djokovic and Murray being completely schooled by old Federer's serve in 5 of those 8 sets in 2012?

I wrote less than 10k or whatever in my comments post when I took the stats, but mentioned that, heh

"9. The returning from both wasn't great, but they were better than what I remember seeing the 1st time live. The serving was just exceptional from both and the weather being hot helped make the conditions faster."

Federer Roddick Wimbledon 2009 final stats

Federer def. Roddick 5-7, 7-6(6),7-6(5), 3-6,16-14 Aces :Federer : 50, Roddick : 27 DFs: Federer : 4, Roddick : 4 SWs: Federer : 4, Roddick : 10 FHWs: Federer : 36 (including 5 passing shot winners) Roddick : 22 (including 2 passing shot winners and 1 return passing shot winner) BHWs...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

 

[juanparty]

Send a private msn

 

[metsman]

I wrote less than 10k or whatever in my comments post when I took the stats, but mentioned that, heh

"9. The returning from both wasn't great, but they were better than what I remember seeing the 1st time live. The serving was just exceptional from both and the weather being hot helped make the conditions faster."

Federer Roddick Wimbledon 2009 final stats

Federer def. Roddick 5-7, 7-6(6),7-6(5), 3-6,16-14 Aces :Federer : 50, Roddick : 27 DFs: Federer : 4, Roddick : 4 SWs: Federer : 4, Roddick : 10 FHWs: Federer : 36 (including 5 passing shot winners) Roddick : 22 (including 2 passing shot winners and 1 return passing shot winner) BHWs...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

not only was the final hot but the whole 2 weeks was very hot and dry, usually it rains a few times, but this totally baked the court and made it very dry and completely killed the grass, which makes bounces more irregular and makes it tougher to move in the back. You can observe this in both SFs as well.

 

[Nadalgaenger]

I love the effort but honestly could have watched the entire 4-hr match in about the same time needed to get through all of this thread!
I don’t think my enthusiasm for this match is as high. Was an overall inspired effort by Andy and somewhat uninspired effort by Fed…

 

[Russeljones]

Thought you could figure that one out for yourself given it’s you know a Wimbledon final.

It's obvious he's talking about the playing conditions vs other years.

 

[metsman]

It's obvious he's talking about the playing conditions vs other years.

I think he was just joking, which is fine, but usually joking to make up for not having anything of substance to say is different from just messing around.

 

[abmk]

not only was the final hot but the whole 2 weeks was very hot and dry, usually it rains a few times, but this totally baked the court and made it very dry and completely killed the grass, which makes bounces more irregular and makes it tougher to move in the back. You can observe this in both SFs as well.

Yep, I meant for the fortnight there.

 

[The Guru]

I think he was just joking, which is fine, but usually joking to make up for not having anything of substance to say is different from just messing around.

I was joking but that’s not cuz I have nothing of substance to say and that’s just a real ****** thing to say considering I just wrote like a huge write up and watched a long ass match and spent a lot of time on this. There’s really nothing in there of any substance. You’re disdain for me is that intense? I mean how about just a modicum of respect.

And fwiw on the surface I agree with Third Serve it was probably marginally quicker than normal just because of weather but nothing drastic. Certainly not a big change from other years it’s the exact same surface after all. Weather can only change so much.

 

[Russeljones]

Certainly not a big change from other years it’s the exact same surface after all. Weather can only change so much.

This is BS and shows a surprisingly poor understanding of the correlation between heat/drought/hardness and serving at Wimbledon. With all due respect.

 

[Herald]

Good, detailed analysis. I'm not quite sure I'll ever understand the fixation the Federer fanbase has with the 2004 Wimbledon men's final, but I agree this match was "good", or perhaps a little better. The "little better" would come from the tension of a Federer-Roddick match that felt like it could go either way, for the first time since 2003, possibly ever. Of course Roddick flubbed it, but even after that tiebreaker there was still a flicker of hope that he could limp to the finish line.

I think Roddick's level is very underestimated in this match. His forehand from the perspective of shot tolerance, spin, angles, depth, and power was better than it had been in years, and his backhand and movement far better than ever. In combination with a far below par Federer you get the sense that Roddick really should have gotten this one.

As far as Federer's backhand goes, I'm quite sure he mostly sliced it in this match, as even when skimming the match I can hardly find points where he actually hits over it. That in itself is a very weak showing.

 

[metsman]

I was joking but that’s not cuz I have nothing of substance to say and that’s just a real ****** thing to say considering I just wrote like a huge write up and watched a long ass match and spent a lot of time on this. There’s really nothing in there of any substance. You’re disdain for me is that intense? I mean how about just a modicum of respect.

And fwiw on the surface I agree with Third Serve it was probably marginally quicker than normal just because of weather but nothing drastic. Certainly not a big change from other years it’s the exact same surface after all. Weather can only change so much.

I was talking about both of your posts neglecting to mention this, not just your's.

Certainly you spent a lot of time, but I'm not going to appreciate 1000 words which say the same thing as 10 more just because the former is longer. And plus I've probably spent more time arguing the 2009 final at this point than it took to write that lol, and will have to continue to do so because of these kinds of posts.

 

[The Guru]

This is BS and shows a surprisingly poor understanding of the correlation between heat/drought/hardness and serving at Wimbledon. With all due respect.

You’re right I don’t know much about how the grass is managed and how exactly it reacts to different weather conditions and I doubt you do either but I do know that it’s not some massive change as you seem to be claiming here. I mean they do water the courts to achieve the hardness they want every day I know that much. Don’t think a drought could effect it that much and it doesn’t seem that way when watching the matches.

 

[Third Serve]

10K or whatever words here and no mention of the playing surface?

It's hard to take people who talk about this match seriously when they wax poetic about the mug level on return and ground without bringing that up. Which isn't even true, yes, Roddick's standard of returning on average wasn't that great, but he was clutch enough to generate solid chances in 3 different sets, taking two. What's the excuse for GOAT returns Djokovic and Murray being completely schooled by old Federer's serve in 5 of those 8 sets in 2012?

Pretty sure I mentioned that. But in case it’s not actually up there, it is worth noting that the conditions are quite hot and dry as opposed to most other years. I think it’s unusually quick for the standards of Wimbledon surfaces over the years.

Edit: Actually I did mention it, right at the very beginning of the first post.

 

[RS]

Fed fans taking it to heart

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

I think the 5th set was the highest quality set of the match apart from the last 2-3 games or so. Yeah Roddick let a few aces go by, big deal. Fed's serve+1 was so strong that it would have been a waste of time to try on 40-0 or 40-15, and Roddick did make his push when he could, but he was denied. Both the 04 and 08 final had two sets worse than even the fourth set of this match (by play dynamic), but the base level of both guys was higher in 04 to make up for that. Can't quite say that in 08.

good ole mugtsman lol

 

[abmk]

Only quoting for which I have a comment on. You can assume I agree with the rest.

From the first post ->

In fact, let's talk about the placement for a second because it partly explains a curious statistic: Fed's ahead in the ace tally by a massive margin, 51 to 27. I mean, he does serve well, but on that shot alone, Roddick clearly does better. So why are the ace counts the way they are? Part of it has to do with the placement of the serves from both players. Fed goes out wide or down the T roughly an equal number of times, and he does so well that it's often tricky to get a racket on them. On the other side, Roddick employs a relatively high proportion of body serves--he hits about as many of those as he does wide serves, just looking at the numbers.

Assuming charter has this aspect charted right (net play isn't charted correctly for this match), there is 59 wide serves to 56 body serves from Roddick. So that's about right.
Federer has 85 wide serves to 34 body serves.

2009 Wimbledon F: Andy Roddick vs Roger Federer Detailed Stats | Tennis Abstract

Roddick hits a high number of return errors, many of them very clearly unforced.

I have 3 return UFEs for Roddick (1 on the fh and 2 on the bh)

Unreturned serves (excluding aces and service winners)

2nd serve:Federer : 9, Roddick : 10

Doubt any of Fed's first serves would be called an UFE on the return by Roddick.
and even if half of Roddick's misses on 2nd serves are unreturned, that'd be 5. Can't call that many.

Federer Roddick Wimbledon 2009 final stats

Federer def. Roddick 5-7, 7-6(6),7-6(5), 3-6,16-14 Aces :Federer : 50, Roddick : 27 DFs: Federer : 4, Roddick : 4 SWs: Federer : 4, Roddick : 10 FHWs: Federer : 36 (including 5 passing shot winners) Roddick : 22 (including 2 passing shot winners and 1 return passing shot winner) BHWs...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

He's not a natural returner in the first place but I will say it's a little disheartening to see how that part of his game has fallen from the balls-to-the-wall second serve returning he put up in the 2004 final.

Well, 2004 Wim final was one of Roddick's best returning performances and is the reason why I'd say Roddick of Wim 04 was better first and foremost (even over the FH).
Returning is Roddick's only -ve for this match.

Fed doesn't return super well either. Unlike Roddick's which is decidedly below par, however, Fed's return is just pretty average. He's up against legitimately GOAT-tier serving which has to factor into the analysis and given that, in a vacuum he doesn't return badly: there's just some room for work. It's a little bit better than I remembered but not by much. I am pretty confident now that the returning he displayed in this final was at least a half-step up from that in the previous year's final, though. It's mostly due to the significantly fewer F-ups on the second serve.

yup.

Even the one break he does surrender at the end comes down not to mentality but to stamina.

I think its the overall effort taken to hold from 4-5 down till 14-15 down that takes not only a physical effort, but a mental one as well.

 

[DSH]

With a 2-0 lead in his favor, I don't think the Nebraska native would have missed the title.
One of the most devastating defeats in men's tennis in recent times.

 

[The Guru]

I was talking about both of your posts neglecting to mention this, not just your's.

Certainly you spent a lot of time, but I'm not going to appreciate 1000 words which say the same thing as 10 more just because the former is longer. And plus I've probably spent more time arguing the 2009 final at this point than it took to write that lol, and will have to continue to do so because of these kinds of posts.

You don’t have to appreciate it you also don’t have to be an ass. I think the vast majority of your opinions are not only wrong but crazy but if you wrote up why you think Henman would triple bagel Thiem with a lot of effort and analysis I wouldn’t be how you’ve been. Normally I think you are fine but don’t understand why you can’t just say you respectfully disagree and why considering both of us clearly put a lot of time in and approached it with good faith analyzing as best we can.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Guru is no stranger to disrespect bur here he's clearly under attack by disrespectful jerks once again demonstrating that I have not erred in calling them deplorable. A shameful existence.

 

[Red Rick]

Not sure what's worse @Third Serve

You arguing with Abmk and Memesman or you reminding me of this match again

 

[abmk]

Only quoting for which I have a comment on. You can assume I agree with the rest.

From the second post ->

The baseline play, whenever it's given the opportunity to feature, is mostly decent stuff. It's a clear step down from the brilliant shotmaking of the 2007 and 2008 finals but I think it's still solid enough and it features a few nice shots and rallies. There are some clear wrinkles, though. Let's get those out of the way first.

solid isn't the word I'd use tbh. It was more disruptive, older style grass court tennis from the baseline. with hot and dry conditions, that's what happens. not easy to get into the flow like in Wim 07/08 finals.

The most obvious one to me is that Roddick's BH is the clear weak link of the four groundstrokes on show, with some caveats which we'll get to in a second. Fed's slices continue to work it over all match and Andy makes some fairly cheap errors on that wing all the way from the first to the fifth set. Curiously enough, though, the Roddick BH also happens to be maybe the clutchest single shot of the match. When a big point occurs (and by that I mean any time one of the two serves gets remotely close to being broken), Roddick hits some legit zingers off the BH wing and especially on the pass. This is what probably leads people to view this as one of his best BH showings when I don't think this is quite the case except for the big points. But it is true that the big points were particularly big in this match so I can understand having a more positive rating of the shot based on that. On average, though, Roddick's BH is not good at all.

I got 18 UFEs from Roddick on the BH wing, which is fine. I'd classify Roddick's BH overall as good on an average (a little better than good overall given both breaks and minibreak in 2nd TB came off BHs) and this still remains one of his best BH showings.

Federer's backhand doesn't have a lot of time to shine here and frankly I can't remember any particularly memorable shots off of that wing.

The half volley BH flick down SP in the 2nd set TB.

This is a good showing from Roddick on the forehand. It's not quite the elite weapon it was in 2003 or 2004, but he keeps the errors low for the most part and feels quite comfortable trading blows with Federer's forehand. His problem lies in generating consistent offense. It's a strong forehand, but just barely below weapon-level strong and this is a general issue with Roddick's post-2004 gameplan. He's trying too hard to be a counterpuncher when that just isn't his natural style of play. Still, for not being his best gameplan, it's still pretty decent and he makes some good rallies with the forehand. It just needs that extra power.

I don't think Roddick was trying to be a counter-puncher here. He was trying to play % tennis for this. In b/w his 2004 Wim final performance and his counter-punching post Gilbert for big chunk. Aggressive when required, but not in your face aggressive like under Gilbert.

Federer's forehand is by far the best groundstroke of the match. He dictates play pretty well with it and lands some nice point-finishers in addition. A good chunk of Roddick's forehand winners come from putaways or serve+1s while Fed manages those and also plenty of winners off of neutral rally shots. A solid showing on the whole. However, in the context of Fed's other forehand displays in this era, he's a little reserved. He uses the forehand more to work over Roddick's game and pressure the American into errors rather than by painting the lines. In other words, safer tennis. When he does go for the kill, however, he's very effective. I can't recall very many occasions on which he goes for one of his trademark Federerian winners and messes up. Smart play on the forehand from him, I have to say, but given how different it is from his norm I wonder why he opted for it this time around. It's not like his typical aggressive tennis isn't already effective at dealing with even a good Roddick's game, as we've seen numerous times.

@ bold part: well, not that many, but probably a pretty important one at 5 all in the first set.

fed's FH also went up a notch after set2.
first set was serve dominated from both sides, so not that many chances for FH. 2nd set, fed was a bit subdued.

At the net, Roddick suffers from the usual post-2005 problem of picking the wrong times to approach. Here, he does it often to Fed's forehand which leads to passes much of the time. As far as his actual net game goes, though, he's pretty decent... again, with one notable exception

well not really. He approached well enough in this and the Murray SF.

In the final, I have:
Roddick : 37/57 (including 3/4 on 1st serve SnV) [64.91%]

A below par transition game with competent net play doesn't lead to 65% success at the net vs prime fed.
Both transition game and net play were atleast competent (a little more than that I'd say) from Roddick.

 

[RS]

Not sure what's worse @Third Serve

You arguing with Abmk and Memesman or you reminding me of this match again

Rate both guys out of 10?

 

[NatF]

not only was the final hot but the whole 2 weeks was very hot and dry, usually it rains a few times, but this totally baked the court and made it very dry and completely killed the grass, which makes bounces more irregular and makes it tougher to move in the back. You can observe this in both SFs as well.

Yeah I played on our clubs grass courts a couple of weeks ago (in the middle of a drought here) it was not fun lol. I think any comments about the returning and rallies need to have that caveat in mind.

 

[RS]

Thought you could figure that one out for yourself given it’s you know a Wimbledon final.

Do you still stand by your 7/10 rating?

 

[metsman]

You don’t have to appreciate it you also don’t have to be an ass. I think the vast majority of your opinions are not only wrong but crazy but if you wrote up why you think Henman would triple bagel Thiem with a lot of effort and analysis I wouldn’t be how you’ve been. Normally I think you are fine but don’t understand why you can’t just say you respectfully disagree and why considering both of us clearly put a lot of time in and approached it with good faith analyzing as best we can.

Of course I disagree, this shouldn't be any surprise to anyone, is me adding "respectfully" in front of that really going to make that big a difference. If anything, I think it makes it worse. I didn't make any personal attacks and plus I did not even single you out specifically as I've said this exact same line to many others, some of them even Fed fans, including in this thread. So I think a lot of this is in your head due to maybe past arguments or whatever and because I have a snobbish/grumpy style of posting, sure.

 

[Third Serve]

Only quoting for which I have a comment on. You can assume I agree with the rest.

From the second post ->




solid isn't the word I'd use tbh. It was more disruptive, older style grass court tennis from the baseline. with hot and dry conditions, that's what happens. not easy to get into the flow like in Wim 07/08 finals.

Fair enough. Actually a good observation... the play in this final does remind me of some of that older grass tennis.

I got 18 UFEs from Roddick on the BH wing, which is fine. I'd classify Roddick's BH overall as good on an average (a little better than good overall given both breaks and minibreak in 2nd TB came off BHs) and this still remains one of his best BH showings.

Yeah, I still don't agree. It broke down so often off of neutral balls, considerably more than any of the other three groundstrokes in play. And not to mention he didn't handle Fed's slice too well (granted, Fed has a really good slice and that was also true for this match, but I don't think it took an awful lot of effort to work over the Roddick BH; I also think 18 UFEs is a very generous number... everywhere else I've looked except Wimbledon has like 30-35 and I believe this lines up best with what I saw in the match.

The half volley BH flick down SP in the 2nd set TB.

Good mention. I brought it up in my discussion of the second set tiebreak (which I wrote after the post you replied to) but it's definitely worth noting. I'll add it in an edit.

I don't think Roddick was trying to be a counter-puncher here. He was trying to play % tennis for this. In b/w his 2004 Wim final performance and his counter-punching post Gilbert for big chunk. Aggressive when required, but not in your face aggressive like under Gilbert.

The counterpuncher stuff is more of the issue with the post-2005 Roddick gameplan. Here, I will say he was a little more aggressive than his norm for the time, but generating offense was still a (small but noticeable) problem.

@ bold part: well, not that many, but probably a pretty important one at 5 all in the first set.

fed's FH also went up a notch after set2.
first set was serve dominated from both sides, so not that many chances for FH. 2nd set, fed was a bit subdued.

I mention most of these points in the set discussions.

well not really. He approached well enough in this and the Murray SF.

In the final, I have:
Roddick : 37/57 (including 3/4 on 1st serve SnV) [64.91%]

A below par transition game with competent net play doesn't lead to 65% success at the net vs prime fed.
Both transition game and net play were atleast competent (a little more than that I'd say) from Roddick.

You might be right on Roddick's net play. Upon closer reflection I think his net play was a bit better than competent and there were some nice volleys I observed throughout the match. Still not a fan of the transition play, though.

 

[The Guru]

Of course I disagree, this shouldn't be any surprise to anyone, is me adding "respectfully" in front of that really going to make that big a difference. If anything, I think it makes it worse. I didn't make any personal attacks and plus I did not even single you out specifically as I've said this exact same line to many others, some of them even Fed fans, including in this thread. So I think a lot of this is in your head due to maybe past arguments or whatever and because I have a snobbish/grumpy style of posting, sure.

Yes because you adding respectfully in front of you have nothing of substance to say would be oxymoronic. And you replied that to me specifically. Its not in my head it’s in this thread and we’d have no problem if you just said hey actually I think the 5th set was quality for these reasons and I think the court speed was a big factor in the parts you though were lacking or subpar so actually I think this was a great match. Instead you’ve done this and the thread is derailed.

 

[RS]

Was Roddick's BH improvements in Wim 09 overstated?

I remember when he played Murray he couldn't hit that many winners off that wing. Murray looked like he was crushing winners in comparison at times think Murray had over 15 BH winners while Roddick had less than 5 IIRC.

 

[RS]

My weak analysis maybe.

 

[The Guru]

Do you still stand by your 7/10 rating?

Haha is that what the spreadsheet has me at. Yeah seems fair enough to me. Question for fans of this match. What did Roddick do significantly better than Kyrgios? Certainly not serve as Kyrgios had more aces at a higher percentage in a shorter match against a better returner and on apparently a far slower court. Roddick has the clear better FH but Kyrgios has the clear better BH. Both returned poorly both had averageish movement solid volleys. Roddick was more clutch and that matters for big server matches on grass so on that basis he has the edge but it’s an edge. No one considers this years Wimbledon final a classic or anywhere near it so how do we explain that?

 

[metsman]

Yes because you adding respectfully in front of you have nothing of substance to say would be oxymoronic. And you replied that to me specifically. Its not in my head it’s in this thread and we’d have no problem if you just said hey actually I think the 5th set was quality for these reasons and I think the court speed was a big factor in the parts you though were lacking or subpar so actually I think this was a great match. Instead you’ve done this and the thread is derailed.

You literally replied to me with a joke instead of anything of substance to say, and that is exactly what I said. I'm not sure why I should reply to that with stuff I've repeated hundreds of time.

 

[metsman]

Was Roddick's BH improvements in Wim 09 overstated?

I remember when he played Murray he couldn't hit that many winners off that wing. Murray looked like he was crushing winners in comparison at times think Murray had over 15 BH winners while Roddick had less than 5 IIRC.

Maybe Roddick played quite a bit better in the F than the SF (or QF) in all departments? Just a thought.

 

[RS]

Maybe Roddick played quite a bit better in the F than the SF (or QF) in all departments? Just a thought.

Maybe mate.