Better Career: Chang or Roddick?

Better Career: Chang or Roddick?

  • Chang

    Votes: 22 23.2%

  • Roddick

    Votes: 73 76.8%
  • Total voters
    95
  • Poll closed .
soyizgood

soyizgood

G.O.A.T.
Barring a major disturbance in the Federer-Nadal ecosphere, Roddick looks stuck on one slam. Perfect for comparing him with Michael Chang.

Both have one slam title, both have won Master's shields, and relatively similar number of titles. Both also found themselves playing second fiddle to all-time greats (Sampras/Agassi for Chang, Federer/Nadal for Roddick).

Feel free to debate and discuss.
 
Last edited:
Roddick.

Chang has 3 finals, 1 slam, 4SF's, 5 QF's in slams.

Roddick has 4 slam finals(not 3), 5 SF's, 7 QF's and his career is anything but finished.

Roddick has already surpassed Chang. He has 7 overall titles less, but large portion of Chang's titles are in Asia tournaments. Roddick has won titles on 4 different surfaces(having in mind the lack of carpet now) and Chang has no grass court title.

All in all Roddick>Chang.
 
soyizgood said:
Barring a major disturbance in the Federer-Nadal ecosphere, Roddick looks stuck on one slam. Perfect for comparing him with Michael Chang.

Both have one slam title and 3 slam runner-ups, both have won Master's shields, and relatively similar number of titles. Both also found themselves playing second fiddle to all-time greats (Sampras/Agassi for Chang, Federer/Nadal for Roddick).

Feel free to debate and discuss.
Click to expand...

roddick has 4 runner ups, therefore he's been in more slam finals, therefore roddick wins the debate
 
Although Roddick has 4 runner ups, chang (39 compared to 27) does have more titles and is youngest ever slam winner. (17yrs 3 months or something).
 
Chang vs the hegemon Sampras: 8-12
Roddick vs the hegemon Federer: 2-19

Chang's slam opponent: Edberg
Roddick's slam opponent: Ferrero

Chang forced opponents to playing long matches and rarely beat himself. Meanwhile, Roddick skipped the 2008 Olympics to play in DC and skips clay season routinely.

Chang is generally considered an overachiever while Roddick has been deemed an underachiever by many. Roddick has heart and arguably more talent than Chang, but you just feel the guy should have done more by now.

Just my opinion...
 
Last edited:
soyizgood said:
Chang vs the hegemon Sampras: 8-13
Roddick vs the hegemon Federer: 2-19

Chang's slam opponent: Edberg
Roddick's slam opponent: Ferrero

Chang forced opponents to playing long matches and rarely beat himself. Meanwhile, Roddick skipped the 2008 Olympics to play in DC and skips clay season routinely.

Chang is generally considered an overachiever while Roddick has been deemed an underachiever by many. Roddick has heart and arguably more talent than Chang, but you just feel the guy should have done more by now.

Just my opinion...
Click to expand...

this isn't a thread on who should have done better, this is a thread on who has had the better career. roddick will have a much better career when he finishes
 
soyizgood said:
Chang vs the hegemon Sampras: 8-13
Roddick vs the hegemon Federer: 2-19

Chang's slam opponent: Edberg
Roddick's slam opponent: Ferrero

Chang forced opponents to playing long matches and rarely beat himself. Meanwhile, Roddick skipped the 2008 Olympics to play in DC and skips clay season routinely.

Chang is generally considered an overachiever while Roddick has been deemed an underachiever by many. Roddick has heart and arguably more talent than Chang, but you just feel the guy should have done more by now.

Just my opinion...
Click to expand...

Roddick has 5 clay court titles, RG champion Chang has 4. He's much more consistent in slams and has better results even at the age of 27.

In his best slams (US, RG) Chang has passed the 4th round on no more than 9 occasions out of 33 appearances (27%).

Roddick has passed the 4th round at US and Wimbey 12 times out of 18 apps. (67%)

At AO Roddick has passed the 4th round on 5 out of 8 apps (63%).
Chang - 3 out of 10 (30%).

I completely agree about the overachiever/underachiever point.
 
Turning Pro said:
Although Roddick has 4 runner ups, chang (39 compared to 27) does have more titles and is youngest ever slam winner. (17yrs 3 months or something).
Click to expand...

This part seems irrelevant when analyzing and comparing careers. It's about overall career, not how early you peaked. Otherwise we could say Chang was better than Federer because he won a Slam when he was 17
 
just flip a coin......if Roddick does win another slam, he'd win out on this debate

Roddick.....great serve, average ground strokes, inconsistent volley game
Chang.......great back court game, weak serve, inconsistent net game

Chang did more with what he had to work with (his size) than Roddick ever will
 
soyizgood said:
Chang vs the hegemon Sampras: 8-13
Roddick vs the hegemon Federer: 2-19

Chang's slam opponent: Edberg
Roddick's slam opponent: Ferrero

Chang forced opponents to playing long matches and rarely beat himself. Meanwhile, Roddick skipped the 2008 Olympics to play in DC and skips clay season routinely.

Chang is generally considered an overachiever while Roddick has been deemed an underachiever by many. Roddick has heart and arguably more talent than Chang, but you just feel the guy should have done more by now.

Just my opinion...
Click to expand...



Chang beat Sampras in smaller tournaments in ones that Sampras really didn't care. Oh, and he beat Sampras on clay :oops: great achievement.



Chang wasn't considered an overachiever. He screwed himself over mid way through his career by trying to go long body, beefing up his serve, and putting too much body weight on and trying to play more aggressive. He could have won another slam had he just stuck to his counter punching ways. Most people say Chang burnt out, when in reality he tried to change his game and it really messed him up.
 
Roddick has a much more distinguised Davis Cup career and has the best singles record next to John McEnroe (I think). Combined with the fact that he's made more GS finals and has a few more years left I think he'll win a comparable number of titles. But I think his Davis Cup participation edges him ahead of Chang in terms of career accomplishments after he leaves the game.
 
I don't think it would require any "major disturbance in the Federer-Nadal ecosphere" for Roddick to win a second Slam. He was within a hair's breadth of winning Wimbledon by going directly through Federer just a week-and-a-half ago; if he hadn't tightened up at 6-2 in the second set tiebreak or had converted one of his two break points at 8-8 in the fifth set (let's say a gust of wind throws off Federer's toss just a smidgen and he misses one of those first serves), this would be a much different discussion. Moreover, Roddick's form in that match did not look to me to be unreproducible. As a guy for whom things like court positioning, transition game, etc. did not come naturally, it took Roddick a long time and a great deal of diligent work to get to where he was in that match, but it did not look to me like something necessarily destined to be only a one-time thing. If Roddick can do that again, there will be absolutely nothing to render him incapable of winning another Grand Slam title.
 
Commando Tennis Shorts said:
This part seems irrelevant when analyzing and comparing careers. It's about overall career, not how early you peaked. Otherwise we could say Chang was better than Federer because he won a Slam when he was 17
Click to expand...

Although i'm not saying Chang is better, that IS a pretty big deal. It's not even about how early it was but the record of ALL time is pretty big, i mean 17 years and the french open? Beating Ivan Lendl, Edberg etc? Who did roddick beat? Ferrero and Nalbandian got cheated in the semi's and then proceeded to choke, it should have been Nalbandian's slam for even the neutrals who saw THAT point and match.

btw that Federer comparison is confusing irrelevant, because Fed has 15 slams and Chang has 1. We're comparing similiar careers and achievements here with Rod and Chang.
 
Given the fact that maybe half of the people here haven't even watched Chang play in the old days(90s), the poll is meaningless.
 
Turning Pro said:
Although i'm not saying Chang is better, that IS a pretty big deal. It's not even about how early it was but the record of ALL time is pretty big, i mean 17 years and the french open? Beating Ivan Lendl, Edberg etc? Who did roddick beat? Ferrero and Nalbandian got cheated in the semi's and then proceeded to choke, it should have been Nalbandian's slam for even the neutrals who saw THAT point and match.

btw that Federer comparison is confusing irrelevant, because Fed has 15 slams and Chang has 1. We're comparing similiar careers and achievements here with Rod and Chang.
Click to expand...

jealous much, ferrero claimed the #1 ranking in the US open, roddick destroyed the best player. Nalbandian didn't get cheated, his gut began to erode due to nerves
 
Roddick...factor in his Davis Cup accomplishments and it's a no-brainer. Chang couldn't compete consistently with the big boys. His small stature and defensive game were just not suited for the era of fast surfaces/serve & volley tennis.
 
Good thread. These two are more similar than different. They both were one trick ponies who had their share of success with their weapon, but many learned to cope with it and therefore neither was in the top tier.

If I were to give the nod to one I would give it to Roddick just because of his drive to get better after having peaked early (not as early as Chang, but still early) and then being disappointed through much of his mid-career.
 
LuckyR said:
Good thread. These two are more similar than different. They both were one trick ponies who had their share of success with their weapon, but many learned to cope with it and therefore neither was in the top tier.

If I were to give the nod to one I would give it to Roddick just because of his drive to get better after having peaked early (not as early as Chang, but still early) and then being disappointed through much of his mid-career.
Click to expand...

Being the only person besides Federer to hold a top 10 ranking each year for the past 8 years isn't top tier? Being a top 5 player isn't top tier? Being the #2 player for a couple of years isn't top tier?
 
Wow, this is really a toss up. I can't go either way. Chang had 4 slam finals at three different surfaces, 2 FO with 1 win, 1 US, and 1 AO. Roddick 5 finals, 2 US finals with 1 win and 3 Wimbledon finals. But Chang did get as far as the quarter final at Wimbledon in 94. Up to now, Roddick only manage to get as far as the 4th round at the FO and Roddick only made semi finals to 4 AO.

It's really a toss up, but if I have to pick one, then I am going with Chang simply because he has better results at slams on different surfaces as opposed to Roddick, mostly at the US Open and Wimbledon.

Then again, as I wrote, it's a toss up. I am not talking about stature of a player or speed of the serve or style of play, I am simply talking about results oriented.

Man, the OP actually has a good topic discuss and compare between these two players.
 
eric draven said:
Roddick has a much more distinguised Davis Cup career and has the best singles record next to John McEnroe (I think). Combined with the fact that he's made more GS finals and has a few more years left I think he'll win a comparable number of titles. But I think his Davis Cup participation edges him ahead of Chang in terms of career accomplishments after he leaves the game.
Click to expand...

Roddick hasn't had any competition for Davis Cup time, especially when Blake/Fish/Querrey/aging Agassi are/were the only other viable choices. Chang had to fight for DC playing time with Sampras/Agassi/Courier/Martin/Washington/Wheaton to name a few.
 
Commando Tennis Shorts said:
Are you serious? Chang wasn't nearly as consistent a player as Roddick, never had the overall results of Roddick and never had a good Davis Cup under his belt.
Click to expand...

Chang was very consistent.. And their overrall accomplishments are pretty close. I still say Roddick.. But Like i mentioned before, it certainly isnt by THAT MUCH. Its very close to call..


Once again.... People overrating Roddick and his career as if he has multiple slam titles under his belt.
 
Commando Tennis Shorts said:
Are you serious? Chang wasn't nearly as consistent a player as Roddick, never had the overall results of Roddick and never had a good Davis Cup under his belt.
Click to expand...

Chang has 7 MS shields which is not too shabby. Also, 34 titles against higher caliber peers than what Roddick's played with.

Not knocking Roddick here, even though I don't particularly like him. Both men have had quality careers and shined on multiple occasions. If Roddick wins another slam than he'd likely come out ahead. Until or unless that happens, I think it's an even comparison.
 
soyizgood said:
Chang has 7 MS shields which is not too shabby. Also, 34 titles against higher caliber peers than what Roddick's played with.

Not knocking Roddick here, even though I don't particularly like him. Both men have had quality careers and shined on multiple occasions. If Roddick wins another slam than he'd likely come out ahead. Until or unless that happens, I think it's an even comparison.
Click to expand...

Higher caliber peers?

MS finals - Jay Berger, Chesnokov, Mancini, Haarhuis, Ullirach, Edberg twice.
Other than Edberg has anyone heard of the other guys?

Titles in Birmingham, Jakarta, Osaka, Beijing, Honk Kong, Orlando, Boston against the likes of Furlan, Haarhuis, Ullirach, Järryd, Rikl, Mansdorf, Steeb, Berger, Raoux, Kreek, Svensson, Gambil...

I don't see those higher caliber players you are implying that Chang beat in finals.

Roddick had and has plainly better career. His slam performances are better already and he has 3-4 good years in him to win more than 7 titles to surpass him in the overall titles count.
 
Welll.....


Give Murray time.. Hes not doing a whole lot of slam winning now, but at the end of the day Murray will most likely have a far greater career than Roddick and Chang
 
hate machine said:
he was a moron and kept pushing it. I haven't done anything wrong , i have nothing to lose, if i get banned, i know how to get back on stright away
Click to expand...

Mods got your IP addrese, no chance of creating another account. ;)

I told them you made another account after getting banned under the username 'galactico'. :roll:
 
NamRanger said:
He screwed himself over mid way through his career by trying to go long body, beefing up his serve, and putting too much body weight on and trying to play more aggressive. He could have won another slam had he just stuck to his counter punching ways. Most people say Chang burnt out, when in reality he tried to change his game and it really messed him up.
Click to expand...

Yea, but what options did he have? I remember that period well, and from the looks of things, Chang must have felt overwhelmed by the bigger opponents with bigger serves (among other skills), hence his overall reshaping. I think Chang remaining the workhorse/speedster was not going to serve his career better. He had to try something.
 
maximo said:
Mods got your IP addrese, no chance of creating another account. ;)

I told them you made another account after getting banned under the username 'galactico'. :roll:
Click to expand...

ye, the thing is that i am very good with computers and i can use a proxy IP address which lets me back on
 
I'll back Roddick just on this one.

Tournament Name Record accomplished Player tied
Wimbledon 2009 Most games won in a Grand Slam final (39) Stands alone
2007 Most consecutive tie-breaks won (18) Stands alone
Davis Cup 2004 Fastest serve (155 mph) Stands alone
U.S. Open 2004 Fastest serve in a Grand Slam tournament (152 mph) Stands alone
 
hate machine said:
ye, the thing is that i am very good with computers and i can use a proxy IP address which lets me back on
Click to expand...

1)

You have just admitted that you were banned once (galactico), and used a proxy to create a new account.

and

2)

Further proof i can now put forward to the mods.
 
soyizgood said:
Chang vs the hegemon Sampras: 8-13
Roddick vs the hegemon Federer: 2-19

Chang's slam opponent: Edberg
Roddick's slam opponent: Ferrero

Chang forced opponents to playing long matches and rarely beat himself. Meanwhile, Roddick skipped the 2008 Olympics to play in DC and skips clay season routinely.

Chang is generally considered an overachiever while Roddick has been deemed an underachiever by many. Roddick has heart and arguably more talent than Chang, but you just feel the guy should have done more by now.

Just my opinion...
Click to expand...
actually, according to atp, it was 8-12 chang vs. sampras...chang did win their first four meetings before sampras won the 90 u.s. open so it was 4-12 after that
 
I'd say from a results standpoint, Roddick's career has surpassed Chang's handily, however, I don't consider Roddick a better tennis player. I'm not sure he'll ever be.

There's no need to sugar coat the fact that bigger is better in sports (for the most part) and Roddick's a heavyweight compared to featherweight Chang. Roddick doesn't need to be a better tennis player than Chang to beat Chang in the same way that Shaq doesn't need to be a better fighter than Earl Boykins to beat the crap out of Boykins (or every other player in the NBA for that matter.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Cesc Fabregas
Better career Chang or Roddick?
2
Replies
59
Views
5K
Staiger
Staiger
B
Who has/had the better career? Chang or Roddick?
Replies
3
Views
865
JohnS
JohnS
soyizgood
  • Poll Poll
Better Career: Nalbandian or Davydenko?
2
Replies
57
Views
6K
Anaconda
A
Fedeonic
Best tennis player ever to win just ONE Grand Slam title?
3 4 5
Replies
211
Views
3K
SystemicAnomaly
SystemicAnomaly
Holmes
  • Poll Poll
Is Alcaraz greater than Roddick on grass?
Replies
12
Views
544
toth
T
Back
Top