Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by The FishEXpress, Apr 29, 2008.
Probably 3. Maybe 4. 2 more US Open's and 2 Wimbledons. Everywhere where he lost to Fed in the finals or semis.
Who knows, maybe he d have been beaten by another player. Here is their head to head.
he lost three finals to fed and a couple semis/quaters, soo i would say he woulda probably won 2 or 3 more slams.
Sounds about right. With all that people rag on him, he has done quite well in the era of Federer/Nadal and now Djokovic.
1. That is, none besides the one he won in 2003.
We can't say that he'd win 3-4 more slams just because he reached the finals. Roddick is not the second best player in the world obviously, so that means there are other guys apart from Fed that will beat him eventhough Fed is not around.
^Yeah, I think its rather simplistic to just look at who Fed beat in finals & assume they would have beaten whoever came through that half of the draw if Fed wasn't in it.
Look at how many times Fed beat a very in form Hewitt in the QF, SF of majors, does anyone really think Roddick would have been a lock to beat Hewitt had they played in the '04 or '05 W final? He didn't start beating Hewitt in important matches until he got injured/married/whatever, so it would have a tough task imo. And remember the last non clay major(before this year's AO) that Federer lost early in(by his standards) was the '05 AO. A day after Safin beat Fed, Roddick lost to Hewitt in the SF, so clearly his lack of a 2nd major isn't all just about Fed being around.
I'm not sure Roddick would've beaten Philippoussis in the '03 W either, frankly. Mark P was serving & volleying on 1st & 2nd serves, & serving like 30 aces a match that event, he was clearly the best grasscourt player not win W at that point, while Roddick was very young. And Roddick historically had troubles with elite S&V types(he was thrashed by a player who was very similar to Mark P at the previous year's USO - Sampras)
I think he would definitely have won Wimbledon 2003, and 2004 and also USO 2006. He probably would have won Wimbledon 2005 as well. Other majors he may have won include AO 2007 and USO 2007.
So you think he'll do better in a Sampras-Agassi era? An old Agassi completely owned Roddick, and an old Sampras straight setted a young Roddick in a slam event, USO to be exact. I don't see him going toe-to-toe with these guys in their primes.
You misinterpret what I wrote. What does Sampras-Agassi have to do with this? My thought, that you have pointed out was very poorly expressed, is that I agree with MajinX that without Federer, Roddick would have won several more grand slam tournaments. So would a lot of guys.
Alot of you forget Hewitt owned Roddick until 2006 or so. Roddick only got the occasional win. It is quite possible Hewitt was hurt more by Federer being there then Roddick. The slams Roddick lost to Federer? These would be my guesses to who might have won each:
2003 Wimbledon- Roddick for sure. No way Phillipousis beats him IMO.
2004 Wimbledon- Quite possibly Hewitt. Although Roddick was in great form in the final so who knows. Would have have been able to get as charged up for Hewitt as he was for Federer? He would have had to in order to win since Hewitt was almost as tough an opponent for Roddick as Federer.
2005 Wimbledon- Definitely Hewitt. Roddick was not in great form at all that Wimbledon and was lucky to make the final.
2006 U.S Open- I think Roddick here or Blake. Really tough call between the two. Davydenko would choke if he made the final.
2007 Australian- Gonzalez I think would have taken Roddick the way he played those 2 weeks. Although Roddick has the head to head edge Gonzalez has decent success vs him for a lower ranked player, and in the form he was in that fortnight only Federer beats him.
2007 U.S Open- I think Djokovic for sure.
So I would say 1 more Wimbledon and 1 more U.S Open as my best guess. 2 Wimbledons and 1 U.S Open in best case scenario. 1 Wimbledon and 0 U.S Opens in worst case scenario.
i would say 3 more at most. combination of wimb, us, maybe an aussie
Roddick in 2002 was not even close to his prime either. So just saying an old Sampras is a bit misleading. Both players were clearly out of their primes. Roddick was a combined 3-3 in the 3 slam events before the U.S Open that year. The only 2 slam quarters he made before 2003 were the two U.S Opens. That being said I cant see Sampras not owning Roddick if they were in their primes together anyway, but just to be fair that was definitely not a prime Roddick either.
An old Agassi was better then what a prime age Agassi was many years though. Agassi in 2001-2004 was certainly better then Agassi of 1993, 1996, 1997, and 1998. It shouldnt be that way but it was. Atleast when he was older he was serious about tennis every year.
taking this 'what-if' further. here are who I think would've won(& the finalists) of all the non clay majors since '03 W if Fed wasn't around)
'03 W Philippoussis d Roddick
'04 AO Nalbandian d Safin
'04 W Roddick d Hewitt
'04 USO Hewitt d Agassi
'05 W Hewitt d Roddick
'05 USO Agassi d Hewitt
'06 AO Haas d Baghdatis
'06 W Nadal d Ancic
'06 USO Blake d Roddick
'07 AO Roddick d Gonzalez
'07 W Nadal d Ferrero
'07 USO Djokovic d Roddick
Looking at it this way, it sure seems like there have been a lot of great players on tour the last 5 or so years, no?
That was sort of fun, maybe we should do this for another era as well.
dont agree with the bolded ones, did u see the way roddick played against fed in 07 uso? he lost in two tie breakers and they were not one sided tie breakers either, imo it was almost 50-50 that the ties coulda went to roddick and if it did he woulda muscled one last set to most likely take fed and after that he would but too great of a fight for djokovic esp since djo looks like he thinks he can beat roddick easily.
Ferrero in the 2007 Wimbledon final!?!?
Djokovic would definitely have beaten Roddick at the 2007 U.S Open IMO. Yeah Roddick was in tiebreaks but he still wasnt really unlucky to lose any set. Djokovic should have won the first set, and maybe the second set, of the final vs Federer with all those set points. He is just too strong a player right now for Roddick in a best 3-of-5, in a big big event like that.
Blake vs Roddick at the 2006 U.S Open? That is a tough up for me.
I definitely agree with you on Wimbledon 2003. No way I see Phillippoussis beating Roddick there personally.
Look at the draw(specifically Fed's half)
The winner of the Fed-Ferrero QF had a few days off while Gasquet had to go 5 vs Roddick late in the day the day before the SF's. I think anyone would have beaten Gasquet in the SF that day, he was exhausted.
Plus, is picking Ferrero over Gasquet in a major SF really that big an upset? The guy's kinda a flake & had been in exactly 0 career major sf's before that event.
And Ferrero was playing some of the best tennis I've seen from him in years at that event, Blake didn't get a point on his serve in one set in the match they played earlier in that event.
I think he would have won another 3.
A Wimbledon, another US, and Australia.
If you think of Wimbledon 2004, he was playing really well until the rain, then Fed went up a level, at USO 2006, he was looking awesome little bit like the Roddick of 03/04 and then Australia 2007 he was playing really well then bumped into Fed in the SF in what was probably one of Federers best performances of his career.
Well Gasquet and Roddick dont even neccessarily play in the quarters without Federer. The draw is completely re-arranged in the case Federer is non-existant. I agree Gasquet would not have made the final. He would find someway to not make it there IMO.
Roddick is probably in the final if he isnt in Nadal's half, and he doesnt play Gasquet on that exact day Gasquet played maybe the match of his life and still so narrowly won. Youzhny played some incredible tennis vs Nadal, I think he also could have made the final had he not had to play Federer or Nadal. He is better on grass then Ferrero IMHO. There is also Berdych as well, who also might have been playing well enough to be in the final if he were to avoid Federer or Nadal. I see your point though, None of those are exactly sure things, except Roddick beating Ferrero IF they played, so who knows.
You say Gasquet would have found the way not to be in the final,I can agree with that but I think the same with Berdych.He is as much of a flake as Gasquet IMO.
Well, I'm trying to work with actual draws even in a 'fantasy' game
All my picks were possible due to the actual draws of those events. And Fed is just one spot in the draw.
Hence my picks for the '06 AO final - Haas d Baghdatis. I don't think Haas is a particularly great player or anything, just that the draw was sorta open that year & think he could've taken advantage of it had he not faced Fed in the 4R.
Djokovic took Federer to 2 tie breaks to in the final and had more opportunities for breaks than Roddick did if I remember right.
he woulda definetely won 2 wimbledons and prolly 1 more us open.
federer also had alot less break points against roddick than he did against djo, the first break came in the 3rd set and that was not unexpected, to lose two tiebreakers in a role would have some affect on ur game.
I would say 10 - 15 probably.
I'll go with six. I know he didn't actually lose to Federer everytime, and I'm sure he would have lost a lot to other players, but being unable to overcome such a great hurdle had to take a toll on his confidence.
Federer was not the only hurdle for Roddick,for example Hewitt owned him in his prime(2001-2005) but I think he would have won 2003 Wimbledon,2004 Wimbledon and 2006 USO if Federer wasn't around.
Sure, and Hewitt probably would have benefited too from Federer not being dominant. But I don't know if Roddick would have had to face Hewitt as consistently as Fed, for one thing. And for another, while their games don't really seem to match up well for Andy, I don't think Roddick faced the same anxiety when going up against the Aussie.
He would have had 2-3 more. Same with Hewitt.
AA beat Hewitt in Cincy that summer, and it's the US Open so I'd pick him, but of course it's impossible to say.
Agassi also gave Federer a much tougher match then Hewitt at the 2004 U.S Open. Then again it is hard to say much from that too. Agassi went after Federer hard when they played. Hewitt often acted like he was attending a wedding to Federer when they played.
Hurricane katrina was working her way up and it was like 40-65mph winds during the agassi fed match.
Id give roddick 5-6 more gs titles. Alot of home cooking at wimbledon and the us open.
The confidence boost of being the clear #1 should let him play at a higher level of play. Let say Wimbledon 03, 04, US Open 04, 06, 07, and Australian 07.
Roddick completely changed his game just to beat Federer, so yea.. I'd definitely say Roddick would have more then 1 slam right now. Maybe 2-3 more, who knwos.
Would have should have could have........
haha, what a good question, i think he would of won the u.s last year he looked really good, but still federer conqured him
I prefer the question "how many slams would Andy Roddick have won with a standard wood racquet?"
Wait, is the way to make tennis more interesting is to take away one of the greatest things that have ever happened to it?
I cannot understand the question.
i agree that it wouldve been another 3 grand slams.
Separate names with a comma.