IF...Murray was born in 1982 & Roddick born in 1987, who would've had a more Successful Slam Career?

IF Murray was born in 1982 & Roddick born in 1987, who would've had a more Successful Slam Career?

  • Both of them would be on 1-2 slams each, not more.... Similar Slam Counts

    Votes: 2 13.3%

  • Roddick could have won 1-2 but Murray would have on 0 due to peak Fed & then young Djokodal rising.

    Votes: 5 33.3%

  • Murray would still have won 1 slam somehow before 2004 but Roddick would be on 0

    Votes: 8 53.3%
  • Total voters
    15
Razer

Razer

G.O.A.T.
While the Murray we know is a better player than Roddick, the margins I feel are small...... It is the statistics that seem much wider because of birth year difference...... It is a huge minus to be born with Fed with 2 younger beasts coming up than being born later with loser 1990s gen coming up.......

IRL we know that Roddick retired in 2012 not because of any career ending injury, he just did not want to work hard and make a comeback since he was at the heart of the Strong Era in 11-12, he did not see any hope of going toe to toe with Djokodal & Roger who were all looking invincible...... in stark contrast Andy Murray is still playing with a metal hip.

If reversed, I feel Murray would have won 0 slams (as Ferrer, Hewitt what Federer from 2004 to them) while Roddick could have collected something like 1-2 slams somehow, he would not retire at 29-30 because now in front of him it would be Djokodal having fitness problems.

Could it be possible that Roddick was extremely unlucky while Murray was a bit luckier to win slams when Big 3 were in bad shape (Nadal missed US open 2012, Federer in terrible form during wimbledon 2013 & all the Big 3 out during wimbledon 2016) ??? .... .I certainly dont see Roddick retiring in 2017, he would probably be playing even today.....

Who in your view would have won more if the years swapped ?
 
Holmes said:
It depends on when Murray peaks. When does he reach his 2012 level?
Click to expand...

If he is born 5 years earlier then that will be in 2007 ;)

Aus open final will be Federer vs Murray ..... good luck to Murray against peak Federer.

Murray would have been reduced to a better David Ferrer of our times by Federer & Djokodal.
 
Murray has chances in many slams. AO 2005 Murray would be like AO 2010. He may not even have to play Federer and straight up play Hewitt and Safin. UTS gives Murray 2010 60% chance vs Safin 2005.

AO 2008 will be Murray 2013 where he beat Federer. He was physically strong. He could take that title from Nole. Uts gives Murray 66% chance to win that hypothetical match.

Finally USOpen 2006 will be 2011 Murray. He could at least have some chance vs Roger. Not very high but that's one other slam I see him getting. Uts says Federer will be 65% strong to win that match.

Apart from these 3 slams I think it's pretty hard to see a good performance from Murray vs bad performance from big 3 who are 5 years apart.
 
nachiket nolefam said:
Murray has chances in many slams. AO 2005 Murray would be like AO 2010. He may not even have to play Federer and straight up play Hewitt and Safin. UTS gives Murray 2010 60% chance vs Safin 2005.

AO 2008 will be Murray 2013 where he beat Federer. He was physically strong. He could take that title from Nole. Uts gives Murray 66% chance to win that hypothetical match.

Finally USOpen 2006 will be 2011 Murray. He could at least have some chance vs Roger. Not very high but that's one other slam I see him getting. Uts says Federer will be 65% strong to win that match.

Apart from these 3 slams I think it's pretty hard to see a good performance from Murray vs bad performance from big 3 who are 5 years apart.
Click to expand...
LOL
 
Roddick peaking in an era where basically every player in the top 10 was an outstanding returner? Yeah. 0 slams for him. He'd be struggling to go deep let alone winning. Murray on the other hand would be handling the early 2000s MUCH better with his returns and touch in comparison and going into the Big 3 era whilst approaching his peak? Yeah.. anyone who thinks Roddick would be more successful is smoking the good stuff.
 
Terenigma said:
Roddick peaking in an era where basically every player in the top 10 was an outstanding returner? Yeah. 0 slams for him. He'd be struggling to go deep let alone winning. Murray on the other hand would be handling the early 2000s MUCH better with his returns and touch in comparison and going into the Big 3 era whilst approaching his peak? Yeah.. anyone who thinks Roddick we be more successful is smoking the good stuff.
Click to expand...
Peak Murray vs Peak Roddick 20 matches at each slam?
 
RS said:
Peak Murray vs Peak Roddick 20 matches at each slam?
Click to expand...
Instead Roddick from 2002 to 2011 vs Murray from 2008 to 2017 would be better.

I think Murray wins RG 8-2
AO depends on the surface. Murray played on plexi. But rebound ace if Agassi was so strong then he would have good success there too. Probably 6-4 Murray
USO Roddick's favorite tournament. I think he peaked higher here than Murray. 6-4 Roddick.
All we are left with is Wimbledon. Murray has decimated big servers here. But he lost the only match vs Roddick here. Probably 6-4 or 7-3 Murray I am not sure.

So probably 24-16 Murray but could have become 25-15 if Murray beats Roddick 7-3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
RS said:
Peak Murray vs Peak Roddick 20 matches at each slam?
Click to expand...

Murray's best weapon neutralizes Roddick's biggest weapon. Id say 15-5 for Murray and that's being kind to Roddick. I say this because of Wimbledon 2009. That was peak Roddick, best surface for his game and Murray tested him hard and that was far from peak Murray. I don't dislike Roddick but I do think people give him a bit too much credit because of his association with Federer and their matches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
Terenigma said:
Roddick peaking in an era where basically every player in the top 10 was an outstanding returner? Yeah. 0 slams for him. He'd be struggling to go deep let alone winning. Murray on the other hand would be handling the early 2000s MUCH better with his returns and touch in comparison and going into the Big 3 era whilst approaching his peak? Yeah.. anyone who thinks Roddick would be more successful is smoking the good stuff.
Click to expand...
More succesful player in stronger era and they trade places? Like what is this question even.

The only argument could possibly be if basically Roddick had been really good into his early-mid 30 but he was completely finished by 28.
 
Red Rick said:
More succesful player in stronger era and they trade places? Like what is this question even.

The only argument could possibly be if basically Roddick had been really good into his early-mid 30 but he was completely finished by 28.
Click to expand...
Has your Roddick fandom died out at all in the last few years?
 
nachiket nolefam said:
Murray has chances in many slams. AO 2005 Murray would be like AO 2010. He may not even have to play Federer and straight up play Hewitt and Safin. UTS gives Murray 2010 60% chance vs Safin 2005.

AO 2008 will be Murray 2013 where he beat Federer. He was physically strong. He could take that title from Nole. Uts gives Murray 66% chance to win that hypothetical match.

Finally USOpen 2006 will be 2011 Murray. He could at least have some chance vs Roger. Not very high but that's one other slam I see him getting. Uts says Federer will be 65% strong to win that match.

Apart from these 3 slams I think it's pretty hard to see a good performance from Murray vs bad performance from big 3 who are 5 years apart.
Click to expand...

UTS is a nonsense website when it comes to predictors and ELOs. Beyond its statistical database that website is unworthy of being taken seriously.
Murray has 0% chances of winning against Safin or Federer of 2005. Safin 05 is basically a Nadal 2012 level opponent in Australia. Beyond Murray's league.
 
Razer said:
UTS is a nonsense website when it comes to predictors and ELOs. Beyond its statistical database that website is unworthy of being taken seriously.
Murray has 0% chances of winning against Safin or Federer of 2005. Safin 05 is basically a Nadal 2012 level opponent in Australia. Beyond Murray's league.
Click to expand...
Uts is more accurate than ttw
 
Razer said:
If he is born 5 years earlier then that will be in 2007 ;)

Aus open final will be Federer vs Murray ..... good luck to Murray against peak Federer.

Murray would have been reduced to a better David Ferrer of our times by Federer & Djokodal.
Click to expand...

Given that Roddick himself wouldn’t be present in this hypothetical, wouldn’t the Murray of the US Open 2008 be pretty clear favorite to win the US Open 2003?
 
Razer said:
If he is born 5 years earlier then that will be in 2007 ;)

Aus open final will be Federer vs Murray ..... good luck to Murray against peak Federer.

Murray would have been reduced to a better David Ferrer of our times by Federer & Djokodal.
Click to expand...
That Murray could very well take the 2007 US Open, 2008 AO, and maybe even defend USO.
 
Holmes said:
That Murray could very well take the 2007 US Open, 2008 AO, and maybe even defend USO.
Click to expand...

No chance.

Federer will beat Murray like a drum from 2003 till 2006 so many times that by the time it is 2007 Murray will a proper pigeon of Federer. The Federer in Black Kit will wipe out Murray in 3-4 Sets like he used to beat the Roddicks, Hewitts, Gonzales and co. Aus open 2008 Murray will have to beat Federer & Djokovic, against he ain't beating either of them, even Mono Fed will beat Murray.

Scary thing about peak Roger was that he won't give you any win in between to gain confidence ... with him as your opponent every week you face he will take the racquet out of your hands, once this happens for 3 years you yourself will lose all belief and think you are worthless. Djokovic never gave that feeling to Murray because Nole cannot do that, but I am dead sure Federer will do that to Sir Andy, will thrash him so many times that Andy will go back home crying like a little boy, lol

Federer is probably the most dangerous bully in Tennis to people who are not in his league. To rattle Roger you need something to bother him, like Nadal's forehand or Nole's return. What does this Murray have to bother Federer ? Absolutely nothing, Murray is a deer in a forest for the Lion Federer to hunt for food.
 
helterskelter said:
Given that Roddick himself wouldn’t be present in this hypothetical, wouldn’t the Murray of the US Open 2008 be pretty clear favorite to win the US Open 2003?
Click to expand...

Murray could win that, but lets not forget that if Murray is born 5 years earlier then the strings he grows up with changes too. Roddick grew up with all gut, so Murray's evolution could also be different. The reason why Murray, Djokovic matured a bit early is also because they were more adept to Poly while growing up, so if you take that away from Murray then you could have a more inconsistent Murray in his early 2000s years. Also lets not forget that David Nalbandian was also there at the US Open 2003, he himself could beat Murray. Nalbandian had a MP vs Roddick in the SF if I remember correctly. Infact I am sure he will beat Murray, rest assured.
 
Razer said:
Murray could win that, but lets not forget that if Murray is born 5 years earlier then the strings he grows up with changes too. Roddick grew up with all gut, so Murray's evolution could also be different. The reason why Murray, Djokovic matured a bit early is also because they were more adept to Poly while growing up, so if you take that away from Murray then you could have a more inconsistent Murray in his early 2000s years. Also lets not forget that David Nalbandian was also there at the US Open 2003, he himself could beat Murray. Nalbandian had a MP vs Roddick in the SF if I remember correctly. Infact I am sure he will beat Murray, rest assured.
Click to expand...

Good post but your reasoning implies how meaningless are these Hypotheticals. As you said Murray would evolve differently if he was born before and Rods would evolve differently ( not necessarily good or bad)
 
Problem for Roddick was there was not much he was better at than Federer.

Serve was much better than Federer but Federer was somehow able to neutralize it.

Once that is gone there is nothing Roddick was better at.

Federer was faster, he arguably hit harder, he could use slice backhand to take the baseline game out of Roddick, fed was arguably more consistent on backhand and fed was much more efficient in spreading the court out. Fed was better at even the net game.

While Murray has few things to hurt fed. He could return fed much better than Roddick. His backhand was much more efficient than Federer. Come on it's Andy Murray we are talking about. He also had pace to rival Federer. But Andy lacked good second serve that he worked on for as he got older.
 
metsman said:
The funniest part of that whole post was not those two numbers in standalone but more the totality. UTS gives Peak Federer a similar chance to beat Murray on a fast court as it gives Murray to beat peak Safin and peak/near-peak Djokovic on the latter's best conditions and not Murray's best. It views these matchups as basically the same. ROFLMAO
Click to expand...
But...stats!
 
nachiket nolefam said:
Murray has chances in many slams. AO 2005 Murray would be like AO 2010. He may not even have to play Federer and straight up play Hewitt and Safin. UTS gives Murray 2010 60% chance vs Safin 2005.

AO 2008 will be Murray 2013 where he beat Federer. He was physically strong. He could take that title from Nole. Uts gives Murray 66% chance to win that hypothetical match.

Finally USOpen 2006 will be 2011 Murray. He could at least have some chance vs Roger. Not very high but that's one other slam I see him getting. Uts says Federer will be 65% strong to win that match.

Apart from these 3 slams I think it's pretty hard to see a good performance from Murray vs bad performance from big 3 who are 5 years apart.
Click to expand...
Lol at 2010 Murray having 60% chance vs 2005 Safin. Don't know where you got it from or whether you've actually seen Safin play when in the zone, but this one's super hilarious.
 
helterskelter said:
Given that Roddick himself wouldn’t be present in this hypothetical, wouldn’t the Murray of the US Open 2008 be pretty clear favorite to win the US Open 2003?
Click to expand...
That's most likely the one slam he'll win. Unfortunately for Roddick though, with the hypothetical switch, he ain't winning anything.
So it's 1 for Muzza and 0 for A-Rod.
 
Why we ignore BO3 record of Murray vs Fed when Murray gets compared to Roddick ? but use Lil Davy's BO3 record against Nadal? Murray did miles better in BO3 against Fed than Roddick did.
 
Roddick at his best could've had a chance of getting a sub par Djokovic once or twice.

Murray wouldn't have got that with Federer.
 
Terenigma said:
Murray's best weapon neutralizes Roddick's biggest weapon. Id say 15-5 for Murray and that's being kind to Roddick. I say this because of Wimbledon 2009. That was peak Roddick, best surface for his game and Murray tested him hard and that was far from peak Murray. I don't dislike Roddick but I do think people give him a bit too much credit because of his association with Federer and their matches.
Click to expand...
So 19-1 at RG if it's 15-5 at the other 3?
 
The Sinner said:
Lol at 2010 Murray having 60% chance vs 2005 Safin. Don't know where you got it from or whether you've actually seen Safin play when in the zone, but this one's super hilarious.
Click to expand...

He has not seen Safin play live, he is using UTS to calculate whether Peak Murray can beat Peak Safin or not. He actually believe Murray is better than Safin peak for peak. He also thinks 5-6 years of age gap make no difference in fortunes of players.
 
The Sinner said:
Lol at 2010 Murray having 60% chance vs 2005 Safin. Don't know where you got it from or whether you've actually seen Safin play when in the zone, but this one's super hilarious.safi a
Click to expand...
I don't trust Safin at all. He may have gotten super aggressive vs fed like Cilic and delpo but highly inconsistent player.
 
1-2 slams for Roddick at W or USO. He could nick a couple in that 2008-2014 period. If we’re saying his 2003-2009 is pushed 5 years forward.

Murray’s best chance is to win a couple pre 2004. 2004-2010 don’t think he wins any. 2006 AO would have a slim chance but I think Fed pulls through.

At most, 1-2 for either guy. You’d need a era like 2017-2023 for them to achieve any more.
 
Difference between opportunities for a Roddick/Murray level guy born in 1982 and 1987 could be illustrated in this graph below

The first Graph shows how someone born in 1987 could sneak something when 2 members of Big 3 are down, but for someone in 1982 there is nowhere to hide since Federer is invincible & Djokodal will make vulturing in absence of Federer impossible, so Roddick had to retire in 2012 since he found himself in the midst of an era which had no scope, but if he was 1987 then in his prime his scope of dodging prime Federer increases a lot... Only Clay the second diagram shows nobody has any chance, Nadal's radius cover everyting from 1981 till mid 90s, anyone born in between have their French open chances erased... @nachiket nolefam @Kralingen @BorgTheGOAT @Pheasant, Do you agree with this diagram?



409012224_3386675548145585_3998536218755716292_n.jpg
 
helterskelter said:
Given that Roddick himself wouldn’t be present in this hypothetical, wouldn’t the Murray of the US Open 2008 be pretty clear favorite to win the US Open 2003?
Click to expand...
If we plug 2008 Murray into 2003 Roddick's draw at the 2003 U.S. Open, he plays Nalbandian in the SF.

2008 Murray played 2008 Nalbandian once. It was at Bercy. Murray was on a 14 match winning streak, having won two Davis Cup matches, Madrid, and St. Petersburg, back-to-back. Overall, Murray was 20-1 in his last 21 matches, the only loss coming to Federer in the U.S. Open final.

Meanwhile, Nalbandian was in worse form in 2008 than he was in 2003.

Nalbandian beat Murray in straight sets at Bercy, 7-6, 6-3.

That would have been a really tough match for Murray.
 
"Serve was much better than Federer but Federer was somehow able to neutralize it."

Roddick's serve better than Federer? Roddick was a little better than a servebot.
 
Razer said:
Difference between opportunities for a Roddick/Murray level guy born in 1982 and 1987 could be illustrated in this graph below

The first Graph shows how someone born in 1987 could sneak something when 2 members of Big 3 are down, but for someone in 1982 there is nowhere to hide since Federer is invincible & Djokodal will make vulturing in absence of Federer impossible, so Roddick had to retire in 2012 since he found himself in the midst of an era which had no scope, but if he was 1987 then in his prime his scope of dodging prime Federer increases a lot... Only Clay the second diagram shows nobody has any chance, Nadal's radius cover everyting from 1981 till mid 90s, anyone born in between have their French open chances erased... @nachiket nolefam @Kralingen @BorgTheGOAT @Pheasant, Do you agree with this diagram?



409012224_3386675548145585_3998536218755716292_n.jpg
Click to expand...
Of course not. No one is invincible. Federer gave a few slams on top in 2005 AO, 2008 AO, 2008 Wimbledon, 2009 AO and 2009 USO all before his prime fell off. At least Djokovic and Delpo were very young, and still had physical maturing to do. Instead a fit Murray who has to worry about Federer instead of big 3 will sneak a slam or two from him before perennial rise of Djokovic and Nadal outside RG.
 
nachiket nolefam said:
Of course not. No one is invincible. Federer gave a few slams on top in 2005 AO, 2008 AO, 2008 Wimbledon, 2009 AO and 2009 USO all before his prime fell off. At least Djokovic and Delpo were very young, and still had physical maturing to do. Instead a fit Murray who has to worry about Federer instead of big 3 will sneak a slam or two from him before perennial rise of Djokovic and Nadal outside RG.
Click to expand...
Which slams do you think a prime Murray has a chance to win between 2004-2010? AO 06 a slim chance. Fed owned him 5-1, the 1 being 2013 AO SF which was worse level than every HC/grass slam he played from 2003-2009.
 
fedfan24 said:
Which slams do you think a prime Murray has a chance to win between 2004-2010? AO 06 a slim chance. Fed owned him 5-1, the 1 being 2013 AO SF which was worse level than every HC/grass slam he played from 2003-2009.
Click to expand...
Plugging Murray into Roddick's draw at the 2006 Australian Open, he faces Baghdatis in the R16, Ljubicic in the QF, Nalbandian in the SF, and Federer in the final.

That's a pretty tough draw:

-Murray was 5-3 against Baghdatis. They played twice in 2011, which is the version of Murray that would now be playing in 2006. Baghdatis won in Rotterdam, 6-4, 6-1. Murray won in Tokyo, 7-6, 2-6, 6-4. And 2006 AO Baghdatis was probably the best Baghdatis ever.​
​
-Murray was 4-3 against Ljubicic. They played once in 2011, with Murray winning at Wimbledon, 6-4, 4-6, 6-1, 7-6. Their prior match on hard courts was In Beijing in October 2010, with Ljubicic winning, 6-3, 6-2.​
​
-Murray was 5-2 against Nalbandian, easily winning both of their matches in 2011, but when Nalbandian was ranked #66 and #54. As noted above, their biggest prime-to-prime matchup was Bercy in 2008, which Nalbandian won, 7-6, 6-3.​

Then, there's Federer in the final. I have Murray as a favorite to make the final, but he could lose any of those three matches above. And then, Federer is definitely the favorite in the final.
 
Murray is the better player, more consistent and better at adapting to different surfaces. In the end, I think he would end up achieving slightly more, although the difference between them isn't that big.


I think Murray vs Hewitt/Safin would be more debatable. I think Roddick would struggle against guys like Zverev or Medvedev who can serve great as well (although not as great as him) but are much better movers and returners. He would still win matches but overall he would lose more. He is better than Tsitsipas or Rublev though, who play a more similar game.


SonnyT said:
"Serve was much better than Federer but Federer was somehow able to neutralize it."

Roddick's serve better than Federer? Roddick was a little better than a servebot.
Click to expand...


Is this supposed to prove his serve is not better than Federer's?
 
Djokovic in 2007 vs Roddick in 2006 USOpen is sample to look for. Roddick played a super match in 06, just like Djokovic in 07. But Roddick hit better serve and Roddick was aged 24 while Djokovic was aged 20.


Even at age 20, Djokovic completely matched Federer from the ground. But in tiebreaks Djokovic lost both meekly. This is one area where Djokovic got better vs fed as he aged. In tiebreaks, Federer in 2007 stayed consistent, didn't go for risky shots and Djokovic went for his. Result was consistency winning. While Roddick had to absolutely peak for winning 1 set from Federer. His level was superb but he was at his limit.

Murray is not Djokovic but he is also not Roddick. He is somewhere in the middle. He faced Federer at slams in these years.

Aged 21 - fed demolished him in USO final
Aged 22 no matches
Aged 23 - 2010 fed played vs much better Murray but won in straight sets
Aged 24 - no matches Murray is at his peak here. He reached all 4 slam semis and only stopped by Nadal 3 times and Djokovic
Aged 25 - fed played Murray once more and this time fed had some trouble. Murray played better before the roof closed but from set 2 fed went up a level
Aged 25 - in Olympics Murray beat a tired fed like a drum
Aged 25 - Murray beat Federer again in a close five setter. Fed had 1 five setters before vs tsonga
Aged 26 - no matches
Aged 27 - Federer beat Murray in tight four setter when Murray was suffering from back issues.
Aged 28 - fed beat Murray in close 3 setter. Murray was dominated


Now vs Roddick at age specific
Aged 21 - Roddick was demolished like Murray at same age
Aged 23 - Roddick lost to Federer in a tough 4 setter
Aged 24 - Roddick lost to fed in 3 setters like Murray AO 2010
Aged 24 - Roddick gave Federer a tough fight for a set but wasn't good enough for more like Murray in Wimby 2012
Aged 24 - fed demolished Roddick at AO , worse than he ever did vs Murray
Aged 25 - fed beat Roddick in 2 tough tiebreaks like fed did vs Murray 2015
Aged 26 - Roddick lost in a routine 3 setter vs fed in AO
Aged 27 - this was closest Roddick got, he probably should have beaten fed. But it was like 55/45 Roddick, not guaranteed.

Murray did suffer vs fed due to early age differences. But when Murray hit his prime in 2008, he was not at his physical prime while Federer was. It took Murray 2 more years to get there, by which time fed was 3rd best player in the world behind Djokovic and Nadal. Nadal beat Murray almost every time when Murray and Nadal both were at their physical peak. But Fed lost at AO (aged 31) and olymlics (aged 30)

While Djokovic played Murray first time when both got to their peak physical health. Murray beat Djokovic 2 times. Djokovic beat Murray 3 times between 2011-13 in BO5.

Murray had his best success vs Nole. Nole did struggle vs Murray as their physical primes coincided.

Murray had most trouble vs Nadal. He beat Nadal twice in slams but Nadal took him away most of the times when Murray had a chance to win.

And Murray had second most trouble vs Federer who himself beat Murray in first 2 slam finals. But Murray of pre 2011 wouldn't win vs post 2011 Nadal and Djokovic as well.

Maybe I am wrong.
 
Murray doesn't need to dominate in 2000s. He just needs to win 2 slams to be better than Roddick. I don't know which 2 but he has won a lot of non slams and was stopped by fedalovic during his prime.

While Roddick was stopped by fed Hewitt nalbandian in his prime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

clout
If Thiem was born in 1983 instead of 1993, how would his career have changed?
2
Replies
57
Views
3K
Sunny014
Sunny014
Sport
  • Poll Poll
Dimitrov vs. Roddick. If Andy Roddick had been born about a decade later, would he realistically achieve more than Dimitrov in the Big 3 era?
2
Replies
65
Views
2K
Holmes
Holmes
Entername
If Murray was born in 1997 instead of 1987, how many slams does he win up to this point?
Replies
17
Views
579
RS
RS
Nadalgaenger
Who Would Have More Slams if Fed had never been born: Rafa or Nole?
Replies
40
Views
1K
ibbi
ibbi
Sunny014
  • Poll Poll
Were Sir Andy Murray and Mr Stanimal lucky to born in Djokovic's generation instead of 1980-81 with Peak Federer?
2 3
Replies
122
Views
3K
Sunny014
Sunny014
Back
Top