ShowStealer
Rookie
Murray being better than roddick is not even a question
IF...Murray was born in 1982 & Roddick born in 1987, who would've had a more Successful Slam Career?
- Thread starter Razer
- Start date
Good post. Very tough draw,then prime Federer in the final. Peak Murray barely scraped through 2013 Fed in 5. 2006 is a notch above that.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Roddick had a very powerful forehand in addition to his serve. I feel if he was born 5-6 years later and grew up with Poly Strings then his baseline game would be much better honed to compliment his serve. He would have taken some slams here and there in bits and pieces, the thing is Roddick's game was very badly matched to Federer's unlike Murray's which was better matched towards Djokovic's, but this won't help Murray at all if birth years are shifted because now he would be up against Federer against whom he matches very badly.... it would be a bloodbath for poor Murray. He'll have to collect 1 slam before 2004, otherwise he will be retiring on 0. Bad luck for him that even guys like Agassi, Safin, prime Hewitt, Nalbandian won't be losing to him at least until mid 2000s. Safin is inherently better than Murray everywhere outside Grass.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
I will give you this Roddick had powerful forehand. Murray doesn't. But Roddick looked subpar even on fh side vs fed.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Except Nadal who wasn't subpar against Peak Federer on the forehand side ? With Federer it was swift destruction, Federer has the greatest fast court forehand in history.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Berdych
Nadal
Djokovic
Tsonga
Blake
Gonzalez
These players could hang with federer on fh to fh wing. I don't know if there is any data regarding pace of strokes. Need to check if we can find stats on fh speed spin in 2000s.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
The point is that Murray wont win a thing if pit against the best versions of Federer that are better than the ones Murray actually faced in Grand Slams. Nobody here is arguing Roddick to be a Titan of the Game, he's a 1-2 slam winner in most eras, but so is Murray if placed in other eras & if he had peaked in the 2000s his count will be 0 in 04-10. Thats the point of contention in this thread, not Roddick being an ATG.
Last edited:
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Roddick in his overall career played only 22 matches vs top 10 in slams. He lost 16 of them. 9 of them to Federer and 3 to Hewitt. He won only 6 matches vs top 10.
Hewitt played 41 and lost 31.
Safin played 24 and lost only 11. He had > 50 % chance to win vs top 10.
Murray played 49 and lost 28. Murray basically got clobbered by big 3 combined who were damn consistent. He almost had more match wins vs top 10 than Roddick played top 10. So Roddick had it much more comfortable.
Just for checking numbers for Medvedev and Thiem to add some more depth,
Medvedev played 16 matches lost 8. 50% strike rate.
Thiem played 19 matches lost 10. Almost 50% strike rate.
Even here Murray is combination of Medvedev and Thiem. Murray alone played 49 top 10s. While Roddick Medvedev Thiem were all in same ballpark.
If Murray had less opposition like these three, he would have won 2/3 slams in those eras as well. Murray is no world beater but he achieved good enough in an era where it was hard to break through. Yes he didn't need to beat fedal for his slam wins but he beat Djokovic 2/3 times in slam finals. Which isn't bad at all. And then Murray got 1 lucky break like Roddick got in 2003 USO.
Hewitt played 41 and lost 31.
Safin played 24 and lost only 11. He had > 50 % chance to win vs top 10.
Murray played 49 and lost 28. Murray basically got clobbered by big 3 combined who were damn consistent. He almost had more match wins vs top 10 than Roddick played top 10. So Roddick had it much more comfortable.
Just for checking numbers for Medvedev and Thiem to add some more depth,
Medvedev played 16 matches lost 8. 50% strike rate.
Thiem played 19 matches lost 10. Almost 50% strike rate.
Even here Murray is combination of Medvedev and Thiem. Murray alone played 49 top 10s. While Roddick Medvedev Thiem were all in same ballpark.
If Murray had less opposition like these three, he would have won 2/3 slams in those eras as well. Murray is no world beater but he achieved good enough in an era where it was hard to break through. Yes he didn't need to beat fedal for his slam wins but he beat Djokovic 2/3 times in slam finals. Which isn't bad at all. And then Murray got 1 lucky break like Roddick got in 2003 USO.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
And why is that a good thing. 2008 onwards Nadal and Djokovic got strong on AO. Strong enough to reach quarters regularly. Fed was still as good.
Wimby Nadal and Federer both were strong in 2008. I am not sure if Roddick wins in 2009 if he is 22 like Murray was as well. 2010 I don't know. Maybe he has a chance.
2008 USO Djokovic and fed both were good enough to beat him. 2009 was fed and delpo. 2010 was fed Nole and Nadal. It was triple threat.
Only slam he will have chances would be Wimbledon 2009/2010.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
You think the "less opposition" will decide whether Murray wins a slam or not ? .. .. lol.... His daddy Federer will decide whether he wins a slam or not, and Federer had decided to not give slams to anyone. Between 04-10 you either had to go through Federer to win a slam or you had to through Rafael Nadal to win. How is Murray gonna do that ? He doesnt have a peak like Safin/Novak in Australia to break through, he would not win other slams ever since he cannot touch Federer at W/USO and neither can be touch Nadal on Clay. So where will be win??
You use big words like 2/3 but you did not explain where he will win 2/3. You said AO05, lot of people in the thread laughed at that preposterous idea. Give better examples where Murray can win his 2/3.
Whether you like it or not @nachiket nolefam .... It is a Big Big Big blot on Novak's resume that he lost in 2 slam finals to Murray, but good for him that he has 24 slams to cover up that blot..... Federer and Nadal showed us what Murray is actually worth, something which Novak couldn't or rather did not. Novak made the matches vs Murray look so close that he has given you the notion of Murray a legend capable of inflicting damage on other ATGs in other eras, well he's not.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
I already told you.
USO 2003, USO 2006, AO 2005, AO 2008 and he will have his chances. He will have to go through fed maybe once which he is capable of winning. You talk about terms like his daddy and stuff yet every poll you are creating are turning into self goals.
Federer was obviously the worst possible match up for him, its 21-3. Peaking at the same time as Federer gave him no chance. At least Federer dipped both 2008 and 2010. Peak Roddick could beat Djokovic pre-2011, doesnt he actually lead the H2H? I havent looked at each slam in detail, but facing a subpar Federer at Roddicks peak 2008-2010 cant be that bad.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
His problem is not 1 but 3 greats then. He can maybe beat pre peak Djokovic once but he would then face fed or Rafa. Even on hc. Rafa made 5/6 slam semis. Nole made 4/6 slam semis and fed made 5/6 slam semis between 2008-10 hc.
I've already discussed some of these, but not AO 2008. Assume Murray takes Roddick's spot. His QF/SF/F draw is Nadal/Tsonga/Djokovic
-He's 7-17 against Nadal.
-In addition to playing maybe his best match ever in the 2008 AO SF, Tsonga beat Murray in 4 sets earlier in the tournament.
-We all know Djokovic's record against Murray at the Australian Open, including their 2013 match, w/the 2013 version of Murray now playing this match.
Very low chance that Murray wins all three of those matches back-to-back-to-back.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Murray in 2013 was superb. Won Brisbane. Won first 5 matches in straight sets vs all. Then beat Federer in five (losing 2 tiebreaks I will add, should have done in 4). And even in final he was leading peak Djokovic for a set. Those first two sets is videogame tennis. 2008 Djokovic will have issues vs such a game himself.
AO could be Murray's second best slam if not for playing fedkovic a combined 5/5 times in the final and one more epic 5 setter in 2012. His form in 2013 vs 2008 Djokovic, I will give Murray even odds.
RelentlessAttack
Hall of Fame
This question is particularly interesting because these guys aren’t super elite tier 1 ATG athletes that I think would be great in any era like the big 3.
As a result, they would be very different players if their birth years were switched and it’s hard to predict what effect that might have.
Roddick bet the farm developmentally on having a big serve + 1, and then obviously the courts were slowed down. He would be a different player growing up 5 years later but what would that look like?
Murray is very comfortable playing a high variety game, volleying, slicing, etc and was an elite returner but really worked that defensive grinding game and his fitness after seeing his contemporaries set the standard. His variety and grass comfort makes you wonder if he would have tried to develop a more S&V oriented game when he was younger if he was born 5 years earlier, but on the flip side his serve has never been a weapon and he’s naturally passive. People mentioned Agassi but Agassi was naturally aggressive and played a very different style or baseline game to be honest.
Hard to imagine what the hypothetical matchup would look like even.
As a result, they would be very different players if their birth years were switched and it’s hard to predict what effect that might have.
Roddick bet the farm developmentally on having a big serve + 1, and then obviously the courts were slowed down. He would be a different player growing up 5 years later but what would that look like?
Murray is very comfortable playing a high variety game, volleying, slicing, etc and was an elite returner but really worked that defensive grinding game and his fitness after seeing his contemporaries set the standard. His variety and grass comfort makes you wonder if he would have tried to develop a more S&V oriented game when he was younger if he was born 5 years earlier, but on the flip side his serve has never been a weapon and he’s naturally passive. People mentioned Agassi but Agassi was naturally aggressive and played a very different style or baseline game to be honest.
Hard to imagine what the hypothetical matchup would look like even.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Polls are polls, even if my view is in minority I will still argue for it, there is no goal or self goals involved since I don't see glory. Maybe you are looking to hit goals/gloryhunt when you say "Nolefam hold the line" but I don't buddy, I am not here to hold the line for any player, thats why I dont see any reason for glorifying Murray. AO05 and USO2006 are 2 slams where the winner was very powerful. Roddick was barely broken in us open 2006 till the final and after he reached the final Federer broke him multiple times in the first set itself, you think Murray will do any better ? LOL....Federer will crush Murray with impunity.
As many ppl have said, AO06 is the only slam where Murray could come close to stretching Federer and even that is far fetched as @buscemi explained a few posts above.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
I was thinking Nalbandian would probably choke a bit, as he did against Roddick. But you may be right - especially as home crowd support contributed to Nalbandian’s nerves. Given that Murray beat Nadal at the semi-final stage - and Nadal in the form of his life - I think a match between him and Nalbandian would be very high quality and close.
Even if we give him even odds against Djokovic, he has a SF against god-mode Tsonga who beat the 2008 version of Murray earlier in the event, and a QF against Nadal, who had only lost 30 games and zero sets in the first four round and looked great in his QF match. Again, he can probably win one of these matches, maybe two, but all three in a row is a tall order.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
What Murray 2013 ( aged 25 ) vs tsonga. I am taking Murray. Murray is 14-2 vs tsonga. Even Nadal was aged only 21 when he lost to tsonga and despite being a freak teen, his game was/will have some issues vs someone like tsonga.
On the other hand, Murray is beaten by fedkovic 7 consecutive years between 2011/2016. He was good vs anyone else. And he gave them a good scare once or twice ( Djokovic 2012/2013) fed 2013.
Murray played Tsonga once in 2013, winning in 3 sets at Queen's Club on grass.
But any discussion of Murray vs. Tsonga in a hypothetical 2008 AO SF has to mention (1) the fact that Tsonga's actual match in the 2008 AO SF is widely regarded as the best match he ever played; and (2) the fact that he beat Murray earlier in that tournament in a year in which Murray made the other Major final on hard courts.
RS
Bionic Poster
What's UTS for Djokovic AO 08 vs Murray AO 13 and Wawrinka AO 13?
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
So going back it gives me 55% odds for Andy Murray to win in AO final if Murray 2013 met Djokovic 2008.
You have to agree that the level kept going higher and higher for Murray. It's his misfortune that he had not 1 but 3 challengers. And I don't usually make his case because I think he gets overrated sometimes but @Razer and others are now underrating him.
Murray was evenly consistent in slams in 2011/2012 and 2013 I think. He played in 9 out of possible 12 semis, 5 finals and won 2 slams. Federer played in 7 semis, 2 finals and won 1 slam.
So Murray would be 5 years younger.
I think he would've been his shots, these are some of the best:
-2008 Murray in 2003 US Open.
-2010 Murray in 2005 AO. With Roddick draw he could capitalize Federer's upset.
-2013 Murray in 2008 AO. He beat Federer and play well for two sets against prime Djokovic. I think he could have a good shot against pre-prime Djokovic.
He could even upset prime Federer one or two times like he upsets prime Djokovic. Some possibilities are 2011 Murray against subpar 2006 Federer at USO, 2012 vs 2007 at USO where Federer was good but Murray beat Djokovic, or beat another subpar Federer at 2006 AO in his 2011 form. Or even beat 2011 Wimbledon Djokovic in his 2016 form like he won in 2013.
If Murray was able to win 3 slams playing in Djokodal's prime, and 2 of them beating Djokovic, he would've been able to win at least 3 in any era. Maybe even more. I'll say 3-4. 2 of 3 above and 1-2 upsets below.
Roddick 5 years older?
He has less slam-worthy version. So go slam to slam:
AO: He lost to Federer only in 2007 and 2009. No way he can beat 2012 Djokodal. And, even if his 2009 version could beat Wawrinka, he would've played Federer and Nadal back to back pre-final with Murray draw. No AO for him
RG: No way.
WIM: I think his 2004 version could capitalize against a bad Federer in 2009. No much chances for his 2003/05 against 2008/10 Nadal and his 2009 against 2014 Djokovic. 1 title.
USO: I don't think his 2003 version can beat 2008 Federer. And his 2006 version would've been smashed by 2011 Djokovic.
So:
Murray 3/4 vs Roddick 1
I think he would've been his shots, these are some of the best:
-2008 Murray in 2003 US Open.
-2010 Murray in 2005 AO. With Roddick draw he could capitalize Federer's upset.
-2013 Murray in 2008 AO. He beat Federer and play well for two sets against prime Djokovic. I think he could have a good shot against pre-prime Djokovic.
He could even upset prime Federer one or two times like he upsets prime Djokovic. Some possibilities are 2011 Murray against subpar 2006 Federer at USO, 2012 vs 2007 at USO where Federer was good but Murray beat Djokovic, or beat another subpar Federer at 2006 AO in his 2011 form. Or even beat 2011 Wimbledon Djokovic in his 2016 form like he won in 2013.
If Murray was able to win 3 slams playing in Djokodal's prime, and 2 of them beating Djokovic, he would've been able to win at least 3 in any era. Maybe even more. I'll say 3-4. 2 of 3 above and 1-2 upsets below.
Roddick 5 years older?
He has less slam-worthy version. So go slam to slam:
AO: He lost to Federer only in 2007 and 2009. No way he can beat 2012 Djokodal. And, even if his 2009 version could beat Wawrinka, he would've played Federer and Nadal back to back pre-final with Murray draw. No AO for him
RG: No way.
WIM: I think his 2004 version could capitalize against a bad Federer in 2009. No much chances for his 2003/05 against 2008/10 Nadal and his 2009 against 2014 Djokovic. 1 title.
USO: I don't think his 2003 version can beat 2008 Federer. And his 2006 version would've been smashed by 2011 Djokovic.
So:
Murray 3/4 vs Roddick 1
But what are we talking here? Im not saying Roddick would do better, but he might win a slam also if born in 1987. His worst match up Federer dipped in 2008 & 2010, and 1982-Roddick beat both Nadal and Djokovic on HC 2008 & 2010.
I think match up is the key here, not only era strength. Federer was Roddicks nightmare.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
I would take a slam away from Murray because I think it's his best case scenario
So I think 2/3 slams for Murray and 1 for Roddick just like in real life.
But OP never made such an option so had to go with option 1.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Roddick is no threat to prime Djokovic Nadal as well.
RS
Bionic Poster
I picked SF for SF. Murray 68.5% favourite.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
No, but 2008-2010 would be peak-Roddick (same as 2003-2005 real Roddick). He could push Federer to 5 sets at W2009, i believe an even better version could win a slam 2008-2010.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
I never said he would go slamless. I respect his skills. He could have won 2 slams even in reality.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
I haven't seen Ben Shelton much. But does he look like modern Roddick apart from being lefty?
Razer
G.O.A.T.
This new version of Roddick would have some shot at the year 2016 as well where the last 2 slams were up for the taking cause the Big 3 were down.... A Rod will collect something there as well...
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
2016 in hypo version will be 2011 Roddick. He wins NOTHING.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
Hypotheticals don't work like in a linear way, his injury patterns could change since he would be training differently, he could be more motivated to win seeing Federer and Nadal declined, winning slams early in 08-10 period could give him more motivation to prepare for wimbledon/US open in 2014-2016.... There is no way to predict that he will win nothing in 2016 when there is such a big vacuum present. Roddick never suffered any carer ending injury, it is Murray who did. Roddick, Hewitt, Safin all would decline a bit slower if they were born in 1987 compared to 1980-1982 period. Longevity of guys born after mid 80s is even more.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Why ? In this way we will predict Murray will play aggressive if given faster surfaces.
Or Murray himself won't get injured in 2011 onwards. He will have chances in 2012 Wimby 2012 USO 2013 Wimby and 2014 USO as well then.
RS
Bionic Poster
Couldn't be bothered to check AO 13 Wawrinka but assuming that Djokovic wins that by UTS.
Razer
G.O.A.T.
No you cannot say that because Murray never had it in him to play aggressive tennis, his bread and butter, his instincts have always been to be grind and grind and grind, just put the ball back in play, that is him and yeah he is really good at it, but that kinda inferior play does not work even 1%, so he is toast when his peer is now Federer instead of that injured guy or an inconsistent Nole. Plus how exactly do you expect Murray to be aggressive ? To play aggressive Tennis on fast surfaces you first need a formidable serve.
Plus even if Murray doesn't get injured in 2011, he still win a BIG 0 from that point because he would be approaching 30, and it would be a daunting task of seeing Federer & peak Djokodal along with Roddick, all 4 players whom he wont be able to beat. Don't you think Murray would be demoralized in 2011-2012 and retire even if he is fit ? On the other hand Roddick in 2016-2017 would be seeing 90's losers entering their prime and he would not retire at all, he would play until 2023. Not sure what he will win in 2023 but let me tell you with that Serve of his he would be a threat in 2020 as well when Nole is banned from US open 2020, Fedal absent....
See I'm telling this for a reason, Roddick will find ways to win 2-3 slams somehow in this new scenario but Murray born in 82 will be toast, he would be a better version of David Ferrer now .... 0 slams or maybe 1 slam at best if he is lucky before 2004.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
No
D
Deleted member 758560
Guest
time flies..but thats not always a bad thing, just a bit more than one month left to the start of ao and thats cool
metsman
Talk Tennis Guru
Roddick will have his chances at 07/12 USO and 09/14 Wimby.
The Sinner
Semi-Pro
deleted
Last edited:
Razer
G.O.A.T.
He means 2007 version of Roddick will have his shot at taking out 2012 Novak in the US open final. He is not wrong, Roddick was beaten by Federer in a tight 3 setter in the QF just like Federer was taken out by Novak in Ao 2011.
Last edited:
The Sinner
Semi-Pro
Ah ok, i Miss understood his quote. I can see where he’s coming from then. Re USO yeah I can see that , but not sure about Wimby.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Both are criminally overrated here on TTW since the Djoko and Fed fan bases try to give them more credit than they deserve to prop up their hero’s competition.
In terms of actual abilities they are pretty close, Murray a little better, but it is true that if you switch their eras they will be more or less identical in slams to the respective other. Muzz will be more accomplished in Bo3 though.
In terms of actual abilities they are pretty close, Murray a little better, but it is true that if you switch their eras they will be more or less identical in slams to the respective other. Muzz will be more accomplished in Bo3 though.
RS
Bionic Poster
This is consistent. Don't just blame one if you are going to.
Similar threads
- Poll
