Is Alcaraz greater than Roddick?

Is Alcaraz greater than Roddick?

  • Yes: 2 slams to 1, more than double weeks at #1

    Votes: 106 68.8%

  • No: Memphis is a big hole in his resume

    Votes: 10 6.5%

  • Yes: What he's done at 5'5 is an inspiration and shows talent off the chart

    Votes: 15 9.7%

  • No: 2004 Wimbledon final first set Roddick is the best level in tennis history

    Votes: 7 4.5%

  • No

    Votes: 16 10.4%
  • Total voters
    154
Just looking upthread, it is silly to dismiss Roddick's wins over Djokovic by saying Djokovic was "off" if you are going to gush over Alcarez scoring some wins over a 35-37 year old Djokovic. And not even many at that, as we see he loses most of his matches to even Djokovic at that age. As my comments suggest I don't have a clear side or pick in this debate, in fact to the actual title of "greater" I already said IMO you have to pick Alcarez but "better" is very up for debate. However atleast be consistent and don't be ridiculous. You can't build up Alcarez's wins over a really old Djokovic (the few he even gets, lol) and then thrash Roddick's wins over a much younger Djokovic, claiming he was "off" in them all.
 
insideoutforehanders said:
Just looking upthread, it is silly to dismiss Roddick's wins over Djokovic by saying Djokovic was "off" if you are going to gush over Alcarez scoring some wins over a 35-37 year old Djokovic. And not even many at that, as we see he loses most of his matches to even Djokovic at that age. As my comments suggest I don't have a clear side or pick in this debate, in fact to the actual title of "greater" I already said you have to pick Alcarez but "better" is up for debate. However atleast be consistent and don't be ridiculous. You can't build up Alcarez's wins over a really old Djokovic (the few he even gets, lol) and then thrash Roddick's wins over a much younger Djokovic, claiming he was "off" in them all.
Click to expand...

Statistically big 3 have been far greater player in their mid 30s than their pre prime
 
insideoutforehanders said:
Just looking upthread, it is silly to dismiss Roddick's wins over Djokovic by saying Djokovic was "off" if you are going to gush over Alcarez scoring some wins over a 35-37 year old Djokovic. And not even many at that, as we see he loses most of his matches to even Djokovic at that age. As my comments suggest I don't have a clear side or pick in this debate, in fact to the actual title of "greater" I already said IMO you have to pick Alcarez but "better" is very up for debate. However atleast be consistent and don't be ridiculous. You can't build up Alcarez's wins over a really old Djokovic (the few he even gets, lol) and then thrash Roddick's wins over a much younger Djokovic, claiming he was "off" in them all.
Click to expand...
Thanks for this comment. ;)
 
insideoutforehanders said:
Just looking upthread, it is silly to dismiss Roddick's wins over Djokovic by saying Djokovic was "off" if you are going to gush over Alcarez scoring some wins over a 35-37 year old Djokovic. And not even many at that, as we see he loses most of his matches to even Djokovic at that age. As my comments suggest I don't have a clear side or pick in this debate, in fact to the actual title of "greater" I already said IMO you have to pick Alcarez but "better" is very up for debate. However atleast be consistent and don't be ridiculous. You can't build up Alcarez's wins over a really old Djokovic (the few he even gets, lol) and then thrash Roddick's wins over a much younger Djokovic, claiming he was "off" in them all.
Click to expand...
Djokovic was able to finish his match against Alcaraz. That should count for something.
 
Holmes said:
Djokovic was able to finish his match against Alcaraz. That should count for something.
Click to expand...

You are just talking about one win Roddick had. I can agree about that one match, but there were numerous other victories he had, hence the head to head. I know it wasn't peak Djokovic, but god knows the one Alcarez is playing certainly isn't, and likely a lot further from it. And Alcarez is currently on yet another losing streak to Novak as we speak which is kind of embarassing at this point, especialy seeing how much Djokovic is struggling on tour now, so even the "Djokovic is so amazing even at this age, blah blah" arguments can't be even tried here as he is struggling way too much overall to even try that game. Alcarez has lost 4 of his last 5 matches to grandpa Djokovic, and Djokovic has won just 1 of 6 slams in that span, but also had a slew of horrendous losses to nobodies on tour, and even in his 2nd last slam (US Open). So not going to take anyone throwing shade at Roddick's wins over #3 ranked rising star, slam champion (while facing prime Fed and peak Nadal) Djokovic seriously.
 
Last edited:
mike danny said:
Roddick is known to underestimate himself a lot. He probably thinks he wouldn’t even be able to hit through Berrettini
Click to expand...
Roddick's self-misunderestimation was a job requirement for a pundit, and I would not take it too seriously.

Remember how he'd start strutting around the court on those rare occasions when he was playing
well against Fred?

#don'tpoketheBear
 
Last edited:
Holmes said:
Roddick trails in slams 1<4, and he never beat a healthy Djokovic in a slam. Keeping him in flying distance of Alcaraz is far fetched. Roddick was never going to dominate in absence of the big 3 anyways.
Click to expand...
Novak gave up as he was not able to lose the last point in full play.

He has done this more than any atg and has blamed injury or played possum a lot too. I agreee on his diet and conditioning but doesnt do the honarable thing like federer or sampras.

I dont recall many roddick retirements too. Small events maybe.

So credit to the best one slam wonder for that alone.
 
insideoutforehanders said:
You are just talking about one win Roddick had. I can agree about that one match, but there were numerous other victories he had, hence the head to head. I know it wasn't peak Djokovic, but god knows the one Alcarez is playing certainly isn't, and likely a lot further from it. And Alcarez is currently on yet another losing streak to Novak as we speak which is kind of embarassing at this point, especialy seeing how much Djokovic is struggling on tour now, so even the "Djokovic is so amazing even at this age, blah blah" arguments can't be even tried here as he is struggling way too much overall to even try that game. Alcarez has lost 4 of his last 5 matches to grandpa Djokovic, and Djokovic has won just 1 of 6 slams in that span, but also had a slew of horrendous losses to nobodies on tour, and even in his 2nd last slam (US Open). So not going to take anyone throwing shade at Roddick's wins over #3 ranked rising star, slam champion (while facing prime Fed and peak Nadal) Djokovic seriously.
Click to expand...
I was referring to the slam win (singular) Roddick procured over a pre-prime Novak. Carlos is struggling in general, not just Novak. I would think a Roddick supporter would understand that experience.
 
insideoutforehanders said:
That is post career and meaningless. Evert underestimates herself even worse than Roddick does, but I doubt you would say she wouldn't be capable of winning the French Open easily at minimum in todays field.
Click to expand...
Roddick did seem to under estimate himself on tour at times. That second set tie breaker against Federer blowing that lead in the wimby final.

Don’t think he trusted his patience many times for poorly approaching the net in general.
 
I truly wonder how much psychological damage Federer did to some of the posters here (especially the Sampras fans) who continue to engage in comments/threads denigrating Roddick as a means to take swipes against Federer even after Federer has been retired for years.
 
ghostofMecir said:
I truly wonder how much psychological damage Federer did to some of the posters here (especially the Sampras fans) who continue to engage in comments/threads denigrating Roddick as a means to take swipes against Federer even after Federer has been retired for years.
Click to expand...
I have equal wonder at what black holes of neurosis Novak has created in the minds of many posters here, typically my fellow Fed fans, such that they obsessively denigrate the aesthetics of his game, bring up Federer's popularity, or attempt to discredit his far superior achievements (to Federer) by calling his vastly superior competition the Inflation Era. All this despite Novak having convincingly proven his superiority to Roger and given us all the opportunity to put aside this silly GOAT debate and finally admire all great players free of any desire to elevate one over the other.

It does make me wonder.
 
Peak for peak on hardcourt and grass it's a closely run thing, but GOATcaraz has a level on clay that Roddick can't match. As is so often the case when assessing Big 3 / Post Big 3 players, clay makes the crucial difference.

Clay is where we see Alcaraz's mixture of diversity of ball, shotmaking variety and combination of violent movement and incredible balance and body control on full display.

It's also where one of Andy's biggest weapons is somewhat dulled, and his mid-career decision to play with less aggressive ballspeed is also at its most terminal.

Andy at this stage would be considered the better player on low bouncing hardcourt.

If Andy had started his career in the mid 2010s he would have feasted on that Australian Open Greenset surface that rewarded power serving and a mixture of aggressive counterpunching and shot tolerance.
 
Subway Tennis said:
Peak for peak on hardcourt and grass it's a closely run thing, but GOATcaraz has a level on clay that Roddick can't match. As is so often the case when assessing Big 3 / Post Big 3 players, clay makes the crucial difference.

Clay is where we see Alcaraz's mixture of diversity of ball, shotmaking variety and combination of violent movement and incredible balance and body control on full display.

It's also where one of Andy's biggest weapons is somewhat dulled, and his mid-career decision to play with less aggressive ballspeed is also at its most terminal.

Andy at this stage would be considered the better player on low bouncing hardcourt.

If Andy had started his career in the mid 2010s he would have feasted on that Australian Open Greenset surface that rewarded power serving and a mixture of aggressive counterpunching and shot tolerance.
Click to expand...
I could see arguing grass, but hard courts?!?! Seriously. Hard courts is nowhere remotedly close at this point. Alcarez is a super erratic and suspect hard court player, one almost default US Open won with Djokovic absent, Nadal injured, and a pre prime Sinner choking away a win vs Alcarez in the quarters aside.

Personally I still go with Roddick on grass too. No way do I see the Alcarez I have seen so far pushing Federer as hard in the 2004 and 2009 Wimbledon finals as Roddick did.
 
Roddick is nobody on grass. Raz will likely become near borg at least here. Otherwise at least Edberg level.

There are many Federer fans who lost marbles comparing these two on grass but it's not even close.
 
Enceladus said:
It's Alcaraz, guys, hands down. Roddick would not have been able to win the RG in any era, let alone the rare Channel Slam.
Click to expand...
I would say raz is better even on fast hard courts. His career just started and will likely win a few indoor titles as well.

This is like comparing atg Lendl to some scrub like Cilic.
 
insideoutforehanders said:
I could see arguing grass, but hard courts?!?! Seriously. Hard courts is nowhere remotedly close at this point. Alcarez is a super erratic and suspect hard court player, one almost default US Open won with Djokovic absent, Nadal injured, and a pre prime Sinner choking away a win vs Alcarez in the quarters aside.

Personally I still go with Roddick on grass too. No way do I see the Alcarez I have seen so far pushing Federer as hard in the 2004 and 2009 Wimbledon finals as Roddick did.
Click to expand...
yeah, fair points all round.
 
There are 14 events at slams masters and tour finals where Roddick made a final.

1 Canada
2 Cincy
2 Miami
1 US open

4 top 5 wins in these 6 titles.



Raz already won 10 of his 12 big title finals.

1 MC
1 Miami
2 Madrid
2 IW
1 RG
1 US open
2 Wimbledons

Already has 12 top 5 wins in these 6 titles
 
Even on Roddick's best surfaces, he won't even be in league of Alcaraz. In coming few years.

One is possibly greatest player having won 4 at 21, another is 1 time wonder.
 
Raz has already won half the big events already. 7 out of 14.
Roddick didn't even reach finals of 7 events. Reached finals of 5 out of 14 events. That is how bad he is compared to Alcaraz
 
I will concede the gap on clay is much bigger than the gap anywhere else. I do think the most important question though is whether Alcarez on a clay court (thus far) and grass would be more or less likely to contend for big titles than Roddick on grass and hard in a somewhat normal era. I think that is more important than Roddick being worse on clay than Alcarez on any surface. Obviously it is extremely safe to say in a normal era Alcarez on hard (so far, he could improve of course) and Roddick on clay would never be contending for big titles, so it doesn't really matter much that Alcarez is better on hard courts than Roddick on clay.
 
ghostofMecir said:
I truly wonder how much psychological damage Federer did to some of the posters here (especially the Sampras fans) who continue to engage in comments/threads denigrating Roddick as a means to take swipes against Federer even after Federer has been retired for years.
Click to expand...

I am a Pete fan and Roger breaking his record means nothing since Pete played in different era and was best player of his generation, he had no say in stopping Roger. Both are absolute legend and not all Pete fans dislike Fed.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
Even on Roddick's best surfaces, he won't even be in league of Alcaraz. In coming few years.

One is possibly greatest player having won 4 at 21, another is 1 time wonder.
Click to expand...

Rod would have won many Wimbledon if grass was not slowed down and catered to baseline play with new rackets , he deserved at least one Wimbledon .
 
TennisGrandpA said:
Rod would have won many Wimbledon if grass was not slowed down and catered to baseline play with new rackets , he deserved at least one Wimbledon .
Click to expand...
That is just another excuse then.

From what we know is on this grass he came close to winning it. Even on fastest grass ivanisevic barely won a Wimbledon.

Roddick is not shortchanged at all. He was given same grass from 2002 onwards as everyone else. He was 20.
 
mike danny said:
I’d certainly like Roddick’s chances better against mid 30’s Djokovic rather than against prime Fed
Click to expand...
Perhaps but it is only fair roddick is out of prime too if you are making this big 3 comparison. I also have criticised nole for quitting, which is the same thing as what i was praising andy for (i wont follow his podcast anytime soon online).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TheNachoMan
  • Poll Poll
Alcaraz vs Roddick
2 3
Replies
125
Views
7K
SonnyT
S
powerangle
  • Poll Poll
Who currently is "greater"? Hewitt or Murray?
5 6 7
Replies
344
Views
25K
Deleted member 307496
D
Hitman
Young Nadal v Young Alcaraz - The story so far
2
Replies
68
Views
4K
DSH
DSH
Holmes
  • Poll Poll
Is Alcaraz greater than Roddick on grass?
Replies
12
Views
509
toth
T
D
  • Poll Poll
Wawrinka vs Roddick. Who is greater?
5 6 7
Replies
305
Views
14K
insideoutforehanders
I
Back
Top