Match Stats/Report - Federer vs Roddick, Wimbledon final, 2009

Waspsting

Hall of Fame
Roger Federer beat Andy Roddick 5-7, 7-6(6), 7-6(5), 3-6, 16-14 in the Wimbledon final, 2009 on grass

The win gave Federer a record breaking 15 Slam title. He had recently won the French Open. Roddick was playing his third and as it would turn out, last Wimbledon final. The two had previously met in the finals in 2004 and 2005 as well as the semis in 2003, with Federer winning all the encounters

Federer won 223 points, Roddick 213

Serve Stats
Federer...
- 1st serve percentage (127/197) 64%
- 1st serve points won (113/127) 89%
- 2nd serve points won (42/70) 60%
- Aces 51
- Double Faults 4
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (89/197) 45%

Roddick...
- 1st serve percentage (168/239) 70%
- 1st serve points won (140/168) 83%
- 2nd serve points won (31/71) 44%
- Aces 27, Service Winners 3
- Double Faults 4
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (98/239) 41%

Serve Pattern
Federer served...
- to FH 45%
- to BH 55%
- to Body 5%

Roddick served...
- to FH 37%
- to BH 52%
- to Body 11%

Return Stats
Federer made...
- 137 (58 FH, 79 BH)
- 68 Errors, comprising...
- 20 Unforced (7 FH, 13 BH)
- 48 Forced (21 FH, 27 BH)
- Return Rate (137/235) 58%

Roddick made...
- 104 (34 FH, 70 BH)
- 1 Winner (1 FH)
- 38 Errors, comprising...
- 15 Unforced (10 FH, 5 BH)
- 23 Forced (14 FH, 9 BH)
- Return Rate (104/193) 54%

Break Points
Federer 1/7 (4 games)
Roddick 2/5 (3 games)

Winners (including returns, excluding aces)
Federer 52 (35 FH, 8 BH, 2 FHV, 1 FH1/2V, 4 BHV, 2 OH)
Roddick 34 (20 FH, 7 BH, 3 FHV, 1 FH1/2V, 3 BHV)

Federer's FHs - 10 cc (4 passes, 1 at net), 7 dtl (1 pass), 11 inside-out (1 at net), 3 inside-in, 2 longline and 1 longline/inside-in
- BHs - 4 cc (1 pass - a net chord clipper), 2 dtl passes, 2 running-down-drop-shot passes at net (1 cc, 1 dtl)

- 1 from a serve-volley point, a first 'volley' FH at net drop shot

- 1 other FHV was a swinging shot
- 1 OH on the bounce from the baseline

Roddick's FHs - 6 cc (2 passes - 1 a return, 1 at net), 1 cc/longline at net, 1 dtl, 8 inside-out, 2 inside-in (1 at net), 1 longline and 1 running-down-drop-shot net chord dribbler at net
- BHs - 1 cc pass, 5 dtl (4 passes) and 1 inside-out

Errors (excluding returns and serves)
Federer 77
- 44 Unforced (23 FH, 19 BH, 2 FHV)... with 1 non-net FHV
- 33 Forced (19 FH, 11 BH, 2 FHV, 1 BH1/2V)... with 1 BH running-down-drop-shot at net
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 45.5

Roddick 78
- 57 Unforced (23 FH, 31 BH, 3 BHV)
- 21 Forced (6 FH, 12 BH, 1 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 BH1/2V)... with 2 BH running-down-drop-shot at net
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 45.1

(Note 1: all half-volleys refer to such shots played at net. Half -volleys played from other parts of the court are included within relevant groundstroke counts)

(Note 2: The 'Unforced Error Forcefulness Index is a measure of how aggressive of intent the average UE made was. 60 is maximum, 20 is minimum. This match has been scored using a four point scale - 2 defensive, 4 neutral, 5 attacking, 6 winner attempt)

Net Points & Serve-Volley
Federer was...
- 24/38 (63%) at net, including...
- 2/4 (50%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 1/2 off 1st serve and...
- 1/2 off 2nd serve
---
- 1/1 forced back/retreated

Roddick was...
- 35/54 (65%) at net, including...
- 3/4 (75%) serve-volleying, all 1st serves

Match Report
Straight out, serving shoot out on a fast court between 2 great servers leaves precious little chance for both returners and result hinges on the odd 'big point' and as match goes on and on, is finally settled by stamina. Roddick appears physically a goner as he's broken for the only time in the match to end the contest

There are multiple ways to interpret the match. Serve is overwhelming to the point of pushing everything else into background. In other words, it doesn't matter who the 'better player' is because so being doesn't extend to the degree to actually break serve. Federer is significantly the better player in almost all areas, but needs a slice or 2 of fortune to gain the win

Points served - Federer 197, Roddick 239... indicating Fed holding easier on whole
Points won - Federer 233, Roddick 213... slim, but given discrepancy of points served, tellingly in Fed's favour
Games with break points - Fed 3, Roddick 2... negligible difference. Roddick snagging 2 breaks to Fed's 1 is the 'playing big points better' random factor

Unreturned serves - Fed 45%, Roddick 41%... Roddick actually serves better, but Fed is considerably the better returner
Winners - Fed 52, Roddick 34... huge advantage for Fed. He has more FH winners (35) than Roddick does total. Even extending out to....
Winners + errors forced - Fed 73, Roddick 67
UEs - Fed 44, Roddick 57.
.. with Roddick's BH the weak link with match high 31 UEs

Looking at more basic stats -
- 1st serve points won - Fed 89%, Roddick 83%
- 2nd serve points won - Fed 60%, Roddick 44%
... Fed's lead on both serves somewhat counter-balanced by Roddick serving at 70% to Fed's 64%

In short, well as Roddick plays, there's very little he actually does better than Federer. The 2nd serve points won numbers are particularly telling. Both players serve a mean 2nd serve, enough to give them advantageous starting point in rallies and occasionally, even be a strong weapon. Roddick's 44% isn't good in this light and in conjunction with Fed's impressive 60% won tells the tale of how the two stack up in play. Briefly, Fed superior

With Fed also leading aces 51 to 27 and unreturned rates 45% to 41%, he's also ahead in serve-return complex

Advantage in serve-return complex + advantage in play should equate to comfortable win. Such is the degree to which the serve shot dominates everything else that it doesn't. A good game here, a bad one there, a bad miss or 2 is enough to potentially offset all that. And very nearly does

Roddick utilizes net play to greater extent, though neither player particularly does. He's at net 54 times, winning 65% of those. Fed's up there 38 times and wins just a shade fewer at 63%. Low frequency numbers for such a long match. Coming to net is Rod's point finishing spearhead, while Fed looks to work over Rod's BH to draw errors or lash FHs to kill points

Easy holds in first set to the very end. Serving at 5-5, Roddick has to save 4 break points in a 16 point game. Among them are Fed missing a 2nd serve return and just missing a FH dtl winner attempt
Next game, he takes his only break point - a poor game from Fed where he misses a couple FH dtl's and a BH slice

Next set goes to tiebreak and Rod has 4 set points at 6-2. Fed saves the first with an exquisite flick BH cc winner on the half-volley and follows with 2 strong serves, leaving Rod with 1 last set point. Rod misses his first serve on that, but outplays Fed to leave himself a high BHV to putaway, which he yanks wide. Misses first serve next point too, and loses that too. He'd made 30/36 first serves prior to that in the set, including 10 of the last 11

Fed loses all of 2 service points in holding 6 times in the 3rd set, while having 1 break point in his 6 return games. He's comfortably up in the breaker from the start at 5-1, before closing it out 7-5. He serves 32 points in the set to Roddick's 42

Couple of BH errors by Fed, Rod being up to handling a tough, stretch BHV and unleashing a strong pass that forces a FHV error gets Rod the break in the 4th set. By this stage, both players are sending down relatively returnable serves and there is scope for returner getting into service games. Neither can manage to much though and its the only break point in the set

Fed has break point at start off 5th when a net chord clipping pass goes by for a winner. Rod serves his way out of trouble
Rod plays a superb game in game 17 to bring up 2 break points. Fed steps in with strong serves to hold
Rod ceases coming to net in the set. Both players continue to hold on back of strong serving, but the serve shot is down a step or 2 from what it had been earlier in match

Its probably simple fatigue that leads to the match ending. Roddick's finally broken in game 30. All 6 points he loses in the game in question are groundstroke UEs. He has 11 in the last 4 games of match (as opposed to 43 in the 73 games preceding it - the 2 tiebreakers included as games). Just wafting regulation shots out, often with mishits. It brings out that how clean a match he'd played upto this point
 
Last edited:

Waspsting

Hall of Fame
Serve & Return
Skimming over both players serving superbly. For Roddick, the 70% in count is particularly impressive, given how hard he sends down his first serve. His second serves are also powerful - much more so than Federer's.

The returning - particularly Roddick's - has room for improvement. Significant lot of Federer's first serves are near enough regulation placed, in swing zone or coverable by a step - and unlike Rod, his serve isn't overwhelmingly fast.

15/38 Roddick return errors have been marked unforced or 39%. For Federer, the figure is 20/68 or 29%. Even 'regulation' returns on grass aren't gimmes. Room for improvement for Roddick, not amounting to a blackmark. Some for Fed too

Great credit to both for low double faults - again, more Roddick. Both have just 4 in virtually same number of 2nd serves (Fed 70, Roddick 71)

There area few reasons for the large discrepancy in aces. Fed has humongous 51, to Roddick's sizable 27 (+ 3 service winners). Roddick serves more to the body (11% to 5%), forcing errors but not likely to go for aces. Fed places his serves out wide - particularly to FH in deuce court - much better. Most of all, the movement of the returners

Fed steps around on light feet to get racquet on ball. Roddick's often stone as the aces go by

Finally, there's a small amount of tanking returns by Roddick, enough to account for 3-7 aces. Well down in games, he makes no effort to play the ball when its wide

While Fed returns best he can, there are areas Roddick can do better. He obviously has no read on the serve... why not just guess and move to one side or the other? If he's wrong, ball goes through for an ace - which its already doing very large amount of the time. If he's right, he has much better shot at making the return. With Fed winning 89% first serve points - mostly through unreturned serves, but also drawing weak returns that he can putaway or at least, command - there's no down side to guessing and moving from Roddick's point of view. Instead, he plays ball through the air and can get little down against it

Healthy as Fed's 2nd serve is - though overshadowed by the power of Roddick's - its rarely weapon level strong and predictably directed to Rod's BH. Attacking it with big cut returns is doable. Roddick makes next to no attempt, and returns orthodoxly firmly, leaving Fed with oppurtunity to command third ball. As Fed dominates play from even neutral positions, let alone one's where he has initiative - onus is on Rod to do something proactive with the return. He doesn't.

Contrast to the '04 final when he looked to put the aggressively take on the 2nd serves, with reasonable success. Attacking returning might be beyond Rod's ability - and its no easy task against Fed's good 2nd serve. The alternative of returning orthodoxly and allowing play to unfold as Fed dictate is what he goes with it. It doesn't work and he wins just 40% 2nd serve return points

Good, solid returning by Fed against 2nd serves. He doesn't attack with the return either - it would be harder to against Roddick's bigger delivery - but he doesn't need to as much since he's got better of rallies, and wins 56% 2nd serve return points

Strategy & Play - Baseline (& Net)
There are differences in the way 2 players approach play, all of which lies in context of unreturned serves doing most of the work in holding for both players

Roddick is content to keep ball in play off the ground and looks to come to net to attack. Federer stays on baseline more, looks to stay solid and work over Roddick's BH while throwing out point finishing FHs

On the FH, Federer has a huge advantage in all areas. In neutral rallies, he hits harder and is able to lash the odd ball to take charge. Rod is relegated to counter-punching. FH UEs are dead even at 23, but Fed's shot ends points or gives him charge to a far greater degree. It also doesn't take too much to draw an error out of Roddick... a bit extra wide or deeper does the trick. Roddick's rarely able to get similar shots of to test Federer with. Fed with match high 35 winners - 1 more than Roddick's total winners, 20 of which are FHs. Roddick's winners tend to be set up by big serves or putaway shots. Fed has all that going for him + shot making out of near regulation positions to boot. And it not taking too forceful a shot to get errors out of Roddick

Roddick's BH is the only real weak link on show. Fed works it over some with BH cc's and mild FH inside-outs. 31 BH UEs from Rod. He struggles against slices, which are excellent and stay low, but looks like a problem in technique on Roddick's end as much as anything. Fed's BH has match low 19 UEs... its solid enough, but more discredit to Roddick's BH than credit to Fed's in this particular exchange

Solidity, more than aggression marks baseline play and UEFI's are surprisingly low and near equal (Fed 45.5, Rod 45.1). Breakdown of errors -
- Neutral - Fed 27, Rod 34
- Attacking - Fed 10, Rod 17
- Winner attempts - Fed 7, Rod 6

Both players making about half as many attacking UEs as they force errors (Fed forces 21, Rod 33) is a decent outcome

Fed with advantage in basic neutral consistency. Rod's FH UEs tend to be on hard side for being UEs (on the move, or against deep-ish balls), the BHs which make up the bulk area problem for him

Tremendous efficiency from Fed on the winners front since he has 52 winners to 7 UEs going for them. He picks and chooses when to go for the kill shot, looking to work Roddick's BH over first or to set up the final shots. Its a balanced and sensible showing from him. Roddick's number is also very good to (34 winners to 6 UEs trying). Most of his winners are set up by the serve or net points... and in neutral rallies, he's usually pushed into reactive position

Roddick makes 11 UEs (5 FH, 6 BH) in the last 4 games (Fed 0) when fatigue more than anything about his game seems to be the cause. Sans that small period, UEs read -
- Federer 44 (23 FH, 19 BH, 2 FHV)
- Roddick 46 (18 FH, 25 BH, 3 BHV)

Just about even, and a reasonably clean showing from both players

Somewhat oddly, Roddick primarily approaches to Federer's FH. Likely because he's most confident in his FH cc. Given its fragility in play, it'd be asking for trouble to trust to his BH and he barely hits a FH dtl all match... so by default, he comes in behind FH cc's to Federer's very strong FH side. Wouldn't come as a surprise to see that end disastrously - given general strength of Fed's FH and Roddick's volleying - but it goes ok. Fed's FH has match high 19 FEs and most would be passing shots. Putting that in perspective, Roddick has 21 FEs total and Fed's non-FH FEs total 14. Rod's not faced with difficult volleys and good lot of Fed's 8 baseline-to-net passing winners are points he's drawn Roddick forward with short slices

Plenty of scope for Fed to come in more, though not much reason as he dominates the baseline. Curiously, Roddick's choppy BH fires on the pass. He knocks off 3 winners early in first set, which might have a hand in keeping Fed back (not that it matters much)
---
Summing up, highly serve dominated match that pivots on a small number of crucial points. Its a tricky one to interpret and best remembered for Roddick missing an easy BHV on set point and more broadly, choking away 2nd set tiebreak (misses regulation return, misses 2 first serves after having barely missed all set, misses regulation BH on set point though that's not uncommon for him) that would have left him 2 sets to love up

Its more the case that Roddick's fairly lucky to have gotten deep enough into the match where he's in a position to have blown chances of winning it, with Federer having been superior in virtually all areas of the game. The serving is about a wash, Federer returns significantly better with there being scope for Roddick to have done more on the 2nd shot, Federer is a lot better off the ground - in attack, in defence, of solidity, of shotmaking - and Roddick's left to dangerously approach to Federer's FH to give his game teeth

All that's in context of thorough serve domination from both players. Roddick plays cleanly enough to hold without much trouble (though not as little as Federer) and takes his few chances and thwarts Federer's all the way to the end, when he's physically spent. Match could go either way. For it to have gone Roddick's way would have entailed a disproportionate hand from chance.

Good showing from both - Fed balanced in his attacking play and smartly exploiting Roddick's weak BH, Roddick playing quite cleanly and bold enough to attack net with success - and great serving to the extent of making it a 'serve-botty' encounter. Fed comfortably better overall, but not enough to guarantee the result, a few crucial points shaping sets and Roddick out of gas at the end allowing Fed to get over

@RS - thoughts?

Stats for pair's '04 final - Match Stats/Report - Federer vs Roddick, Wimbledon final, 2004 | Talk Tennis (tennis-warehouse.com)
Stats for the '08 final between Federer and Rafael Nadal - Match Stats/Report - Nadal vs Federer, Wimbledon final 2008 | Talk Tennis (tennis-warehouse.com)
 
Last edited:

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
Official count has Roddick at 74, TA has it at 87. I assume that's non-service considering Wasp has Roddick with 30 aces + services winners and highlights 3 BH pass winners early in the first.
Oh yeah forgot he did it like that. That's fair.
 

The Guru

Hall of Fame
Interesting. It seems you came to a more favorable conclusion about the match than I did on my rewatch. It's a hard one to get through with all the botting haha. The drama really carried it the first time but when you know who wins it was kinda boring.
 

The Guru

Hall of Fame
If Fed had lost, it’d probably have been an even bigger choke considering he was generally outplaying Roddick for most of the match.
That's only kind of true. Let's say Roddick bombs an ace at 6-2 in the second set TB and the rest of the match plays out exactly the same. In that scenario then it would've been a pretty reasonable 4 setter with Roddick winning the two close sets and then splitting sets where there was a bigger gap. Roddick's choke is what enabled it to be a choke had Fed lost if that makes any sense.
 

Red Rick

Bionic Poster
Thanks @Waspsting for an assessment without needing to watch the match again

34 winners from Roddick in a 16-14 scoreline? Lol.
It's Stefanki era Roddick, what do you expect. Always said this match was overrated
Roddick beat Roddick that day no question about it.
The idea that Roddick choked this tilts me so much. Him winning this would've been the biggest unclutch of Feds career in a career full of 40-15s and wasted chances
If Fed had lost, it’d probably have been an even bigger choke considering he was generally outplaying Roddick for most of the match.
Interesting. It seems you came to a more favorable conclusion about the match than I did on my rewatch. It's a hard one to get through with all the botting haha. The drama really carried it the first time but when you know who wins it was kinda boring.
Fed's channel Slam and Wimbledon 2009 in general were full of servebotting. Fed's return game was just suspect this tournament, and I still believe 2009 is Fed's weakest Wimbly final win.

In all, I think 2009 is overrated because it's the final of 3 consecutive 5th set "epic" finals, because of the scoreline, and because Fed broke the Slam record here. In terms of level it's a long ways away from their 2004 final, which only made the critical error of not going 5 sets.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Interesting. It seems you came to a more favorable conclusion about the match than I did on my rewatch. It's a hard one to get through with all the botting haha. The drama really carried it the first time but when you know who wins it was kinda boring.
In fairness you can say that about any match.

I sure as heck wouldn't be re-watching a full match once I know who wins :D
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Thanks @Waspsting for an assessment without needing to watch the match again


It's Stefanki era Roddick, what do you expect. Always said this match was overrated

The idea that Roddick choked this tilts me so much. Him winning this would've been the biggest unclutch of Feds career in a career full of 40-15s and wasted chances


Fed's channel Slam and Wimbledon 2009 in general were full of servebotting. Fed's return game was just suspect this tournament, and I still believe 2009 is Fed's weakest Wimbly final win.

In all, I think 2009 is overrated because it's the final of 3 consecutive 5th set "epic" finals, because of the scoreline, and because Fed broke the Slam record here. In terms of level it's a long ways away from their 2004 final, which only made the critical error of not going 5 sets.
See, thst's the thing, I don't think I'd call 2009 the worst after what happened in 2017.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Thanks @Waspsting for an assessment without needing to watch the match again


It's Stefanki era Roddick, what do you expect. Always said this match was overrated

The idea that Roddick choked this tilts me so much. Him winning this would've been the biggest unclutch of Feds career in a career full of 40-15s and wasted chances


Fed's channel Slam and Wimbledon 2009 in general were full of servebotting. Fed's return game was just suspect this tournament, and I still believe 2009 is Fed's weakest Wimbly final win.

In all, I think 2009 is overrated because it's the final of 3 consecutive 5th set "epic" finals, because of the scoreline, and because Fed broke the Slam record here. In terms of level it's a long ways away from their 2004 final, which only made the critical error of not going 5 sets.
Karlovic was unbroken in the grass season. fed broken him clean twice in their first 2 sets in the QF
Fed also returned well vs Haas in the semi.
Just because Fed didn't return well in the final., doesn't mean his return was suspect throughout the tournament.

2012/17 Wim fed were worse level wise than 2009 Wim fed.
2004 Wim final was better than 2009 WIm final, but not by such a big margin as you made it out to be.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
In fairness you can say that about any match.

I sure as heck wouldn't be re-watching a full match once I know who wins :D
I rewatch matches to re-assess quality/get the stats.
This match was definitely better quality-wise than what it seemed when watching live - because people were like oh how can Fed struggle so much vs Roddick - while watching it live.

Comments :

1. 1st set, Federer was dominant on serve for the 1st 5 service games, losing only 3 points on serve till then. Roddick also held serve without too much trouble.
Then there was long Roddick service game where Federer had 4 BPs. Roddick survived , including one easy missed FH error from federer that should have been a winner. (I think Roddick saved the other 3 BPs with some clutch play)
Then Federer's level dips, Roddick plays an inspired game and breaks to get the set.

2. 2nd set, both hold comfortably till the TB. Roddick's best set serving wise. I think his serve% was close to 80 or slightly above in this set. Federer was slightly subdued on the return in this set.
TB, Roddick goes up 6-2 , Federer saves 3 SPs with a great BH half-volley flick, an unreturned serve and an ace. Then at 6-5, Roddick serving, Federer mishits the passing shot, Roddick is unsure of whether to hit it or leave it and ends up flubbing the volley. Federer then takes the next 2 points to win the TB 8-6 and complete a miraculous comeback.

3. 3rd set, both hold on till the TB. Roddick's 1st serve% dips to 56% in this set, but he's playing well enough off the ground to continue holding.
Federer plays a near perfect TB to win it 7-5.
he gets 2 mini-breaks with great play, roddick gets 1 back with great play of his own, but federer serves it out.

4. 4th set, Federer plays slightly loose and gets broken. He has 30 all, 15-30,0-30 in the last 3 service games of Roddick, but Roddick comes up with the goods and Federer is not able to come up with inspired play to cluster the points for a break.

5.Then we go onto the 5th and final set. Federer has a BP early on, but Roddick saves it with an unreturned serve.
Then Roddick has 2 BPs at 8 all, but Federer saves them both - with an uneturned serve and a swinging FH volley

6. Towards the end, from 12 all or so, Federer is holding serve comfortably and Roddick's service games are getting tougher.
Finally in the 30th game of the set, a game where Roddick gets 7/10 1st serves in, in the last 2 points, Federer dropshots a BH return and Roddick misses a makeable FH, then Federer drives his BH to force a mishit from the Roddick FH and clinches the match.


7. The W/UE stats for the Roddick BH are quite misleading. He forced quite a few errors from federer with BH.
Especially killed Federer with great BHs on almost every crucial point. (both the break points and one of the mini-breaks in the 2nd set TB)

8. Overall, Roddick won clearly less% of return points, but clustered them better to get the 2 breaks as compared to just 1 for Federer.
But honestly, Federer should've taken the 1st set with that easy FH and roddick should've taken the 2nd at 6-5 in the breaker with a volley.

[[[Federer return points won : 68/239 (28.45%), Roddick return points won : 42/197 (21.32%). Notice that Roddick had to serve 42 points more , with having to serve just one extra game ]]]]

9. The returning from both wasn't great, but they were better than what I remember seeing the 1st time live. The serving was just exceptional from both and the weather being hot helped make the conditions faster.


10. Overall, a prime performance from federer, not peak level, coz' returning was just decent, not as sharp as it used to be at his peak (& did not cluster them well) and some slightly sloppy play at crucial intervals. Still , great serving, moved well, hit his FH well (esp. in the 2nd half of the match), BH was working fine, came up with some amazing shots.

Roddick did almost everything well - serve, FH, BH, net play and was moving really well and really kept his cool. Only down point was slightly below par returning. But he truly gave it his all.

I think a factor in Roddick keeping Federer honest in this match he used the body serve really effectively (more so than in their other matches)


-----

11. And please,no, Roddick did NOT outplay federer from the ground. Federer still outplayed Roddick from the ground to some extent, just that the Roddick got closer than he had ever before (save maybe wimby 04) and stayed with him in the rallies.
This included some amazing BHs and unexpected hustling &retrieving.

Total points won :
Points :Federer : 223
Roddick : 213

All unreturned serves:

Federer : 89/197 (45.18%)
Roddick : 99/239 (41.42%)

4 DFs each

So points apart from on serve :

Federer = 223-93 = 130
Roddick = 213-103 = 110
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
FWIW, I completely disagree with @Waspsting 's assessment of Roddick's BH in this match. It worked well, especially on important points. Hardly a weak link in this match.

Edit: As I noted when I did the stats: Especially killed Federer with great BHs on almost every crucial point. (both the break points and one of the mini-breaks in the 2nd set TB)
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Roger played like crap during most part of that match, if memory serves. His worst final by far.
Debatable. Extremely debatable.

He played like crap for big part in the 2008 final too, but because it was Nadal on the other side of the net, this one gets a pass apparently.

2015 gets a pass too...

And then there's the 2017 final.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Debatable. Extremely debatable.

He played like crap for big part in the 2008 final too, but because it was Nadal on the other side of the net, this one gets a pass apparently.

2015 gets a pass too...

And then there's the 2017 final.
14/15/19 Wim finals atleast significantly worse than 09 final. Not even close.
12 final was worse as well, given Fed played a mediocre first set, FH not working well for a set and half and had only like 22% serves unreturned in the match.
17 Wim final - well, he did as best as he could given the circumstances - took care of his part - especially serving&returning.
 
That's only kind of true. Let's say Roddick bombs an ace at 6-2 in the second set TB and the rest of the match plays out exactly the same. In that scenario then it would've been a pretty reasonable 4 setter with Roddick winning the two close sets and then splitting sets where there was a bigger gap. Roddick's choke is what enabled it to be a choke had Fed lost if that makes any sense.
Federer losing two close sets in a wimbledon final would be a deplorable choke in itself, with that DR too lol. Next thing you tell us kovic hasn't choked four times in five years at the USO 2012-16.
 

ElisRF

Professional
Thanks @Waspsting for an assessment without needing to watch the match again


It's Stefanki era Roddick, what do you expect. Always said this match was overrated

The idea that Roddick choked this tilts me so much. Him winning this would've been the biggest unclutch of Feds career in a career full of 40-15s and wasted chances


Fed's channel Slam and Wimbledon 2009 in general were full of servebotting. Fed's return game was just suspect this tournament, and I still believe 2009 is Fed's weakest Wimbly final win.

In all, I think 2009 is overrated because it's the final of 3 consecutive 5th set "epic" finals, because of the scoreline, and because Fed broke the Slam record here. In terms of level it's a long ways away from their 2004 final, which only made the critical error of not going 5 sets.
Are you even a Roddick fan? This is quite harsh on his performance in that W that was technically some of the best tennis Roddick ever played in the SF and the F.
 

Red Rick

Bionic Poster
Are you even a Roddick fan? This is quite harsh on his performance in that W that was technically some of the best tennis Roddick ever played in the SF and the F.
I just don't think that Roddick played his best tennis when he was rolling in forehands and running to the net at random
 

ElisRF

Professional
I just don't think that Roddick played his best tennis when he was rolling in forehands and running to the net at random
You pretty much made it sound like Roddick was a mental choker in W 2009 of course if it was his best tennis compared to years before is a different story and is subjective but it was still a high level of play.
 

Red Rick

Bionic Poster
You pretty much made it sound like Roddick was a mental choker in W 2009 of course if it was his best tennis compared to years before is a different story and is subjective but it was still a high level of play.
I am saying the opposite. Roddick choked like 2 points in tiebreaks other than that he wasl basically much clutcher than Federer for about 4 hours and he really needed to be.
 

ElisRF

Professional
I am saying the opposite. Roddick choked like 2 points in tiebreaks other than that he wasl basically much clutcher than Federer for about 4 hours and he really needed to be.
Never looked that way you seemed pretty negative on that Roddick imo.
 
Last edited:

abmk

Bionic Poster
That's only kind of true. Let's say Roddick bombs an ace at 6-2 in the second set TB and the rest of the match plays out exactly the same. In that scenario then it would've been a pretty reasonable 4 setter with Roddick winning the two close sets and then splitting sets where there was a bigger gap. Roddick's choke is what enabled it to be a choke had Fed lost if that makes any sense.
yes, all the while ignoring fed missing an easy FH on BP at 5 all in the 1st set. Fed should've won the 1st set and Roddick the 2nd set.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
34 winners from Roddick in a 16-14 scoreline? Lol.
just goes to show your attention to detail.
But then when your head is filled with stuff only to push up Djokovic with lies/propaganda (and pushing down others when required), you end up confusing yourself and becoming a fraud.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I just don't think that Roddick played his best tennis when he was rolling in forehands and running to the net at random
Roddick was approaching the net perfectly fine in Wim 09 and he wasn't just rolling in FHs in this final. It was somewhere b/w pusher level roddick and peak level Roddick FH. He was more judicious in taking his chances with FH as compared to Wim 04 final or USO 07 QF.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
Your winners shows 35 FH, but then underneath they add up to 21?

Either way these stats with the high errors confirm what I suspected. Low quality servebot affair.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
For level of play this is definitely near the bottom of Fed’s Wimbledon runs. Similar to 2011 and 2014.
 

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
That's only kind of true. Let's say Roddick bombs an ace at 6-2 in the second set TB and the rest of the match plays out exactly the same. In that scenario then it would've been a pretty reasonable 4 setter with Roddick winning the two close sets and then splitting sets where there was a bigger gap. Roddick's choke is what enabled it to be a choke had Fed lost if that makes any sense.
Fed actually choked the first set about as much as Roddick did the second, a detail many people seem to miss because 6-2 draws a lot of the attention. In reality, Roddick probably only choked one or two points in that tiebreak: that famous one and I believe one other. I’m not even kidding when I say that Fed losing would have been a less clutch loss than 40-15. The match had no business going five in the first place given, as I said, how much Fed was generally outplaying Roddick in most aspects of the game.

Fed's channel Slam and Wimbledon 2009 in general were full of servebotting. Fed's return game was just suspect this tournament, and I still believe 2009 is Fed's weakest Wimbly final win.

In all, I think 2009 is overrated because it's the final of 3 consecutive 5th set "epic" finals, because of the scoreline, and because Fed broke the Slam record here. In terms of level it's a long ways away from their 2004 final, which only made the critical error of not going 5 sets.
Fed’s return game wasn’t completely up to par, sure, but I always get a little annoyed when people (not saying this is you) point out his “poor” returning in the 2009 final but completely overlook that it was even worse in the 2008 final against a much worse server to boot. In general, I think his return game as a whole was worse in 2007-2009 than it was in 2003-2006 and that’s mostly what sets those streaks apart in terms of level. As for his returning throughout the whole tournament, it probably wasn’t completely up to par, but I think he faced some generally great servers throughout the tournament which tanks his numbers a little.

Do agree with you on the 2004 final being a better match but I think you’re overestimating the difference.

I don’t think Fed servebotted very much in RG 2009. Perhaps in the early rounds, maybe, but he certainly improved a lot in his overall game once the QFs rolled around. Wimbledon 2009, maybe, but there’s a marked difference between what Fed was doing and actual servebotting. For one, his baseline game was still up to par, though of course it was below his absolute best. Even well below.

I’m not 100% sure on 2009 being his worst Wimbledon final win given 2012 and 2017. 2012 is probably a bit better but it’s very close, and 2017 is straight-up impossible to rate because... well... Cilic... my ranking probably looks like this:

2005
2003
2004
2006
2007
2008
2012
2009
2017???
 

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
just goes to show your attention to detail.
But then when your head is filled with stuff only to push up Djokovic with lies/propaganda (and pushing down others when required), you end up confusing yourself and becoming a fraud.
Relax man lol

It’s a simple mistake a lot of people would make. No one else writes winners that way I think.
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
Level of play is subjective. We can never 100% prove that Federer was better or worse in the 2009 F than in 2012 and 2017 or even in 2011 and 2014/2015.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Relax man lol

It’s a simple mistake a lot of people would make. No one else writes winners that way I think.
Disagree, on 2 counts:

1. No one who watched the match seriously, without having an agenda stuffed up their you know what - would think Roddick had only 34 winners in the match.

2. waspsting quite clearly has written in the heading : Winners (including returns, excluding aces)
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
just goes to show your attention to detail.
But then when your head is filled with stuff only to push up Djokovic with lies/propaganda (and pushing down others when required), you end up confusing yourself and becoming a fraud.
:-D
when are you next on tour?
 
Top