Andy Roddick beat Juan Carlos Ferrero 6-3, 7-6(2), 6-3 in the US Open final, 2003 on hard court
It would turn out to be Roddick’s only Slam title. He had won the Canada-Cincinnati double leading in and would go onto finish the year ranked #1. Ferrero had won French Open earlier in the year and this would be his third and last Slam final and only one on hard court
Roddick won 101 points, Ferrero 76
Roddick serve-volleyed a third off the time off second serves (rarely off firsts)
(Note: I’ve guessed serve type for a small number of points)
Serve Stats
Roddick...
- 1st serve percentage (55/87) 63%
- 1st serve points won (49/55) 89%
- 2nd serve points won (19/32) 59%
- Aces 23
- Double Faults 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (44/87) 51%
Ferrero...
- 1st serve percentage (56/90) 62%
- 1st serve points won (41/56) 73%
- 2nd serve points won (16/34) 47%
- Aces 7
- Double Faults 1
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (27/90) 30%
Serve Pattern
Roddick served...
- to FH 44%
- to BH 56%
Ferrero served...
- to FH 26%
- to BH 73%
- to Body 1%
Return Stats
Roddick made...
- 62 (14 FH, 48 BH), including 1 runaround FH & 2 return-approaches
- 2 Winners (2 FH)
- 20 Errors, comprising...
- 9 Unforced (4 FH, 5 BH)
- 11 Forced (5 FH, 6 BH)
- Return Rate (62/89) 70%
Ferrero made...
- 41 (14 FH, 27 BH)
- 2 Winners (2 FH)
- 21 Errors, comprising...
- 3 Unforced (1 FH, 2 BH)
- 18 Forced (10 FH, 8 BH)
- Return Rate (41/85) 48%
Break Points
Roddick 2/5 (3 games)
Ferrero 0/3 (2 games)
Winners (including returns, excluding aces)
Roddick 17 (9 FH, 3 BH, 3 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 OH)
Ferrero 21 (10 FH, 6 BH, 1 FHV, 1 BHV, 3 OH)
Roddick's FHs - 3 cc (1 pass), 1 dtl return, 1 inside-out, 1 inside-out/dtl, 2 inside-in (1 return), 1 inside-in/cc at net
- BHs - 3 dtl (1 pass - a net chord pop over)
- 3 from serve-volley points - 1 first volley (1 FHV) & 2 second volleys (1 FHV, 1 BHV)
- the OH was on the bounce from the baseline
Ferrero's FHs - 6 cc (2 returns, 1 pass, 1 at net), 2 inside-out, 1 inside-in at net, 1 longline
- BHs - 3 cc (1 pass), 1 dtl, 1 inside-out/dtl, 1 net chord dribbler
Errors (excluding returns and serves)
Roddick 26
- 17 Unforced (12 FH, 5 BH)
- 9 Forced (4 FH, 5 BH)... with 1 BH running-down-drop-shot at net
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 48.2
Ferrero 39
- 22 Unforced (13 FH, 9 BH)
- 17 Forced (11 FH, 4 BH, 1 FHV, 1 BHV)
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 46.4
(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
Roddick was...
- 18/21 (86%) at net, including...
- 11/12 (92%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 2/2 off 1st serve and...
- 9/10 (90%) off 2nd serve
---
- 1/2 return-approaching
Ferrero was...
- 12/16 (75%) at net, including...
- 1/1 serve-volleying, a 2nd serve
Match Report
Monster serving from Roddick is front and center of match but rest of his game also very good, just not called on too much. Ferrero matches him in all areas bar the serve - and he serves well too, but ‘monstrous’ is beyond him - and that one difference is enough to leave him in the dust. Court is quick
51% unreturned for Roddick (Fer has healthy 30% himself), including 23 aces or 42% off first serves (Fer has 7 and 13% respectively). Speaks for itself. I believe this is the only Slam final outside grass where freebies cross the 50% barrier (and on grass, all the entries belong to the 100% serve-volleying Pete Sampras)
No hit-&-miss, low percentage returning or poor movement from Fer to account. Just a shadow of learnt helplessness or making no effort for a few returns at the end, where its likely that any effort would have been in vain anyway. Rod’s serve just happens to be that darn good. His having no read on the serve is about extent of his crimes on the return. He returns from 3-4 paces back and is still rushed on serves not far away. Second serves offer little relief. Rod’s second serves would make decent firsts for most players, and few of them draw errors that have been marked FEs, without serve-volleying support
Somewhat amusingly, he second serve-volleys 10 times or 33% off second serves, while doing so just twice of firsts. He’d be about half-way to service line were he to try behind those first serves. He’s less than optimally far forward even behind the seconds
Good tennis from both players when return is made, with action hard hitting baseline stuff, with both players going for their shots too
-Roddick 17 winners, forcing 17 errors, 17 UEs
- Fer 21 winners, forcing 9 errors, 22 UEs
For all that, Fer’s conjured break points in 2 games (just 1 less than Rod). Good going, seeing as Rod’s numbers are in completely lock-down-serve games territory. It’s a quick court where low breaks would be normal, but Fer is reduced to matter being fully out of his hands. Stick around, hope for double faults, low in count for a given game (and the low in count wouldn’t help much either, given Rod’s would-make-a-decent-first-serve second serve) and Rod getting a bit sloppy. It doesn’t happen
Rod at least can get into rallies and holds his own in them. Fer’s 16/34 or 47% second serve points won is best indicator of how the two players stack up from equal starting position. Sans the sole double fault, its 16/33, so virtually 50-50
Rod’s second serves leave him healthy initiative by contrast and his second serve-volleying aids in seeing him win 59% second serve points won.
And of course, first serve points are more about quality of serves than rallying ability and both players win fat loads of those
Action & Stats
Unreturneds - Rod 51%, Fer 30%, broken down as -
Aces - Rod 23, Fer 7
Return FEs drawn - Rod 18, Fer 11
Return UEs drawn - Rod 3, Fer 9
Not much scope for Fer to make return UEs. Virtually every Rod first serve qualifies as forceful and about half the seconds. He also serve-volleys off 33% second serves, transforming whatever there wasn’t to forceful to
Aced 23 times, making 21 return errors is an ace heavy yield. Serve is so big that even reading it wouldn’t help much in making returns, but Fer doesn’t seem to have a read
Fer serves powerfully too, though its pushed into background next to Rod’s serves. Rod’s a fraction slow to react in returning, which is also true to his play in rallies
The little delay in Rod’s first-step movement (both return and often in rallies) is common part of his general game. Seems to be an eye-reaction rather than movement matter. Once he’s on the move, he moves quickly, but that first is a touch off
Unlike Rod, Fer sends down a few routine first serves. He has a good second serve too. Its moving a step for these that Rod’s slower reaction comes out. 9 UEs, 11 FEs is yield that either speaks to doing very well against tough stuff or not so well against routine stuff
Both players look to have a swing at the return when they can, Fer’s chances limited and both have 2 return winners (none of them passes). Rod also return-approaches twice. Fer reduced to trying to poke and block returns back in play anyway he can regularly
It would turn out to be Roddick’s only Slam title. He had won the Canada-Cincinnati double leading in and would go onto finish the year ranked #1. Ferrero had won French Open earlier in the year and this would be his third and last Slam final and only one on hard court
Roddick won 101 points, Ferrero 76
Roddick serve-volleyed a third off the time off second serves (rarely off firsts)
(Note: I’ve guessed serve type for a small number of points)
Serve Stats
Roddick...
- 1st serve percentage (55/87) 63%
- 1st serve points won (49/55) 89%
- 2nd serve points won (19/32) 59%
- Aces 23
- Double Faults 2
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (44/87) 51%
Ferrero...
- 1st serve percentage (56/90) 62%
- 1st serve points won (41/56) 73%
- 2nd serve points won (16/34) 47%
- Aces 7
- Double Faults 1
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (27/90) 30%
Serve Pattern
Roddick served...
- to FH 44%
- to BH 56%
Ferrero served...
- to FH 26%
- to BH 73%
- to Body 1%
Return Stats
Roddick made...
- 62 (14 FH, 48 BH), including 1 runaround FH & 2 return-approaches
- 2 Winners (2 FH)
- 20 Errors, comprising...
- 9 Unforced (4 FH, 5 BH)
- 11 Forced (5 FH, 6 BH)
- Return Rate (62/89) 70%
Ferrero made...
- 41 (14 FH, 27 BH)
- 2 Winners (2 FH)
- 21 Errors, comprising...
- 3 Unforced (1 FH, 2 BH)
- 18 Forced (10 FH, 8 BH)
- Return Rate (41/85) 48%
Break Points
Roddick 2/5 (3 games)
Ferrero 0/3 (2 games)
Winners (including returns, excluding aces)
Roddick 17 (9 FH, 3 BH, 3 FHV, 1 BHV, 1 OH)
Ferrero 21 (10 FH, 6 BH, 1 FHV, 1 BHV, 3 OH)
Roddick's FHs - 3 cc (1 pass), 1 dtl return, 1 inside-out, 1 inside-out/dtl, 2 inside-in (1 return), 1 inside-in/cc at net
- BHs - 3 dtl (1 pass - a net chord pop over)
- 3 from serve-volley points - 1 first volley (1 FHV) & 2 second volleys (1 FHV, 1 BHV)
- the OH was on the bounce from the baseline
Ferrero's FHs - 6 cc (2 returns, 1 pass, 1 at net), 2 inside-out, 1 inside-in at net, 1 longline
- BHs - 3 cc (1 pass), 1 dtl, 1 inside-out/dtl, 1 net chord dribbler
Errors (excluding returns and serves)
Roddick 26
- 17 Unforced (12 FH, 5 BH)
- 9 Forced (4 FH, 5 BH)... with 1 BH running-down-drop-shot at net
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 48.2
Ferrero 39
- 22 Unforced (13 FH, 9 BH)
- 17 Forced (11 FH, 4 BH, 1 FHV, 1 BHV)
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 46.4
(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
Roddick was...
- 18/21 (86%) at net, including...
- 11/12 (92%) serve-volleying, comprising...
- 2/2 off 1st serve and...
- 9/10 (90%) off 2nd serve
---
- 1/2 return-approaching
Ferrero was...
- 12/16 (75%) at net, including...
- 1/1 serve-volleying, a 2nd serve
Match Report
Monster serving from Roddick is front and center of match but rest of his game also very good, just not called on too much. Ferrero matches him in all areas bar the serve - and he serves well too, but ‘monstrous’ is beyond him - and that one difference is enough to leave him in the dust. Court is quick
51% unreturned for Roddick (Fer has healthy 30% himself), including 23 aces or 42% off first serves (Fer has 7 and 13% respectively). Speaks for itself. I believe this is the only Slam final outside grass where freebies cross the 50% barrier (and on grass, all the entries belong to the 100% serve-volleying Pete Sampras)
No hit-&-miss, low percentage returning or poor movement from Fer to account. Just a shadow of learnt helplessness or making no effort for a few returns at the end, where its likely that any effort would have been in vain anyway. Rod’s serve just happens to be that darn good. His having no read on the serve is about extent of his crimes on the return. He returns from 3-4 paces back and is still rushed on serves not far away. Second serves offer little relief. Rod’s second serves would make decent firsts for most players, and few of them draw errors that have been marked FEs, without serve-volleying support
Somewhat amusingly, he second serve-volleys 10 times or 33% off second serves, while doing so just twice of firsts. He’d be about half-way to service line were he to try behind those first serves. He’s less than optimally far forward even behind the seconds
Good tennis from both players when return is made, with action hard hitting baseline stuff, with both players going for their shots too
-Roddick 17 winners, forcing 17 errors, 17 UEs
- Fer 21 winners, forcing 9 errors, 22 UEs
For all that, Fer’s conjured break points in 2 games (just 1 less than Rod). Good going, seeing as Rod’s numbers are in completely lock-down-serve games territory. It’s a quick court where low breaks would be normal, but Fer is reduced to matter being fully out of his hands. Stick around, hope for double faults, low in count for a given game (and the low in count wouldn’t help much either, given Rod’s would-make-a-decent-first-serve second serve) and Rod getting a bit sloppy. It doesn’t happen
Rod at least can get into rallies and holds his own in them. Fer’s 16/34 or 47% second serve points won is best indicator of how the two players stack up from equal starting position. Sans the sole double fault, its 16/33, so virtually 50-50
Rod’s second serves leave him healthy initiative by contrast and his second serve-volleying aids in seeing him win 59% second serve points won.
And of course, first serve points are more about quality of serves than rallying ability and both players win fat loads of those
Action & Stats
Unreturneds - Rod 51%, Fer 30%, broken down as -
Aces - Rod 23, Fer 7
Return FEs drawn - Rod 18, Fer 11
Return UEs drawn - Rod 3, Fer 9
Not much scope for Fer to make return UEs. Virtually every Rod first serve qualifies as forceful and about half the seconds. He also serve-volleys off 33% second serves, transforming whatever there wasn’t to forceful to
Aced 23 times, making 21 return errors is an ace heavy yield. Serve is so big that even reading it wouldn’t help much in making returns, but Fer doesn’t seem to have a read
Fer serves powerfully too, though its pushed into background next to Rod’s serves. Rod’s a fraction slow to react in returning, which is also true to his play in rallies
The little delay in Rod’s first-step movement (both return and often in rallies) is common part of his general game. Seems to be an eye-reaction rather than movement matter. Once he’s on the move, he moves quickly, but that first is a touch off
Unlike Rod, Fer sends down a few routine first serves. He has a good second serve too. Its moving a step for these that Rod’s slower reaction comes out. 9 UEs, 11 FEs is yield that either speaks to doing very well against tough stuff or not so well against routine stuff
Both players look to have a swing at the return when they can, Fer’s chances limited and both have 2 return winners (none of them passes). Rod also return-approaches twice. Fer reduced to trying to poke and block returns back in play anyway he can regularly