OK now that Andy Roddick has carried the US team to Davis cup win, Will he win a slam

It's not about Federer.
Roddick is 8-18 in last 3 years vs top10 players

The last time he has beaten a top9 player in a grand slam event is Us Open 2003.

Roddick is just not able to beat a top10. He has no tennis.

On the other hand, Roddick is great with other players.

Don't blame him, he's great. Like Chang, he wins always when he can (but unlickily for him Chang's tennis skills were very better).

We cannot ask him more. If all top10 players lose, Roddick will win another slam for sure.


c.
 
i think if roddick is in a position to play federer in the semi-finals again and somehow wins, then he will win another slam. Beating federer would inspire a competitor like roddick to take care of who he had in the finals. The trick for him is beating federer though, if he can make it through fed in the semis of any particular tournament he will get another one.
 
Nickognito said:
It's not about Federer.
Roddick is 8-18 in last 3 years vs top10 players

The last time he has beaten a top9 player in a grand slam event is Us Open 2003.

Roddick is just not able to beat a top10. He has no tennis.

On the other hand, Roddick is great with other players.

Don't blame him, he's great. Like Chang, he wins always when he can (but unlickily for him Chang's tennis skills were very better).

We cannot ask him more. If all top10 players lose, Roddick will win another slam for sure.


c.
Click to expand...

Roddick is 21-19 H2H against top 10 in the last 3 years. 10 have come from Federer, so 21-9 against the rest.

In grandslams, excluding Federer, he's only got one loss against the Top 10 (the embarrassing 1 to Gasquet), but that could be because he hasn't played Djokovic, Ferrer, and Nalbandian (3 years ago, so excluding the '03 USO) in a slam before.
So he's 6-1 against them.
 
my_forehand said:
Roddick is 21-19 H2H against top 10 in the last 3 years. 10 have come from Federer, so 21-9 against the rest.

In grandslams, excluding Federer, he's only got one loss against the Top 10 (the embarrassing 1 to Gasquet), but that could be because he hasn't played Djokovic, Ferrer, and Nalbandian (3 years ago, so excluding the '03 USO) in a slam before.
So he's 6-1 against them.
Click to expand...

Roddick is 8-18 vs top 10 opponents since the start of 2005. 7 of those vs Federer. So if you exclude Federer, which is kind of pointless anyway since anyones overall record is inflated by taking out their own biggest nemisis while still leaving in their own biggest pigeon (eg-for Roddick, Davydenko) it still would be only 8-11.
 
Last edited:
no andy roddick will not win a slam, hes a great player but hes not a champion, he has physical limitations that prevent him from being a serious slam contender, to win a slam andy would need a dream draw just to get to the final, and then on the very, very off chance that there would not be a top five player there waiting he would have a good shot, but no he won't because even if that did happen it would be pure luck and it won't happen
 
Straight from Davy's mouth... lol...

"Q. Nikolay, this is not about the match so much today, but Roddick seemed to set the stamp on this tie by winning the first match against Tursunov so soundly. Having played him and seeing him play today, can you say that he is a guy who you expect will resurface in the Slams as far as having another chance to win another slam?

NIKOLAY DAVYDENKO: I think as long as Federer is the leader, it's going to be rather difficult for him to win a slam. " - Dec 1, Portland, Oregon
 
lambielspins said:
Wimbledon is slower then the U.S Open. Roddick would have lost even more easily playing the same match.
Click to expand...
Do you have any definitive proof of this? Have you played on both Centre Court at Wimbledon and in Arthur Ashe Stadium at the US Open to compare the speeds?

Wimbledon may be slower now than it used to be but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's slower than the US Open. More likely it just means that the ball bounces higher than it used to at Wimbledon. And Nadal likes a higher bouncing ball, and he prefers running on natural, slippery, softer surfaces more than on artificial, grippy, harder surfaces.
 
I know it's popular to bash Roddick on these boards, but I was happy to see him playing well and really enjoying the moment. I respect Roddick for his commitment to playing Davis Cup.

As for him winning a slam, I think its going to be an uphill battle but I don't think its outside of the realm of possibilities. After all, Federer is not going to be winning every slam until he retires.
 
Chopin said:
I know it's popular to bash Roddick on these boards, but I was happy to see him playing well and really enjoying the moment. I respect Roddick for his commitment to playing Davis Cup.

As for him winning a slam, I think its going to be an uphill battle but I don't think its outside of the realm of possibilities. After all, Federer is not going to be winning every slam until he retires.
Click to expand...

Good point, great point actually, I wish other top players would use Roddick as an example in this respect, unfortunately thats not the age we live in I think, def good to see though
 
lambielspins said:
Nadal schooled Roddick earlier this year on hard courts, the surface Roddick has his best chance vs Nadal on. Nadal would beat Roddick almost anytime they played these days, Roddick would need a very fast hard court like the U.S Open to have any hope whatsoever.

Djokovic won his only meeting with Roddick so far, I expect him to regularly beat Roddick in the future from now on should they meet. He is probably better then Roddick in every surface now.
Click to expand...

Right on. I say the same thing. Anyway, are we talking about Roddick winning another slam after beating Dmitry Tursonov on indoor? Big Deal!!! Did we forget the ass whooping he suffered at the hands of Fed and Ferrer a week and a half ago in Shanghai? Jeez, he got murdered by Nadal in Indian Wells hardcourt and then by Joker in Montreal. Then he still has to worry about Fed on top of that. Don´t forget Nalbandian and Ferrer either. Roddick will NEVER win a slam again. I would bet the house on that. Back in 2004 I would have said different but from 2008 and onwards Roddick won´t have any better oppotunities than he did from 2002-2006. Now let´s stop dreaming here people. It was just a DC match against a guy ranked considerably lower than him. OMG, Roddick beat Tursunov, he´s a sure fire contender for Grand Slam titles now! Do you hear yourselves? Wake up!
 
Chopin said:
I know it's popular to bash Roddick on these boards, but I was happy to see him playing well and really enjoying the moment. I respect Roddick for his commitment to playing Davis Cup.

As for him winning a slam, I think its going to be an uphill battle but I don't think its outside of the realm of possibilities. After all, Federer is not going to be winning every slam until he retires.
Click to expand...

I respect Roddick´s dream to win a DC, I also give him credit for trying his butt off to get better but it´s obvious that his movement is a liability. His court sense is terrible, he has a way of making people look so good against him, especially when he comes to net behind those infamously bad approach shots. Lesser players can´t take advantage of it but quality opponents can pass him all day and night. You are also right, Fed won´t win every slam until he retires, expect guys like Nadal and Joker to do that. But not ARod.
 
Roddick has a great record in all the non-clay slams. I still think the draw will break for him at least one more time in the future and get him one more slam.
 
superman1 said:
Davis Cup means a lot because it's best of 5 and there is a huge amount of pressure, moreso than any Slam, so it's a big indicator of how mentally tough the guy is.

That being said, he'll have to be pretty damn lucky to ever win a Slam. The top players will have to get knocked out first.
Click to expand...

Like no, a grand slam needs more mental fortitude. Roddick had the whole crowd of US tennis fans behind him when he won Tursunov.
 
Fedace said:
Today, andy Roddick looked like a new man. He has accomplished one of his life long dream of winning the Davis Cup. He looked like a new REBORN andy Roddick. So with this win behind him and with new found Confidence, Can andy Roddick win a Grand Slam in 08 ?? and Can Roddick finally beat Roger Federer and win Wimbledon like he was supposed to do before this Federer fellow came along ?? I think he can.:)
Click to expand...

It's great that the USA won the Davis cup, but honestly what in Roddicks game, besides his serve, that you can see him challenging for Slams? I might not be the most objective when it comes to him, but I am looking forward to 2008, and him losing. Sorry, no slams for the American #1. :cry:
 
There are lots of American fans at one of the grand slams...i think which slam was that? Oh yeah the won he won in 2003 and was RUP in 2006. I'm not going to see he is going to win another slam but hey, the US hockey team did win in 1980, and Stanford beat USC etc...upsets happen...maybe not for Roddick, but in theory he could win another slam.
 
logansc said:
There are lots of American fans at one of the grand slams...i think which slam was that? Oh yeah the won he won in 2003 and was RUP in 2006. I'm not going to see he is going to win another slam but hey, the US hockey team did win in 1980, and Stanford beat USC etc...upsets happen...maybe not for Roddick, but in theory he could win another slam.
Click to expand...

I think andy will beat Federer in 4 tiebreakers at Wimbledon.
 
I think he should consider himself unlucky that he has only won one. The standard is so high at the top of the men's game at the moment.

Had he played at another time he would probably have won another couple of majors.

Having said this I don't see the standadard of his top rivals falling any time soon, so I would have to say no, I doubt he will win another major.

Regards

Tim
 
Wuornos said:
I think he should consider himself unlucky that he has only won one. The standard is so high at the top of the men's game at the moment.

Had he played at another time he would probably have won another couple of majors.

Having said this I don't see the standadard of his top rivals falling any time soon, so I would have to say no, I doubt he will win another major.

Regards

Tim
Click to expand...

What i want to know is WHy does roddick keep losing all the tiebreakers to Roger?? If andy has a out of mind serving day, i think he can take federer to tiebreakers in each set. Isn't tiebreakers one of those anything can happen type of situation. if anything can happen, why does andy keep losing practically all the tiebreakers to roger??:confused:
 
Fedace said:
What i want to know is WHy does roddick keep losing all the tiebreakers to Roger?? If andy has a out of mind serving day, i think he can take federer to tiebreakers in each set. Isn't tiebreakers one of those anything can happen type of situation. if anything can happen, why does andy keep losing practically all the tiebreakers to roger??:confused:
Click to expand...

Because rogers best shots appear during tiebreaks. If you watched the open he had some crazy "genius" shots that only showed up towards the tiebreaks. Before the tiebreakers roddick was holding his own really pushing federer around.
________
Buy Vapormatic
 
Last edited:
I think hes just glad sampras retired after winning the US open in 2002 to give him a chance to win it in 2003.

Wuornos said:
I think he should consider himself unlucky that he has only won one. The standard is so high at the top of the men's game at the moment.

Had he played at another time he would probably have won another couple of majors.

Having said this I don't see the standadard of his top rivals falling any time soon, so I would have to say no, I doubt he will win another major.

Regards

Tim
Click to expand...
 
i just find it funny that this thread should exist...roddick helped team USA win the davis cup but its still questionable if he can win a slam, especially with federer and nadal being so dominant in the slams

i just thought the funniest moment of yesterday was when roddick was asked who'd be buying the champaigne, to which roddick replied to the pure delight of the crowd, something like "i think the USTA is buying the champaigne tonight!" LOL :)
 
People overreact way way to much to the results of a few matches. And read way to much into the results. Like Federer's done now. Roddick will beat Federer in the AO because he beat him in an exhibition. And so on. To get a realistic picture you have to look at match results over time.
 
tzinc said:
People overreact way way to much to the results of a few matches. And read way to much into the results. Like Federer's done now. Roddick will beat Federer in the AO because he beat him in an exhibition. And so on. To get a realistic picture you have to look at match results over time.
Click to expand...
That's a bit unfair. Several of us were reading the exo result in addition to how well Andy had played against Fed at the Master's Cup the preceding December as evidence that he was starting to break through against Federer. I had predicted that the Aussie was going to be one of their closest slam matches since Wimbledon 2004.

But we all saw what happened.

Basically, Fed's destruction of Andy there may have pretty much sealed up their future head to head. If you listen to Roddick in interviews, I don't think he believes any more that he can beat him. It is--plain and simple--a bad match up for Andy. He can't really do anything if he's not getting free points on his serve, and Fed has an unbelievable ability to get his serve back into play in awkward positions.

Andy CAN beat Nadal and Djokovic, though. That doesn't mean he will, but many people upthread are acting like he can't hang with them. If Andy is on his game and on the right surface, he can beat them.

And he doesn'tnecessarily have to beat any of them to win a slam if the draw breaks his way at some point.
 
No he will not. Andy will fall into a heavy alcoholism fed by binge drinking after match victories. By mid spring it will be so bad he shows up to matches half lit and has to be carried off court 30 minutes into the match. His ranking will drop out of the top 200 by the hard court season and by the end of the year he wont even be playing anymore. He will then have a short lived broadcasting career with ESPN before his castmates become annoyed with his attitude and the heavy scent of Jack Daniels on his breath. 3 years from now he will have run out of money and you will find him at a local tavern in Austin, Texas trying swindle the locals for drink money, and impress the bar flies so he can get lucky at night. The end.
 
in response to tursonov playing like crap, is it possibe because roddick forced him to do so? roddick has beaten tursonov a number of times this year.
 
If I could throw my 2 cents in... a few years (2003) back my college team had a chance to have dinner w/ David Wheaton and at that time he said he believed that Roddick would win 1-2 majors... and thats it. His game is to predicatable and he's not able to adapt his style of play to counter many oponets like Federer, Nadal or even Dokovic has been able to do.
 
only chance is if roddick and fed are in opposite sides of the draw and fed is upset. not likely but anything is possible
 
Tennis Magazine says yes: possible:http://www.tennis.com/features/general/features.aspx?id=108700

"And that future is long, at least another five or six years, and maybe seven or eight. Ask yourself, who has been the steadiest player on the tour since 2003, after Roger Federer? Probably Roddick. If Federer were not as dominant—and no one has ever won as consistently or easily over such a long period—Roddick might have six major titles to his name: two at the U.S. Open (he won in 2003 and lost to Federer in the 2006 final); three at Wimbledon (he lost to Federer twice in the final and once in the semifinal); and one at the Australian Open (he lost to Federer in the semifinal last year). He’s always in contention and he’s point-for-point as feisty as Nadal, just not nearly as fast afoot. If someone else could take care of Federer along the way, or Federer had to miss a slam, which is bound to happen sometime, Roddick should be in position to challenge for the title, unless it’s at Roland Garros.

There’s little chance that Roddick will ever match Andre Agassi (eight majors) or regain the No. 1 ranking that he held briefly in 2003. But if Sampras could serve his way to a U.S. Open title in 2002 and Ivanisevic could win Wimbledon at age 29 when Sampras was in his prime (he had won the previous four), Roddick can win another major. The timing and draw has to be right, but the good thing about Roddick is you can count on him to be around when good fortune comes his way. The Davis Cup is a perfect example of that—after plugging away for seven years, Roddick performed when the draw (no match against Argentina on the road and a home final) broke in his favor. There’s no reason why it couldn’t happen for him a major, too."
 
just thought I'd point out that of the original New Balls -

Hewitt, Safin, Ferrero, Roddick, and Federer -

all of them have won a slam, been #1, and won the Davis Cup ...

except Federer.
 
Fedace said:
I think with this new found confidence, andy will beat Federer in the finals of wimbledon 08 and proclaim " I AM NOBODY'S PIGEON"
Click to expand...

I like Andy, but I don't see him beating Federer. Who did Andy really have to play? Tursonov??? Two old or injured Swedes? The minute the final was going to be played on fast courts, the Russians had no chance. Davydenko's head is in the crapper, Youzhny has a nice backhand, but a forehand as bad as Roddicks backhand. Tursonov hasn't beaten anybody in months.
 
Roddick couldn't win 3 wimbledons (2003-2005), 1 US Open (2006) because of Roger Federer.
If no Federer, he probably would have won 2007 Australian and 2007 US Open also.

But then, you have to beat everyone including Federer to win (like Nadal showed in French).

Roddick might win anoother slam or two when Fed's dominance reduces
 
JRstriker12 said:
Tennis Magazine says yes: possible:http://www.tennis.com/features/general/features.aspx?id=108700

"And that future is long, at least another five or six years, and maybe seven or eight. Ask yourself, who has been the steadiest player on the tour since 2003, after Roger Federer? Probably Roddick. If Federer were not as dominant—and no one has ever won as consistently or easily over such a long period—Roddick might have six major titles to his name: two at the U.S. Open (he won in 2003 and lost to Federer in the 2006 final); three at Wimbledon (he lost to Federer twice in the final and once in the semifinal); and one at the Australian Open (he lost to Federer in the semifinal last year). He’s always in contention and he’s point-for-point as feisty as Nadal, just not nearly as fast afoot. If someone else could take care of Federer along the way, or Federer had to miss a slam, which is bound to happen sometime, Roddick should be in position to challenge for the title, unless it’s at Roland Garros.

There’s little chance that Roddick will ever match Andre Agassi (eight majors) or regain the No. 1 ranking that he held briefly in 2003. But if Sampras could serve his way to a U.S. Open title in 2002 and Ivanisevic could win Wimbledon at age 29 when Sampras was in his prime (he had won the previous four), Roddick can win another major. The timing and draw has to be right, but the good thing about Roddick is you can count on him to be around when good fortune comes his way. The Davis Cup is a perfect example of that—after plugging away for seven years, Roddick performed when the draw (no match against Argentina on the road and a home final) broke in his favor. There’s no reason why it couldn’t happen for him a major, too."
Click to expand...

Too many wishful thinkings on this article. That guy is talking like if Federer was the only reason that prevented Roddick from winning several majors. Why isn´t Roddick no.3 then instead of no.6? Why didn´t he reach the final in any of the hardcourts Masters Series this year? Why not admit that his game has dropped, his forehand isn´t the same and top players can return his serve better than a few years ago?
6 majors if it weren´t for Federer LOL. Now all the players that lost to Federer in the last rounds can add several majors to their careers: Hewitt,Davydenko,Agassi, Nadal...
If it weren´t for Federer other top players would have played those finals/ semifinals against Roddick and why should we assume that Roddick would have beaten them? Didn´t he save matchpoint in the semifinal to win his only major title?

"There’s little chance that Roddick will ever match Andre Agassi (eight majors)". This sounds about right, zero chances indeed. I would say he has a chance to win another Slam but it´s a slim chance.
 
Fedace said:
What i want to know is WHy does roddick keep losing all the tiebreakers to Roger?? If andy has a out of mind serving day, i think he can take federer to tiebreakers in each set. Isn't tiebreakers one of those anything can happen type of situation. if anything can happen, why does andy keep losing practically all the tiebreakers to roger??:confused:
Click to expand...

Well for one Roger has the mental edge. To Roddick's mind it's always an uphill battle.Secondly, Roger has a wide variety of shot selections to choose from and he can bring the level of his game higher up to win, not entirely true in Roddick's case.You need to get yourself out of that "if Andy has an out of mind serving day". To beat Roger you need more than a serve, in case you havent noticed that. Roddick's game has no more surprises.
 
Last edited:
rommil said:
Well for one Roger has the mental edge. To Roddick's mind it's always an uphill battle.Secondly, Roger has a wide variety of shot selections to chose from and he can bring the level of his game higher up to win.You need to get yourself out of that "if Andy has an out of mind serving day". Roddick's game has no surprises.
Click to expand...

Plus Federer seem to raise his level little bit when he gets into the tiebreaker. It is possible that Federer could lose at Wimbledon this year. Noone won more than 5 in a row. If someone talented can play out of his head and Federer has a bad wimbledon, it is possible. I say Ivo Karlovic can take him out in the early rounds.
 
Fedace said:
Plus Federer seem to raise his level little bit when he gets into the tiebreaker. It is possible that Federer could lose at Wimbledon this year. Noone won more than 5 in a row. If someone talented can play out of his head and Federer has a bad wimbledon, it is possible. I say Ivo Karlovic can take him out in the early rounds.
Click to expand...

Your way of thinking is the reason why some things confuse you.
 
It's impossible to say that he is a HOFer when he has a 1-17 record against the best player in his era, maybe all time. And it's not like he loses in every GS to Fed. Marcos Baghdatis, Andy Murray, Richard Gasquet,... not to mention...GILLES MULLER. Even w/o Fed, he'd win 4 at the most. Don't even bring up the French Open....
 
coloskier said:
I like Andy, but I don't see him beating Federer. Who did Andy really have to play? Tursonov??? Two old or injured Swedes? The minute the final was going to be played on fast courts, the Russians had no chance. Davydenko's head is in the crapper, Youzhny has a nice backhand, but a forehand as bad as Roddicks backhand. Tursonov hasn't beaten anybody in months.
Click to expand...


So it's Andy's fault that the Russians couldn't get thier stuff together and the Swedes suck?

Hey, the Russians picked clay last year and beat us. This year we picked hard courts and beat them- pay-back is a b.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Fedace
  • Poll Poll
If Roddick Carries USA to Davis cup victory over Spain ?
Replies
30
Views
3K
Doubles
Doubles
K
US Davis Cup Team Announced
Replies
6
Views
960
gugafanatic
G
capriatifanatic
  • Poll Poll
Does Andy Roddick ever win another slam or beat Feds or Rafas?
Replies
17
Views
2K
Arafel
A
J
Andy Roddick ESPN chat
Replies
24
Views
3K
SydW
S
M
I would give anything to see an American win a Grand Slam again.
Replies
44
Views
3K
Matt_Williamson
M
Back
Top