roddick is not mentally weak

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Has Roddick won anything this year?? :lol:

Roddick is a one slam wonder and you very well know that. Murray will surpass Roddick's rather minimal 1 slam.

Again, all speculation as to whether Murray will surpass Roddick.

He can’t even win with the crowd supporting him to the bitter end. The match against Wawrinka at SW19 he BARELY survive with plenty of help from the British fans. So how is he going against Roddick when 20000+ crowd totally on Roddick’s side.

All we know is Roddick is a better player this year b/c he's lose some weight, got fitter and a better mover. Murray as we know so far, is overhype and is underachieving.
 
T

TheMagicianOfPrecision

Guest
You can't exactly say that since the final slam of the year hasn't been played yet. Murray has time on his side, and his best chance of winning his first slam in New York this month.
You still havent answered post 25, im sooo curious to hear...
 

drwood

Professional
I disagree with that totally..


What decade (70s, 80's,90s) is Roddick going to be a multi-slam winner in?

Well I can account for Roddick in the 90s since thats when I began watching.. Some others who witness the 70s and 80s would like to chime in here go ahead.

In the 90s

French- Roddick isnt winning any of those we can agree. Too many guys around who could take him out

Early 90s, Roddick doesnt see any slams.. His best bet would have to come in the late late 90s.
Wimbeldon- Sampras reigned supreme, and how would Roddick handle the attack of guys like Goran (We saw what goran did to roddick at Wimbeldon), Kraijeck in 96, Becker and others. Roddick isnt beating Sampras anyways, so Roddick doesnt see a Wimbeldon title

Australian Open- Maybe a late 90s Australian Open title where the competition was rather weaker. Though thats not guaranteed

US0- Maybe one during the years Sampras was injured 97-98. Roddick doesnt win any prior to 96. But you still have Rafter who was very good there. Then you have Andre coming back in 99 .. Roddick if he is lucky grabs a USO title.



As far as the 80s, the competition was even greater.. Possibly the greatest competition in history. Roddick would be lucky to see a slam

Slams prime Roddick could win in the 90s:
1990 US Open -- was a better server than Sampras at that time of Pete's career
1997 and 98 US Open -- Rafter not a lock to beat him
1999 US Open -- much better than Todd Martin who took Agassi to 5 sets

I agree about Wimbledon -- probably not winning in the 90s, but would make a few finals (96, 97, 98)

French -- nope

Aus Open
1996 Aus Open -- more fit than Becker, more powerful than Chang
1998 Aus Open -- Better than Korda, Rios, or Kucera
1999 Aus Open -- better than Kafelnikov or Enqvist

So that's 7 slams that he could realistically win in the 90s -- he'd probably win 3 or 4 of them.
 

GameSampras

Banned
Slams prime Roddick could win in the 90s:
1990 US Open -- was a better server than Sampras at that time of Pete's career
1997 and 98 US Open -- Rafter not a lock to beat him
1999 US Open -- much better than Todd Martin who took Agassi to 5 sets

I agree about Wimbledon -- probably not winning in the 90s, but would make a few finals (96, 97, 98)

French -- nope

Aus Open
1996 Aus Open -- more fit than Becker, more powerful than Chang
1998 Aus Open -- Better than Korda, Rios, or Kucera
1999 Aus Open -- better than Kafelnikov or Enqvist

So that's 7 slams that he could realistically win in the 90s -- he'd probably win 3 or 4 of them.



How is Roddick going to win the USO in 1990? Agassi, Mac, Lendl, Pete would all stand in his way. Roddick no doubt is going out to one of them. No doubt about that.

Dont see Roddick beating Prime Agassi at the USO in 1999 either.. Agassi was the superior HC player, and playing the best tennis of his career. No way does Roddick win.

The Australian Opens.. Yea maybe I could see one or two in the late 90s when they were up for a grabs.

Not sure about Rafter.. Rafter was a sun of a gun in 97 and 98 at the Open And pete was hurt.. SO maybe Roddick could grab one anyways..


Roddick isnt collecting too many slams though. 2-3 maybe.. MAYBE!!! But he isnt a lock. He certainly isnt winning 7 SLAMS though!! Thats just silly.. 2-4 sound alright. But most would of them would have to come in the late 90s. ANything prior to 96 doubtful Roddick is winning anything
 
Last edited:

GameSampras

Banned
Murray is a 0 slam "wonder"...at the age of 22 Roddick had 1 slam, Murrays got 0, and Murray came along at a much better time than Roddick.

Murray is a zero slam wonder now.. But hes only been significant for around a year now.. Murray may not have a great, capitivating career, but I definitely see him winning more than 1 slam.
 

Zeppy

Rookie
Has Roddick won anything this year?? :lol:

Roddick is a one slam wonder and you very well know that. Murray will surpass Roddick's rather minimal 1 slam.

Well, to be fair, Roddick did win Memphis if that is what you mean.

And who knows? Roddick may win another slam. He was pretty close at Wimbledon this year.
 

FiveO

Hall of Fame
Slams prime Roddick could win in the 90s:
1990 US Open -- was a better server than Sampras at that time of Pete's career
1997 and 98 US Open -- Rafter not a lock to beat him
1999 US Open -- much better than Todd Martin who took Agassi to 5 sets

I agree about Wimbledon -- probably not winning in the 90s, but would make a few finals (96, 97, 98)

French -- nope

Aus Open
1996 Aus Open -- more fit than Becker, more powerful than Chang
1998 Aus Open -- Better than Korda, Rios, or Kucera
1999 Aus Open -- better than Kafelnikov or Enqvist

So that's 7 slams that he could realistically win in the 90s -- he'd probably win 3 or 4 of them.

1990 US Open? His serve was better than Sampras's? If you say so. How about absolutely every other element of Sampras's game? No chance, not if you are correlating his 2009 to 1999, and working backward. What's the thought here, Roddick's peak was a full 10 years in length. You have to go back and look at Roddick's early results at the same age. Forget 1990 for Roddick.

'97 and '98 US Opens. Highly unlikely if he were coming from the other half of Rafter's draw. Henman remained a tick better than Roddick in their h2h and Rafter was a tick better than Henman throughout and rarely blinked in a big spot from '97 through 2001. As close to a lock as one could get. Overall, and this remains a theme throughout Roddick's career, even taking Federer out of it, Roddick doesn't beat contenders. In fact the first time he did was this year v. Murray at Wimbledon, and Murray's contender status at Wimbledon remains conjecture at this point. No one knows whether Murray will prove to be even a Henman type there. Could he? Sure. But we don't know yet. As far as Roddick goes at the US Open, he has results in the form of rounds reached, however the only top ten ranked/seeded player he's posted wins over was Ferrero at #3 in the '03 final and Berdych at #9 in a retirement in '07. In '97 it's likely that Roddick gets to the final if given Rusedski's draw. Unlikely he beats Rafter who had come through AA and then Chang to reach that final in the first place. In '98 if Roddick had Flipper's draw would it would set up pretty well for him provided he got past Henman would be a 50/50 prop, Thomas Johansson then Moya. He may final there but IMO he wouldn't beat Rafter who had come through Sampras, even an injured one. So out of the two I would say Roddick would be fairly assured of reaching one final in '97 and was no lock for '98. Unlikely he gets past a prime Rafter in those finals however.

Inserted in the other finalist's spot a strong case for one Final but IMO no Majors at this point, anywhere else in those draws he's no lock for a QF appearance.

'99 US Open? Forget it. Roddick was not going to beat a prime AA and he likely wasn't beating Martin in '99 who went QF, QF and Final at the AO, Wimbledon and US Open that year. Martin was 1-1 vs. Roddick on h/c in '03 and '04 when Roddick was reaching #1, and Martin was had slid and was in his last two years on tour. From '94 to '01 Martin faced Sampras or Agassi 11 times at Majors going 2-9. Roddick isn't reaching this final unless Martin pulls a Malavai Washington Wimbledon SF which was already years behind him.

The AO? This is Roddick's second worst surface.

'96 AO, you really need to re-check Becker's second half of '95 through the spring of '96 and Chang's v. big servers. Put him in Chang's spot it's still unlikely he gets past AA. So no.

'98 AO likely finalist opposite Korda but that final is a crap shoot, but maybe Roddick can take him out. Korda was one match win away from #1 and better than Kohlschrieber, Bagdhatis and Schuettler. Korda also didn't flinch v. big servers. Not a lock for Roddick by any stretch.

'99 This is YK's 2nd best surface. After Agassi and Sampras he was likely the 3rd best performer at the AO from '94 on. Between '94 to 2000 he played the AO 5 times losing to Sampras in '94, Agassi in '95, Becker in '96, winning it in '99 and losing to Agassi again in 2000. That's a title and four losses to the champion each of those five years. In a similar time frame Roddick has lost to Schuettler, Bagdhatis and Kohlschrieber at the AO. Again not a Roddick lock by any stretch.

Realistically Roddick would have likely reached 2 finals and perhaps a third. He was not winning every one of those three and just as plausible could have have lost all of them. IMO Roddick's in the nineties would have looked like and fallen somewhere between a Todd Martin and if things broke just right a YK, a very, very high quality player but not an event in/event out Major threat.

5
 
Last edited:
1990 US Open? His serve was better than Sampras's? How about absolutely every other element of Sampras's game? No chance, not if you are correlating his 2009 to 1999, and working backward. The premise being being what? Roddick's peak was a full 10 years in length. Forget 1990 for Roddick.

'97 and '98 US Opens. Highly unlikely if he were coming from the other half of Rafter's draw. Henman remained a tick better than Roddick in their h2h and Rafter was a tick better than Henman throughout and rarely blinked in a big spot from '97 through 2001. As close to a lock as one could get. Overall, and this remains a theme throughout Roddick's career, even taking Federer out of it, Roddick doesn't beat contenders. In fact the first time he did was this year v. Murray, whose contender status at Wimbledon remains conjecture at this point. No one knows whether Murray will prove to be even a Henman type there. Could he? Sure. But we don't know yet. As far as Roddick goes at the US Open, he has results in the form of rounds reached, however the only top ten ranked/seeded player he's posted a win over was Ferrero at #3 in the '03 final and Berdych at #9 in a retirement in '07. In '97 it's likely that Roddic gets to the final with Rusedski's draw. Unlikely he beats Rafter who had come through AA and then Chang to reach that final in the first place. In '98 if Roddick had Flipper's draw would it would set up pretty well for him provided he got past Henman would be a 50/50 prop, Thomas Johansson then Moya. He may final there but IMO he wouldn't beat Rafter who had come through Agassi and Chang to reach. So out of the two I would say Roddick would be fairly assured of reaching one final in '97 and was no lock for '98. Unlikely he gets past a prime Rafter in those finals however.

Inserted the other finalists spot a strong case for on Final and no Majors at this point, anywhere else in those draws he's no lock for a QF appearance.

'99 US Open? Forget it. Roddick was not going to beat a prime AA and he likely wasn't beating Martin in '99 who went QF, QF and Final at the AO, Wimbledon and US Open that year. Martin was 1-1 vs. Roddick on h/c in '03 and '04 when Roddick was reaching #1, and Martin was had slid and was in his last two years on tour. From '94 to '01 Martin faced Sampras or Agassi 11 times at Majors going 2-9. Roddick isn't reaching this final unless Martin pulls a Malavai Washington Wimbledon SF which was already years behind him.

The AO? This is Roddick's second worst surface.

'96 AO, you really need to re-check Becker's second half of '95 through the spring of '96 and Chang's v. big servers. Put him in Chang's spot it's still unlikely he gets past AA. So no.

'98 AO likely finalist opposite Korda but that final is a crap shoot, but maybe Roddick can take him out. Korda was one match win away from #1 and better than Kohlschrieber, Bagdhatis and Schuettler. Korda also didn't flinch v. big servers. Not a lock for Roddick by any stretch.

'99 This is YK's 2nd best surface. After Agassi and Sampras he was likely the 3rd best performer at the AO from '94 on. Between '94 to 2000 he played the AO 5 times losing to Sampras in '94, Agassi in '95, Becker in '96, winning it in '99 and losing to Agassi again in 2000. That's a title and four losses to the champion each of those five years. In a similar time frame Roddick has lost to Schuettler, Bagdhatis and Kohlschrieber at the AO. Again not a Roddick lock by any stretch.

Realistically Roddick would have likely reached 2 finals and perhaps a third. He was not winning every one of those three and just as plausible could have have lost all of them. IMO Roddick's in the nineties would have looked far more fallen somewhere between a Todd Martin and if things broke just right a YK, a very, very high quality player but not an event in/event out Major threat.

5

you can't prove any of this
 

FiveO

Hall of Fame
you can't prove any of this

Alot of what is in my post is in the record already, but no, the proposed match-up/outcomes can't be "proven", just like a conclusion supposing Roddick would amass a higher Major count in the '90's can't, which is the opinion I was addressing.

5
 

GameSampras

Banned
1990 US Open? His serve was better than Sampras's? If you say so. How about absolutely every other element of Sampras's game? No chance, not if you are correlating his 2009 to 1999, and working backward. What's the thought here, Roddick's peak was a full 10 years in length. You have to go back and look at Roddick's early results at the same age. Forget 1990 for Roddick.

'97 and '98 US Opens. Highly unlikely if he were coming from the other half of Rafter's draw. Henman remained a tick better than Roddick in their h2h and Rafter was a tick better than Henman throughout and rarely blinked in a big spot from '97 through 2001. As close to a lock as one could get. Overall, and this remains a theme throughout Roddick's career, even taking Federer out of it, Roddick doesn't beat contenders. In fact the first time he did was this year v. Murray at Wimbledon, and Murray's contender status at Wimbledon remains conjecture at this point. No one knows whether Murray will prove to be even a Henman type there. Could he? Sure. But we don't know yet. As far as Roddick goes at the US Open, he has results in the form of rounds reached, however the only top ten ranked/seeded player he's posted wins over was Ferrero at #3 in the '03 final and Berdych at #9 in a retirement in '07. In '97 it's likely that Roddick gets to the final if given Rusedski's draw. Unlikely he beats Rafter who had come through AA and then Chang to reach that final in the first place. In '98 if Roddick had Flipper's draw would it would set up pretty well for him provided he got past Henman would be a 50/50 prop, Thomas Johansson then Moya. He may final there but IMO he wouldn't beat Rafter who had come through Sampras, even an injured one. So out of the two I would say Roddick would be fairly assured of reaching one final in '97 and was no lock for '98. Unlikely he gets past a prime Rafter in those finals however.

Inserted in the other finalist's spot a strong case for one Final but IMO no Majors at this point, anywhere else in those draws he's no lock for a QF appearance.

'99 US Open? Forget it. Roddick was not going to beat a prime AA and he likely wasn't beating Martin in '99 who went QF, QF and Final at the AO, Wimbledon and US Open that year. Martin was 1-1 vs. Roddick on h/c in '03 and '04 when Roddick was reaching #1, and Martin was had slid and was in his last two years on tour. From '94 to '01 Martin faced Sampras or Agassi 11 times at Majors going 2-9. Roddick isn't reaching this final unless Martin pulls a Malavai Washington Wimbledon SF which was already years behind him.

The AO? This is Roddick's second worst surface.

'96 AO, you really need to re-check Becker's second half of '95 through the spring of '96 and Chang's v. big servers. Put him in Chang's spot it's still unlikely he gets past AA. So no.

'98 AO likely finalist opposite Korda but that final is a crap shoot, but maybe Roddick can take him out. Korda was one match win away from #1 and better than Kohlschrieber, Bagdhatis and Schuettler. Korda also didn't flinch v. big servers. Not a lock for Roddick by any stretch.

'99 This is YK's 2nd best surface. After Agassi and Sampras he was likely the 3rd best performer at the AO from '94 on. Between '94 to 2000 he played the AO 5 times losing to Sampras in '94, Agassi in '95, Becker in '96, winning it in '99 and losing to Agassi again in 2000. That's a title and four losses to the champion each of those five years. In a similar time frame Roddick has lost to Schuettler, Bagdhatis and Kohlschrieber at the AO. Again not a Roddick lock by any stretch.

Realistically Roddick would have likely reached 2 finals and perhaps a third. He was not winning every one of those three and just as plausible could have have lost all of them. IMO Roddick's in the nineties would have looked like and fallen somewhere between a Todd Martin and if things broke just right a YK, a very, very high quality player but not an event in/event out Major threat.

5



Bravo... Great Post and way to keep into perspective.. This idea where Roddick would be a multi slam winner in any other era that doesnt contain Fed is a bit of joke.

Roddick is good but was never THAT GOOD, to where we could just automatically rack slams up for him in a different era
 

Joseph L. Barrow

Professional
Roddick is obviously not mentally weak. He has time and time again come back and made another run towards the top just when prognosticators were expecting him to fade into oblivion, and staunchly refuses to give up on his quest for a second Slam no matter how many discouraging batterings he receives from a certain demi-god-esque Swiss player. He has won many close, high-pressure matches (see the Hewitt and Murray encounters this last Wimbledon for recent reference) in which the deciding factor was his superior play at the most crucial stages.

He has more than his share of come-from-behind victories to his credit as well. He wins after saving match point on at least a once-a-year basis- Haas this year in Madrid, Schwank last year at Legg Mason, Mahut at the '07 Queen's Club, Arthurs at '06 Memphis, Ferrer at '05 Paris, Haas and Ljubicic at the '04 Olympics and Indianapolis,, Nalbandian and Aynaoui at the '03 US and Australian Opens, etc. (I didn't remember all of those off the top of my head, but rather scanned through his match record). I imagine there are few, if any, players on the tour who have saved match point to win as many times as Roddick has.

As for the second set tiebreak at Wimbledon, the shot Roddick missed at 6-5 was not an "easy put-away" volley. It was a pretty fast top-spin shot above his head at an angle to the backhand side, and per his account it was further complicated by a timely gust of wind. It was a difficult shot. Roddick's four failed set points in the second-set tiebreak resulted from three excellent shots by Federer and one miss on a difficult high backhand volley by Roddick. A msised opportunity? Yes. A choke? Not really.
 

GameSampras

Banned
Roddick is obviously not mentally weak. He has time and time again come back and made another run towards the top just when prognosticators were expecting him to fade into oblivion, and staunchly refuses to give up on his quest for a second Slam no matter how many discouraging batterings he receives from a certain demi-god-esque Swiss player. He has won many close, high-pressure matches (see the Hewitt and Murray encounters this last Wimbledon for recent reference) in which the deciding factor was his superior play at the most crucial stages.

He has more than his share of come-from-behind victories to his credit as well. He wins after saving match point on at least a once-a-year basis- Haas this year in Madrid, Schwank last year at Legg Mason, Mahut at the '07 Queen's Club, Arthurs at '06 Memphis, Ferrer at '05 Paris, Haas and Ljubicic at the '04 Olympics and Indianapolis,, Nalbandian and Aynaoui at the '03 US and Australian Opens, etc. (I didn't remember all of those off the top of my head, but rather scanned through his match record). I imagine there are few, if any, players on the tour who have saved match point to win as many times as Roddick has.

As for the second set tiebreak at Wimbledon, the shot Roddick missed at 6-5 was not an "easy put-away" volley. It was a pretty fast top-spin shot above his head at an angle to the backhand side, and per his account it was further complicated by a timely gust of wind. It was a difficult shot. Roddick's four failed set points in the second-set tiebreak resulted from three excellent shots by Federer and one miss on a difficult high backhand volley by Roddick. A msised opportunity? Yes. A choke? Not really.



Missed opportunity, Choke.. Call it what u will.. Roddick has had his share against Fed
 

NamRanger

G.O.A.T.
Bravo... Great Post and way to keep into perspective.. This idea where Roddick would be a multi slam winner in any other era that doesnt contain Fed is a bit of joke.

Roddick is good but was never THAT GOOD, to where we could just automatically rack slams up for him in a different era



If we shift Roddick's best years back he probably splits slams with Hewitt / Federer 2001-2003. In fact, prime Roddick probably wins the AO that year with his eyes closed, and could give Hewitt a real test at Wimbledon. So yes, if we put Roddick in that "transition era" then he probably is a multi slam winner.
 

GameSampras

Banned
If we shift Roddick's best years back he probably splits slams with Hewitt / Federer 2001-2003. In fact, prime Roddick probably wins the AO that year with his eyes closed, and could give Hewitt a real test at Wimbledon. So yes, if we put Roddick in that "transition era" then he probably is a multi slam winner.



I dunno how we can account for this.. Roddick was destroyed even by 31 year old Sampras. He was beaten pretty consistently by Hewitt at the time.. Hewitt at his peak was a better player than Roddick. And even brokeback Agassi still gave Roddick problems.


I think some of you are given Roddick just a little too much credit. And some will argue that even back in 03, Roddick was a little more of a deadly threat then than he is now, with his "try to grind style". His FH was lethal and serving as huge.. Yet he still only saw one slam for himself.


Some area of his game has improved like his fitness, maybe his BH. But his return of serve is still crap.. His overrall return, still nothing special
 

NamRanger

G.O.A.T.
I dunno how we can account for this.. Roddick was destroyed even by 31 year old Sampras. He was beaten pretty consistently by Hewitt at the time.. Hewitt at his peak was a better player than Roddick. And even brokeback Agassi still gave Roddick problems.


I think some of you are given Roddick just a little too much credit. And some will argue that even back in 03, Roddick was a little more of a deadly threat then than he is now, with his "try to grind style". His FH was lethal and serving as huge.. Yet he still only saw one slam for himself.


Some area of his game has improved like his fitness, maybe his BH. But his return of serve is still crap.. His overrall return, still nothing special




2002 he wins the AO with his eyes closed. I don't see anyone in this pitiful tournament actually beating Roddick. That is, assuming we shift back Roddick's prime years abit.


2002 Wimbledon it's close. Dead even H2H with Hewitt.




So yes, if we shifted it back abit than Roddick wins 2002 easily since no one is there essentially (except Safin, Haas, and Johansson, but seriously? Safin left his mind somewhere in the final, and Johansson and Haas are not beating prime Roddick).



Counting his 2003 USO victory than Roddick is a multi slam champion. Easy. I do like how you still refuse to acknowledge the fact that Roddick was injured in his match against Sampras in 2002. I guess if you continue to do so, than Sampras was not injured when he played Jaime Ygaza.
 
Last edited:

Wolland

Rookie
Roddick is definitely not mentally weak. I mean, even in the match against Del Potro he showed some mental strength by coming back from 6-3 in the tie break. Yes, he did lose this match, but Del Potro was very lucky in the tie break. That forehand miss-hit which acted like a drop shot is a shot you hit once in a million years.
 
I'm sure this has already been said, but there are only two players who have stayed in the top 10 over the past 7 years----one's name is Federer...the other is Roddick.

Nothing says mental toughness like consistency, and that's the truth---it's a goddamn shame the haters can't see that...
 
Top