federerforever said:
It's amazing that Roddick was able to win a non-tiebreak set off Federer while playing the worst match of the tournament and completely choking. And he did that while Federer was playing at his best. Anybody who has seen the Roddick-Hewitt match will know what I am talking about. If Roddick would have played at least as good as he did against Hewitt then he would have taken Federer to five sets and actually would have had a chance to win a match. Roddick has all the talent and skills to beat Federer playing at his best. But unfortunately Roddick does not have the mental toughness or stamina to pull this off. In order to beat Federer at his best Roddick would have to go over 4 hours in a 5 setter match. If Roddick is not prepared to handle that then he will never be able to beat Federer in a slam. Roddick's biggest weakness is the lack of mental toughness and endurance. That's what makes Federer so invincible because he is the mentaly toughest and fit player of all time. Hopefully next time Roddick will realize that you have to play at your best against Federer in a slam, not at your worst.
wellI agree on some of your points...
While I wouldn't say that Roddick played the worst match of the tournament vs. Federer, he certainly came out way too tight and got pummeled in the first set....if he had been able to play the way he did in the 2nd and 3rd sets in the first, he might have taken that first set, and in doing so, may have actually had a shot at winning the match. Losing the first set to Fed pretty much equals match suicide.
I do think that Roddick could have served better....he got his serve going at moments, but it let him down in some key situations. Against Hewitt, his serve was just rolling from start to finish. Also, he did not seem to have the confidence in his backhand, particularly down the line, as he did earlier in the tournament....that is the one shot that is crucial in order to beat Fed (unless you are a lefty), as has been shown time and time again.
I agree that his mental toughness, or in particular, his confidence, is the area that he is clearly not in the same league as Roger...and yes, he appeared to tire in the fourth set, but normally, I don't think Roddick has fitness issues...he is a pretty fit guy in his own right...but it's always hard to play a final less than 24 hours after a grueling semi....in this regard, Fed usually has the advantage in finals, as he usually steamrools whoever he plays in the semis.
I actually disagree about Federer's endurance....it is good, but I think it appears better than it is usually b/c he spends so little time out on the court over the course of a tournament compared to everyone else! I mean, yes, physically, he has the endurance to go the distance against most players, but it is mentally where he has proven that he is vulnerable in long matches. He has a losing record in 5 set matches for his career. We've actually seen him have some pretty monumental mental collapses late in long matches. Not converting on matchpoints vs. Safin at the AO 2005 and vs. Nadal at the Rome Masters 2006, and going on to lose both those matches are some recent examples. Even in the quarter finals vs. Blake, Fed started to become mentally unglued late in the match.
So in a way, I think his mental endurance is not quite at the same level as the rest of his game. In particular, I've noticed that in matches where a player, like Nadal, is able to pick on his backhand enough, and is able to draw enough errors from it, late in the match, Federer's backhand is suceptible to rather long bouts where it breaks down completely...yes part of this is a loack of phycial endurance hitting high backhands all day, but I think it is more mental. Since his backhand was his one obvious weakness from his youth and on, until really only the last couple of years, and it was picked on and exploited by players such as Hewitt and Nalbandian who dominated Fed as a junior, I think that it can still break down under pressure, and maybe always could...sometimes the things we are most insecure about early in life (particularly matters of the psyche), even if we are able to overcome these things or improve them, can come back to haunt us under duress.
Anyway, I guess the main point here is that Roddick is improving, as hard as it is to believe. I like him in this role of a forgotten player with a chip on his shoulder, and I like the infusion of emotion that Connors has re-instilled in him. I think he is a hard worker , harder than people give him credit for, and while he may never be no.1 in the world again, I do think he has another slam or two left in him if he is able to continue to improve. The improvement in his backhand alone in the last 3 or 4 months is impressive. This tells me that it is perhaps just a matter of proper coaching. The volleys are improving slowly but steadily..the approach game also has, but there's a long way to go there. There have been some subtle improvements in his awful return game, but again, a long way to go to hte top in that department....certainly Connors could be a hell of a boon here....2007 will be an interesting year for Roddick...I've rarely seen a player rise from such low depths as he was playing in early in the year and late last year to his current form. That in of itself is actually pretty impressive in my mind. It shows a mental toughness on a macro level that few people possess.
