Roddick's comments during AO'17 on Federer: "if he wins one more, it pretty much puts the all-time slams record out of reach"

That comment didn't age well:

Roddick, a four-time semi-finalist at Melbourne Park, is among those cheering for a Federer vs Nadal grand slam final for the first time since the 2011 French Open. And he says there are huge ramifications for both men when it comes to legacy and being remembered as the greatest of all time.

Federer holds the record for most majors with 17 and Nadal — five years his junior — sits equal second with Pete Sampras on 14.

“I think (a Federer vs Nadal) final would be amazing for tennis,” Roddick told Fox Sports Australia via the online social marketplace Charly.

“And the impact of that match, if it were to happen, would be Rafa's march on Roger’s 17 slams.

“All of a sudden, if he sneaks a win here, and he is always in with a realistic shot of winning that French Open ... all of a sudden it becomes a realistic conversation again.

“We kind of all had left Rafa — at least his better days of tennis — for dead a little bit and I’m certainly guilty of that.”

“He can see that 18th slam and if he wins one more, it pretty much puts — in my opinion — the all-time slams record out of reach for someone like Rafa or someone like Novak. It just puts so much space between them”


Bionic Poster
No one thought that after the already ridiculously weak two next gens, even the third consecutive one will be a dud.

Records are fine and dandy, but when the game is in the gutter it is only so much meaning that they can have.



Hall of Fame
It wasn't an outrageous hypothesis at the time. novak throating that ball might be incredibly significant .


I thought Rafa would not catch Roger at nearly every point until Rafa
won until Roger narrowly missed 21 at Wimb.

With Novak it still might hold true but wouldn’t bet on it.


This was pre-final. There's a reason that match was so hyped up. It was supposed to be closing the book on the Fedal era. One last go-round, and then maybe if things went really well and they stayed healthy, then they could be legitimate contenders again. They weren't supposed to go from not winning a slam in 3/5 years to suddenly rattling off 6 in a row. Roger had to scratch & claw his way to that final. Nadal barely survived Grigor Dimitrov. These were the signs of a magical run, not a return to dominance.

Murray and Novak's losses were still considered blips on the radar at the time, and they would go back to being 1-2 after Australia.


Hall of Fame
Agree to all the comments above. Nobody foresaw Federer and Nadal continue to win. 18 seemed too high and then 20 also.

And the Djoker came and started winning everything again. And suddenly 20 seemed very much manageable.

So two players have reached 20 , and the 3rd one will reach too.
A lot of people at the time thought the Big 3 was pretty much done, especially Roger and Rafa. Murray and Wawrinka won back to back slams to end 2016. The last time 2 slams in a row were won by non-Big 3 players was 2003 - Agassi and Ferrero at the AO and at RG.

So yeah, a 4 slam lead at that time in their careers looked insurmountable. No one in their right mind would have predicted that Roger and Rafa would win 6 consecutive majors and the Big 3 would win 13 straight slams (14 of 15).

Terry Tibbs

I also thought the same as Roddick when Federer won that AO17 final even though I didn't envisage Federer adding to his 18. At that point in time Nadal I don't think had won a major for several years and had been struggling with injuries. I really thought he was close to being finished.


That comment didn’t age well. What’s strange is how so many appear to have learned nothing are are predicting that Novak simply can’t reach 20 slams, much less surpass it. How many times will we misjudge these players?