The Kings of Grass

NatF

Bionic Poster
The sad thing about Roddick is he actually had the weapons to achieve more but not the belief or mindset. His level in the 2004 Wimbledon final was mindblowing and he was just ripping the match from Federer's hands and then the rain delay happened, and he came back out without the intensity he had. That was the story of Roddick's career. I do agree though that the grass field in particular did not have many challengers early on and there was a void there until Djokovic and Murray matured.
I think the field was fine tbh (what a surprise I think that lol). The likes of Federer, Roddick, Hewitt, Grosjean, Henman and Ancic were all good in at least a few of those 03-06 years.

I think 2004/early 2005 broke Roddick's spirit, never had the same belief and his game went in the wrong direction as a result. I don't think he got the most out of his game.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Safin and Nalbandian were in that Hewitt bracket also.

I actually felt more bad for him at W 2004 than W 2009, because in 2004 it was an external factor that caused the massive change, where as in 2009 he made a massive critical mistake in that second set. Now while we will never know for sure, I feel Roddick was on the path to the title in 2004, Federer was struggling to contain him and needed a big drop in form from Andy. Also, Federer wasn't in his head at that time IMO. People think that was an easy for Fed, far from it.
Yea Roddick didn't fear him then which was a big difference. I think when he left the court he then realized what he close to making happen and he starting thinking about too much, whereas before he was just going for it with no hesitation. Roddick needed that win much more than Federer did who would have gone on to dominant anyway. This would have at least given Roddick belief that he could win more big titles. It wasn't meant to be though.
 

BHud

Hall of Fame
He has won 8 titles on grass (more than any other active player except Federer): 3 at Wimbledon (2 in The Championships, 1 in the Olympics against 2 Grass Kings) and 5 at the next most important grass event (more than any other player). I think that's a resumé worthy of consideration.

Nothing personal, mate.
But the five “next most important” are minor tournaments...competition is questionable...sorry mate, we’re talking big boy venues, I’ll stick with my list...no Murray :)
Mac has three Wimbledon titles - 1981, 1983 & 1984.
In the Open Era, Laver and Newcombe have two Wimbledon titles.
Even better...Murray of limited significance...
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Safin and Nalbandian were in that Hewitt bracket also.

I actually felt more bad for him at W 2004 than W 2009, because in 2004 it was an external factor that caused the massive change, where as in 2009 he made a massive critical mistake in that second set. Now while we will never know for sure, I feel Roddick was on the path to the title in 2004, Federer was struggling to contain him and needed a big drop in form from Andy. Also, Federer wasn't in his head at that time IMO. People think that was an easy for Fed, far from it.
Hewitt was the real #2 in 2004 imo :p
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Went 5 with Youzhny too IIRC?

I do recall Nadal being reasonably close to defeat in 2010 as well?
He went down 2 sets to love to Youhnzy and then won the last 3 sets easily, only losing like 5 games I think.

In 2010, he went to 2 sets 1 twice and then won the last two sets easily. He was close to losing to both Kendrick and Soderling though.
 

Hitman

Hall of Fame
Yea Roddick didn't fear him then which was a big difference. I think when he left the court he then realized what he close to making happen and he starting thinking about too much, whereas before he was just going for it with no hesitation. Roddick needed that win much more than Federer did who would have gone on to dominant anyway. This would have at least given Roddick belief that he could win more big titles. It wasn't meant to be though.
Yes, that was the tipping point for Roddick going forwards. IMO, I just never saw that same Roddick again. I do feel also that Roddick needed that win more, Federer winning it is what allowed him to pull away from the pack and be declared the top dog.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
I think the field was fine tbh (what a surprise I think that lol). The likes of Federer, Roddick, Hewitt, Grosjean, Henman and Ancic were all good in at least a few of those 03-06 years.

I think 2004/early 2005 broke Roddick's spirit, never had the same belief and his game went in the wrong direction as a result. I don't think he got the most out of his game.
Outside of Federer and Roddick in 2004, it was ok but not great imo.

Yea he underachieved imo but I do feel he started playing in a way that wasn't going to win big titles. He started pushing his forehand and trying to rally more, when he should have remained really aggressive because that's what helped him get to #1. I do think he could have achieved more and gotten more out of himself.
 

Sabrina

Semi-Pro
Hewitt was more consistent than Roddick in 2004, just that he started the year at No.17 so that he bumped into Federer much earlier than Roddick, who stayed in the top 2 for whole year.
 

Hitman

Hall of Fame
Hewitt was more consistent than Roddick in 2004, just that he started the year at No.17 so that he bumped into Federer much earlier than Roddick, who stayed in the top 2 for whole year.
Yes, Hewitt was having deep runs on clay also in 2004. Had a good run at RG and Hamburg.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Yes, that was the tipping point for Roddick going forwards. IMO, I just never saw that same Roddick again. I do feel also that Roddick needed that win more, Federer winning it is what allowed him to pull away from the pack and be declared the top dog.
Yep and like @NatF said, I think his spirit was broken after that loss, the loss at the 2004 USO, and other losses that came right after that. Roddick was never the same player aftrer 2004.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Yes, I think Hewitt pulled ahead of him in 2005. I loved the Roddick of 2001 to 2004, he was one of my favs.
2003 and 2004 Roddick were my favorite versions. He kind of flew under the radar a bit for me before that because I was so focused on Pete and Andre. I remember one year though he lost in the main draw at a Slam and then entered the boy's tournament and won. Lol.
 

Sabrina

Semi-Pro
Yes, I think Hewitt pulled ahead of him in 2005. I loved the Roddick of 2001 to 2004, he was one of my favs.
The first time I saw Roddick was 2003 AO against Schuettler. Basically I followed his entire career from start to finish. Roddick was my most favorite players, ever.
 

The_Mental_Giant

Hall of Fame
Sampras

No King chokes the way Federer has against his two greatest rivals on his "best" surface.
How did Federer choke against Nadal? He was lucky not to get straighsetted that day.. remember me who won the first two sets again.. completely different picture with Djokovic in 2019..
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
The first time I saw Roddick was 2003 AO against Schuettler. Basically I followed his entire career from start to finish. Roddick was my most favorite players, ever.
I became a fan of Rafa after seeing him beat Roddick and USA in Davis Cup. I was like who the heck is this youngster doing this under that much pressure!! I like Roddick, but that match was a turning point for me!
 

Sabrina

Semi-Pro
I became a fan of Rafa after seeing him beat Roddick and USA in Davis Cup. I was like who the heck is this youngster doing this under that much pressure!! I like Roddick, but that match was a turning point for me!
I remember that I knew Nadal around 2004 but that time as a double player lol. He usually partnered Tommy Robredo in 2004-2005 IIRC. I became a Nadal fan since 2007 Indian Wells - Miami though.
 

Hitman

Hall of Fame
2003 and 2004 Roddick were my favorite versions. He kind of flew under the radar a bit for me before that because I was so focused on Pete and Andre. I remember one year though he lost in the main draw at a Slam and then entered the boy's tournament and won. Lol.
I first started focusing more on Roddick when I was watching Ivanesvic's magical ( and yes, it is still the best run to any slam title) run to the Wimbledon 2001 title. I liked his big hitting game a lot, and then followed him over to the USO where he had that dogfight with Hewitt that went five sets. Also, I knew he had a 2-0 H2H against Pete before that classic USO 02 match up. Just loved his style, and the way he played up to the crowd. Fun times.

The first time I saw Roddick was 2003 AO against Schuettler. Basically I followed his entire career from start to finish. Roddick was my most favorite players, ever.
Oh, sadly when he was likely at his weakest you saw him for the first time. He had just won an iconic match the round before. I always wanted him to win Wimbledon, especially in 2003, after he had beaten Agassi in Queens and won that title, felt he was the guy after Sampras, but fate had other ideas.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
I first started focusing more on Roddick when I was watching Ivanesvic's magical ( and yes, it is still the best run to any slam title) run to the Wimbledon 2001 title. I liked his big hitting game a lot, and then followed him over to the USO where he had that dogfight with Hewitt that went five sets. Also, I knew he had a 2-0 H2H against Pete before that classic USO 02 match up. Just loved his style, and the play he played up to the crowd. Fun times.



Oh, sadly when he was likely at his weakest you saw him for the first time. He had just won an iconic match the round before. I always wanted him to win Wimbledon, especially in 2003, after he had beaten Agassi in Queens and won that title, felt he was the guy after Sampras, but fate had other ideas.
Ivanisevic's run was magical and like it was fate for him to win that tournament. That match stretched into a Monday and had a great atmosphere.
 

Hitman

Hall of Fame
Ivanisevic's run was magical and like it was fate for him to win that tournament. That match stretched into a Monday and had a great atmosphere.
That was best run in the history of tennis. The wildcard coming in and winning the title on People's Monday. It is matches like that that will always make Wimbledon the most prestigious slam in the eyes of the world. I remember the partying taking place in Croatia when Goran won that title. I still watch that match from time to time and each time I have this feel good moment, though I do feel for Rafter.
 
Mote importantly, Federer 5 Wimbledon came from 2003 to 2007 and only Nadal was there as a true contender. Both Djokovic and Murray were only coming into the picture and were far from their prime. While Roddick was a solid player, he didn’t have the means or the mindset to beat a prime Federer. That leaves Hewitt who was washed up by that time. Though better than Roddick in terms of mentality, didn’t have the weapons or the health to hurt a prime Federer in the true sense. Not a true grass court player either.
And Murray did? Ah right, he beat exhausterer at the Olympics, Wimbledon earlier showed what happens when Fed is ready to rumble.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Outside of Federer and Roddick in 2004, it was ok but not great imo.

Yea he underachieved imo but I do feel he started playing in a way that wasn't going to win big titles. He started pushing his forehand and trying to rally more, when he should have remained really aggressive because that's what helped him get to #1. I do think he could have achieved more and gotten more out of himself.
Hewitt was maybe playing his best Wimbledon in 2004 so can't agree there. Ancic was good too, crushing Henman...

Agree e about Arod, in the matches where he threw caution to the wind he played the Big 3 close or even beat them.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Yep and like @NatF said, I think his spirit was broken after that loss, the loss at the 2004 USO, and other losses that came right after that. Roddick was never the same player aftrer 2004.
I think the Wimbledon loss, the USO loss and then drubbing by Hewitt promoted a snap decision to sack Gilbert and that started a downwards slide for basically a year and a half that he never really recovered from.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Hewitt was maybe playing his best Wimbledon in 2004 so can't agree there. Ancic was good too, crushing Henman...

Agree e about Arod, in the matches where he threw caution to the wind he played the Big 3 close or even beat them.
What was so special about Hewitt's form in 2004 Wimbledon? Federer was never in danger of losing to him.

I always thought BG got the best out of Roddick. Other coaches that came after just didn't help him reach that same level.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
What was so special about Hewitt's form in 2004 Wimbledon? Federer was never in danger of losing to him.

I always thought BG got the best out of Roddick. Other coaches that came after just didn't help him reach that same level.
Federer was insane on grass in 2004, the first set of that QF was maybe his best ever in grass. He wasn't as sharp in the final.

Hewitt was just in really good form, his 4R win over Moya was really high quality - check the stats on that one.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
I think the Wimbledon loss, the USO loss and then drubbing by Hewitt promoted a snap decision to sack Gilbert and that started a downwards slide for basically a year and a half that he never really recovered from.
Personally, I always thought that decision was a mistake.
 
What was so special about Hewitt's form in 2004 Wimbledon? Federer was never in danger of losing to him.

I always thought BG got the best out of Roddick. Other coaches that came after just didn't help him reach that same level.
Of course this is the ultimate yardstick lel, who the hell cares how well Federer played. All hail the mighty peak Anderson pushing BOATOV1C so close in 2015, that weak era mug hewitt could never LoLz11!!
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Federer was insane on grass in 2004, the first set of that QF was maybe his best ever in grass. He wasn't as sharp in the final.

Hewitt was just in really good form, his 4R win over Moya was really high quality - check the stats on that one.
He was but if someone is having their best level they shouldn't lose sets 6-0 and 6-1 no matter what is going on on the other side of the net.

It's Moya on grass man. Lol.
 

Sabrina

Semi-Pro
Federer was insane on grass in 2004, the first set of that QF was maybe his best ever in grass. He wasn't as sharp in the final.

Hewitt was just in really good form, his 4R win over Moya was really high quality - check the stats on that one.
I think Hewitt was in better form in Wimbledon 2005. I did not follow Hewitt career closely so maybe I overlook his 2004 form a bit.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Of course this is the ultimate yardstick lel, who the hell cares how well Federer played. All hail the mighty peak Anderson pushing BOATOV1C so close in 2015, that weak era mug hewitt could never LoLz11!!
Why do you always have to act like the new millennium version of Ernie Goes To Camp to make your point? We kaan undastannnd yew.

Sorry. I forgot. Federer is so good he bagels and breadsticks guys who are playing the match of their lives. LOL. I must remember these things when I dwell in the house of thy lord.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
The point is, when Nadal beat Federer, he was primarily a clay specialist and Wimbledon was his first big win outside clay and he beat Federer, the apparent grass king who was at his peak at the moment.

On the other hand, Sampras was beaten by Kraijack who was also great on grass or had the game to be lethal on grass and upset anyone even Pete.

It would have been unheard of to be beaten by a clay specialist on grass in the final no less in the 90s. Especially if you take into a player like Federer into account who’s supposed to be the grass king.

No excuses please.
LOL Nadal was already an established grass threat before the 2008 Wimb final. So cut the nonsense.

Pete lost to a one-slam wonder in straights in the QF of his best slam. Only Fed's haters would say Sampras's loss was better.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
He was but if someone is having their best level they shouldn't lose sets 6-0 and 6-1 no matter what is going on on the other side of the net.

It's Moya on grass man. Lol.
Well if Murray can go 5 sets with elite grass courter Verdasco then Hewitt shutting down a better Moya in 4 is a good indictment of his play.



Serving wasn't the best with those doubles from Hewitt but off the ground both guys were sharp. I've actually watched this match, not bullshitting you here aha.

So nah disagree, Hewitt was bad in the bagel set but unless your name is Pete Sampras I think Fed takes that first set no worse than 6-3 against anyone else in the last 25 years. He was in full flight.

I think Hewitt was in better form in Wimbledon 2005. I did not follow Hewitt career closely so maybe I overlook his 2004 form a bit.
Nah he was better in 2004 for sure.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
In 2008, the grass was slow enough to allow Nadal to thrive from the baseline and of top of that, he was a very tough matchup for Federer due to well know reasons.It's not like Fed lost on a grass that was fast like back in the 90s, so your comparison with the Krajicek case is incorrect.
The clay court specialists of the 90s would have probably won Wimbledon on a grass like the one post 2001, especially in years when it was even slower and bouncier, like 2007.
It's ok. She still believes the younger guys today only fail because of "3 GOATS" and they are Federer-like talents :p
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Even so, given that Federer is the grass king according to many as we see, this should have never happened. You never saw Nadal letting the grass king beating him on clay, case in point.

And the slow surface feels like an excuse given that Federer did win 8 of them on this slow surface so it’s not like he was compromised.
Nadal allowed himself to lose to an indoor specialist in 2009 so...
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Yes, that was the tipping point for Roddick going forwards. IMO, I just never saw that same Roddick again. I do feel also that Roddick needed that win more, Federer winning it is what allowed him to pull away from the pack and be declared the top dog.
Then USO 2007 broke Roddick's spirit again. He came into that one with lots of energy and game.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Well if Murray can go 5 sets with elite grass courter Verdasco then Hewitt shutting down a better Moya in 4 is a good indictment of his play.



Serving wasn't the best with those doubles from Hewitt but off the ground both guys were sharp. I've actually watched this match, not bullshitting you here aha.

So nah disagree, Hewitt was bad in the bagel set but unless your name is Pete Sampras I think Fed takes that first set no worse than 6-3 against anyone else in the last 25 years. He was in full flight.



Nah he was better in 2004 for sure.
In 2005 Wimb, Hewitt was just better than Roddick in that particular tournament.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
He was but if someone is having their best level they shouldn't lose sets 6-0 and 6-1 no matter what is going on on the other side of the net.

It's Moya on grass man. Lol.
Murray was also troubled severely by grass specialists Verdasco and Ferrer.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Well if Murray can go 5 sets with elite grass courter Verdasco then Hewitt shutting down a better Moya in 4 is a good indictment of his play.



Serving wasn't the best with those doubles from Hewitt but off the ground both guys were sharp. I've actually watched this match, not bullshitting you here aha.

So nah disagree, Hewitt was bad in the bagel set but unless your name is Pete Sampras I think Fed takes that first set no worse than 6-3 against anyone else in the last 25 years. He was in full flight.



Nah he was better in 2004 for sure.
Ok. Serving numbers aren't great but the numbers off the ground look good. I didn't watch the match so I have to take your word for it. It's just this is the 1st and only time that Moya made the 4th round at Wimbledon so I'm skeptical. I know Hewitt is one of your faves so I will let you have this one and give you the benefit of the doubt.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
The sad thing about Roddick is he actually had the weapons to achieve more but not the belief or mindset. His level in the 2004 Wimbledon final was mindblowing and he was just ripping the match from Federer's hands and then the rain delay happened, and he came back out without the intensity he had. That was the story of Roddick's career. I do agree though that the grass field in particular did not have many challengers early on and there was a void there until Djokovic and Murray matured.
Nah, the grass field was fine in 2003-2009. Roddick, Nadal, Hewitt were good enough competition.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Ok. Serving numbers aren't great but the numbers off the ground look good. I didn't watch the match so I have to take your word for it. It's just this is the 1st and only time that Moya made the 4th round at Wimbledon so I'm skeptical. I know Hewitt is one of your faves so I will let you have this one and give you the benefit of the doubt.
Yeah I know Moya didn't have any history on grass. He played well though, double the winners to errors against Hewitt even on a quick grass court is good stuff.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Murray was also troubled severely by grass specialists Verdasco and Ferrer.
Fun fact: Verdasco has made the 2nd week at Wimbledon more than he has at the USO and AO. Ferrer has a few grass titles and made the QF twice so he could play on it.
 

Zara

Legend
Why do you always have to act like the new millennium version of Ernie Goes To Camp to make your point? We kaan undastannnd yew.

Sorry. I forgot. Federer is so good he bagels and breadsticks guys who are playing the match of their lives. LOL. I must remember these things when I dwell in the house of thy lord.
Because he's a cocky poster. I put him on ignore for a while.
 

Zara

Legend
And Murray did? Ah right, he beat exhausterer at the Olympics, Wimbledon earlier showed what happens when Fed is ready to rumble.
Is that an excuse? Anyway, Murray did beat Federer at the Olympics final in straight sets and that's something. Though Murray is not a true champion like Federer, Nadal, Djokovic etc. he's still better than Roddick in all respects. He's probably a champion on the second level. Roddick was never one.
 

Zara

Legend
LOL Nadal was already an established grass threat before the 2008 Wimb final. So cut the nonsense.

Pete lost to a one-slam wonder in straights in the QF of his best slam. Only Fed's haters would say Sampras's loss was better.
By the same token, wasn't Federer also an established clay threat at RG? Was he able to beat Nadal there?

Sampras' loss had at least perspectives. He lost to a genuine grass-court player and Kraijack got him at the right time at the right round when Sampras was still reeling from his RG semi-final loss and lost significant energy there and the surface change (from very slow to very quick) was hard to adjust. Therefore, Sampras' loss is and will always be significantly better than Federer's.
 

Zara

Legend
Yea Roddick didn't fear him then which was a big difference. I think when he left the court he then realized what he close to making happen and he starting thinking about too much, whereas before he was just going for it with no hesitation. Roddick needed that win much more than Federer did who would have gone on to dominant anyway. This would have at least given Roddick belief that he could win more big titles. It wasn't meant to be though.
It was far more than that. Roddick just had no idea what Federer was all about so he could play fearlessly for a bit. A champion always sees through his peers and establish is own authority and Federer did just that at that time. Roddick - as solid as he was, at the end of the day, he was only as good as his results.
 
Last edited:

NatF

Bionic Poster
By the same token, wasn't Federer also an established clay threat at RG? Was he able to beat Nadal there?

Sampras' loss had at least perspectives. He lost to a genuine grass-court player and Kraijack got him at the right time at the right round when Sampras was still reeling from his RG semi-final loss and lost significant energy there and the surface change (from very slow to very quick) was hard to adjust. Therefore, Sampras' loss is and will always be significantly better than Federer's.
:-D

Sampras gets excuses for still be reeling from losing to a different player in the FO SF but Fed has no excuses for losing to the same player that drubbed him in the final of the FO...

Sampras got thrashed in straights. Claiming that's a much better losses is the kind of nonsense I've come to expect from you...
 

Zara

Legend
:-D

Sampras gets excuses for still be reeling from losing to a different player in the FO SF but Fed has no excuses for losing to the same player that drubbed him in the final of the FO...

Sampras got thrashed in straights. Claiming that's a much better losses is the kind of nonsense I've come to expect from you...
Well, at least Sampras never lost to a clay courter on grass that's for sure. And Nadal never let a grass courter beat him on clay.

Laugh it up, Nat. Good times.
 
Top