Using the h2h logic, Roddick is the greatest

JackGates

Legend
Or at least has the highest peak.

Sounds crazy at first, but after the evidence, things will be pretty obvious.

Ok, first Djokovic has a leading h2h vs Federer and Nadal. Well, Roddick has leading h2h vs Djokovic.

Then guys, Dominic Hrbaty has a leading h2h vs Nadal and Federer, and guess who has a leading h2h vs Dominic? Yes, Roddick.

Oh, it gets better. Safin is also the only guy who defeated peakest of Federer at AO 05, and Safin also has leading h2h vs Djokovic who has leading h2h vs Fedal. And who has leading h2h vs Safin? RODDICK!.

Davydenko is legendary for his Nadal ownage, especially on hard courts. And Roddick again has a leading h2h vs Davydenko.

Then, who had tougher competition? Let's see, Roddick had to deal with 19, 12 and 16 grand slam champions. Plus, Murray, Hewitt, old Agassi and so on. Big 3 only had to deal with 1 slam champion when they faced Roddick.

So, I don't see how this doesn't prove Roddick is the greatest or at least has the highest peak.

Sure, Federer has leading h2h vs Roddick, but that doesn't really matter, because when they faced each other, Roddick had to deal with 19 GS champion, but Fed had to deal with only 1 GS champion.

Roddick is too overrated on these boards.
 

JMR

Hall of Fame
Actually, the fact that head-to-head comparisons are not transitive is sufficient, by itself, to show that head-to-head records cannot logically be used to rank players within a field of more than two players.

Statistics useful for rankings are transitive. E.g., F has more slams than N. N has more slams than D. Therefore, F has more slams than D.
 

Service Ace

Hall of Fame
Only loser Nadalitos use this stupid argument. In no other sport do fans try to use h2h as an argument for greatness except in tennis because it's the only argument they can cling to it order to justify to themselves why they admire someone who has spent his entire career being 2nd best.
 

asifallasleep

Hall of Fame
Fed is my favorite player, but I actually miss Roddick a lot. Warts and all the guy did bring it every single time he stepped on the court and he always wanted to win badly. There was always a circus type atmosphere when he played. Kyrgios has a bit of Roddick I think.

Roddick really should get a lot more respect.
 

IowaGuy

Hall of Fame
Well, Roddick is a year younger than Fed, so he should come out of retirement and kick some #@$@ at the Australian Open!
 

Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil

Talk Tennis Guru
giphy.gif
 

clout

Hall of Fame
Roddick is either extremely overrated by some or vastly underrated by others. There's literally no in between for Arod or at least not in this forum.
 
Last edited:

swordtennis

G.O.A.T.
Even a clumsy servebot like Isner could push Nadal to 5 at Roland Garros 11, imagine what Federer would have done to Nadal if they met.

Oh wait, they DID meet at that tournament and all the Almighty Fedr could do was taking a set.

Sorry, things don't work that way.
They see dead people. They know all. But for some dang reason they just cannot predict who will win a match that is being played today. o_O wish they did we would all be millionaires. :eek::D
 

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
Even a clumsy servebot like Isner could push Nadal to 5 at Roland Garros 11, imagine what Federer would have done to Nadal if they met.

Oh wait, they DID meet at that tournament and all the Almighty Fedr could do was taking a set.

Sorry, things don't work that way.
That's some serious soreness from Fed taking out Djokovic.

tumblr_mrgywnvzty1ryhthbo2_500.gif
 
Last edited:

axlrose

Professional
[QUOTE="axlrose, post: 11900797, member: 755567"]Even a clumsy servebot like Isner could 6 Nadal to 5 at Roland Garros 11, imagine what Federer would have done to Nadal if they met.

Oh wait, they DID meet at that tournament and all the Almighty Fedr could do was taking a set.

Sorry, things don't work that way.
That's some serious soreness from Fed taking out Djokovic.

tumblr_mrgywnvzty1ryhthbo2_500.gif
[/QUOTE]

:D

No, I'm just telling KINGROGER that in tennis: A > B, B > C doesn't mean A always > C. Don't try to start a fight with me, because I won't waste my time for that, Rommel once said: Don't fight a battle if you don't gain anything by winning.

And Laver is the GOAT, want it or not. Sorry.

 

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
That's some serious soreness from Fed taking out Djokovic.

tumblr_mrgywnvzty1ryhthbo2_500.gif

:D

No, I'm just telling KINGROGER that in tennis: A > B, B > C doesn't mean A always > C. Don't try to start a fight with me, because I won't waste my time for that, Rommel once said: Don't fight a battle if you don't gain anything by winning.

And Laver is the GOAT, want it or not. Sorry.

[/QUOTE]
That's not all you were doing.
 

axlrose

Professional
:D

No, I'm just telling KINGROGER that in tennis: A > B, B > C doesn't mean A always > C. Don't try to start a fight with me, because I won't waste my time for that, Rommel once said: Don't fight a battle if you don't gain anything by winning.

And Laver is the GOAT, want it or not. Sorry.
That's not all you were doing.[/QUOTE]

:eek::eek::eek:
 

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
Even a clumsy servebot like Isner could push Nadal to 5 at Roland Garros 11, imagine what Federer would have done to Nadal if they met.

Oh wait, they DID meet at that tournament and all the Almighty Fedr could do was taking a set.

Sorry, things don't work that way.
Obviously you are looking for an argument yourself by typing that jibberish.
 

axlrose

Professional
Obviously you are looking for an argument yourself by typing that jibberish.

Oh mate, a beefsteak is still a beefsteak, no matter what spice you cook it with. The point here is tennis isn't maths.

OK, so I'd say it in a more "politely" way to Fedr fans: Isner took Nadal to 5, Fedr took Nadal to 4, was Isner better than Fedr?

or: Soderling took out Nadal 09 then lost to Fedr, does that mean Fedr would have slayed Nadal if they met?
 

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
Oh mate, a beefsteak is still a beefsteak, no matter what spice you cook it with. The point here is tennis isn't maths.

OK, so I'd say it in a more "politely" way to Fedr fans: Isner took Nadal to 5, Fedr took Nadal to 4, was Isner better than Fedr?

or: Soderling took out Nadal 09 then lost to Fedr, does that mean Fedr would have slayed Nadal if they met?
No argument with your logic here at all. My views are the same on the subject. But, it appeared as a masked dig at Federer. There's many other examples you could have used.Also the emphasis on his greatness in the next line of your post also suggest this.
 
Last edited:

Bender

G.O.A.T.
Or at least has the highest peak.

Sounds crazy at first, but after the evidence, things will be pretty obvious.

Ok, first Djokovic has a leading h2h vs Federer and Nadal. Well, Roddick has leading h2h vs Djokovic.

Then guys, Dominic Hrbaty has a leading h2h vs Nadal and Federer, and guess who has a leading h2h vs Dominic? Yes, Roddick.

Oh, it gets better. Safin is also the only guy who defeated peakest of Federer at AO 05, and Safin also has leading h2h vs Djokovic who has leading h2h vs Fedal. And who has leading h2h vs Safin? RODDICK!.

Davydenko is legendary for his Nadal ownage, especially on hard courts. And Roddick again has a leading h2h vs Davydenko.

Then, who had tougher competition? Let's see, Roddick had to deal with 19, 12 and 16 grand slam champions. Plus, Murray, Hewitt, old Agassi and so on. Big 3 only had to deal with 1 slam champion when they faced Roddick.

So, I don't see how this doesn't prove Roddick is the greatest or at least has the highest peak.

Sure, Federer has leading h2h vs Roddick, but that doesn't really matter, because when they faced each other, Roddick had to deal with 19 GS champion, but Fed had to deal with only 1 GS champion.

Roddick is too overrated on these boards.
believe_or_understand_futurama.gif
 

killerboi2

Hall of Fame
Forgot he had a winning head to head against Djokovic lmao. Gotta give him his props for that pre prime or not. He isn't a complete mug- good grass courter, would have been a great one if he had won Wimbledon in 2009.
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
It's revealing though that he crumbled like a house of cards when the chips were down.
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
No argument with your logic here at all. My views are the same on the subject. But, it appeared as a masked dig at Federer. There's many other examples you could have used.Also the emphasis on his greatness in the next line of your post also suggest this.

That clueless fanboy used the logic first, all Axelrod was doing was showing how stupid it is to think that way. Pay bit of attention to your surroundings.
 

Clay lover

Legend
Theres nothing to explain if you know how to read.

Excuse me for interrupting, but what has RF-18 done to warrant such a juvenile response? Referring to the original post about Isner, his point was that how well a player does against one has no bearings on how he does against another. The match-up example used serves merely to illustrate his point and is in no way a dig at Federer.

Us, others, including RF-18, were only so kind to point this out so you don't have to continue indulging in this weird hatred of yours.

Not everything is a veiled attempt to discredit your player. If you like him, might as well like him in a postive way.
 

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
Excuse me for interrupting, but what has RF-18 done to warrant such a juvenile response? Referring to the original post about Isner, his point was that how well a player does against one has no bearings on how he does against another. The match-up example used serves merely to illustrate his point and is in no way a dig at Federer.

Us, others, including RF-18, were only so kind to point this out so you don't have to continue indulging in this weird hatred of yours.

Not everything is a veiled attempt to discredit your player. If you like him, might as well like him in a postive way.
Axle does this constantly. I've never called him out. Then a Djokovic fan comes in to defend another djokovic fan and what not. I have no issue with you. I've never had an issue with anyone of you. A dig is a dig man. He's just trying to justify it.
 

Shaolin

Talk Tennis Guru
Only loser Nadalitos use this stupid argument. In no other sport do fans try to use h2h as an argument for greatness except in tennis because it's the only argument they can cling to it order to justify to themselves why they admire someone who has spent his entire career being 2nd best.

Thankfully the deranged h2h obsessed Nadalians are flaking away, drying up and dying off like they should have years ago.

Like their idol they fought hard but just lacked the diversity to evolve and survive.

desert-skull.jpg
 

axlrose

Professional
He also thinks Sampras is grass GOAT lol. I guess you share the same view.

Come on man.

Pete won 7 Wimby on real grass, which equals to 14 Wimby on fake slow grass.

You guys Fedr fans always say Fedr's titles on Rebound Ace at AO are more valuable than Nole's on Plexicushion because hard court must be fast, slow is fake HC.

Not to mention all Pete's USO were also on real lightning-fast hard, not the turtle's speed decoturf Fedr's won so far

I think even Fedr would bet for Pete if he has to choose a player to play for his life between peak Pete and peak him on fast grass and fast hard.

Long live King Pete :D
 

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
Come on man.

Pete won 7 Wimby on real grass, which equals to 14 Wimby on fake slow grass.

You guys Fedr fans always say Fedr's titles on Rebound Ace at AO are more valuable than Nole's on Plexicushion because hard court must be fast, slow is fake HC.

Not to mention all Pete's USO were also on real lightning-fast hard, not the turtle's speed decoturf Fedr's won so far

I think even Fedr would bet for Pete if he has to choose a player to play for his life between peak Pete and peak him on fast grass and fast hard.

Long live King Pete :D
Let's say the courts never changed. Who is challenging Roger? Explain.

In fact there's a good chance he would have more slams than he does now.
 
Last edited:

axlrose

Professional
If so, my answer is I don't care. All I care is Pete won everything on fast courts while Fedr has won almost everything on slow courts, which are inferior, lower class than fast courts, according to the majority of Fedr fans.

Hahaha.
 

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
To be honest, I wasn't never that happy with a Fed win as on that day. And Fed failed to convert those MPs at USO I was more disappointed than a Fed Fan would be.
To me, it was like winning a slam. Someone needed to knock Djokovic off his pedestal. Who better than the Federer to bring him back down to earth? Djokovic got lucky at UO. That's how I will always feel.
 

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
Officially Fedr has never won anything on fast Wimby and fast USO so the case here is He would have continued to dominated the AO if they kept the RA, right?
I'm not into the AO argument. This began with the grass. Federer beat Sampras btw. Explain to me who is going to beat Roger on fast grass.
 

ADuck

Legend
Eli Manning is greater than Tom Brady because he leads the Superbowl h2h is 2-0
Larry Bird is greater than Michael Jordan because Larry leads their h2h 17-11
Rafael Nadal is greater than Roger Federer because he leads the h2h 23-15

Stupid is as stupid does

:rolleyes:
Why compare team sports with individual sports? :rolleyes:
 

axlrose

Professional
I'm not into the AO argument. This began with the grass. Federer beat Sampras btw. Explain to me who is going to beat Roger on fast grass.

I don't know, there must be someone else who are capable of doing what Henman and Ancic have done.

Actually Ancic beat him when courts have already been slowed down but I like him so I include his name to this post : D
 
Top