CentreCourt
Rookie
But you're prepared to give Roddick slams against guys he doesn't have a better H2H against? For example, Tommy Haas.
Who did more damage: Fed to Roddick or Djokovic to Murray?
- Thread starter Nadalgaenger
- Start date
But you're prepared to give Roddick slams against guys he doesn't have a better H2H against? For example, Tommy Haas.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Yes. Wawrinka at the end of the day has proven to be as good as Murray at winning the slams. Haas hasn't proven as good as Roddick.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Murray did have at least 1 win over Federer at the Slams which was 1 more than Roddick managed and also notched up other big titles against Federer which Roddick never managed. Prior to his back surgery in 2013, Murray actually owned his H2H with Federer which Roddick certainly never did so, of the two, he was always the more likely to beat Federer in a Slam final even if it never materialised in either case.
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
Prior to his back surgery in 2013, Murray actually owned hisH2H with Federer.
lie no.1
He was always the more likely to beat Federer in a Slam final.
lie no. 2
Murray fans like the other delusional fans were hoping Federer would become cannon fodder as he got older. Let me know how that worked out for Murray.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
It's the truth. I realise this is hard for you to take but the fact remains that Murray was 11-9 vs Federer in their overall H2H up to the end of 2013 when he had his back surgery (since then it's been 1 way traffic for Fed).
Check it here if you don't believe me: http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/fedex-head-2-head/roger-federer-vs-andy-murray/F324/MC10
I gave it as my opinion that he was always more likely than Roddick to beat Federer in a Slam final not that he was more likely to beat Federer. Read the posts properly and follow the conversation before getting your knickers in a right old twist!
mike danny
Bionic Poster
He would never beat Fed in a slam final, sorry to disappoint you. Never came closer than Roddick to doing so.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
He was never morel likely than Roddick to beat Fed in a slam final. Murray found out the hard way that some BO3 victories over Fed wouldn't bring him slam victories.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
True but, given their respective records against Federer, Murray was still the more likely of the two to do so. Sorry, but that remains my firm opinion.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Don't forget he had 2 best of 5 victories over Federer in amongst the best of 3 wins unlike Roddick so, on that basis, always had more potential to beat Federer in another one.
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
Agreed the 2012 Wimbledon final had me worried (even before the match) when Murray won the first set I was confident he would go on to win.
But luckily Fedr pulled through and Andy won Wimbly the following year
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Agreed the 2012 Wimbledon final had me worried (even before the match) when Murray won the first set I was confident he would go on to win.
But luckily Fedr pulled through and Andy won Wimbly the following year
How worried were you when they met on the same spot just a few weeks later in the Olympic final?
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
I pretty much conceded before the match that Murray was gonna win because of Fed’s war with Delpo.How worried were you when they met on the same spot just a few weeks later in the Olympic final?
The loss still hurt though
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
Look everybody a lying Murray fan! Murray didn't OWN the H2H w/Federer prior to Murray having back surgery just an excuse because the H2H went south so that is a lie and Murray has only won ONE set in his 3 meetings w/ Federer in GS finals.
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
He’s not lying? Murray did have back surgery in 2013 and it most certainly had an impact on his future meetings with Fed.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
So by that logic Hewitt was the more likely than Roddick to beat Fed in a slam final going by their records.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
They didn't deal with the same Federer. We never got to see prime/peak Roddick against 30+ year old Fed.
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
Says his partner in crime. The minor back surgery excuse is because Murray fans can't cope with the fact an OLDER Federer is getting the best of a YOUNGER Murray. But don't worry Murray fans were the only fans to make that mistake.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Well, if someone is 11-9 vs their opponent that usually translates to ownership of the H2H (even if close) and that was the case right up to the end of 2013 when Murray had his back surgery. Since then, Federer has won all their encounters and now owns their H2H 14-11. What's difficult for you to grasp about these simple facts unless, as I suspect, you are simply a Murray-hating Fedfanatic who can't abide being faced with facts you would rather not contemplate. If you don't like it...tough. There's nothing more to be said. Cheerio!
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
Grasp this. Repeat after me: "I can't cope as a fan that an older Federer is beating my younger fav."
EloQuent
Legend
H2H is a very flawed metric. Federer beat everyone but a handful of players, who only met him when playing their very best. When not playing their very best, they lost to other players.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Murray first beat Federer when he was 19 and Fed was 25. Prior to Fed's 30th birthday the H2H was 8-6 in Murray's favour. Murray knew what it was like to play peak/prime Federer and beat him.
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
Basically hoping Federer would become cannon fodder as he aged. On a Murray fan forum, some posters were pissed because a 36 year old Federer is able to beat younger players.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
I will if you also repeat after me: "I can't cope as a fan that, prior to Murray's back surgery, a younger Federer lost more times to him than he beat him".
Mainad
Bionic Poster
No idea about Hewitt. Did Hewitt ever own his H2H with Federer after Federer started winning Slams?
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
But neither was able do any damage against Federer in GS play.
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
0-3 in GS finals winning only 1 set. Try coping with that and Federer was older in all 3.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Murray did beat Federer at 2013 AO (semi-final) whereas Roddick never actually beat Federer at a Slam.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
I can cope with it but can you cope with the fact that Murray was 11-9 in their overall H2H prior to his back surgery in 2013?
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
Little good that did him because it didn't actually occur in a GS final against Federer. Neither Murray or Roddick won a GS final against Federer. Roddick was actually closer than Murray could ever dream of.
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
Yes, because look at where Federer is now as oppose to Murray. Its all about what have you done LATELY.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
That's not what I asked. I asked if you can cope with it?
He came closer at 2009 Wimbledon but still fluffed his chances. Unlike him Murray has beaten Federer in a Slam and also in other big finals including the 2012 Olympic final in best of 5 sets in the very same spot where they played the Wimbledon final a few weeks earlier. Murray was also the more likely to beat Federer in a Slam final than Roddick simply because, unlike Roddick, Murray had experience of beating Federer in big finals.
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
You saw my above post. I am coping just fine because the present looking bright for Federer while Murray's present not so much. Federer fans don't have to look in the past. Murray and Roddick has NEVER BEATEN A NON-TIRED FEDERER IN ANY FINAL. Two can play this game Mr. Murray HAD BACK SURGERY.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Well, you don't seem to care about the stages of a player's career since you mention a Murray win over 2013 Federer as some proof that he would beat him in a slam final.
Hewitt was 7-2 against Federer at the end of 2003 after Fed won Wimb. Beat him in Davis Cup in 2003.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Make as many excuses as you like. Fact remains that Murray beat Federer in 2 Masters finals when Fed was absolutely fine. Roddick never beat him at any final.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Murray played no better at 2012 Wimb than Roddick at 2004 Wimb.Agreed the 2012 Wimbledon final had me worried (even before the match) when Murray won the first set I was confident he would go on to win.
But luckily Fedr pulled through and Andy won Wimbly the following year
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
I agree but Roddick turned into a mental midget when he played Fed.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Sigh..I never offered it as proof of anything. I said it was an indicator that Murray was more likely to beat Federer in a Slam final than was Roddick.
Fair enough in which case I would agree that Hewitt was more likely to beat Federer in a Slam final at that time than was Roddick.
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
Make all the excuses you like Roddick and Murray are in the same boat. Have WAY less GS titles than Federer and none of the one's they have won came against Federer.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Lol...MOST players have way less Slam titles than Federer so that's no particular shame but the fact remains Murray still had more success against Federer at the Slams and in big tour finals than Roddick so, of the two, he still had more potential to beat him in a Slam final (note that I said potential and not that he would).
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
Federer is the most talented player to ever exist so there’s no shame in having much less slams than him.
90% of people on this forum already agree that Fed is GOAT so you don’t need to constantly devalue other players achievements.
fedtennisphan
Hall of Fame
If they are so proud of their favs achievements they shouldn't knowingly over-inflate them by putting down another player who is in the same boat.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
He sure beat him.
Hewitt was the BIG underdog here too, ranked 7th (ended the year at 17th) and Fed was No. 2.
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
... the nadal to tennis
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
The Roddick loss in Wim 09 was a damn shame but pretty funny too in a black comedic sort of way.
mavsman149
Hall of Fame
Federer and Roddick. Roddick sadly will be looked at as a one slam wonder and he was so much better than that. Murray actually beat Djokovic in 2 slam finals and his 8 slam finals losses are all to Fed and Djokovic.
I can't think of a more soul crushing loss period than the 09 Wimbledon Final
I can't think of a more soul crushing loss period than the 09 Wimbledon Final
CentreCourt
Rookie
Wawrinka has never beaten a fit Andy Murray in a slam though. Like ever.
2010 US Open - Murray, still a bit of a novice too, but had the trainer out twice during the match. We can, at best, list this one as debatable.
2013 US Open - Murray had surgery on his back more or less right after that.
2017 RG - Murray might not even play to a high level again he was in such bad condition.
Genuinely just don't see Wawrinka beating a fit, form Murray at a slam, as evidenced by the occasions it has happened.
Similar threads
