Who did more damage: Fed to Roddick or Djokovic to Murray?

Who inflicted more damage on the other’s career?

  • Federer hurt Roddick’s career more

    Votes: 90 91.8%
  • Djokovic hurt Murray’s career more

    Votes: 8 8.2%

  • Total voters
    98

abmk

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.

Murray in slam finals vs fed:
lost badly in 3 sets in USO 08
lost convincingly in 3 sets in AO 10
lost in a very good match in 4 sets at Wim 12

Roddick in slam finals vs fed :
lost in a very good match in 4 sets at Wim 04
lost convincingly in 3 sets in Wim 05
lost in a good match in 4 sets at USO 06
lost in a ATG match in 5 sets in Wim 09

Roddick played very good in 3 of his slam finals (USO 03, Wim 04, Wim 09), good in one of them (USO 06) and decent/below par in one (Wim 05).
So very good in 3/5 and good or better in 4/5.


Murray played very good in (Wim 12, USO 12, Wim 13, Wim 16) , good in 2 of them (AO 13, AO 15) and decent/below par in (USO 08, AO 10, AO 11, AO 16, RG 16)

So very good in just 4/11, good or better in 6/11.

Data suggests Roddick has done better and would be more likely to do better vs Federer in a slam final, even with Murray's h2h vs fed being clearly (due to Bo3 matches mainly)
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Murray in slam finals vs fed:
lost badly in 3 sets in USO 08
lost convincingly in 3 sets in AO 10
lost in a very good match in 4 sets at Wim 12

Roddick in slam finals vs fed :
lost in a very good match in 4 sets at Wim 04
lost convincingly in 3 sets in Wim 05
lost in a good match in 4 sets at USO 06
lost in a ATG match in 5 sets in Wim 09

Roddick played very good in 3 of his slam finals (USO 03, Wim 04, Wim 09), good in one of them (USO 06) and decent/below par in one (Wim 05).
So very good in 3/5 and good or better in 4/5.


Murray played very good in (Wim 12, USO 12, Wim 13, Wim 16) , good in 2 of them (AO 13, AO 15) and decent/below par in (USO 08, AO 10, AO 11, AO 16, RG 16)

So very good in just 4/11, good or better in 6/11.

Data suggests Roddick has done better and would be more likely to do better vs Federer in a slam final, even with Murray's h2h vs fed being clearly (due to Bo3 matches mainly)

I guess it's a matter of opinion and whilst I accept that Roddick played Federer closer in some of their Slam finals than Murray did, for me the fact remains that Roddick never won any of his 5 setters against Fed whilst Murray at least recorded 2 which proves he could, on occasion, get over the line whereas Roddick couldn't and that indicates to me that Murray probably had more potential to do it in a Slam final. All rather academic now anyway.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I guess it's a matter of opinion and whilst I accept that Roddick played Federer closer in some of their Slam finals than Murray did, for me the fact remains that Roddick never won any of his 5 setters against Fed whilst Murray at least recorded 2 which proves he could, on occasion, get over the line whereas Roddick couldn't and that indicates to me that Murray probably had more potential to do it in a Slam final. All rather academic now anyway.
It's just academic as they didn't play the same Federer all the time. And when they did, Murray did worse than Roddick. I'm talking strictly about slams here.

Murray's wins were very good at the Olympics and the AO, but it doesn't mean he would beat 2004-early 2010 Fed in slams, the one whom Roddick could not beat.

Who's to say Roddick wouldn't have licked his chops if he had played 2012 Olympics final Federer?
 
Last edited:

Mainad

Bionic Poster
It's just academic as they didn't play the same Federer all the time. And when they did, Murray did worse than Roddick. I'm talking strictly about slams here.

Murray's wins were very good at the Olympics and the AO, but it doesn't mean he would beat 2004-early 2010 Fed in slams, the one whom Roddick could not beat.

Who's to say Roddick wouldn't have licked his chops if he had played 2012 Olympics final Federer?

All ifs, buts, maybes and whatevers. We can only go by the records, well that's what I'm doing anyway.
 
D

Deleted member 756486

Guest
But, unlike Murray, he didn't beat Federer in any best of 5 matches. You're entitled to your opinion Mike just as I'm entitled to mine. Let's leave it there because it's all now academic anyway and, truth be told, I doubt either of them would have ever beaten Fed in a Slam final anyway.
Murray in 2016 would’ve definitely had a good shot.
 

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
It's just academic as they didn't play the same Federer all the time. And when they did, Murray did worse than Roddick. I'm talking strictly about slams here.

Murray's wins were very good at the Olympics and the AO, but it doesn't mean he would beat 2004-early 2010 Fed in slams, the one whom Roddick could not beat.

Who's to say Roddick wouldn't have licked his chops if he had played 2012 Olympics final Federer?

I agree that Murray very likely would NOT have beaten prime Fed in any of the slams that Roddick lost.

Still, I think it is obvious that Fed would have feared Murray more in those hypothetical matches.
I’m glad you at least mentioned the 2012 Olympics match.
I think that was one of the best matches Murray has every played. Yes, Fed was tired and all, but I’ve never seen Fed get beaten up on grass as badly as in that match. Murray deserves a lot of credit for coming out of the gates and blitzing Fed in that—something that Roddick might have been able to do in 2009 if he had not botched the infamous volley in the tiebreak!

Murray is head and shoulders above Roddick as a player imo. And I say that as an American, indeed a Texan, who appreciates Roddick’s contributions to the game. Watch this video and tell me that Murray’s not a sick natural talent:

 
Last edited:

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I agree that Murray very likely would NOT have beaten prime Fed in any of the slams that Roddick lost.

Still, I think it is obvious that Fed would have feared Murray more in those hypothetical matches.
I’m glad you at least mentioned the 2012 Olympics match.
I think that was one of the best matches Murray has every played. Yes, Fed was tired and all, but I’ve never seen Fed get beaten up on grass as badly as in that match. Murray deserves a lot of credit for coming out of the gates and blitzing Fed in that—something that Roddick might have been able to do in 2009 if he had not botched the infamous volley in the tiebreak!

Murray is head and shoulders above Roddick as a player imo. And I say that as an American, indeed a Texan, who appreciates Roddick’s contributions to the game.
You and I disagree here.
 

MasturB

Legend
Depends. Roddick would have had a few Wimbys and at least one more USO.

Mugg would have already had double career slam perhaps? Well except USO.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I guess it's a matter of opinion and whilst I accept that Roddick played Federer closer in some of their Slam finals than Murray did, for me the fact remains that Roddick never won any of his 5 setters against Fed whilst Murray at least recorded 2 which proves he could, on occasion, get over the line whereas Roddick couldn't and that indicates to me that Murray probably had more potential to do it in a Slam final. All rather academic now anyway.

talk was specifically about slam finals.
As well as Murray played in these matches, a spent federer in an Oly final (after a marathon vs delpo) and a slam semi where 31.5 year old federer came into the match spent after a 5-setter vs tsonga don't really mean that much in this comparision when Roddick went up vs a much better Federer in all of his losses.

Roddick most certainly would've won Oly 12 final vs that Federer and would've had a good shot vs AO 13 SF fed.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
talk was specifically about slam finals.
As well as Murray played in these matches, a spent federer in an Oly final (after a marathon vs delpo) and a slam semi where 31.5 year old federer came into the match spent after a 5-setter vs tsonga don't really mean that much in this comparision when Roddick went up vs a much better Federer in all of his losses.

Roddick most certainly would've won Oly 12 final vs that Federer and would've had a good shot vs AO 13 SF fed.
Not too sure about the bolded. Roddick was nver that great at the AO.
 

metsman

Talk Tennis Guru
Not too sure about the bolded. Roddick was nver that great at the AO.
He's a little underrated there. 03 he would have made the final had he not run into El Aynaoui. 04 he ran into Safin, 05 played Hewitt at his absolute best and was not far from having that match go differently, with a little more belief maybe it does, but Roddick's confidence wasn't great in 05 after having no answer for Federer in 04 and that embarrassing loss to Hewitt in the Masters Cup. 07/09 he ran into GOAT-ing Federer, 09 he actually played pretty well against Federer the last couple sets. Murray would have lost just as bad, in fact in 2010 he lost even worse to a lesser Federer than the one Roddick lost to in 09. I don't think those 5 runs are that much worse quality wise than Murray's finals. Just faced much tougher competition before the final. If he had gotten Cilic/Berdych/Ferrer as his toughest pre-finals opponents in those years he definitely makes multiple finals. And you can't say that Murray has played an end to end good match in a single one of his AO finals. Overall, I'd say Murray's level and consistency at the AO is a little higher, but it's nowhere near as large as 5 finals vs 0 would have you believe.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Not too sure about the bolded. Roddick was nver that great at the AO.

Nonsense. Roddick was good at the AO, his 03, 04, 05 and even 07 runs were high quality. He got a bit unlucky with quality opponents like Safin, Hewitt and Federer who stopped him from going even deeper. In 2003 he played as good a match as Murray has ever played in the QF and was spent in the SF.
 

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
talk was specifically about slam finals.
As well as Murray played in these matches, a spent federer in an Oly final (after a marathon vs delpo) and a slam semi where 31.5 year old federer came into the match spent after a 5-setter vs tsonga don't really mean that much in this comparision when Roddick went up vs a much better Federer in all of his losses.

Roddick most certainly would've won Oly 12 final vs that Federer and would've had a good shot vs AO 13 SF fed.
How many more slam finals would Murray have made if he hadn’t had to deal with one of the Big 3 in a SF? Roddick never had to deal with two additional ATGs in the draw at each slam.
Again, I’m not saying that Murray wins all of those hypothetical finals, or even a small majority of them, but I think he would have found himself in a few more and at least had a puncher’s chance. And even in cases like 2008, he wore himself out in the SF against Nadal and had little left in the tank to challenge Fed.
 

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
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.
So 2015 Wawrinka couldn’t have beaten Murray at the FO?

Generally, I agree with you, but I think Stan and Murray are more even than say Roddick and Murray.
 

Sputnik Bulgorov

Professional
I agree that Murray very likely would NOT have beaten prime Fed in any of the slams that Roddick lost.

Still, I think it is obvious that Fed would have feared Murray more in those hypothetical matches.
I’m glad you at least mentioned the 2012 Olympics match.
I think that was one of the best matches Murray has every played. Yes, Fed was tired and all, but I’ve never seen Fed get beaten up on grass as badly as in that match. Murray deserves a lot of credit for coming out of the gates and blitzing Fed in that—something that Roddick might have been able to do in 2009 if he had not botched the infamous volley in the tiebreak!

Murray is head and shoulders above Roddick as a player imo. And I say that as an American, indeed a Texan, who appreciates Roddick’s contributions to the game. Watch this video and tell me that Murray’s not a sick natural talent:


I think the best video showing just what Murray is capable of is this:


As well as Murray played in that 2012 Olympic final vs Federer, he played even better in the Tokyo 2011 final vs Nadal, who was in very good form himself. I still think it's the best I've seen him play. The level of tennis Murray found in that 3rd set was simply insane, and was beyond anything Roddick could have ever mustered. The forehand, that backhand both cc and dtl, the return, the movement and defense - simply unplayable. Till now, I wonder why Murray was never capable of bringing that form to a Slam. He would give Nadal, Fed or Djokovic a run for their money.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I think the best video showing just what Murray is capable of is this:


As well as Murray played in that 2012 Olympic final vs Federer, he played even better in the Tokyo 2011 final vs Nadal, who was in very good form himself. I still think it's the best I've seen him play. The level of tennis Murray found in that 3rd set was simply insane, and was beyond anything Roddick could have ever mustered. The forehand, that backhand both cc and dtl, the return, the movement and defense - simply unplayable. Till now, I wonder why Murray was never capable of bringing that form to a Slam. He would give Nadal, Fed or Djokovic a run for their money.
Because Federer, Nadal and Djokovic could reach a much higher gear in the slams that Murray never had.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
I think the best video showing just what Murray is capable of is this:


As well as Murray played in that 2012 Olympic final vs Federer, he played even better in the Tokyo 2011 final vs Nadal, who was in very good form himself. I still think it's the best I've seen him play. The level of tennis Murray found in that 3rd set was simply insane, and was beyond anything Roddick could have ever mustered. The forehand, that backhand both cc and dtl, the return, the movement and defense - simply unplayable. Till now, I wonder why Murray was never capable of bringing that form to a Slam. He would give Nadal, Fed or Djokovic a run for their money.
Because they played at a higher level against Murray in slams? Post is absurd. Roddick could bring a level similar to that.

Guess you've never watched Dubai 2008 where Roddick effectively blew Nadal off the court.
 

Sputnik Bulgorov

Professional
Because they played at a higher level against Murray in slams? Post is absurd. Roddick could bring a level similar to that.

Guess you've never watched Dubai 2008 where Roddick effectively blew Nadal off the court.

Hey bro, I never said Murray plays a higher level than Nadal, Djokovic and Federer. Only that if he could play to the level he was capable of like in that Tokyo 2011 final, he could give them a run for their money.

Also, I'm not one to underrate Roddick or overrate Murray. I'm not one of those weak era guys who consider Roddick a pigeon just because Fed owned him. I think Roddick would have been fully capable of winning any of the GS finals he made against Nadal or Djokovic. But let's be honest here, Murray is a tier above Roddick and he can definitely reach a level that Roddick just can't match in the same way that Fedalovic can reach a level Murray can't match. Murray beat a much better Nadal in Tokyo 2011 than the one that Roddick beat in Dubai 2008. There's a reason why Murray was beating prime Roddick when he was just a teenager.
 

metsman

Talk Tennis Guru
Hey bro, I never said Murray plays a higher level than Nadal, Djokovic and Federer. Only that if he could play to the level he was capable of like in that Tokyo 2011 final, he could give them a run for their money.

Also, I'm not one to underrate Roddick or overrate Murray. I'm not one of those weak era guys who consider Roddick a pigeon just because Fed owned him. I think Roddick would have been fully capable of winning any of the GS finals he made against Nadal or Djokovic. But let's be honest here, Murray is a tier above Roddick and he can definitely reach a level that Roddick just can't match in the same way that Fedalovic can reach a level Murray can't match. Murray beat a much better Nadal in Tokyo 2011 than the one that Roddick beat in Dubai 2008. There's a reason why Murray was beating prime Roddick when he was just a teenager.
We're seriously going to make distinctions in Nadal's form in two random 500 events on HC and say the one he got bagelled in was much better? The list of people who have looked like world beaters against Nadal on HC is long.
 

Sputnik Bulgorov

Professional
We're seriously going to make distinctions in Nadal's form in two random 500 events on HC and say the one he got bagelled in was much better? The list of people who have looked like world beaters against Nadal on HC is long.

I only brought Tokyo 2011 up to show what Murray is capable of. I think he has a higher ceiling than Roddick. It's partly the reason he beat Djokovic in two GS finals - he could occasionally reach a level that made things very difficult for Djokovic, or anyone, really. Roddick could never really get over the Federer hump, even when Fed didn't bring his A game like in Wimbledon 2009. If you disagree, it's cool.

To go back on topic, Fed definitely took more from Roddick because he basically single-handedly stopped Roddick from being so much more than a one slam wonder. Djokovic inflicted a lot of pain on Murray, but Murray overcame him a couple of times on his way to becoming a 3 time slam champ.
 
So 2015 Wawrinka couldn’t have beaten Murray at the FO?

Generally, I agree with you, but I think Stan and Murray are more even than say Roddick and Murray.

Obviously he could have, I just don't believe he would have. All just my opinion, of course, and taking nothing away from Wawrinka, I just think a fit and form Murray wins against him on all surfaces the vast majority of the time.
 
Top