who is better on grass court , A. Murray or A. Roddick

[Mirror Image]

There are so many threads comparing nole and Murray
but what's about Roddick?
Roddick reached 3 Wimbledon finals and all lost to the
grass court GOAT , sorry we can say GOD !
He was very close in 2009 but lost in 5th with a score 16-14.
in the same year he beat Murray in semis .

Though he didn't win Wimbledon he was one of the best
player on grass ever .

on the other hand , Murray have 1 Wimbledon title and
other small grass crowns .

Very difficult to choose but I go with Roddick as I dont
think Murray would have won against GOD in 2003, 4,5, 9
at Wimbledon .

 

[tipsa...don'tlikehim!]

So far, Roddick, so i have to vote Roddick

But at the end of Murray's career it will be a different story I guess...

 

[Goosehead]

not this nonsense again..:roll:

transplanting murray into an earlier time and claiming he would have lost like Roddick did..and therefore Roddick is better than murray..:?

cool story bro..

as they say on the interwebz,

 

[Kenshin]

I have to say Murray is a better grass court player than Roddick at this point because he actually WON Wimbledon. And that is a big difference when you compare two players. However, I believe Roddick's 2009 Wimbledon playing level was better than any Murray's playing level at Wim so far.

 

[Mirror Image]

not this nonsense again..:roll:

transplanting murray into an earlier time and claiming he would have lost like Roddick did..and therefore Roddick is better than murray..:?

cool story bro..

as they say on the interwebz,

are you watching tennis from 2012 ?
Roddick beat Murray in 2009 Wimbledon semis also he was
not close to his peak level.

 

[Goosehead]

are you watching tennis from 2012 ?
Roddick beat Murray in 2009 Wimbledon semis also he was
not close to his peak level.

hello fastgrass,

or hello the champions game,

or hello delpo fan.

and indeed hello 'mirror image'.

 

[Backspin1183]

Murray is the better player grass court player. He's won Wimbledon and OG on grass. He also beat Federer in straight sets for the OG.

 

[Homeboy Hotel]

fast grass is back

 

[batz]

That troll banned in just 3 hrs ! making all time record !

Good work by the mods. The guy is a pollutant.

 

[beast of mallorca]

Good work by the mods. The guy is a pollutant.

If only they will ban Chico permanently as well................:twisted:

 

[batz]

yes good work by moderators to keep troll away but how
they concluded that guy is troll in just 3 hrs ?

I don't know Fastrgass#5 - maybe the free IP mask you are using is crap? Or maybe it's that unique posting style of yours?

 

[Goosehead]

lol wut ..don't say 'bench mark' is the freshly banned 'mirror image' ? or should we say 'fastgrass5' lol.

 

[TMF]

I can't believe one would keep trying to comeback with another account when he knows he's not wanted here.

It's like a game to him.

 

[FreeBird]

why to ban chico ? He is most popular poster here !

At least change your writing style.

 

[kiki]

I suggest to open a new thread...how would 2000-2013 players fare on old grass? How would pre 2000 players do in mdern grass?

IMO, there is a good chance that nowadays top players could really do very well at Melbourne, where the grass pattern allowed for slower, higher bouncing shots; except Federer and, for a couple of tournaments Nadal would suck at Wimbledon...and would be completely hopeless on Forest Hills grass.

And if they played with wooden rackets, it would be a disaster for most of them ( again I think Federer could adapt very well to wood).

As for older players, Borg and Lendl would feel very comfortable on current grass, and Borg would have probbaly the record of titles at Wimbledon while Lendl would have won a couple of times there.Wilander did very well at the aussie but very bad at London and that must be a great sign of how could it have gone through.

 

[Goosehead]

its not my fault that you are nadal fan and I am not.
You are just deluded. I hate nadal because I don't like
his playing style , time wasting .
Don't get me agree .

oh you hate nadal now..what, have you got bored with hating murray then ? :neutral:

are you still bench mark..? I know, here's fun..why not amalgamate all your banned profiles ?

hello fastgrassthechampionsgamedelpofanmirrorimage>>benchmark (*soon to be banned) lol.

did I leave any out ?...........baby.

 

[Goosehead]

cry ******** fan cry!
your tears are so delicious.
why you don't give any credit to delpotro instead of trolling and still backing him.
he was destroyed by tower , that is fact .

lol wut ? you make even less sense that usual..i'm a del potro fan too you sad dehydrated oaf...

on second thoughts go back to hating murray, you will get banned quicker.

 

[NatF]

Roddick's best level on grass is higher IMO. But Murray has better achievements.

 

[illusions30]

There are too many who is better than who on grass threads. It is pretty simple really of the last 10 years:

Federer > Nadal > Murray > Roddick = Hewitt = Djokovic. You could argue the order of those last 3 but they are all roughly equal, they are all below Murray, who is below Nadal, who is below Federer.

 

[illusions30]

Roddick's best level on grass is higher IMO. But Murray has better achievements.

I think their best levels on grass are fairly close. Neither are up to Nadal's best level on grass (last 3 or 4 rounds of Wimbledon 2007, 2008, 2010), and even further from Federer's best level on grass. Both are far better than Djokovic's best level on grass unless they are all playing Nadal, and probably better than Hewitt's best level on grass.

 

[NatF]

I think their best levels on grass are fairly close. Neither are up to Nadal's best level on grass (last 3 or 4 rounds of Wimbledon 2007, 2008, 2010), and even further from Federer's best level on grass. Both are far better than Djokovic's best level on grass unless they are all playing Nadal, and probably better than Hewitt's best level on grass.

I think it is probably close, but I think at his best Roddick's serve and forehand combination on a quicker surface gives him the edge. A slight edge mind you.

 

[illusions30]

I think it is probably close, but I think at his best Roddick's serve and forehand combination on a quicker surface gives him the edge. A slight edge mind you.

Well Roddick did beat Murray in Wimbledon 2009 when Murray was probably closer to his prime (although even that is hard to say). Murray is a bad matchup for Roddick in general, which made it an even more impressive win. So you might be right.

Murray mantained his best level alot longer though. I would say Roddick's great tennis on grass for him was only 2003, 2004, and 2009. Even though he made the 2005 final his level of play wasnt impressive, and Federer predictably rolled him with ease that time. Murray has consistently been a contender and played at a high level on grass since 2008 now.

 

[NatF]

Well Roddick did beat Murray in Wimbledon 2009 when Murray was probably closer to his prime (although even that is hard to say). Murray is a bad matchup for Roddick in general, which made it an even more impressive win. So you might be right.

Murray mantained his best level alot longer though. I would say Roddick's great tennis on grass for him was only 2003, 2004, and 2009. Even though he made the 2005 final his level of play wasnt impressive, and Federer predictably rolled him with ease that time. Murray has consistently been a contender and played at a high level on grass since 2008 now.

Murray is certainly better than pusher Roddick, his consistancy is reflected in his win percentage which is right up there with the best. We agree that Murray has achieved more on grass, bigger titles and better consistancy.

I definately don't think Murray can be significantly better than Roddick in terms of level of play. Roddick of 04 and 09 is atleast equal to the Murray performances of 2012 IMO.

 

[Rob31]

Andy Roddick, by a slight margin.

 

[TERRASTAR18]

not this nonsense again..:roll:

transplanting murray into an earlier time and claiming he would have lost like Roddick did..and therefore Roddick is better than murray..:?

cool story bro..

as they say on the interwebz,

mad because it's true? roddick went toe to toe with a grass goat in fed. murray lost to a past his prime fed and needed a partisan crowd to beat beat djoker on a slowed down wimbly which had crappy conditions whch led to alot of "upsets" of ppl who would have destroyed murray- isner,fed,and nadal.

 

[TERRASTAR18]

I have to say Murray is a better grass court player than Roddick at this point because he actually WON Wimbledon. And that is a big difference when you compare two players. However, I believe Roddick's 2009 Wimbledon playing level was better than any Murray's playing level at Wim so far.

but you can't compare the slowed down grass of the 10's to 2003-9 when roddick played aginst goat fed.

 

[TERRASTAR18]

Murray is certainly better than pusher Roddick, his consistancy is reflected in his win percentage which is right up there with the best. We agree that Murray has achieved more on grass, bigger titles and better consistancy.

I definately don't think Murray can be significantly better than Roddick in terms of level of play. Roddick of 04 and 09 is atleast equal to the Murray performances of 2012 IMO.

roddick a pusher? and murray having slightly better play on grass? the things yyou hear on this board.

 

[Goosehead]

mad because it's true? roddick went toe to toe with a grass goat in fed. murray lost to a past his prime fed and needed a partisan crowd to beat beat djoker on a slowed down wimbly which had crappy conditions whch led to alot of "upsets" of ppl who would have destroyed murray- isner,fed,and nadal.

roddick lost to a past his prime fed as well in that case 2009, Roddick beat preprime murray did he ?...hmmm. wow.

slowed dowm wimby ??.. lol wut, slowed down when? in 2001, stop living in the past its embarrassing.

crappy conditions ??, wot that then diddums ?. , hot sunny days of 29c 84f like on mens final day, yes dreadful weather for tennis, I agree

and the old routine>>if only loads of players hadn't lost in the first round or two then they would have 'destroyed' murray lol, , shame these amazing players lost early on then isn't it, whilst murray kept on winning,

isner..??, ISNER..John '2singleswinsatwimbledon' Isner is going to 'destroy' murray lol, he is 28yrs old and has won 2 singles matches at Wimbledon in his career (or was it 3)

lol JOHN ISNER..You hear that muffled sound ?, that's the sound of everyone laughing at your absurd and deranged nonsense.

 

[NatF]

roddick a pusher? and murray having slightly better play on grass? the things yyou hear on this board.

Roddick became a bit of a pusher after mid 2005. Went for much less on his shots etc...And yes Murray is only slightly better. Rewatch Wimbledon 2004 and 2009.

 

[roberttennis54]

This comparison is similar to the Murray vs Djokovic comparison on grass a couple of years back. Murray was the better player, but Djokovic greater. Murray is a greater grass court player than Roddick, but Roddick played at a higher level. At their best Roddick would beat Murray more times than not (who actually is a very nad match up against him) and beat other players Murray would struggle with.

 

[illusions30]

Can even better as opposed to greater be determined solely by peak level play though. I could see arguing Roddick 's peak play on grass being slightly better than Murray's, but Murray has kept that level up for 6 years and counting now non stop, while Roddick came in brief flashes, and was produced in 3 or 4 grass tournaments at most. So Murray's average level is well above Roddick's on grass considering their whole careers, in addition to his superior record.

Murray at the last 6 Wimbledons has 1 title, 1 finals loss to Roger, 2 semi final losses to Nadal, 1 semi final loss to on fire Roddick, and 1 quarter final loss to Nadal.

Roddick from 2004-2009 lost 3 Wimbledon finals to Roger, 1 of them playing mediocre tennis and super lucky Hewitt and all other threats were on the other half, lost to Gasquet in a match he allowed Gasquet 90 winners in the quarters, lost to Tipsarevic in an early round, and lost to 18 year old unseeded Andy Murray in another.

Based on that both greater and better would have to go to Murray, even if Roddick on occasions might have reached a slightly higher peak level of play on grass. Put another way, take the Roddick of Wimbledon 2003-2009 up against the Muray of Wimbledon 2008-2014 somehow.

Lets say Roddick won 2 out of 3 of his "good" years (the other being 2003). Murray obviously wins the other 4 (barring an unlikely poor performance in 2014) as none of the other Roddick's (including even the one who reached the 2005 final) is particularly good, and would thus come out ahead 5 out of 7 probably. Hard to say this indicates Roddick being "better" overall. Or go year by year:

2003 Roddick vs 2008 Murray- Roddick wins
2004 Roddick vs 2009 Murray- Roddick probably wins considering he won theri 2009 match
2005 Roddick vs 2010 Murray- Murray probably wins
2006 Roddick vs 2011 Murray- Murray crushes, he beat Roddick as it was in 2006 at 18.
2007 Roddick vs 2012 Murray- Gasquet beat Roddick and hit 90 winners, so of course a very in form Murray would.
2008 Roddick vs 2013 Murray- Murray easy again.
2009 Roddick vs 2014 Murray- we will see.

 

[syc23]

All you idiots should stop this debate.

Murray is better by virtue that he is the owner of 1 Wimbledon title and has beaten Roger also to win OG. Roddick has achieved what on grass in comparison?

Yeah Murray settled the debate in 2011 when he whooped A-Rod at Queens.