Who is greater between Roddick and Medvedev?

[Angrybirdstar]

Conversely, I also think Rod wouldn't be particularly troubled by Med's low-spin depth-botting return from the back fence

hm i feel like he could be. Medvedev's returning style seems like it could produce similar effects to Federer or Murray's returning styles, especially given that Roddick was more of a brute force finisher than a proficient shotmaker from the middle

Ehhh Roddick was an actual attacking (as in, goes forward) player. Med hasn't been very good at handling those, as his utter drubbing by S&V-ing Djokovic (a good but not great net player) in Paris showed.

Djokovic has always had a better transition and net game than Roddick, let alone late career Djokovic. in the battle of stoppable force Roddick at net vs movable object Medvedev on pass, i'd take Medvedev (relatively speaking ofc; not saying that Roddick would be held to < 50% on net points by Medvedev lol)

Guys who had weaker return games but weren't abjectly terrible. But yeah he's probably not going to be breaking lots. Med rarely botted for entire matches over five sets though, so I think Roddick could get crucial breaks here and there and win some TB's.

stats-wise, looking at their outdoor hard primes (generally, Cinci '19-AO '24 vs AO '03-AO '09), TBs are actually one of the few clear edges for either player (given that Roddick's serve+1 vs Medvedev's return+baselining basically cancels out with the reverse serve-return matchup, in terms of games/sets won %), and that edge actually goes to Medvedev (66.2% vs 61.1%)

I do think Roddick being YE #1 is a nice feather in his cap but it was in 2003 in the transition era when there was no dominant force on tour, unlike Medvedev who got caught between Djokovic and the hand off to Sinner/Alcaraz.

i mean, '22-pre-RG '23 was clearly a transition period (just like '24 as a whole) - it's just that Medvedev was slumping too much to take advantage, compared to Alcaraz, Roddick, and Hewitt

factoring in respective prime competitions, Roddick's longer prime, and Roddick's (serve-derived) higher peak, i think the overall edge still lies with Roddick on outdoor hard. the only real counter-argument i can see is if one thinks Medvedev's style would give him a particularly large matchup advantage, which isn't too clear when looking at Roddick's Monfils/Simon h2hs. we can also pretty safely say that Roddick has a big edge on grass, Medvedev has a moderate edge indoors, and Medvedev has a minor edge on clay (real Med-heads know that his peak clay form was in MC and Barcelona '19 and not Rome '23), none of which really changes the calculation much

 

[NoleFam]

i mean, '22-pre-RG '23 was clearly a transition period (just like '24 as a whole) - it's just that Medvedev was slumping too much to take advantage, compared to Alcaraz, Roddick, and Hewitt

factoring in respective prime competitions, Roddick's longer prime, and Roddick's (serve-derived) higher peak, i think the overall edge still lies with Roddick on outdoor hard. the only real counter-argument i can see is if one thinks Medvedev's style would give him a particularly large matchup advantage, which isn't too clear when looking at Roddick's Monfils/Simon h2hs. we can also pretty safely say that Roddick has a big edge on grass, Medvedev has a moderate edge indoors, and Medvedev has a minor edge on clay (real Med-heads know that his peak clay form was in MC and Barcelona '19 and not Rome '23), none of which really changes the calculation much

I wouldn't say 2022 was a transition period but a weird period in the game since Djokovic, the best player in the world still, was unable to play half the Slams and Masters because of political reasons. Order was pretty much restored in 2023. I don't even think 2024 is a transition period because there was one dominant force in the game and another who won the the channel Slam. One is already an ATG and the other will be in another year or two. 2024 was basically a hand off from one dominant player to two dominant players.

Outdoor is hard is probably a tie or advantage Medvedev. Both are missing IW and AO in big events, but Medvedev got closer to winning AO than Roddick did. I don't know how about the head to head would go but I agree on the rest.

 

[Angrybirdstar]

I wouldn't say 2022 was a transition period but a weird period in the game since Djokovic, the best player in the world still, was unable to play half the Slams and Masters because of political reasons. Order was pretty much restored in 2023. I don't even think 2024 is a transition period because there was one dominant force in the game and another who won the the channel Slam. One is already an ATG and the other will be in another year or two. 2024 was basically a hand off from one dominant player to two dominant players.

to me, a transitional (aka "weak") period is characterized by non-existent/inconsistent dominance ('98-'03, '22), or outright (not necessarily solo) dominance over an inconsistent and reliably unthreatening field ('06, '16-'17, '24). it's also pretty vibes-based in the sense of "how unhype and/or miserable is the viewing experience"

 

[NoleFam]

to me, a transitional (aka "weak") period is characterized by non-existent/inconsistent dominance ('98-'03, '22), or outright (not necessarily solo) dominance over an inconsistent and reliably unthreatening field ('06, '16-'17, '24). it's also pretty vibes-based in the sense of "how unhype and/or miserable is the viewing experience"

Fair enough but I think it's when a dominant force or forces decline, and leave a space in the game for lesser players to take reign and win Slams and big titles until the next dominant force arrives. That's why I see 2001-2003 as the last transition period. I could see the argument for 2022 though because that was the last hurrah from Nadal which left a space there for other players, and then Alcaraz promptly took that year's USO.

 

[Rosstour]

One of the few things that can sway things in Andy's favor is that he wasn't just a 1-surface pony.

Roddick on grass is like Fed on clay. Literally one of the greatest to ever do it, but people think he’s trash bc there was someone better—who was literally THE best to ever do it

 

[travlerajm]

It’s eerie how similar their careers are, especially the slam records are career arc trajectory.

Also, both are the undisputed post-match interview champs of their respective generations.

 

[mike danny]

It’s eerie how similar their careers are, especially the slam records are career arc trajectory.

Also, both are the undisputed post-match interview champs of their respective generations.

Don’t see how their career trajectories were similar. Roddick blossomed when he was young while Med was a journeyman until 23

 

[travlerajm]

Don’t see how their career trajectories were similar. Roddick blossomed when he was young while Med was a journeyman until 23

That’s just because Med didn’t hit puberty until his early 20s.

 

[No_Kwan_Do]

Pretty close, and they're both in the same tier, but I'd give it to Roddick on account that he faced tougher slam final opponents in peak/prime Federer on grass.

 

[TheGoldenEra1990’s]

Roddick obviously ... Med was useless and hit like a little girl from the baseline most of the time. Dude couldn't even put a few slam wins together in a vacuum era with old djokovic around. Give Roddick that garbage of 2018-2023 and he wins at least 4-5. Heck Med was lucky to win even one LOL

 

[martinezownsclay]

Roddick is light years better.

 

[Third Serve]

break it down:

serve: Roddick more pace and authority

return: Medvedev better placement

forehand: Roddick could actually hit a proper one

backhand: Medvedev could hit three or more topspin backhands in a row

volleys: Roddick more punch, touch and feel

overall not a very flattering situation for peak player against fresh-poking oldster

 

[reaper]

If neither player is great, can either be greater?

 

[BauerAlmeida]

They are about equal, not much separating them unless you have an obvious agenda involving another player who is NOT one of these two.

In terms of achievements very similar. In terms of strengths and weaknesses inside the court, they are extremely different, but their overall level is pretty similar.

 

[Pheasant]

Let’s take a look at some stats first

Roddick:
493-167, .747 overall
23-49, .319 vs top-5

Medvedev:
385-152, .712 overall
17-38, .296 vs top-5

Medvedev has an extra slam final and 1 extra Masters title. He also has a WTF title. Also, Medvedev has 5 YE rankings in the top-5 to Andy’s 3. However, Roddick has a much better career winning pct, despite playing through a long decline period. Roddick also has a YE#1. And that was well earned, since he won the North American triple(Montreal, Cinci, USO) in a very impressive fashion. Note: includes beating Federer in the semis of Montreal, which seemed to spark Andy. Federer, Djoker, Agassi, and Sampras never won the North American triple. IIRC, Andy received an extra million bucks for his stellar North American swing.

I see an argument for both players. But I have to give this one to Roddick for the win. However, Medvedev could pass Roddick. Let’s see what the rest of his career brings him. He’s not done yet. Another slam title, or another WTF title, or 2 more Masters titles, or 1 more top-5 YE rankings, or 2 more YE top-10 rankings would do it. He doesn’t need to do much to pass Roddick. It’s close.

 

[LuckyR]

Well Andy made $20 million but Daniil made $49 million. By inflation, Andy actually made $25 million (in 2020 dollars, 2020 being Daniil's median career year). So Daniil.

 

[NatF]

i mean, '22-pre-RG '23 was clearly a transition period (just like '24 as a whole) - it's just that Medvedev was slumping too much to take advantage, compared to Alcaraz, Roddick, and Hewitt

factoring in respective prime competitions, Roddick's longer prime, and Roddick's (serve-derived) higher peak, i think the overall edge still lies with Roddick on outdoor hard. the only real counter-argument i can see is if one thinks Medvedev's style would give him a particularly large matchup advantage, which isn't too clear when looking at Roddick's Monfils/Simon h2hs. we can also pretty safely say that Roddick has a big edge on grass, Medvedev has a moderate edge indoors, and Medvedev has a minor edge on clay (real Med-heads know that his peak clay form was in MC and Barcelona '19 and not Rome '23), none of which really changes the calculation much

Yeah, their competition isn't really comparable...

Roddick's win/loss versus the top 10 includes 22 meetings with Federer, against pretty much any other player in history I don't think he goes 3-19 lol. He also met Nadal more than Medvedev did, plus other players like Murray, Hewitt, Agassi etc...that's without getting into third and fourth rung players who were IMO clearly better in Roddick's day. Medvedev did meet Djokovic 15 times, but this older Djokovic not peak Djokovic...

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Roddick is the chosen one this time.

 

[Razer]

I wouldn't say 2022 was a transition period but a weird period in the game since Djokovic, the best player in the world still, was unable to play half the Slams and Masters because of political reasons. Order was pretty much restored in 2023. I don't even think 2024 is a transition period because there was one dominant force in the game and another who won the the channel Slam. One is already an ATG and the other will be in another year or two. 2024 was basically a hand off from one dominant player to two dominant players.

Outdoor is hard is probably a tie or advantage Medvedev. Both are missing IW and AO in big events, but Medvedev got closer to winning AO than Roddick did. I don't know how about the head to head would go but I agree on the rest.

Tennis has been in a transition period from 2016 mid until 2023 end

The True Meaning of Transition period here is the Transfer of Reigns from 1 ATG at his peak to another ATG in his peak, isn't it ?

When we called 00-03 as a transition phase then clearly it means the transfer of reigns from Peter Sampras/Andre Agassi to Roger Federer, the period in between which had many world number 1s and different champions.

Similarly, after 2016 none of the Big 3 were at their peaks, in 2024 both Alcaraz/Sinner are at their peaks but not before this. So the period of 16-23 is the Career Inflation Era when an entire generation of players (90s gen) emerged as abject losers to prolong the careers of Big 3 and take them all past 20. This is the true Transition era.

 

[M4tchP0int]

Roddick, IMO.

He didn’t need Federer or Agassi to get deported to become no. 1.

Med choking 2 slam finals from 2-0 up cannot be dismissed. A greater player doesn’t do that

Yes and no. He didn't choke the second one vs sinner IMO. He run out of gas and shouldn't have reached the Final if the real choker Zverev didn't choke in the SF

 

[NoleFam]

Tennis has been in a transition period from 2016 mid until 2023 end

The True Meaning of Transition period here is the Transfer of Reigns from 1 ATG at his peak to another ATG in his peak, isn't it ?

When we called 00-03 as a transition phase then clearly it means the transfer of reigns from Peter Sampras/Andre Agassi to Roger Federer, the period in between which had many world number 1s and different champions.

Similarly, after 2016 none of the Big 3 were at their peaks, in 2024 both Alcaraz/Sinner are at their peaks but not before this. So the period of 16-23 is the Career Inflation Era when an entire generation of players (90s gen) emerged as abject losers to prolong the careers of Big 3 and take them all past 20. This is the true Transition era.

I don't see it this way or agree with any of this.

 

[Biotic]

2021 USO Novak was a superior player than 2008 USO Novak or the 2009 AO Novak (the versions Andy beat).

Just a slight correction: one time Roddick beat Djoko at a slam was 09 AO and it was only due to Feeblevic suffering a heatstroke.

At 2008 USO, Djoko mopped up A-Rod, after he predictably choked the 4th set away.

 

[Razer]

I don't see it this way or agree with any of this.

You don't but Gustavo Kuerten agrees with me, thats why he openly attacked Federer in 06 by saying that he is benefitting from the decline of Sampras and no prime ATG to fill that vacuum, he even compared that to Ayrton Senna's death in F1 creating a vacuum and Michael Schumacher benefitting from it.

The thing is Big 3 did decline in their 30s and there was no young generation to take the reigns from them in 2016, thats what enabled Murray to become number 1 because the level of play had dropped with Djokovic going down, then after Murray himself went down Fed-Dal returned and they were worse than their 2008-2012 selves levelwise but they still won all the slame, then Djokovic returned in 2018 to top form and he himself was worse than his 2014-2016 peak form but he was still winning, then 2020 onwards Big 3 declined even more compared to their 2017-2019 levels but they still won ... until Alcaraz and Sinner put an end to this, clearly the 1990s gen could not.... THIS is Transition phased of Tennis, a long one at that.

 

[Razer]

Yeah, their competition isn't really comparable...

Roddick's win/loss versus the top 10 includes 22 meetings with Federer, against pretty much any other player in history I don't think he goes 3-19 lol. He also met Nadal more than Medvedev did, plus other players like Murray, Hewitt, Agassi etc...that's without getting into third and fourth rung players who were IMO clearly better in Roddick's day. Medvedev did meet Djokovic 15 times, but this older Djokovic not peak Djokovic...

Yeah and Roddick even defeated Nadal in his great year 2010 in Miami, has 3 wins vs Nadal which is respectable while Med has just 1 in conditions which dont favor Nadal at all.

Roddick is above Med for sure. I donno how these people are even comparing them....

 

[NatF]

Yeah and Roddick even defeated Nadal in his great year 2010 in Miami, has 3 wins vs Nadal which is respectable while Med has just 1 in conditions which dont favor Nadal at all.

Roddick is above Med for sure. I donno how these people are even comparing them....

Nadal choked that match hard iirc? Anyway no way does Roddick in his peak lose from 2-0 up to ancient Nadal.

 

[Razer]

Nadal choked that match hard iirc? Anyway no way does Roddick in his peak lose from 2-0 up to ancient Nadal.

Yes, Andy made a comeback in that match from a losing situation. He surely isn't losing from a 2-0 lead in a GS final vs anyone so old, that loss for Med is a huge blot on his resume. I lost all the respect I had for Med that day.

 

[Razer]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=2267036240270668

 

[ibbi]

I don't think either of them is great, but Medvedev at least has a couple of epic achievements you could truly class as great if you wanted to be so kind. Not sure Roddick does. At least not outside of press conferences. "SARS"

 

[Angrybirdstar]

Nadal choked that match hard iirc? Anyway no way does Roddick in his peak lose from 2-0 up to ancient Nadal.

Johansson-type choke only possible because of bot-off? would also argue that AO '22 Medvedev 1. in fact overperformed and was quite clutch, and it was Nadal who underperformed and choked for the match to be so close, 2. wasn't quite peak compared to USO '21 (regardless of lol-worthy competition), USO '19, or AO '21/USO '23 pre-final, though it depends on how you account for the Kyrgios (positive) and FAA (relative negative) matches

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Nadal choked that match hard iirc? Anyway no way does Roddick in his peak lose from 2-0 up to ancient Nadal.

Didn't he lose from 2-0 up against Gasquet at Wimbledon?

 

[NatF]

Didn't he lose from 2-0 up against Gasquet at Wimbledon?

Did the words "In his peak" escape you?

 

[NatF]

Johansson-type choke only possible because of bot-off? would also argue that AO '22 Medvedev 1. in fact overperformed and was quite clutch, and it was Nadal who underperformed and choked for the match to be so close, 2. wasn't quite peak compared to USO '21 (regardless of lol-worthy competition), USO '19, or AO '21/USO '23 pre-final, though it depends on how you account for the Kyrgios (positive) and FAA (relative negative) matches

The Johansson loss was a 1 in a million fluke loss, and yeah the serve bot off made it possible. Medvedev has lost twice from 2-0 up in a slam final so I don't think there's much wiggle room here. Yes Nadal should have won the second set but tactically Medvedev was all over the place in the latter stages. I guess we could just call it a game limitation rather than a choke though.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Did the words "In his peak" escape you?

What is Roddick's peak? 2003-2009 is where he had his best results, maybe until mid 2010. Sure, 2007 wasn't a standout year within his peak but 2022 wasn't for Medvedev either. Both won 2 titles, Medvedev finished the year #7, Roddick #6. I don't see a reason to consider one a peak year and not the other, they were pretty similar, even the W-L.

 

[Razer]

Roddick's peak was 2003-04

 

[NatF]

What is Roddick's peak? 2003-2009 is where he had his best results, maybe until mid 2010. Sure, 2007 wasn't a standout year within his peak but 2022 wasn't for Medvedev either. Both won 2 titles, Medvedev finished the year #7, Roddick #6. I don't see a reason to consider one a peak year and not the other, they were pretty similar, even the W-L.

2021 was Med's best year, he won the previous slam - you think the 2022 AO for him was analogous to 2007 Wim for Roddick when considering their best forms?

 

[BauerAlmeida]

2021 was Med's best year, he won the previous slam - you think the 2022 AO for him was analogous to 2007 Wim for Roddick when considering their best forms?

Yes, 2021 was Medvedev's best year, making both HC slam finals and winning one. However, 2022 was a disappointing year, dropping to #7 after making #1 earlier in the year because of the previous year's results (and helped by the pandemic restrictions). Roddick wasn't awful in 2007 either, made the AO SF losing to Federer and lost in Indian Wells and Miami in the SF and QF to Nadal and Murray. And had just won Queen's. In the 2nd half of 2006 he had won Cinci and made the USO final and had that match in the YEC where he almost beats Federer. I would bet they ad similar ranking points at the time of those matches (adjusting for the 2009 changes, of course). Roddick was ranked #3 only behind Federer and Nadal until Djokovic surpassed him later that year. So yeah, he wasn't at the summer 2003 form but he was still pretty much in his peak/prime which for me ended in Indian Wells/Miami 2010.

If there was a moment between 2003-2009 where he was in a slump, it was between Wimbledon 2005 and Cinci 2006, but since the latter until USO 2007 he was in strong form. In fact, a couple of months after Wimbledon 2007 is where he had those memorable two sets against Federer at the USO.

Medvedev had a very strong 2021, yes, but 2022 was weak. Nobody considers Murray's win against Fed at AO 2013 a great win because Fed was coming off a great 2012, when he ended up having a terrible 2013.

Nonetheless, I wouldn't hold against someone losing to Nadal from 2-0 up, if there's one player who can come back from the brink of defeat, it's Nadal. Medvedev gets a lot of slack for that match, but he came from 0-2 earlier that tournament against FAA. IIRC he also saved match point. And that is thrown under the rug, in fact, it seems that the perception of him would be "better" had he lost there instead of the final.

 

[zagor]

Nadal choked that match hard iirc? Anyway no way does Roddick in his peak lose from 2-0 up to ancient Nadal.

Nah, you should re-watch it.

Roddick started blasting the FH like it was 2003/2004 when his back was against the wall in the match.

He broke Nadal at 0 at 4-3 in the 2nd set, hit a FH winner on nearly every point IIRC.

 

[Martin J]

Nah, you should re-watch it.

Roddick started blasting the FH like it was 2003/2004 when his back was against the wall in the match.

He broke Nadal at 0 at 4-3 in the 2nd set, hit a FH winner on nearly every point IIRC.

Yep, from the mid second set he started going with his FH like it was 2004. Plus, started playing (surprisingly) a very effective serve and volley tennis for a set and a half and took Ned by surprise. Nadal looked quite uncomfortable after Stifler switched to the all-attacking mode, one of his underrated performances.

 

[NoleFam]

You don't but Gustavo Kuerten agrees with me, thats why he openly attacked Federer in 06 by saying that he is benefitting from the decline of Sampras and no prime ATG to fill that vacuum, he even compared that to Ayrton Senna's death in F1 creating a vacuum and Michael Schumacher benefitting from it.

The thing is Big 3 did decline in their 30s and there was no young generation to take the reigns from them in 2016, thats what enabled Murray to become number 1 because the level of play had dropped with Djokovic going down, then after Murray himself went down Fed-Dal returned and they were worse than their 2008-2012 selves levelwise but they still won all the slame, then Djokovic returned in 2018 to top form and he himself was worse than his 2014-2016 peak form but he was still winning, then 2020 onwards Big 3 declined even more compared to their 2017-2019 levels but they still won ... until Alcaraz and Sinner put an end to this, clearly the 1990s gen could not.... THIS is Transition phased of Tennis, a long one at that.

I wouldn't call '99-2000 part of a transition era but by your definition it would be one. I see transition eras differently but fair enough.

 

[Razer]

I wouldn't call '99-2000 part of a transition era but by your definition it would be one. I see transition eras differently but fair enough.

It was probably the decline of Sampras after 1998 which enabled Agassi to become rank 1 in 1999 and after that Kuerten-Safin-Hewitt-JCF-Roddick all had their stints at the rank 1 until Federer took a firm grip. Even if you do not consider 99 as a transition phase the year 2000 definitely has to be. Gustavo Kuerten and Marat Safin as rank 1 is literally the change of guard.

 

[zagor]

Nonetheless, I wouldn't hold against someone losing to Nadal from 2-0 up, if there's one player who can come back from the brink of defeat, it's Nadal. Medvedev gets a lot of slack for that match, but he came from 0-2 earlier that tournament against FAA. IIRC he also saved match point. And that is thrown under the rug, in fact, it seems that the perception of him would be "better" had he lost there instead of the final.

That's not true actually, in reality Nadal was pretty bad at coming back from 0-2 down. Numerous players were better in that regard, Fed and Murray in this era alone (they came back 10 and 11 times respectively, while Nadal did it only 3-4 times).

 

[Holmes]

Roddick is greater than Alcaraz, for as we know, 1 strong Srichaphan era slam = 6 Inflation Era slams. This question can only be a joke.

 

[NatF]

Nah, you should re-watch it.

Roddick started blasting the FH like it was 2003/2004 when his back was against the wall in the match.

He broke Nadal at 0 at 4-3 in the 2nd set, hit a FH winner on nearly every point IIRC.

I was talking about the loss to Med.

 

[zagor]

I was talking about the loss to Med.

Aa right, that makes sense, sorry.

Can't remember Med Rafa WTF match all that much to be honest.

 

[Third Serve]

Aa right, that makes sense, sorry.

Can't remember Med Rafa WTF match all that much to be honest.

It was a really strange match.

 

[Martin J]

Aa right, that makes sense, sorry.

Can't remember Med Rafa WTF match all that much to be honest.

A bit of a roller coaster match, Ned won the first set, Med was a break up in the second if I recall almost the entire set, then Ned re-broke, served for the match, got broken and lost it eventually. Looked physically exhausted a bit in the last set.

Probably his chance to win this insignificant exo, since there was a Dominic Finals Thiem waiting for him in the finals. So, thank you Med, I guess.

 

[NatF]

Yes, 2021 was Medvedev's best year, making both HC slam finals and winning one. However, 2022 was a disappointing year, dropping to #7 after making #1 earlier in the year because of the previous year's results (and helped by the pandemic restrictions). Roddick wasn't awful in 2007 either, made the AO SF losing to Federer and lost in Indian Wells and Miami in the SF and QF to Nadal and Murray. And had just won Queen's. In the 2nd half of 2006 he had won Cinci and made the USO final and had that match in the YEC where he almost beats Federer. I would bet they ad similar ranking points at the time of those matches (adjusting for the 2009 changes, of course). Roddick was ranked #3 only behind Federer and Nadal until Djokovic surpassed him later that year. So yeah, he wasn't at the summer 2003 form but he was still pretty much in his peak/prime which for me ended in Indian Wells/Miami 2010.

If there was a moment between 2003-2009 where he was in a slump, it was between Wimbledon 2005 and Cinci 2006, but since the latter until USO 2007 he was in strong form. In fact, a couple of months after Wimbledon 2007 is where he had those memorable two sets against Federer at the USO.

Medvedev had a very strong 2021, yes, but 2022 was weak. Nobody considers Murray's win against Fed at AO 2013 a great win because Fed was coming off a great 2012, when he ended up having a terrible 2013.

Nonetheless, I wouldn't hold against someone losing to Nadal from 2-0 up, if there's one player who can come back from the brink of defeat, it's Nadal. Medvedev gets a lot of slack for that match, but he came from 0-2 earlier that tournament against FAA. IIRC he also saved match point. And that is thrown under the rug, in fact, it seems that the perception of him would be "better" had he lost there instead of the final.

It's not the same IMO. Federer was 31 and his results at the end of 2012 were already dropping off a bit from a hard year. In some ways the 2022 AO precipitated the decline in Medvedev's results, together with the surgery he had. The AO 2022 was a continuation of his 2021. Where as 2007 was certainly a prime year for Roddick, but his peak was in 2003-2004 where he relied on the big server + forehand - 2007 was a continuation of the Connors run which had more of a focus on his all around game. There were certainly some bright spots in that run from 2006-2007, but he lacked the explosiveness of his actual peak. He'd also lost the confidence and swagger that he had when he burst onto the scene. This is in comparison to Medvedev who should have been brimming with confidence at the AO in 2022. It was certainly a bad loss for Roddick, but that was IMO the best match Gasquet ever played and I think Roddick got caught a little cold.

 

[Kralingen]

I will never forgive Novak Djokovic for giving this guy a career. The USO 21 Final is maybe the most pathetic performance from a Big 3 player I’ve ever seen in a Slam Final - and that includes matches where they got bageled/breadsticked.

 

[Martin J]

I will never forgive Novak Djokovic for giving this guy a career. The USO 21 Final is maybe the most pathetic performance from a Big 3 player I’ve ever seen in a Slam Final - and that includes matches where they got bageled/breadsticked.

 

[Holmes]

I will never forgive Novak Djokovic for giving this guy a career. The USO 21 Final is maybe the most pathetic performance from a Big 3 player I’ve ever seen in a Slam Final - and that includes matches where they got bageled/breadsticked.

As long as tennis is discussed by true fans, the name of Danill Medvedev will be up there with the Roddicks, Gaudios, Thiems, etc. Guys who were a key part of their tournies.