Would have Roddick beaten Philippoussis in the 2003 Wimbledon final?

[timnz]

If Roddick had somehow got past Federer in the semi's that year, what is the likelihood that he would have beaten Philippousis in the Wimbledon final?. If you believe it was likely then you believe that Federer stopped Roddick from being a 4 time Wimbledon champ (2003, 2004, 2005, 2009) - that's massive.

Or would Mark have beaten Andy?

Their one match was in 2005 with Roddick winning 6-2, 6-4 on the grass at Queens but I don't think we can read too much into that because Philippousis was on the decline then.

 

[dgold44]

Sad that Andy never did win Wimbledon. Goran lost the title 3 or 4 times before finally winning it as a wild card against Rafter.

Life is mostly not fair, when Roddick won the USA open, I thought he would win another 5-7 slams with that Serve and FH.

I know that last lost to Federer really began his big downfall and later retirement. ( If I remember correctly).

Yes Roddick would of beaten Mark that year, I think.

 

[encylopedia]

If Roddick had somehow got past Federer in the semi's that year, what is the likelihood that he would have beaten Philippousis in the Wimbledon final?. If you believe it was likely then you believe that Federer stopped Roddick from being a 4 time Wimbledon champ (2003, 2004, 2005, 2009) - that's massive.

How does believing Roddick would have beaten Flipper make Roddick a 4 time Wimbledon champion?

 

[encylopedia]

Sad that Andy never did win Wimbledon. Goran lost the title 3 or 4 times before finally winning it as a wild card against Rafter.

Life is mostly not fair, when Roddick won the USA open, I thought he would win another 5-7 slams with that Serve and FH.
.

I was the opposite. At that time, some were predicting up to 10 slams for Roddick. I said it was possible that could happen, but only if no "true" champion came along. I said that Roddick was the most untalented #1 I had ever seen, and that at the end of the day, he may be lucky to match Jim Courier.

....and then a talented #1 did come along.....

 

[timnz]

How does believing Roddick would have beaten Flipper make Roddick a 4 time Wimbledon champion?

The sentence in my first thread "If you believe it was likely then you believe that Federer stopped Roddick from being a 4 time Wimbledon champ" explains it

 

[encylopedia]

The sentence in my first thread "If you believe it was likely then you believe that Federer stopped Roddick from being a 4 time Wimbledon champ" explains it

No, that's the point, the statement is nonsensical.

If I believe Roddick would have beaten Fipper, then I would likely believe Federer stopped Roddick from being the 2003 champion - not a 4 time champion. That's basic logic.....not sure why you would claim something like that.

It now sounds like you're just assuming that everyone believes Roddick would have won in the other years without Federer - odd, considering you are asking the question, and acknowledging it's open in regard to 2003. Certainly I would not assume people would automatically be assured that Roddick would beat Hewitt for example.

Of course, even that is assuming that Federer was not replaced by another player.....or that the draw would not be different if Federer wasn't in it......

....but whatever floats your boat....

 

[FD3S]

It's certainly possible. Considering neither man was a return genius and both were serving well throughout the tourney, I'd slightly favor Roddick if only due to his mentality - Flipper's consistency (even in comparison to young Roddick who gunned every other FH he had a look at even when it was tactically unsound) was never quite there, and he did take walkabouts in matches every so often. That said, there'd be TB's for sure and in a hypothetical match it wouldn't surprise me in the least if Philippoussis ending up winning.

As for Roddick in a world without Federer; assuming he makes the same finals he does without Fed there, I'd say the odds are good that he takes down at least one, but there's not a chance in hell he gets near double digits. Roddick was my favorite player, and I firmly believed that he always had at least a puncher's chance against anyone when he played to his strengths, but at any given time his game had gaping holes to exploit, whether it be his BH and UE count early on, his unwillingness to flatten out his FH later on, or the lack of a solid transition game that plagued him throughout.

 

[Anaconda]

Not with the way he served in the 03 semi final.

 

[tonywoo]

Since Hewitt was 95% likely beating a sluggish Roddick in the 05 Wimbledon final the whole premise of this thread is stupid anyway. No he wasn't a lock to beat Hewitt at Wimbledon 04 or Poo at Wimbledon 03 either though.

 

[BGod]

Yes. I think he grins out a 5 set match.

 

[okdude1992]

That would have been a good match. Mark was also having a strong tournament. I'd say Roddick probably sneaks it out, but maybe the experience of the Scud pays off.

 

[mattennis]

If Roddick had somehow got past Federer in the semi's that year, what is the likelihood that he would have beaten Philippousis in the Wimbledon final?.

Don't know, my Alternative Universes Simulator is still not good enough to give a solid answer. It says P for P in [0,1].

If you believe it was likely then you believe that Federer stopped Roddick from being a 4 time Wimbledon champ (2003, 2004, 2005, 2009) - that's massive.

My simulator also told me that "inference" is a bit off.