How many majors did Roger take from Roddick?

[bksballer89]

This always frustrates me as a Roddick fan knowing that he would have much more than 1 major in Fed played in a different era.

 

[bksballer89]

Fed eliminated Andy in the following majors:

03 Wimbledon SF
04 Wimbledon finals
05 Wimbledon finals
06 US Open finals
07 Aussie Open SF
07 US Open QF ( Not going to say Andy would have won but the only player who other player who could have eliminated him was Novak)
09 Aussie Open SF
09 Wimbledon Finals

So basically with no Fed around, Roddick would have at least 5 majors and quite possibly between 7-9 majors.

Andy must lose sleep over this.

 

[cezero]

Roddick was lucky to get the 1 major, IMO. It was right before Roger got dominant, and in between 2 historically great eras of men's tennis.

Right after Andy got that US Open win, Roger went God mode, and had 3-4 years where Roddick was literally his only competition (and abysmal competition at that), and then Nadal, Nole, and Murray started coming on strong, which gave Roddick pretty much zero chance of being relevant in majors.

Roddick maximized his gifts, but he made most of his finals in a relatively weak era compared to the Sampras/Agassi era before him, and the Roger/Rafa/Nole/Murray era that came on strong after him in his prime.

 

[Hank Kingsley]

Andy must lose sleep over this.

Brooklyn Decker keeps him tuckered out.

He sleeps fairly well I'd imagine.

 

[Hs0022]

Roddick was lucky to get the 1 major, IMO. It was right before Roger got dominant, and in between 2 historically great eras of men's tennis.

Right after Andy got that US Open win, Roger went God mode, and had 3-4 years where Roddick was literally his only competition (and abysmal competition at that), and then Nadal, Nole, and Murray started coming on strong, which gave Roddick pretty much zero chance of being relevant in majors.

Roddick maximized his gifts, but he made most of his finals in a relatively weak era compared to the Sampras/Agassi era before him, and the Roger/Rafa/Nole/Murray era that came on strong after him in his prime.

Nadal was already a force by 2005 when he won the FO. So your 3-4 years is incorrect. Nadal's game matured early like Becker's.

 

[cezero]

Nadal was already a force by 2005 when he won the FO. So your 3-4 years is incorrect.

Nadal was losing to people ranked well below him off of clay in 2005. It's why he didn't win a major off the surface until 2008.

Correct.

 

[Hs0022]

Roddick was lucky to get the 1 major, IMO. It was right before Roger got dominant, and in between 2 historically great eras of men's tennis.

Right after Andy got that US Open win, Roger went God mode, and had 3-4 years where Roddick was literally his only competition (and abysmal competition at that), and then Nadal, Nole, and Murray started coming on strong, which gave Roddick pretty much zero chance of being relevant in majors.

Roddick maximized his gifts, but he made most of his finals in a relatively weak era compared to the Sampras/Agassi era before him, and the Roger/Rafa/Nole/Murray era that came on strong after him in his prime.

Nadal was already a force by 2005 when he won the FO. So your 3-4 years is incorrect. Nadal's game matur

Nadal was losing to people ranked well below him off of clay in 2005. It's why he didn't win a major off the surface until 2008.

Correct.

He didn't win off clay because that is where he expended most of his energy and also the fact that he didn't try to play well on other surfaces. Playing everything on clay and winning everything with his crazy topspin strings. He turned pro in 2001.

 

[cezero]

Nadal was already a force by 2005 when he won the FO. So your 3-4 years is incorrect. Nadal's game matur

He didn't win off clay because that is where he expended most of his energy and also the fact that he didn't try to play well on other surfaces. Playing everything on clay and winning everything with his crazy topspin strings. He turned pro in 2001.

Yeah, Federer dominated the tour for 4-5 years with Roddick as his only real competition until Rafa started winning majors off of clay and stopped losing to relative nobodies off of it considering his ranking.

Roddick was lucky to make the final in 2009 when Rafa was absent.

Thanks.

 

[Hs0022]

Are you referring to the year when Rafa started taking something and increased his serve speed to 130mph and reduced his recovery time to steamroll over everyone and win the USO?

 

[cezero]

lol. different discussion.

the magical unbreakable serve was something to behold.

 

[Win TWINS!!!]

Roddick was lucky to get the 1 major, IMO. It was right before Roger got dominant, and in between 2 historically great eras of men's tennis.

Right after Andy got that US Open win, Roger went God mode, and had 3-4 years where Roddick was literally his only competition (and abysmal competition at that), and then Nadal, Nole, and Murray started coming on strong, which gave Roddick pretty much zero chance of being relevant in majors.

Roddick maximized his gifts, but he made most of his finals in a relatively weak era compared to the Sampras/Agassi era before him, and the Roger/Rafa/Nole/Murray era that came on strong after him in his prime.

You pretty much nailed it perfectly.

 

[nuraman00]

Fed eliminated Andy in the following majors:

03 Wimbledon SF
04 Wimbledon finals
05 Wimbledon finals
06 US Open finals
07 Aussie Open SF
07 US Open QF ( Not going to say Andy would have won but the only player who other player who could have eliminated him was Novak)
09 Aussie Open SF
09 Wimbledon Finals

So basically with no Fed around, Roddick would have at least 5 majors and quite possibly between 7-9 majors.

Andy must lose sleep over this.

I get what you're saying.

But I also think Roddick is responsible for losing majors by his own volition too, with his poor return game.

Losing to Lu in 2010 Wimbledon.

2010 Wimbledon Championships Men's Singles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tipsarevic in 2008 Wimbledon, 2010 US Open.

Muller in the 2005 US Open. That was the year ESPN had American Express flash banner ads "Have you seen Andy Roddick's Mojo?" Then during the 2nd week, the ads changed to "I found Andy Roddick's mojo!" Unfortunately, Roddick's loss was in the 1st round.

Isner at the 2009 US Open. That's not a bad loss, but for someone coming off the 2009 Wimbledon Finals, and someone considered a title contender, you have to win that match.

Igor Andreev in the 1st round of the FO isn't a great loss either. Because Andreev isn't a clay court player, and on paper, he has even more of a limited game than Roddick, with worse movement. Not saying Roddick would have made a deep run, but its not a good loss.

I do sympathize with Roddick on his 4th round loss to Monfils at the 2009 FO. It was past 9:20pm local time, and they were still playing. Roddick complained to the umpire during the 2nd set, that he couldn't see the ball. They shouldn't have finished that match that day. But with Monfils up and winning, and the crowd into it, they wanted to finish it. That was not fair.

 

[nuraman00]

I'm fine with Roddick's showing at the AO over the years. Don't think any of the losses are "bad" IMO.