About Andy Roddick - MensTennisForums.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:19 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 265
                     
About Andy Roddick

Now I think the whole world is privy to the fact that Andy Roddick is in a carrer slump at the moment. The evidence is obvious for all to see so there is no need to belabor talking about that. What I do want to address however, is this erroneous opinion that far in Roddick's past, there was this magical heyday where he was the undisputed #1 in the world, and his forehand and serve clobbered all comers on the ATP tour. Roddick fans, in way of psychologically distancing themselves from their player's dismal recent results, have taken to concocting this dreamland fiction of Roddick's 2003 Year. They tell us that no, it is not the fact that Federer is simply the better and more complete player, but that Roddick is in a mental crisis and that harnessing his mental energies properly( as he did all those years ago) he would topple the swissman from his throne and the tennis world would rejoice. I'm sorry to inform those interested parties that Roger was beating Roddick like a drum well before he lost the fearlessness you speak of.
I am here to tell you that at no point in Roddick's career was he ever truly a dominant player. In fact his year-end status for that year is one of the most dubious year-end finishes in the open era. One of those years where one sits back and wonders whether the rankings computers have a mind of their own and were bribed. The fact that Roddick can remain in the top ten with the scarcity of legitimate titles he has won this year is a testament to how well Roger and Rafael have cleaned up in the points race. Even a few mickey-mouse tournaments, and one strong showing at Wimbledon are enough to keep him in the top five.
Roddick's whole career can be seen in terms of the evolution of the tour's reaction to his serve. At the beginning of his career the sheer pace of it astounded everyone, and I distinctly remember Sampras getting clobbered by one in 2002 or so. Finicky things like placement, and variety played no part at that point because the other players couldn't even see the ball. But starting in 2003 with the Wimbledon Semifinal, Federer gave the rest of the tour the blueprints to neutralizing the serve. Of course this didn't matter much for awhile because not many people have the requisite handspeed and eyes. But slowly even journeyman began to be able to block back his returns and from then on the point was 50/50 at worst. Now, with no real substance behind his powerful serve, we see Roddick having trouble with satellite players and getting knocked out of tournaments in the early rounds seemingly every week.
Andy Roddick's problem is one of the strongest endorsements for teaching developing players the art and thinking of the game at an early age. Tennis has, its geometry, it's strategy, those telltale nuances that spell the difference between the merely good and the great. The young Andy was bereft of such instruction(or didn't have the initiative to garner a modicum of it by watching tapes of the greats, or just experimenting on the court) and only now in the big leagues, is this lack coming to light.
On a certain level you cannot make an old dog learn new tricks. Andy is never going to be a competent serve-volleyer or as tactically aware as Coria or Nalbandian. And even if he wanted to be such, Goldfine is not the man to get him there. What the hell does Goldfine know about volleying anyway?

Last edited by Tourmalante; 11-03-2005 at 01:58 AM.
Tourmalante is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:25 PM
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Havok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Montreal
Age: 30
Posts: 9,460
                     
Re: About Andy Roddick

Someone desperately needs a life/brain and fast. There are just SO many things wrong with this load of garbage, and I was only able to read about a paragraph before my brain just completely shut it off.

Andy Roddick.Fernando Verdasco.Richard Gasquet.Tommy Haas





Havok is offline  
post #3 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:30 PM
La La Land
 
blosson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,986
                     
Re: About Andy Roddick

Yep Naldo, it's just all those old threads put together in one. The same old minestrone soup.

Last edited by blosson; 11-02-2005 at 10:53 PM.
blosson is offline  
post #4 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:31 PM
Registered User
 
partygirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hollywood, CA
Age: 34
Posts: 14,048
                     
Re: About Andy Roddick

i wont even read it.

okay i did skim some and my question is what the hell is a legit title, there on the god damn tour for christ sake and he has one on every surface...this sucky year, what have you legitamatley done beside-

forget it i dont even know why im here- naldo, blosson let's go.

*slams door on your sorry ass*

jealous much?

Last edited by partygirl; 11-02-2005 at 10:33 PM.
partygirl is offline  
post #5 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:35 PM
Registered User
 
Paialii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Age: 30
Posts: 329
                     
Re: About Andy Roddick

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tourmalante
Now I think the whole world is privy to the fact that Andy Roddick is in a carrer slump at the moment. The evidence is obvious for all to see so there is no need to belabor talking about that. What I do want to address however, is this erroneous opinion that far in Roddick's past, there was this magical heyday where he was the undisputed #1 in the world, and his forehand and serve clobbered all comers on the ATP tour. Roddick fans, in way of psychologically distancing themselves from their player's dismal recent results, have taken to concocting this dreamland fiction of Roddick's 2003 Year. They tell us that no, it is not the fact that Federer is simply the better and more complete player, but that Roddick is in a mental crisis and that harnessing his mental energies properly( as he did all those years ago) he would topple the swissman from his throne and the tennis world would rejoice. I'm sorry to inform those interested parties that Roger was beating Roddick like a drum well before he lost the fearlessness you speak of.
I am here to tell you that at no point in Roddick's career was he ever truly a dominant player. In fact his year-end status for that year is one of the most dubious year-end inishes in the open era. One of those years where one sits back and wonders whether the rankings computers have a mind of their own and were bribed. The fact that Roddick can remain in the top ten with the scarcity of legitimate titles he has won this year is a testament to how well Roger and Rafael have cleaned up in the points race. Even a few mickey-mouse tournaments, and one strong showing at Wimbledon are enough to keep him in the top five.
Roddick's whole career can be seen in terms of the evolution of the tour's reaction to his serve. At the beginning of his career the sheer pace of it astounded everyone, and I distinctly remember Sampras getting clobbered by one in 2002 or so. Finicky things like placement, and variety played no part at that point because the other players couldn't even see the ball. But starting in 2003 with the Wimbledon Semifinal, Federer gave the rest of the tour the blueprints to neutralizing the serve. Of course this didn't matter much for awhile because not many people have the requisite handspeed and eyes. But slowly even journeyman began to be able to block back his returns and from then on the point was 50/50 at worst. Now, with no real substance behind his powerful serve, we see Roddick having trouble with satellite players and getting knocked out of tournaments in te early rounds seemingly every week.
Andy Roddick's problem is one of the strongest endorsements for teaching developing players the art and thinking of the game at an early age. Tennis has, its geometry, it's strategy, those telltale nuances that spell the difference between the merely good and the great. The young Andy was bereft of such instruction(or didn't have the initiative to garner a modicum of it by watching tapes of the greats, or just experimenting on the court) and only now in the big leagues, is this lack coming to light.
On a certain level you cannot make an old dog learn new tricks. Andy is never going to be a competent serve-volleyer or as tactically aware as Coria or Nalbandian. And even if he wanted to be such, Goldfine is not the man to get him there. What the hell does Goldfine know about volleying anyway?
As someone who doesn't consider themself partial to either Andy or Federer, I must say that I don't think the hardcore fans of Roddick ever denied that Federer is the better player. You say that tennis is a game of geometry, of strategy, basically a game of more than just a big serve -- this is true, but tennis is one of the most mental sports out there, and it's quite obvious (to any tennis enthusiast) that one large chunk of Andy's mental side is missing; the confidence is gone.

It's not as if he doesn't possess the weapons and sheer power to outplay everyone BUT Federer. He does. He's shown it before. Is he consistent with it? No, and that's why you see him losing to so many players ranked lower than him. So let me say before I continue that I agree he doesn't have that complete package that he needs to tango with Federer.

Here's the way I see it, though. Without confidence, you don't win. I suppose the thought of not being able to beat Federer or other top-ranked players on a consistent basis (or at all) has played on Andy's mind quite a bit, and his confidence has gone down significantly. Being a Williams sisters fan, I compare it to Venus Williams' situation. For the past two years she has had zero confidence thanks to her own younger sister, Serena (who was at one point the Federer of women's tennis) and her injury problems. When her mental state was down, her winning was down. She still had the shots, but couldn't make them.

Roddick went for his forehand more in 2003. Anyone who compares matches can see that. His serve has increased in speed, it's somewhat increased in placement and spin, and I do think he's trying to polish the other sides of his game a little more. I think the only problem with his game is what Brad brought out of him: the aggression. He used to be a first-strike player. That's not there anymore. THAT is why he's losing. He's too neutral.

His serve is still one of the most effective ones on the tour. He has the shots, the power, the determination to win on any occasion, he just doesn't apply it to his best.

So for you to assess his losing etc. as him merely not being good enough to compete at the top level is foolish. It IS true that his mentality state isn't as positive as it used to be. It IS true that he has the capability to be 1 or 2 in the world again. It IS true that Federer is the better all-around player. He's (Andy) not someone that I see dropping out of the top five in the next couple of years, and I think he'll win another slam or two before he's finished. So what are you telling us that either isn't 100% biased and assumed or that we don't already know?

Edit: I suppose my avatar looks like a big confliction with all of this, but it's merely satirical.


Serena Williams
Martina Navratilova
Steffi Graf



Andy Roddick | Roger Federer | Venus Williams | Lleyton Hewitt | Maria Sharapova | Justine Henin-Hardenne | Kim Clijsters


Paialii is offline  
post #6 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:39 PM
Blown Out On the Trail
 
star's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 62,739
                     
Re: About Andy Roddick

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tourmalante
Now I think the whole world is privy to the fact that Andy Roddick is in a carrer slump at the moment. The evidence is obvious for all to see so there is no need to belabor talking about that. What I do want to address however, is this erroneous opinion that far in Roddick's past, there was this magical heyday where he was the undisputed #1 in the world, and his forehand and serve clobbered all comers on the ATP tour. Roddick fans, in way of psychologically distancing themselves from their player's dismal recent results, have taken to concocting this dreamland fiction of Roddick's 2003 Year. They tell us that no, it is not the fact that Federer is simply the better and more complete player, but that Roddick is in a mental crisis and that harnessing his mental energies properly( as he did all those years ago) he would topple the swissman from his throne and the tennis world would rejoice. I'm sorry to inform those interested parties that Roger was beating Roddick like a drum well before he lost the fearlessness you speak of.
I am here to tell you that at no point in Roddick's career was he ever truly a dominant player. In fact his year-end status for that year is one of the most dubious year-end inishes in the open era. One of those years where one sits back and wonders whether the rankings computers have a mind of their own and were bribed. The fact that Roddick can remain in the top ten with the scarcity of legitimate titles he has won this year is a testament to how well Roger and Rafael have cleaned up in the points race. Even a few mickey-mouse tournaments, and one strong showing at Wimbledon are enough to keep him in the top five.
Roddick's whole career can be seen in terms of the evolution of the tour's reaction to his serve. At the beginning of his career the sheer pace of it astounded everyone, and I distinctly remember Sampras getting clobbered by one in 2002 or so. Finicky things like placement, and variety played no part at that point because the other players couldn't even see the ball. But starting in 2003 with the Wimbledon Semifinal, Federer gave the rest of the tour the blueprints to neutralizing the serve. Of course this didn't matter much for awhile because not many people have the requisite handspeed and eyes. But slowly even journeyman began to be able to block back his returns and from then on the point was 50/50 at worst. Now, with no real substance behind his powerful serve, we see Roddick having trouble with satellite players and getting knocked out of tournaments in te early rounds seemingly every week.
Andy Roddick's problem is one of the strongest endorsements for teaching developing players the art and thinking of the game at an early age. Tennis has, its geometry, it's strategy, those telltale nuances that spell the difference between the merely good and the great. The young Andy was bereft of such instruction(or didn't have the initiative to garner a modicum of it by watching tapes of the greats, or just experimenting on the court) and only now in the big leagues, is this lack coming to light.
On a certain level you cannot make an old dog learn new tricks. Andy is never going to be a competent serve-volleyer or as tactically aware as Coria or Nalbandian. And even if he wanted to be such, Goldfine is not the man to get him there. What the hell does Goldfine know about volleying anyway?
What crack pipe have you been smoking?

But have it your way. Andy is playing just as well as he ever played in 2003.
star is offline  
post #7 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:40 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 265
                     
Re: About Andy Roddick

The difference though, is that at her peak Venus was dominant so fans have a benchmark to compare her against and have some idea that she is vastly underachieving given her true capabilities. In comparison Andy only has a slam and to his name.
Tourmalante is offline  
post #8 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:42 PM
Registered User
 
Sjengster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Somewhere fairly shingly
Age: 31
Posts: 11,359
                     
Re: About Andy Roddick

[QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tourmalante
Now I think the whole world is privy to the fact that Andy Roddick is in a carrer slump at the moment. The evidence is obvious for all to see so there is no need to belabor talking about that. What I do want to address however, is this erroneous opinion that far in Roddick's past, there was this magical heyday where he was the undisputed #1 in the world, and his forehand and serve clobbered all comers on the ATP tour. Roddick fans, in way of psychologically distancing themselves from their player's dismal recent results, have taken to concocting this dreamland fiction of Roddick's 2003 Year. They tell us that no, it is not the fact that Federer is simply the better and more complete player, but that Roddick is in a mental crisis and that harnessing his mental energies properly( as he did all those years ago) he would topple the swissman from his throne and the tennis world would rejoice. I'm sorry to inform those interested parties that Roger was beating Roddick like a drum well before he lost the fearlessness you speak of.
I have seen plenty of Roddick fans saying that he needs to get his confidence and game back. I have seen virtually none saying that this will then magically result in him toppling Federer from the no. 1 ranking and automatically becoming the dominant force in the game. They're well aware of the scale of the challenge he faces.

Quote:
I am here to tell you that at no point in Roddick's career was he ever truly a dominant player. In fact his year-end status for that year is one of the most dubious year-end inishes in the open era. One of those years where one sits back and wonders whether the rankings computers have a mind of their own and were bribed. The fact that Roddick can remain in the top ten with the scarcity of legitimate titles he has won this year is a testament to how well Roger and Rafael have cleaned up in the points race. Even a few mickey-mouse tournaments, and one strong showing at Wimbledon are enough to keep him in the top five.
It was a tight contest that year, and obviously his year-end no. 1 finish depended an awful lot on Ferrero stinking up the joint at the end of the year when he had big points on the line. But he certainly had a better overall year than Federer, who only closed the gap between them in the rankings in the last tournament of the year by winning it undefeated.

Why pick on Roddick specifically when no-one else outside the top two besides Safin has been able to win a required event this year? Everyone in the Top 10 has been falling to Federer or Nadal at some stage. Do Agassi and Hewitt deserve their Top 5 rankings with one Mickey Mouse title each? Plus your resume of Roddick's year does leave out the semis at the AO, semis at IW, final in Cincy... yes, European clay was a dead loss as usual, but see the two men mentioned above for more of the same.

Quote:
Roddick's whole career can be seen in terms of the evolution of the tour's reaction to his serve. At the beginning of his career the sheer pace of it astounded everyone, and I distinctly remember Sampras getting clobbered by one in 2002 or so. Finicky things like placement, and variety played no part at that point because the other players couldn't even see the ball. But starting in 2003 with the Wimbledon Semifinal, Federer gave the rest of the tour the blueprints to neutralizing the serve. Of course this didn't matter much for awhile because not many people have the requisite handspeed and eyes. But slowly even journeyman began to be able to block back his returns and from then on the point was 50/50 at worst. Now, with no real substance behind his powerful serve, we see Roddick having trouble with satellite players and getting knocked out of tournaments in te early rounds seemingly every week.
Ah, so THAT explains his current 85-game holding streak... they can all figure out his serve now. I do agree that his serve is not the best on tour for several reasons, one being that it can be blocked back into play with regularity by skilled enough returners, but there are very few of those around who can do it on a consistent basis. All the players whom he has suffered early losses to this year, Mathieu, Muller, Karlovic, have serious game of one sort or another. Karlovic certainly did not beat Roddick because he found it easy to return the serve - it was because Roddick had no real clue to returning his.

Quote:
Andy Roddick's problem is one of the strongest endorsements for teaching developing players the art and thinking of the game at an early age. Tennis has, its geometry, it's strategy, those telltale nuances that spell the difference between the merely good and the great. The young Andy was bereft of such instruction(or didn't have the initiative to garner a modicum of it by watching tapes of the greats, or just experimenting on the court) and only now in the big leagues, is this lack coming to light.
On a certain level you cannot make an old dog learn new tricks. Andy is never going to be a competent serve-volleyer or as tactically aware as Coria or Nalbandian. And even if he wanted to be such, Goldfine is not the man to get him there. What the hell does Goldfine know about volleying anyway?
This is the only part I generally agree with. I wonder how Roddick would have developed if he had not discovered his huge serve by accident at the age of 16 or 17, because by all accounts as a junior he was something of a baseline scrapper/grinder who had to work hard for his points, for all his forehand power. This style still reasserts itself when he moves too far behind the baseline and plays too passively, meaning that he becomes an odd hybrid of all-out big serving aggression and tentative, looping groundstroker. That said, I am not about to declare a man who has only just turned 23 dead in the water.

The Wit and Wisdom of the Tennis Journalist, Indian Wells 2004

ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I remember this one time when I went on a vacation on the Maldives. That was in the year 2001, I think. I went to this spa. I went to walk around with my girlfriend. I walk in, and we want to book a spa. This guy goes, "AHH, I remember you. You beat Sampras. I saw you on TV." That was like, really, how can you remember me? This guy has probably never been off his island and still knows me. I was a little bit shocked. Then I went to play tennis with him because he was actually the tennis teacher. It was nice.

Q. Were you naked at the time in the spa?

ROGER FEDERER: No. It was at the front desk. I didn't walk in naked.
Sjengster is offline  
post #9 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:45 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 265
                     
Re: About Andy Roddick

Star: Andy is not playing as well because without a miracle showing at Paris this week, he will end the year without even a masters series title.
Tourmalante is offline  
post #10 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:45 PM
Registered User
 
Jimnik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Here
Posts: 20,932
                     
Re: About Andy Roddick

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tourmalante
Now I think the whole world is privy to the fact that Andy Roddick is in a carrer slump at the moment. The evidence is obvious for all to see so there is no need to belabor talking about that. What I do want to address however, is this erroneous opinion that far in Roddick's past, there was this magical heyday where he was the undisputed #1 in the world, and his forehand and serve clobbered all comers on the ATP tour. Roddick fans, in way of psychologically distancing themselves from their player's dismal recent results, have taken to concocting this dreamland fiction of Roddick's 2003 Year. They tell us that no, it is not the fact that Federer is simply the better and more complete player, but that Roddick is in a mental crisis and that harnessing his mental energies properly( as he did all those years ago) he would topple the swissman from his throne and the tennis world would rejoice. I'm sorry to inform those interested parties that Roger was beating Roddick like a drum well before he lost the fearlessness you speak of.
I am here to tell you that at no point in Roddick's career was he ever truly a dominant player. In fact his year-end status for that year is one of the most dubious year-end inishes in the open era. One of those years where one sits back and wonders whether the rankings computers have a mind of their own and were bribed. The fact that Roddick can remain in the top ten with the scarcity of legitimate titles he has won this year is a testament to how well Roger and Rafael have cleaned up in the points race. Even a few mickey-mouse tournaments, and one strong showing at Wimbledon are enough to keep him in the top five.
Roddick's whole career can be seen in terms of the evolution of the tour's reaction to his serve. At the beginning of his career the sheer pace of it astounded everyone, and I distinctly remember Sampras getting clobbered by one in 2002 or so. Finicky things like placement, and variety played no part at that point because the other players couldn't even see the ball. But starting in 2003 with the Wimbledon Semifinal, Federer gave the rest of the tour the blueprints to neutralizing the serve. Of course this didn't matter much for awhile because not many people have the requisite handspeed and eyes. But slowly even journeyman began to be able to block back his returns and from then on the point was 50/50 at worst. Now, with no real substance behind his powerful serve, we see Roddick having trouble with satellite players and getting knocked out of tournaments in te early rounds seemingly every week.
Andy Roddick's problem is one of the strongest endorsements for teaching developing players the art and thinking of the game at an early age. Tennis has, its geometry, it's strategy, those telltale nuances that spell the difference between the merely good and the great. The young Andy was bereft of such instruction(or didn't have the initiative to garner a modicum of it by watching tapes of the greats, or just experimenting on the court) and only now in the big leagues, is this lack coming to light.
On a certain level you cannot make an old dog learn new tricks. Andy is never going to be a competent serve-volleyer or as tactically aware as Coria or Nalbandian. And even if he wanted to be such, Goldfine is not the man to get him there. What the hell does Goldfine know about volleying anyway?

You really need to shorten the crap you write. Not everyone can be bothered to read all this nonsense.

Last edited by Jimnik; 11-02-2005 at 10:49 PM.
Jimnik is offline  
post #11 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:47 PM
Registered User
 
Hurley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Age: 94
Posts: 1,007
                     
Re: About Andy Roddick

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tourmalante
Star: Andy is not playing as well because without a miracle showing at Paris this week, he will end the year without even a masters series title.
Hmm. Can't say that about too many other players this year, can you?

I say more stupid stuff at https://twitter.com/Hurleytennis.
Hurley is offline  
post #12 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:49 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 265
                     
Re: About Andy Roddick

Sjengster, perhaps I did not articulate my points clearly enough. Roddick's serve is still a force to be reckoned with, and the vast majority of the tour is still completely helpless before it. But with time there is a small, slowly growing niche of players that are no longer intimidated whatsoever by it. Where once there was only there was Roger and Lleyton, now there are several more players who are able to deal with it's pace.
Tourmalante is offline  
post #13 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:50 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 237
                     
Re: About Andy Roddick

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tourmalante
Star: Andy is not playing as well because without a miracle showing at Paris this week, he will end the year without even a masters series title.
Why the attack on Roddick? Just looking at some of your other posts, I see you're a huge Fed fan. Are you afraid Andy will turn the tables?
DJ dropshot is offline  
post #14 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:51 PM
Blown Out On the Trail
 
star's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 62,739
                     
Re: About Andy Roddick

Sjengster for the patience to respond to all of that.

Maybe Andy did suffer because he wasn't spotted as a super talented player when he was very young, but it's wrong to think he had no coaching up until the time he was in his mid-teens. He did have coaching both in Texas and in Florida. And, of course, there have been players who have been on the court since age three who still don't have a beautifully crafted game.

That said, I do admire the Spainish and their teaching system -- although I don't think it is monolithic. However, that's not the be all and end all of tennis either. There is room for all sorts of different tennis styles. Andy certainly isn't a beautiful stylist, but it is also not a fluke that he has been at the top of the game for about 5 years now either.
star is offline  
post #15 of 323 (permalink) Old 11-02-2005, 10:53 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 265
                     
Re: About Andy Roddick

You are right that I should probably be more democratic in my criticism, but the fact that I am picking on Roddick is a sign of respect. Those other members of the top ten-Gaudio, Coria, Davydenko, etc. I respect so little as to not even deign to write about them. Gaudio is a flippant, spineless tanker who's talent is relegated to clay play, Coria has never been the same since the 2004 FO Final, Nalbandian hasn't been the same since the 2003 US Open Semi, and Davydenko is a journeyman masquerading as a top ten player.

Last edited by Tourmalante; 11-02-2005 at 10:56 PM.
Tourmalante is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome