If it's an Andy vs. Roger final... [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

If it's an Andy vs. Roger final...

Fumus
11-19-2004, 07:16 PM
What do you think about this time around?

Denise
11-19-2004, 07:21 PM
i think it's very possible and if it has to happen i rather Andy Roddick to win ;) I wished the final Safin x Federer so right now it's impossible :sad: if Safin wins today against Henman, they can face each other in the semis! :angel:

The_Lion_Nl
11-19-2004, 07:22 PM
I think... :scratch:
Rogi will be sharpening his knives for the last time this year, cause the duck will not escape this year. OMG he will be featherless for the rest of the year...
Hope he doesn't survive the wintercold. :devil:

Fumus
11-19-2004, 07:22 PM
All I am saying is Roger has to get beat in a final sometime...why not Andy and why not now, right?

joeb_uk
11-19-2004, 07:43 PM
because federer has the tools to defeat andy, his game matches up very well against andy, hence why he owns andy totally. Federer exposes andy, and he will carry on doing so for many years to come.

Fumus
11-19-2004, 08:09 PM
Wow...the forum is almost divided on this one. More than 50% say Andy will atleast make a match of this thing and 30% say he can win....

Is this an increase of the belief in Roddick or decrease of the belief in Fed...

joeb_uk
11-19-2004, 08:10 PM
Wow...the forum is almost divided on this one. More than 50% say Andy will atleast make a match of this thing and 30% say he can win....

Is this an increase of the belief in Roddick or decrease of the belief in Fed...

but are they valild votes or just bias fans? thats what you have to ask, because the majority of fans will vote for their favourite player

RogerRocks
11-19-2004, 08:13 PM
1st option, same as usual

Fumus
11-19-2004, 08:20 PM
Will anyone be suprised with Andy upset?

Pea
11-19-2004, 08:22 PM
fumus is a good name for a troll.

joeb_uk
11-19-2004, 08:22 PM
Will anyone be suprised with Andy upset?
how do you mean?

Fumus
11-19-2004, 08:23 PM
fumus is a good name for a troll.

sooo is Poo :)

Rogiman
11-19-2004, 08:23 PM
Will anyone be suprised with Andy upset?

I will.

I'm always surprised when the better player loses, let alone when the so-much-better player loses.

Andrew.
11-19-2004, 08:24 PM
If it happened, Federer would win easily.

Fumus
11-19-2004, 08:24 PM
how do you mean?

I mean if he wins, will you be shocked...like omg...that is impossible..the world has gone crazy..the tennis gods must have been drinking. :)

joeb_uk
11-19-2004, 08:25 PM
I will.

I'm always surprised when the better player loses, let alone when the so-much-better player loses.

yes it would be very surprising, honestly i can see federer with 25-1 record over andy by the end of his career, i can never see andy troubling federer. Maybe he will get the odd win like he did at montreal

Fumus
11-19-2004, 08:27 PM
I will.

I'm always surprised when the better player loses, let alone when the so-much-better player loses.

"At some point everyones survival rate drops to zero.." - Fight Club

It has to happen sometime Rogiman, like it or not, if they keep playing, Andy will rack wins up. There may be a gap between the two but it's less of a gap between those 2 then between Federer and anyone else right now, don't you think?

The reason why I made this thread was just to see if you guys considered the changes in Andy's game big enough to get him over the hump.

joeb_uk
11-19-2004, 08:29 PM
I dont think andy will ever be able to make sufficient changes in his game. Federer just exposes him every time

Fumus
11-19-2004, 08:40 PM
Well, I look at it like this, since Andy got Brad he's 1-4 against Federer. I think you just can't say Federer always exposes Andy because he only really exposed him 2 times this year. I think in the Wimbly match Andy owned Roger from the baseline for the better part of two sets. Even Roger admits he wasn't sure if could have won that one if he didn't change tactics. That match was close and certainly Roger didn't crush Andy there. In Canada when Andy came out flat and in Bangkok when Andy's elbow was injured he was exposed, yes. Other than that Wimbly 03' Andy could have taken the first set if he didn't net an easy fh in the first set TB, and if he didn't then who knows. Of course in Canada 03' Andy wasn't exposed, infact he exposed Roger's ros on the bh, and showed that he could play with Roger from the BL. Somehow Roger fans discount this loss and say Roger didn't get beat he was nervous. I think the record is a false representation of how these two could play in the future. Basically, not to sound too stupid but, once Andy wins against Roger he will start to win more because he will figure out how to do it. Look at Andy's record against Marat, it was bad and Marat beat Andy everytime they played, he sure turned that one around didn't he?

The_Lion_Nl
11-19-2004, 09:32 PM
He fungus, what´s your point whit all this bull***.
You wanna know if duckie can beat Feds, just wait till sunday, if duckie can get past potato, he will face Feds in the final for sure and you will see.

Carolinita
11-19-2004, 09:41 PM
Roger will snatch the final from Roddick, since he has him used :lol: at least it will not be a surprise for 'Andy'

Carolinita
11-19-2004, 09:43 PM
He fungus, what´s your point whit all this bull***.
You wanna know if duckie can beat Feds, just wait till sunday, if duckie can get past potato, he will face Feds in the final for sure and you will see.
:yeah: For a moment I forgot it

RonE
11-19-2004, 10:46 PM
We are jumping ahead of ourselves here. For all we know it could be Hewitt-Henman or Hewitt-Safin in the final.

mitalidas
11-19-2004, 10:57 PM
Wow...the forum is almost divided on this one. More than 50% say Andy will atleast make a match of this thing and 30% say he can win....


what a difference 24 hours makes... it is not even 10% that is in favor of andy now

Crazy_Fool
11-19-2004, 10:58 PM
We are jumping ahead of ourselves here. For all we know it could be Hewitt-Henman or Hewitt-Safin in the final.
Exactly ;)

Fergie
11-19-2004, 11:21 PM
Rogi in 3 :angel:

WyveN
11-19-2004, 11:23 PM
Semi final line up isnt even determined and we have fools making pointless threads about potential finals.

WyveN
11-19-2004, 11:27 PM
It has to happen sometime Rogiman, like it or not, if they keep playing, Andy will rack wins up.

Unless its at slams its irrelevant in the long run.

"At some point everyones survival rate drops to zero.." - Fight Club


Your two personalities remind me of fight club ;)

Fedex
11-19-2004, 11:31 PM
Well, I look at it like this, since Andy got Brad he's 1-4 against Federer. I think you just can't say Federer always exposes Andy because he only really exposed him 2 times this year. I think in the Wimbly match Andy owned Roger from the baseline for the better part of two sets. Even Roger admits he wasn't sure if could have won that one if he didn't change tactics. That match was close and certainly Roger didn't crush Andy there. In Canada when Andy came out flat and in Bangkok when Andy's elbow was injured he was exposed, yes. Other than that Wimbly 03' Andy could have taken the first set if he didn't net an easy fh in the first set TB, and if he didn't then who knows. Of course in Canada 03' Andy wasn't exposed, infact he exposed Roger's ros on the bh, and showed that he could play with Roger from the BL. Somehow Roger fans discount this loss and say Roger didn't get beat he was nervous. I think the record is a false representation of how these two could play in the future. Basically, not to sound too stupid but, once Andy wins against Roger he will start to win more because he will figure out how to do it. Look at Andy's record against Marat, it was bad and Marat beat Andy everytime they played, he sure turned that one around didn't he?
Brad is irrelavent. He does not play the match, Roddick does, and there's nothing Brad can do once they start playing. Almost all of you're analysis is wrong here Fumus. :) Roddick gave him a match a Wimbledon this year, only because about 90% of Federer's ground strokes were short balls, that were very easy to hit winners off of, not near agressive enough in that match, and not enough use of the slice, much worse match from Federer in that match, then say Wimbledon 03. Speaking of which, we cant go into the 'whatifs'. Yes, had he made that forehand, he would of won the 1st set, but does that mean he's going to win the match? Especially not, if Federer played the next 3 sets, like he did in the last 2 sets of that match. There is no strategy against Federer, if he's at the top of his game, he's unbeatable, regardless. Andy wasn't flat in Toronto, Federer just came out firing, and he made a few mistakes, and thats never a good combination. Actually, Andy was exposed in Montreal 03, Federer was dominating Roddick in that 3rd set, and should've won it, but he choked big time. Even without that minor sprain in Bangkok, you like to call an 'injury' the way Federer played that day, the result would not of been any different, just alittle better of a scoreline. When Federer is on his game, Roddick cant compete with him from the baseline, so he needs to attack the net more often, which leads to Federer coming up with great shots, most of the time. He'll need to pay the net alot in their future matches, and hope Federer makes alot of mistakes off the ground(aka Montreal 03), or hits alot of short balls (Wimbledon 04). Those are his only hopes.

Billabong
11-19-2004, 11:34 PM
Rogi:worship:

Fedex
11-19-2004, 11:36 PM
Semi final line up isnt even determined and we have fools making pointless threads about potential finals.
And not to mention about being wrong in every point they make. :)

lina_seta
11-19-2004, 11:40 PM
Well, I look at it like this, since Andy got Brad he's 1-4 against Federer. I think you just can't say Federer always exposes Andy because he only really exposed him 2 times this year. I think in the Wimbly match Andy owned Roger from the baseline for the better part of two sets. Even Roger admits he wasn't sure if could have won that one if he didn't change tactics. That match was close and certainly Roger didn't crush Andy there. In Canada when Andy came out flat and in Bangkok when Andy's elbow was injured he was exposed, yes. Other than that Wimbly 03' Andy could have taken the first set if he didn't net an easy fh in the first set TB, and if he didn't then who knows. Of course in Canada 03' Andy wasn't exposed, infact he exposed Roger's ros on the bh, and showed that he could play with Roger from the BL. Somehow Roger fans discount this loss and say Roger didn't get beat he was nervous. I think the record is a false representation of how these two could play in the future. Basically, not to sound too stupid but, once Andy wins against Roger he will start to win more because he will figure out how to do it. Look at Andy's record against Marat, it was bad and Marat beat Andy everytime they played, he sure turned that one around didn't he?

SHH! nobody wants to hear sooo many "IFs"!!!! :devil:
it didnt happen and theres no IFs in tennis... he didnt win.. well he didnt.. accept it troll...

we'll start talking about andy reversing the H2H record when it happens..

Shy
11-19-2004, 11:54 PM
I think that Andy might win a few of the match up in the futur. It would be pathetic if he can't. However, I don't that he will be able to turn the head to head completely unless Roger stops improving.

joeb_uk
11-20-2004, 12:31 AM
Brad is irrelavent. He does not play the match, Roddick does, and there's nothing Brad can do once they start playing. Almost all of you're analysis is wrong here Fumus. :) Roddick gave him a match a Wimbledon this year, only because about 90% of Federer's ground strokes were short balls, that were very easy to hit winners off of, not near agressive enough in that match, and not enough use of the slice, much worse match from Federer in that match, then say Wimbledon 03. Speaking of which, we cant go into the 'whatifs'. Yes, had he made that forehand, he would of won the 1st set, but does that mean he's going to win the match? Especially not, if Federer played the next 3 sets, like he did in the last 2 sets of that match. There is no strategy against Federer, if he's at the top of his game, he's unbeatable, regardless. Andy wasn't flat in Toronto, Federer just came out firing, and he made a few mistakes, and thats never a good combination. Actually, Andy was exposed in Montreal 03, Federer was dominating Roddick in that 3rd set, and should've won it, but he choked big time. Even without that minor sprain in Bangkok, you like to call an 'injury' the way Federer played that day, the result would not of been any different, just alittle better of a scoreline. When Federer is on his game, Roddick cant compete with him from the baseline, so he needs to attack the net more often, which leads to Federer coming up with great shots, most of the time. He'll need to pay the net alot in their future matches, and hope Federer makes alot of mistakes off the ground(aka Montreal 03), or hits alot of short balls (Wimbledon 04). Those are his only hopes.


very true fedex, as the jerk said himself "i through the kitchen sink at him" so andy played great, yet federer was actually playing poorly and andy still lost?
Also good point about the so called injury, i suspect it wouldnt have made much difference at all.
until andy gets a good net game, this will carry on and on with the federer domination over roddick. Some of his volleys are laughable, and his movement around the net isnt good either.

Sjengster
11-20-2004, 12:49 AM
Roddick has volleyed much better this week, it's competent rather than decisive but it's an improvement over the sort of thing he usually plays. Peter Fleming did note during the Toronto final this year that Roddick is never going to beat Federer consistently without an effective volley and a high first serve percentage, suggesting that the latter will simply wear him down if they get into too many long rallies. That does seem to have been the case this year in the Wimbledon and Toronto matches - Roddick's been the aggressor, hitting all out from the baseline, but Federer's defence has been too good and has caused him to miss or else allow Federer to turn the point to his advantage. It's something of a change in match-up from 2002/03, where Federer was usually the more aggressive player while Roddick, paradoxically given his weight of shot, was too passive from the back of the court.

Fumus makes a good point about turning around the record with Safin, but there the equation is different to playing Federer - Safin's game is much closer to Roddick's, he doesn't vary the pace much, he doesn't block returns as often or as well as Federer and so I think doesn't return Roddick's serve consistently, and on the defence he isn't quite as good as Federer, inevitably so given his extra height and weight. I think Roddick made the point best himself in an interview, that he needs to become a better athlete in the long rallies. His patience is certainly something that needs to be improved; if he could rally with Federer for longer and construct points while still dictating play, without feeling the need to go for something ridiculously big, then I'm sure he'd have more success against him.

Fedex
11-20-2004, 12:59 AM
But when it comes down to it, it's pure talent and heart, two ingredients needed for success. Federer is so far ahead of Roddick in the talent department, and only this year, though, has Federer been ahead of Roddick in the 'heart' department. If Federer loses some of the heart that he showed this year in his matches, then Roddick may have a chance to get a win against Federer.

Chloe le Bopper
11-20-2004, 01:00 AM
I would be very surprised if Roddick beat Fed this week, IF this final comes off. I wouldn't quite feel as if I had just blinked into a parallel universe, but I would consider watching my taped finals coverage to see what on earth happened. However, I would be surprised if Roddick failed to do better than their last match :p

Fedex
11-20-2004, 01:01 AM
And if Federer improves his net play, and plays the net like he did in 03, this will add to the already long list of problems for Roddick, while playing Federer.

Pea
11-20-2004, 01:02 AM
I like how fumus asks us what we think will happen if this comes about, but won't accept our answers unless we agree with him.

Troll.

Fedex
11-20-2004, 01:03 AM
However, I would be surprised if Roddick failed to do better than their last match :p
Didn't you know that Hewitt has officially retired from being Roger's 'bagel boy', and Roddick is his new replacement? ;)

Chloe le Bopper
11-20-2004, 01:04 AM
Didn't you know that Hewitt has officially retired from being Roger's 'bagel boy', and Roddick is his new replacement? ;)
I think I'll have to wait until Roddick gets two bagels in a slam final to be sure of this :o

Fedex
11-20-2004, 01:08 AM
Wow...the forum is almost divided on this one. More than 50% say Andy will atleast make a match of this thing and 30% say he can win....

Is this an increase of the belief in Roddick or decrease of the belief in Fed...
That's hardly divided. That's like saying winning a Presidential election 50% and the next guy having 30% is a close election. That's not even close.

Federerhingis
11-20-2004, 02:59 AM
Yeah i wouldnt be so fast as to say it will be a Federer/Roddick Final just yet. For one thing if its Federer vs Henman and we know already its a Hewitt and Roddick semi, if all play at their best this should be if anything a nailbiting pair of semis, as some have pointed out it could well be a Hewitt vs Henman/Safin FINAL. So lets not get ahead of ourselves, however in the likely case that it does turn out to a Federer vs Roddick final if both are at the top of their games i would give Roger a 4:1 advantage when playing at his very top against Roddick, he just simply knows how to handle the Roddick cannon serve which is his only true weapon, yes his forehand is a weapon, but so is Federer and even with a lot more variety. At net Andy is years if not decades behind Rogers net abilities, and that ultimately makes the difference, as a returner of serve Andy is simply pathetic to say the least when compared to the top 10 players return of serve. :wavey: :wavey:

RogiFan88
11-20-2004, 03:32 AM
...I'll be bored to tears... unless Rogi wins it again.

lucashg
11-20-2004, 03:51 AM
I agree that most here are getting ahead of themselves, but assuming that the final will be Fed vs Roddick, I'd be surprised if Federer doesn't win. I guess he'll make it 9-1.

Neely
11-20-2004, 04:02 AM
If this is really the final between those two players, I will this time rooting for Andy. I was on Andy's side on the most recent matches this season, but at the end, Roger was just too good and deservedly won.
Last year I wanted Roger to take the Masters Cup, but this year I'm completely on Andy's side. That would be nice for him to take this title at home in Texas. :)
I would grant it Andy so much :clap2:

Federer has done really well in all those recent matches against Andy, but I don't want to get it too boring and it would spice up future meetings between those two also.

Agassi also dominated Becker over his whole career and Agassi was winning 8 straight matches against Becker at some stage, but then again Becker was able to beat him. Back then also everybody said "ah, no brainer, Agassi wins the 9th straight. Agassi owns Becker just too much", but then Becker came up with the surprise and broke the streak. And there are much more famous examples, so everything can happen ;)


And first of all, both have to get their jobs done in their respective semifinals, of course! :yeah:

mitalidas
11-20-2004, 04:06 AM
IfBack then also everybody said "ah, no brainer, Agassi wins the 9th straight. Agassi owns Becker just too much", but then Becker came up with the surprise and broke the streak. And there are much more famous examples, so everything can happen ;)
:
there are also many famous examples where the roll went onto 17-0 (lendl connors)

Neely
11-20-2004, 04:11 AM
there are also many famous examples where the roll went onto 17-0 (lendl connors)
true of course, but even Connors could, earlier in his career, win some matches against Lendl.

Also keep in mind when looking at this 17-0 winning streak that Connors was already a grandpa in all of these last meeting (between his mid 30s and 40 year-old, being almost 40 is just way too old) and he was well past his peak, whereas Lendl was exactly on his top level most of the time and in a good age to play tennis.

So with two young guys, like Roddick and Federer, being almost equally old, I don't see it happening ;)

____________________________

edit:
So with two young guys, like Roddick and Federer, being almost equally old, I don't see it happening ;)
It could happen of course, but then it would be solely a matter of total domination! (and not mainly a matter of age like Connors vs Lendl)

that's what I wanted to point out when talking about this 17-0 streak.

Fedex
11-20-2004, 04:13 AM
I dont see Roddick winning 2 matches in a row against Federer, much less 17 ;)

Neely
11-20-2004, 04:18 AM
I dont see Roddick winning 2 matches in a row against Federer, much less 17 ;)
The crux of matter of the above mentioned 17-0 streak is that it probably most likely occured because one player (Connors) wasn't at the needed physical level anymore that was absolutely required to beat a very versatile and clever game like Lendl's.

WyveN
11-20-2004, 04:23 AM
Agassi also dominated Becker over his whole career and Agassi was winning 8 straight matches against Becker at some stage, but then again Becker was able to beat him. Back then also everybody said "ah, no brainer, Agassi wins the 9th straight. Agassi owns Becker just too much", but then Becker came up with the surprise and broke the streak. And there are much more famous examples, so everything can happen ;)


Becker broke the deadlock at Wimbledon, you would always favour Becker over Agassi on grass.

Better example would be Lendl and Mcenroe.

Neely
11-20-2004, 04:25 AM
you would always favour Becker over Agassi on grass.
true, but Becker couldn't beat him some years ago at the same location and was kicked by Agassi. So Agassi showed he can beat Becker also on grass before.

Carolinita
11-20-2004, 04:47 AM
I must to say I wouldn't like a final Roger v/s Roddick 'cause it wouldn't to be exciting...we know...the scoreboard would be very obvious...I would prefer something like Hewitt-Safin ;)

lsy
11-20-2004, 08:01 AM
Fumus you're very funny with this post :lol:...let's see :

What Fumus think of Andy losses :


I think in the Wimbly match Andy owned Roger from the baseline for the better part of two sets. Even Roger admits he wasn't sure if could have won that one if he didn't change tactics.


In Canada when Andy came out flat


and in Bangkok when Andy's elbow was injured he was exposed, yes.


Other than that Wimbly 03' Andy could have taken the first set if he didn't net an easy fh in the first set TB, and if he didn't then who knows.


Of course in Canada 03' Andy wasn't exposed, infact he exposed Roger's ros on the bh, and showed that he could play with Roger from the BL.

then he said :


Somehow Roger fans discount this loss and say Roger didn't get beat he was nervous.

:haha: :haha:


I think the record is a false representation of how these two could play in the future.

With the way you're going, the h/h can go 20-1, you'll still think it's false representation. As for you question, at this moment I really can't look past the sf.

But Andy did show us he can beat Roger in Wimby. Many said Roger wasn't playing his best but in this case, I tend to feel it was Andy not letting Rogi play his game for the 1st set at least. But then, atm, for Andy to beat Rogi, he needs to have everything go his way, same can't be said for Rogi. Also Andy needs to stop those head shaking/negative body language/getting frustrated or feeling deflated so easily during matches vs Rogi. That obviously didn't work well for him and vs Rogi.

Daniel
11-20-2004, 08:03 AM
Roger in 2 :D

hitchhiker
11-20-2004, 08:14 AM
fumus you are smart man.
dont argue with people, we both know time will come when roddick begins to figure out federer game and we both know roddick will achieve great things in career.
Maybe it will start in houston or maybe in davis cup but eventually our time will come and you can join me so we can hose down the haters with custard.

Action Jackson
11-20-2004, 08:15 AM
The next time they play each other and wherever it is it will be 9-1.

Fedex
11-20-2004, 08:19 AM
Ah, I just checked my watch, and almost didn't realize its troll hour :) How you doing, hitchhiker? Given the fact that you're head is so far up you're ass, you may not be able to answer my question or understand it correctly. What a shame. :)

Action Jackson
11-20-2004, 08:21 AM
I dont see Roddick winning 2 matches in a row against Federer, much less 17 ;)

:haha: :haha:

WyveN
11-20-2004, 08:22 AM
:haha: great post lsy.

Mrs. B
11-20-2004, 08:55 AM
if it's an Andy-Roger final...

Jim Mac will wear his US flag jumper, rehire those topless guys from last year to cheer on loudly.

Fedex
11-20-2004, 09:04 AM
Mrs B! :lol: :haha:

Mrs. B
11-20-2004, 09:06 AM
Mrs B! :lol: :haha:

LOL, Fedex, he might even ban Swiss flags inside the stadium! :haha:

RonE
11-20-2004, 09:19 AM
LOL, Fedex, he might even ban Swiss flags inside the stadium! :haha:

And have all the cow-bells melted down for scrap ;)

Fumus
11-20-2004, 02:16 PM
fumus you are smart man.
dont argue with people, we both know time will come when roddick begins to figure out federer game and we both know roddick will achieve great things in career.
Maybe it will start in houston or maybe in davis cup but eventually our time will come and you can join me so we can hose down the haters with custard.

Hitchhiker...lol...what ever happened to you, you decided to hide after Wimbly.

It's nice I guess when your favorite is so awesome. You can just make crazy statements that no one will ever beat him, he will always expose Andy, etc etc. The claims that you make can only be based on how the players are playing now. How can you tell me that next year Roger will be in the same form, you would have to be able to tell the future, no one knows those things that can be as much of a matter of luck as anything.

As for this match, it's likely Roger will win, I know that. I am simply saying that, I hope he doesn't and if he doesn't I won't be suprised. Andy is very talented and anyone who doesn't admit that is a troll. Andy can win, it's definitly a possibility and Roger winning not a certainty. If we went by how everything looks on paper they would just give him the trophy but, that's why they play the matches isn't it. Andy says he's got to turn this "rivalry" around so why not start here, infront of his home crowd. He has his best chance to come out and take win from The Fed.

Auscon
11-20-2004, 03:01 PM
Hopefully, Roger would keep his unbeaten record over top 10 players this year and finish off Roddick in straight sets, but not without a fight

hitchhiker
11-20-2004, 03:13 PM
Hitchhiker...lol...what ever happened to you, you decided to hide after Wimbly.


after I saw people reaction after wimbledon where 95% of people act like Roddick got thrashed i decided to take a break, my unlikely predictions were close to being pulled off but the likely outcome happened, federer won but i think it was much closer then people expected even if they dont admit it.


It's nice I guess when your favorite is so awesome. You can just make crazy statements that no one will ever beat him, he will always expose Andy, etc etc.


must be nice for fedex, just act cocky and predict federer will beat all the players he hates and then he of course almost certainly does but federers dominance wont continue forever


The claims that you make can only be based on how the players are playing now. How can you tell me that next year Roger will be in the same form, you would have to be able to tell the future, no one knows those things that can be as much of a matter of luck as anything.

As for this match, it's likely Roger will win, I know that. I am simply saying that, I hope he doesn't and if he doesn't I won't be suprised. Andy is very talented and anyone who doesn't admit that is a troll. Andy can win, it's definitly a possibility and Roger winning not a certainty. If we went by how everything looks on paper they would just give him the trophy but, that's why they play the matches isn't it. Andy says he's got to turn this "rivalry" around so why not start here, infront of his home crowd. He has his best chance to come out and take win from The Fed.

All very true. of course very likely fed win again this year but if only some luck go andys way then who knows what will happen.

doublebackhand
11-20-2004, 03:18 PM
My gut feeling tells me Andy wont even get past Lleyton. ;)

Rogiman
11-20-2004, 03:23 PM
My gut feeling tells me Andy wont even get past Lleyton. ;)

Live long and prosper! :yeah:

Lynne
11-20-2004, 04:10 PM
Roger's been unstoppable this year, so I expect this match to go Roger's way..

Pea
11-20-2004, 05:33 PM
Fumus you're very funny with this post :lol:...let's see :

What Fumus think of Andy losses :











then he said :



:haha: :haha:



With the way you're going, the h/h can go 20-1, you'll still think it's false representation. As for you question, at this moment I really can't look past the sf.

But Andy did show us he can beat Roger in Wimby. Many said Roger wasn't playing his best but in this case, I tend to feel it was Andy not letting Rogi play his game for the 1st set at least. But then, atm, for Andy to beat Rogi, he needs to have everything go his way, same can't be said for Rogi. Also Andy needs to stop those head shaking/negative body language/getting frustrated or feeling deflated so easily during matches vs Rogi. That obviously didn't work well for him and vs Rogi.


LFR!:haha:

Mlashtok
11-20-2004, 08:06 PM
So, what's the excuse for Andy now, Fumus/HH?

Hewitt dominated him!

sigmagirl91
11-20-2004, 08:42 PM
He fungus, what´s your point whit all this bull***.
You wanna know if duckie can beat Feds, just wait till sunday, if duckie can get past potato, he will face Feds in the final for sure and you will see.

Don't count on it. :devil:

sigmagirl91
11-20-2004, 08:44 PM
My gut feeling tells me Andy wont even get past Lleyton. ;)

By golly...gee willickers...you were right.

Fedex
11-20-2004, 10:41 PM
Amazing that Fumus still actually thinks this is a rivalry. When its 30-1 Roger, will you still be thinking so?

Leena
11-20-2004, 10:42 PM
If Red Sox/Yanks is still a rivalry, Roger/Andy has an excuse.

Gladiadora
11-20-2004, 10:44 PM
There's an obvious typographical error on this poll. It should read Lleyton vs Fed final. :haha:

bad gambler
11-20-2004, 10:47 PM
LOL :)

Fedex
11-20-2004, 11:00 PM
If Red Sox/Yanks is still a rivalry, Roger/Andy has an excuse.
omg, if you're comparing the unbelievable rivalry the Yankees have with the Red Sox, with this total owning that Federer has over Roddick, you need help. Given the fact that ,since 1920, the Sox have 700 wins over the Yanks vs. 900 losses, there is no comparison. Sox/Yankees is one of the greatest rivalrys in sports.

Pea
11-20-2004, 11:02 PM
If Red Sox/Yanks is still a rivalry, Roger/Andy has an excuse.

The only difference, Red Sox beat the Yanks.:haha:

Fedex
11-20-2004, 11:16 PM
And alot too. :lol:

Leena
11-20-2004, 11:17 PM
The only difference, Red Sox beat the Yanks.:haha:
Once, when it mattered. So, they're tied with Andy.

Pea
11-20-2004, 11:33 PM
Once, when it mattered. So, they're tied with Andy.

What? They've played more games during the season. :confused: I hope you know how baseball works.

Fedex
11-20-2004, 11:47 PM
Well, since they're comparing the Sox Yanks rivalry, with this fable of a rivalry between Roger and Roddick, I dont think they do, Pea. :haha: :lol:

Fedex
11-20-2004, 11:49 PM
What? They've played more games during the season. :confused: I hope you know how baseball works.
And the Sox won more games than the Yanks this year too. Last year they were 12-14 against NY, this year 15-11, and this person is comparing this rivalry to Federer-Roddick. :o :rolleyes:

Fedex
11-20-2004, 11:54 PM
Well, this thread also backfired, for unnessasary assumtion that it would be a Federer Roddick final. :)

Action Jackson
11-21-2004, 02:22 AM
My gut feeling tells me Andy wont even get past Lleyton. ;)

You were right. :)

sigmagirl91
11-21-2004, 02:25 AM
Amazing that Fumus still actually thinks this is a rivalry. When its 30-1 Roger, will you still be thinking so?

Probably, in his own delusional way.

LiZpHaIr
11-21-2004, 02:39 AM
No more Roddick! *clap clap clapclapclap*

Mr_Molik
11-21-2004, 03:15 AM
All I am saying is Roger has to get beat in a final sometime...why not Andy and why not now, right?
bcos duck isnt even in the final :haha: goo lleyton :worship: