Roddick in top 50? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Roddick in top 50?

Mlashtok
04-02-2005, 03:30 AM
Would Andy Roddick be ranked in the top 50 on the tour if his current serve was replaced by an "average serve" for a top 50 player, say the serve of Hrbaty, Kiefer, or Malisse?

Put another way, would Roddick be in the top 50 based on his groundstrokes and netgame alone?

I know that Andy relies a tremendous amount on his serve to win matches, but I'm wondering just how much.


Matt

joseluismb
04-02-2005, 03:35 AM
There's this weirdo Argentine commentator at FoxSports LatinAmerica who keeps on saying this over and over again everytime Andy plays.

My opninion? Yes. His groundstrokes would do a #40-45.

Fee
04-02-2005, 03:37 AM
hasn't this been done one, twice, or a hundred times before?

Without his serve, Andy would be begging to be a production assistant for Good Morning Boca Raton! or he would be on some college campus somewhere doing a beer bong AT THIS VERY SECOND!!!!!!!!!

PaulieM
04-02-2005, 03:38 AM
imo yes he would be but i don't think he would be in the top 15-20, he has a great forehand and his game is improving in some areas so i'd say inside the top 35 definitely.

alfonsojose
04-02-2005, 03:41 AM
JesusFed wouldn't be no.1 either. Maybe he doesn't serve has big as Andy but Rogi relies a lot on it. Rogi with Nalbandian serve would be top ten, but not no.1

liptea
04-02-2005, 03:42 AM
The serve is a part of the tennis game, I don't know if anyone noticed.

Sinnet
04-02-2005, 03:42 AM
His serve doesn't always get him out of trouble... not anymore, anyway. There are players that are able to handle his serve with no problem that he's still able to beat or seriously compete with. I think people overemphasize his serve. Yeah, it was a big deal two years ago, but I think now the players are more immune to it.

I think he'd be in the top ten by now without it, but it doesn't matter. Taking away a players' strength only makes a situation irrelevant. Take away Federer's biggest strength, his cat-like movement/preparation, and I don't think he'd be number one in the world right now.

You can take one or two things away from any top player and then say "Without that, they wouldn't be where they are." Well that's just it -- Because they've developed such a weapon, that's how they've earned where they are.

Chloe le Bopper
04-02-2005, 03:57 AM
No, without his serve Roddick would be ranked 20398319083. It is simply absurd that the ATP continues to allow him to exploit this illegal weapon :fiery:

tangerine_dream
04-02-2005, 04:06 AM
Without his serve, he would be nothing but a forehand.

And I think Roger relies on his footwork too much. If he didn't have that, he wouldn't be Top 100, let alone top 10.

uNIVERSE mAN
04-02-2005, 04:08 AM
yep, tangerine is right, but if you go further, without his backhand, forehand, serve and overhead I doubt he can crack the top 500.

Chloe le Bopper
04-02-2005, 04:08 AM
He shouldn't be allowed to use his forehand either :fiery:

liptea
04-02-2005, 04:08 AM
Without his serve, he would be nothing but a forehand.

No. I don't think we should let Andy use the forehand either. From now on, Andy is going to be a clay-court specialist veteran. Just like Carlos Moya.

Fee
04-02-2005, 04:11 AM
In fact, that racqet gives Andy too much of an advantage, so from now on, he has to play with his bare hands only. And he has to have 2 shots of Tequila before each match. Damn that Andy Roddick.

Chloe le Bopper
04-02-2005, 04:11 AM
In fact, that racqet gives Andy too much of an advantage, so from now on, he has to play with his bare hands only. And he has to have 2 shots of Tequila before each match. Damn that Andy Roddick.
And no running either. We'll sit him in a chair in the middle of the court and he will only be permitted to stretch his arms out to either side.

tangerine_dream
04-02-2005, 04:12 AM
No. I don't think we should let Andy use the forehand either. From now on, Andy is going to be a clay-court specialist veteran. Just like Carlos Moya.

Carlos Moya relies on his sleeveless shirts too much. Definitely not Top ten worthy.

uNIVERSE mAN
04-02-2005, 04:14 AM
I am going to say a critical thing of the american commentators. When Goran was winning his wimbledon, people like McEnroe etc. said Goran was nothing but sheer serve, if I remember correctly, PMac said "he's got a 14 year old's game with a lightning bolt serve", John Mac got into a back and forth feud in the papers which Goran was mad at. The two brothers were even saying how men's tennis is too much dominated by the serve.

But when Roddick came along, these two idiots couldn't get enough of it and suddenly it's like "wow, what incredible power!"

Roger-No.1
04-02-2005, 04:43 AM
I am going to say a critical thing of the american commentators. When Goran was winning his wimbledon, people like McEnroe etc. said Goran was nothing but sheer serve, if I remember correctly, PMac said "he's got a 14 year old's game with a lightning bolt serve", John Mac got into a back and forth feud in the papers which Goran was mad at. The two brothers were even saying how men's tennis is too much dominated by the serve.

But when Roddick came along, these two idiots couldn't get enough of it and suddenly it's like "wow, what incredible power!"
No, Roddick wouldn't be top whatever without the big serve

This thread is hilarious.

"It's illegal to have a big serve" was :haha:

Just forget the racket, players!

and universeman, :worship:

Commentators forget people have matches on tape!

iliketennis
04-02-2005, 05:27 AM
Roddick would be top 40 without his serve.

tennischick
04-02-2005, 05:35 AM
why are Duckfans and Co getting their knickers in a twist? i don't see where the poster is saying that the Duck should give up reliance on his serve. he's simply asking where would he be ranked if he didn't have it. :shrug:

my vote -- he'd be ranked #113. just a wild guess :o

Chloe le Bopper
04-02-2005, 05:43 AM
Because it's fun to imagine Roddick sitting in a chair flailing his arms out at the ball?

Mlashtok
04-02-2005, 05:44 AM
Hey,

I'm very well aware that it's only a hypothetical sitation and will never effect the reality of the game. You guys are a tough bunch sometimes.
:dog: :timebomb:

This question came into my mind after I watched the Roddick vs. Verdasco match at Indian Wells, in which I think Verdasco had 30 forehand winners to Roddick's 6. I was amazed to see Roddick playing as a total pusher, seeming to have no confidence in his strokes at all, while Verdasco mauled him from the baseline and hit winners all over the court. Many of our men's tennis players here at UVA hit the ball considerably better from the baseline than Roddick did.

Roddick won the match 6-3, 3-6, 7-6 (2), and it's pretty obvious what the deciding factor was at the end.

Matt

Chloe le Bopper
04-02-2005, 05:46 AM
Isn't Verdasco a poor example? He has a better forehand than most people... when it lands in. Which is the problem.

tennischick
04-02-2005, 05:47 AM
but Verdasco came close to spanking Duck butt in Indian Wells -- and did spank him in Miami. so serve or no serve, the Duck is beatable by a solid creative returner.

El Legenda
04-02-2005, 05:50 AM
20-30...same as Ljubo if he didnt have a serve like he has...but he does have good backhand.

WyveN
04-02-2005, 05:51 AM
I'm very well aware that it's only a hypothetical sitation and will never effect the reality of the game.


If Roddick didnt have the big serve he would probably develop the rest of his game a little better in the junior days.

If he got injured tomorrow and was forced to serve with the pace of Coria for the rest of his career he would probably be around the #30-#70 mark. Roddick on clay is basically Roddick without his serve, yes his bad, but not THAT bad.

WyveN
04-02-2005, 05:53 AM
Rogi with Nalbandian serve would be top ten, but not no.1

These discussions are pointless but if Hewitt can reach #1 with a rather average serve so can Federer.

Roger-No.1
04-02-2005, 05:53 AM
If Roddick didnt have the big serve he would probably develop the rest of his game a little better in the junior days.
You're one of the best posters, WyveN. :yeah:

tennischick
04-02-2005, 05:53 AM
...Roddick on clay is basically Roddick without his serve, yes his bad, but not THAT bad.
you're right. and he did win St. Polten. so maybe #113 was unfair. maybe #63. ;)

deliveryman
04-02-2005, 06:09 AM
And without Roger's left leg, he wouldn't be in the top 50 either...

bad gambler
04-02-2005, 06:29 AM
a new rule should come into effect immediately whereby no player is allowed to serve faster than 200km/h :D

Chloe le Bopper
04-02-2005, 06:46 AM
a new rule should come into effect immediately whereby no player is allowed to serve faster than 200km/h :D
Robredo once suggested a similar rule in interview. No, really.

Mlashtok
04-02-2005, 06:58 AM
Maybe players who CAN serve faster than 200 km/hr should be put on a separate tour from the remaining puffballers.

deliveryman
04-02-2005, 07:00 AM
Putting a 125mph cap on a serve is just retarded. No offense.

Next thing we know, we're gonna put a cap on groundstroke speed.

Roger-No.1
04-02-2005, 07:02 AM
Maybe players who CAN serve faster than 200 km/hr should be put on a separate tour from the remaining puffballers.
There's an article that explains

how power players made golf more popular in America....

and the 200 km/h limit made sense there.

but this topic deserves another thread.

Or maybe not.

misyou25
04-02-2005, 10:58 AM
he'd be top 20 in my opinion, withou serve. i mean, look at robredo

bad gambler
04-02-2005, 10:59 AM
Putting a 125mph cap on a serve is just retarded. No offense.

Next thing we know, we're gonna put a cap on groundstroke speed.

chill mate - i wasn't being serious

misyou25
04-02-2005, 11:00 AM
but no one can win against a top 10 player just because of the serve-it's simply impossible

WyveN
04-02-2005, 11:57 AM
but no one can win against a top 10 player just because of the serve-it's simply impossible

karlovic has beaten hewitt at wimbledon and it wasnt because of his blistering groundstrokes.

TennisLurker
04-02-2005, 12:03 PM
I remember in the past some Fed fans would get defensive when someone would call Fed a big server, now they dont seem to have a problem with it.

WyveN
04-02-2005, 12:06 PM
when someone would call Fed a big server

It depends how you define big serve, in terms of Speed Henman is almost right up there with Federer.

blosson
04-02-2005, 12:18 PM
hewitt, without his biggest weapon, his return, would be outside the top 200.

safin, without his biggest weapon, his beautiful face, would be cleaning toilets

euroka1
04-02-2005, 12:25 PM
but no one can win against a top 10 player just because of the serve-it's simply impossible

OK, but a blistering serve alone leads to a much less interesting game with almost invariably a tie break in each set and then on it is small number statistics. The more rounded games that we've seen in the men's games during the last couple of weeks have been illustrative of this.

.. and they've been much more fun to watch.

WyveN
04-02-2005, 12:38 PM
safin, without his biggest weapon, his beatiful face, would be cleaning toilets

and winning a lot more slams as well.

euroka1
04-02-2005, 01:05 PM
safin, without his biggest weapon, his beatiful face, would be cleaning toilets

.... and getting other players back onto the court. (sorry!)

Neely
04-02-2005, 03:43 PM
karlovic has beaten hewitt at wimbledon and it wasnt because of his blistering groundstrokes.
Hm... yes, maybe not blistering, but they lets say they were good enough this day to also break Hewitt a few times gaining enough return points.

Auscon
04-02-2005, 03:52 PM
I truly believe Roddicks serve is holding him back....without it, he'd have Lleyton and even Rogers number for sure

Experimentee
04-02-2005, 03:59 PM
:haha: at this thread

Btw Hrbaty's first serve is good when it goes in, most of the time around 210kph. Its just his 2nd serve that is shaky.

Experimentee
04-02-2005, 04:04 PM
Hm... yes, maybe not blistering, but they lets say they were good enough this day to also break Hewitt a few times gaining enough return points.

I agree, and he was volleying very well in that match too, using his slice approach and big reach to good effect. He broke Hewitt's serve 3 times I think.

tennischick
04-02-2005, 04:04 PM
And without Roger's left leg, he wouldn't be in the top 50 either...
and to think i was impressed with your "domination" post earlier this week :o

TennisLurker
04-02-2005, 04:08 PM
Even with a normal serve, Roddick would be better than Zabaleta I think.

Carito_90
04-02-2005, 05:23 PM
Oh here we go again, fun!

Andy was given the gift of this massive serve, same as Roger has been gifted with his mentality and groundstrokes, and Lleyton with his fighting spirit and return.
I am very sure if Andy hadn't been given that serve, he would have developed his other strokes a lot more. His juniors career was very much easier with that serve, I'm sure, that's why he has just started improving his groundies and volleys, because he didn't need that before.
But this question of the serve applies for everyone:
Would Lleyton be #2 if he didn't have his fighting spirit or return?
Would Moya have been #1 and won RG if he hadn't had his forehand?

Of course that if you take the best shot or thing out of a player they will become less effective. You don't have to be THAT smart to know that.

Oh and BTW, I don't see anyone making a thread asking if PimPim's would be where he is without his serve. How odd.

alexito
04-02-2005, 05:32 PM
I very tired critic all time roddick, no only roddick no win, all players no win, federer win evrytime.

Skyward
04-02-2005, 06:20 PM
Oh here we go again, fun!

His juniors career was very much easier with that serve, I'm sure, that's why he has just started improving his groundies and volleys, because he didn't need that before.


I did not follow Andy's junior career, but P.McEnroe said a few times that Andy had a late growth spurt( at 17?) and before that he used to be a pusher on the court.

Carito_90
04-02-2005, 06:49 PM
Andy started serving like this when he was 16. Of course he didn't serve at 150mph back then but this BIG serve 'appeared' when he was 16 and probably served a lot harder than most kids on juniors tour.

NATAS81
04-02-2005, 06:53 PM
Where are the threads about "What if Nalbandian has Andy's serve?"

Of course Roddick relies heavily on his serve to win cheap points, but don't give him a free pass for top 10 potential on that alone. I'm sure if he didn't have the serve then he'd be forced to work on other areas of his game, and who's to say he wouldn't be where he is now had he done that?

tennisman.
04-02-2005, 07:22 PM
Why do you ask this?
Andy is top-3 player,he has a good serve.
Why don't everybody serve like that?Becouse they cant they dont have the skill.
If it doesnt need any skill for that then everybody could serve that way and everybody would be top3?
Leave Andy alone,he is the man


Ps.Did Andy win USO with he's serve alone???

makro120
04-02-2005, 07:45 PM
I agree, this is pointless because Andy's serve is what makes him Andy Roddick and I am sure there is alot of work and even creativity behind his serve. I have no idea how many hours each day he trains his serve but he would be a different player if he would use these hours different. Like training his backhand and volley or something like that. He still wouldn't be as good as today, but maybe more fun to watch.

Also if you would take away Hewitt's fighting spirit he wouldn't even play tennis, his fighting spirit took him there in the 1st place.

BlackSilver
04-02-2005, 07:57 PM
Hum, I don't think so, if I have to guess I would say that he would be between the 50-70 position. But as was mentioned before, if he didn't have a so efficient serve, the rest of his game would improve, and in this case I believe that he would be between 35-60

Mlashtok
04-03-2005, 12:04 AM
HTTP://WWW.SOMAXSPORTS.COM/RODDICKSERVE.HTM

I wonder how many people have seen this. It's an interesting analysis of Roddick 's service motion.

euroka1
04-03-2005, 01:38 AM
[QUOTE=tennisman.
Andy is top-3 player,he has a good serve.

Ps.Did Andy win USO with he's serve alone???[/QUOTE]

I agree, and it makes for a pretty boring game.

No, the USO win was not serve alone. Good fortune had a lot to do with it.

El Legenda
04-03-2005, 01:44 AM
What would David Nalby if he had a girls serve....on wait he already does.

Fedex
04-03-2005, 01:59 AM
yep, tangerine is right, but if you go further, without his backhand, forehand, serve and overhead I doubt he can crack the top 500.
:lol:

Fedex
04-03-2005, 03:05 AM
What would David Nalby if he had a girls serve....on wait he already does.
No the question should be what would Nalbandian be if he had a decent serve.

NYCtennisfan
04-03-2005, 04:58 AM
How good would Sampras have been if he had only an "average" serve? Certainly not the greatest player of all time--not even close. He had an average return that was poor a lot of the times (mainly because he knew he only needed one break and wouldn't try to break every time), little above average backhand, very good forehand, great athletic ability, excellent volleys, and good movement. Sampras would certainly be able to win titles without his huge serve, but I am not sure how many Grand Slams he would've won without the greatest serve in the history of tennis.

but I do see your point. Roddick would fall a lot further down without his serve than someone like a Becker or Sampras.

NYCtennisfan
04-03-2005, 05:08 AM
safin, without his biggest weapon, his beautiful face, would be cleaning toilets

LMAO! I just re-read the thread and I must've missed this. This is too good!

NATAS81
04-03-2005, 05:16 AM
LMAO! I just re-read the thread and I must've missed this. This is too good!
Yes! But without his mental lapses would win alot more Grand Slams!

Federer slamming Safin ---> :smash: "YOU WILL NOT BEAT ME AN ANOTHER SLAM! I HAVE THE MENTAL FORTITUDE AND CONSISTENCY TO TEAR YOU APART NEXT SLAM WE MEET!!!!!" "I OPEN HOLES IN YOUR GAME LIKE SWISS CHEESE!!"

blosson
04-03-2005, 10:39 AM
roger without his hair would be bold.

joske
04-03-2005, 11:20 AM
:lol: blosson

top 50? definitely yes
top 5? don't know

Billy Moonshine
04-03-2005, 11:51 AM
Roddick has a fantastic serve. It´s his major weapon.
The serve is a major part of the game.
Now, I know we all know this, but this question, ´would he be a top 50 player without his serve´suggests that the serve is a minor part of the game, almost incidental, when surely it is the most important?
His groundies are good, he can volley, he´s fairly quick. I´d say he had an all round game. Maybe his claycourt game is weak, but he will improve and he does have claycourt titles, however small, but I think it´s good that he still plays these tournies for experience.
Anyway, I think yes his serve has helped him be a grand slam champ, a year ending world number one and wimbledon finalist.