Congrats Roddick... [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Congrats Roddick...

LleytonMonfils
09-11-2006, 12:18 AM
Good US Open, showed tennis you are back and the confidence is there. Keep this up... 2 sets off Federer next time, then the big W... it's going to be a process with him. The turnaround IMO was amazing!

selesfan
09-11-2006, 12:22 AM
Nice match Andy! :)

~*BGT*~
09-11-2006, 12:22 AM
GOOOOOOOO ANDY!!!!!

You'll be ready next year.

PamV
09-11-2006, 12:40 AM
Good US Open, showed tennis you are back and the confidence is there. Keep this up... 2 sets off Federer next time, then the big W... it's going to be a process with him. The turnaround IMO was amazing!

Andy played very well. I think he should set his sights on winning Madrid and/or Paris.

Adler
09-11-2006, 12:42 AM
Great performance, Jimbo makes a great job

No doubt andy is No. 2 on HC now

It's not easy to make a come back in such sport as tennis. Players become better, teens storming the ranking etc.

ASP0315
09-11-2006, 12:43 AM
Roddick did a pretty job out there. If had broken Federer in the third the result might have been different. But Congratulations goes to Federer. He is a tough man to put away. Roddick should be very proud of himself for taking a set off federer.(he should have taken the third to a TB.:sad: ) Anyway another great competitive match. Roddick will definetely win USO Next year. :devil:

mangoes
09-11-2006, 12:43 AM
Andy played very well. I think he should set his sights on winning Madrid and/or Paris.


Agree. This was the match that told me how much Andy has improved........2nd & 3rd set :eek: from Andy. I'm happy he is back in the top 10 and the no. 1 American. I definitely think he can win Madrid or Paris.

scoobs
09-11-2006, 12:46 AM
In spite of losing the match, in the 2nd and 3rd that was the best two sets of tennis I have seen from Andy Roddick ever except for game 12 of the 3rd. He played some amazing tennis and was in full flow and had Roger under pressure a lot to come up with fabulous shots.

He's really improved his game over the years but it's only when he's confident that he expresses it fully and effectively, so it's really nice to see him hitting some good ball again.

ABandt
09-11-2006, 12:47 AM
Andy has nothing to be ashamed of and I hope once the sting of loosing wears off he realizes that. Last year he went out in the first round of the USO and then did pretty much nothing for like 11 months. He's got himself turned around and made the final. His only bad luck was that in getting there he ended up facing Roger on the other end of the net. He had to know that it would be an uphill battle to take three sets off of Roger but he made a go of it for a while there until Roger, as he so often does ramped it up when he needed it and took the match.

~Amy

~Amy

ASP0315
09-11-2006, 12:47 AM
Agree. This was the match that told me how much Andy has improved. I'm happy he is back in the top 10 and the no. 1 American. I definitely think he can win Madrid or Paris.
He is world no 6 now. Yes, he will enjoy playing on Indoor synthetic and will win it.surfaces. I hope he doesn't get injured by then. ;)

preNadal care
09-11-2006, 12:51 AM
He was obviously bummed about losing the Final, but the result is such an improvement over the past year where his results had not been a good indicator of his ability level. The positive mindset and confidence were missing, but I see more and more of that now.

I think one of the burdens that was weighing him down was getting to a point where he could compete with Federer. Yet the past year or so he wasn't playing at the level where he could get to Federer in the Finals. Now that he's back to the top, I think that burden will return, but with a positive coach like Connors, I think he'll be better prepared to handle that challenge.

RiemannLebesgue
09-11-2006, 12:52 AM
Good US Open, showed tennis you are back and the confidence is there. Keep this up... 2 sets off Federer next time, then the big W... it's going to be a process with him. The turnaround IMO was amazing!


Yes, he did an excellent job in the second and third sets. In the 4th set, I think Federeritis snuck in as it seems to do with ALL of the top players who aren't Federer. There's a moment where a very small part of the mind goes "OMG, I'm playing against Federer" and it's all over after that.

Someone will start to be able to beat Federer on a regular basis and that someone will be able to think to himself, "I can beat Federer." Federer has shown himself to be mortal, but the myth of his immortality is messing with the players' minds. Federer has the ability to not be bothered by almost anything mental. The person who beats him will have to do the same.

nkhera1
09-11-2006, 12:54 AM
Roddick showed some good results, and while it is clear that he isn't on Federer's level yet he has made some improvements and I think he can be a top 3 player again.

acca
09-11-2006, 01:07 AM
Great job, in deed. Go Roddick!

Rogiman
09-11-2006, 01:10 AM
Respect to Roddick, I hope he improves his fitness to a point where he can compete at this level for a long time.

scoobs
09-11-2006, 01:14 AM
Respect to Roddick, I hope he improves his fitness to a point where he can compete at this level for a long time.
I think the 2.45 struggle against Youzhny less than 24 hours earlier took a little of the starch out of Andy that he would have needed to keep it very tight into the fourth and possibly fifth.

Regenbogen
09-11-2006, 01:16 AM
I'm surprised he actually challenged Federer, I guess he really IS back, I still wasn't sure after Cincy considering the draw :lol: He played well, overall this tournament has been very positive for him. :) Hopefully he can improve even more :D

mangoes
09-11-2006, 01:18 AM
It's so nice to see no Andy bashing :D ................well, at least, I haven't seen any bashing ;)

Rogiman
09-11-2006, 01:18 AM
I think the 2.45 struggle against Youzhny less than 24 hours earlier took a little of the starch out of Andy that he would have needed to keep it very tight into the fourth and possibly fifth.
Yeah, I mentioned just that in a thread of mine that was locked during the match :mad:
Like I said, it was eventually his own tennis association that did him in with its bizarre scheduling.

Tennis Fool
09-11-2006, 01:19 AM
Yes, Andy has improved back to the point where he can get a consistant beatdown by Feds, and not by the likes of Andy Murray.

nkhera1
09-11-2006, 01:39 AM
Yes, Andy has improved back to the point where he can get a consistant beatdown by Feds, and not by the likes of Andy Murray.

Yeah, now all he needs to do is wait for Murray to beat Federer. ;)

RiemannLebesgue
09-11-2006, 01:49 AM
Yes, Andy has improved back to the point where he can get a consistant beatdown by Feds, and not by the likes of Andy Murray.


You know.... for someone who claims to not like Andy Roddick, you sure seem to like to trash talk. You're worse than Jimmy Connors. ;)

binkygirl
09-11-2006, 01:50 AM
Andy needs to embrace what made him a good player. The big forehand and serve. I cringed everytime he would foray to the net and get passed. He isn't going to be a complete player. He needs to work on his strengths.

World Beater
09-11-2006, 01:53 AM
Yeah, I mentioned just that in a thread of mine that was locked during the match :mad:
Like I said, it was eventually his own tennis association that did him in with its bizarre scheduling.

yeah i dont get why the thread was locked...it wasnt a scoring thread..:rolleyes:

nvm...some people want to flaunt their power everywhere

partygirl
09-11-2006, 01:55 AM
Respect to Roddick, I hope he improves his fitness to a point where he can compete at this level for a long time.
how could his fitness get better?
not by much anyway.

chicky841
09-11-2006, 02:21 AM
I agree, probably the main reason I enjoyed USO so much was seeing Andy playing well again. Cant wait to see how the rest of the year will pan out for him.

Havok
09-11-2006, 03:20 AM
Yes, Andy has improved back to the point where he can get a consistant beatdown by Feds, and not by the likes of Andy Murray.
Hey it's better to get back to the point where you're facing Roger on Sundays and losing (which EVERYBODY besides Nadal on clay is doing) thatn lose to shit or not even getting good results like a ton of other players, and some currently in the top 10!:o No shame in losing to Federer really. He's the greatest to ever play this game, easily.

Pigpen Stinks
09-11-2006, 04:27 AM
He played some of his best tennis this past month. However, I don't think he's within sniffing distance of Roger yet. Roger's game is too polished for Andy right now. If Roger had played his normal tennis, it would have been a straight set affair today. Bash me if you will Roddick fans, but this is just the way I see it.

Andy is capable of competing with Roger. He's made great strides in the past month. Most of it has been mental, because that was his major drop off in the past few years. For whatever reason, Connors seems to have made him realize that he needs to do the things that everyone has been saying - play closer to the baseline, be more aggresive on return games, etc.

He's also added the backhand down the line into Andy's arsenal. It's not like he didn't have the shot before, but he just didn't seen to want to use it. He always seemed content to just hit that useless loopy backhand back crosscourt. It's one thing if you're Sergi Bruguera playing on clay, and entirely another thing if you're a mediocre American baseline player.

Roddick has also become almost comfortable at net against the non top flight competition. Net play has been a major liability for Andy. I'm not suggesting he should become a serve and volleyer, but he needs to learn the skills that will make him an adequate net player. Connors has obviously been working on this, as Andy came to net much more often these past few weeks, but it takes time to develop the appropriate feel at net, especially for someone as uncomfortable up there as Andy.

I've never understood why his previous coaches haven't developed his net game. I suppose part of it has been Andy's stubborness, and his coaches' lack of balls for fear of getting on his bad side. Andy has such a huge serve, and when he excelled early in his career with an agressive baseline game he could get away without any net skills, but as players have caught up to his serve, and as he lost confidence in his overall game, this liability became accentuated.

Andy CAN be a threat to Fed and Nadal. He needs to develop that intermediate game that transitions him to the net. I doubt he'll ever be as strong as Fed or Nadal from the baseline. However, with his awesome serve, and a game that's capable of pressuring the opponent, he can compete with these two. It's just going to take a lot of practice and experimentation. It's a different game today, and I don't think he'll ever be a McEnroe, Cash, Edberg or Rafter, but the key for him will be learning how to approach the net, what types of shots to use, and most importantly, how to anticipate like the masters of that era. It's all about developing that comfort zone up there, because it would fit perfectly into his game. It's obvious that Connors is already trying to teach him that, and Connors was never a pure volleyer himself, but as his career wore on he learned that he needed to incorporate that into his repertoire. And although he wasn't the purest or most elegant volleyer, he did become rather effective on his approaches.

Practice the right things, and he'll have a chance to compete for slam titles. He has the mental framework (which many top players don't), he just needs to put a few key components together.

Deboogle!.
09-11-2006, 04:51 AM
If Roger had played his normal tennis, it would have been a straight set affair today. Bash me if you will Roddick fans, but this is just the way I see it.Yeah, and if Andy had hit his forehand more consistently the way he is capable of instead of the dozens of moonballs he hit that landed around the service line, who knows what would've happened. We can play that game all night long but it's pointless, what happened happened :)

Anyway I pretty much agree with the rest of your post. As to why his other coaches haven't developed his net game, I've got lots of opinions on that - I believe Goldfine really tried, there were patches in 2005 when he came in more, but Andy had serious confidence issues in 2005 and his net play was accordingly awful. People hail Brad as a genius coach but I for one partially blame Brad for a lot of the problems in Andy's game. He is the one who got him to stand so far back to return the 2nd serve and to use his slice too often - two things that have hurt Andy since he started losing some confidence. Just now is he fixing his court positioning and his backhand. But these are all just my opinions.

Ultimately, I think Andy's a stubborn guy who has trouble listening. I'm sure Dean and his brother told him many of the right things, and I think maybe John isn't getting enough credit for also helping Andy out by being, if nothing else, rock solid support, but I think the fact that he absolutely idolizes Jimmy is really helping him actually listen to what he is trying to tell him. So hey if that is what it takes, awesome! and good for andy for not being afraid to go out on a limb and make that phone call out of the blue and take that risk :) The first thing Jimmy allegedly said to him is that he had faith that Andy was, and could again be, a great player. I think that in itself helped him, after reading and hearing such crap about himself, to have someone like Jimmy Connors say they have faith in you can mean a lot I'm sure.

I think physically, Andy's pretty much fit. I think the last month was pretty intense for him emotionally and he fought as long as he could and when he played that bad game at 5-6 he had nothing left. I guess we have no way of knowing for sure. He's scheduled to play a fuller fall schedule than i think he ever has, so I guess that's good. He's never played Vienna before :)

oh! and nice thread :)

rofe
09-11-2006, 05:00 AM
Roddick played really well in the 2nd and for most of the 3rd but he looked totally spent around the 5-5 mark in the 3rd set. He started grunting a lot more when he was reaching for the ball and his serve lost some power. His flat forehands became loopy forehands. That was surprising to me considering that he had quite a bit of rest before playing Cincy.

Deboogle!.
09-11-2006, 05:04 AM
Roddick played really well in the 2nd and for most of the 3rd but he looked totally spent around the 5-5 mark in the 3rd set. He started grunting a lot more when he was reaching for the ball and his serve lost some power. His flat forehands became loopy forehands. That was surprising to me considering that he had quite a bit of rest before playing Cincy.He was grunting loudly periodically all throughout the tournament, I don't think that's really an indicator of his tiredness. His forehands were loopy for most of the USO, so I don't think that is either :shrug: To me it was more emotional, but no way to know really, we can only guess and opine.

LCeh
09-11-2006, 05:17 AM
He played some of his best tennis this past month. However, I don't think he's within sniffing distance of Roger yet. Roger's game is too polished for Andy right now. If Roger had played his normal tennis, it would have been a straight set affair today. Bash me if you will Roddick fans, but this is just the way I see it.

Are you kidding me, Roger played some of his best tennis today. He barely made any unforced errors, and the match was not straight sets because of Andy's unbelievable serve. I didn't check the stats, but his serving % in the second and third set has gotta be in the upper 70s. In rallies however, Roger was in control most of the time.

Andy couldn't really get too aggresive with his ground game today because Federer was putting him in a position where he cannot. He either sliced it to his backhand, or was hitting the ball deep enough so that if Roddick decides to rip the ball, it would be a high risk shot. Whenever Andy had a short ball though, he really tried ripping the approach and coming into net, and after the first set, he was having pretty good success with that play.

World Beater
09-11-2006, 05:21 AM
i disagree with some posters here...roddick's fh was pretty good, better than it has been. But its not as good as roger's fh in the rallies, which is why the ball lands short sometimes because of the weight of roger's ball. So to say, oh andy could have done this or done that, is kind of pointless, cos im sure he tried.

all in all, it was a good match for andy, and i think next time andy will be more dangerous because i believe that this time he was slightly content about reaching the final. however, it has to happen here in nyc, because i cant see andy beating roger on a slow hc in australia.

nkhera1
09-11-2006, 05:52 AM
i disagree with some posters here...roddick's fh was pretty good, better than it has been. But its not as good as roger's fh in the rallies, which is why the ball lands short sometimes because of the weight of roger's ball. So to say, oh andy could have done this or done that, is kind of pointless, cos im sure he tried.

all in all, it was a good match for andy, and i think next time andy will be more dangerous because i believe that this time he was slightly content about reaching the final. however, it has to happen here in nyc, because i cant see andy beating roger on a slow hc in australia.

Andy has been hitting short, loopy forehands for most of the tournament, its just that Federer is the first to really make him pay for it. Many Roddick fans knew he wouldn't be able to get away with it against Federer.

World Beater
09-11-2006, 05:57 AM
Andy has been hitting short, loopy forehands for most of the tournament, its just that Federer is the first to really make him pay for it. Many Roddick fans knew he wouldn't be able to get away with it against Federer.

perhaps, but i think you are being picky. he has hit some nice backhands but still not consistent enough to hit a lot of winners on that side. bh is not winning him matches. the backhand was not the reason andy got to the final, and players cant make it to the final on one shot alone (serve).

unless of course you want to chalk up andy's run to his draw, which i am not willing to do.

rofe
09-11-2006, 06:06 AM
Andy has been hitting short, loopy forehands for most of the tournament, its just that Federer is the first to really make him pay for it. Many Roddick fans knew he wouldn't be able to get away with it against Federer.

Um, we must have watched a different match. Andy was hitting some really good flat forehands from the 2nd set to the end of the 3rd. Around the 5-5 mark, he seemed to be spent at which point he started looping it a little more. In the 4th set, Roger, for the most part did not allow Andy to execute his aggressive game plan. Whenever Andy tried to hit a hard flat forehand, he could not control it so the only option was to cut down UEs by putting more topspin on the forehand. It was a good plan in general but against Fed it was the wrong strategy. Also, Andy seemed a little tired out there which could have contributed to his loss of control on his flat forehand.

nkhera1
09-11-2006, 06:12 AM
perhaps, but i think you are being picky. he has hit some nice backhands but still not consistent enough to hit a lot of winners on that side. bh is not winning him matches. the backhand was not the reason andy got to the final, and players cant make it to the final on one shot alone (serve).

unless of course you want to chalk up andy's run to his draw, which i am not willing to do.

I think the serve was good, backhand was good, movement was good. Volleys and return game were sometimes good, most of the time decent, and sometimes poor. While the backhand wasn't winning a lot of points, it certainly wasn't putting Roddick in bad situations and he caugh players off guard with his down the line backhand. Not many players have backhands which will get them lots of winners. Roddick's forehand was very loopy but fortunately for him he kept his UE count down which really helped him out. His winners weren't that good for a player of his game (if you don't include aces) and if you watch his matchs you will see many weak forehands which almost got him into trouble against Verdasco and Youzhny and which eventually got him into trouble against Federer because he wasn't hitting winners but he was hitting a lot of erros

NYCtennisfan
09-11-2006, 07:38 AM
Roddick did what Roddick was able to do. He played really, really well to win the 2nd set. Federer played one bad game and then then Roddick didn't give him any 2nd serves. Set to Roddick. Nobody would have broken him in that 2nd set. Roddick also played really well in the 3rd set. Federer played a great 3rd set but it still went down to the wire. Roddick volleyed well, hit some good deep BH's and some very good FH's.

As for loopy FH's by Roddick, that wasn't the case at all. Roddick has always hit some loopy FH's and went for the big inside-out FH's, and the DTL FH's when the time was right. People think he hit loopy Fh's because not every ball was crushed. He doesn't have the ability to hit every FH near the lines, and he never has. He has always waited for the high ball that was somewhat short and crushed it. I thought he hit some very good FH's in that match, but his FH is nowhere near as good as Federer's. Roddick lost most of the FH exchanges. But his numbers could not have been too miuch better because:

1. He doesn't have the BH right now (although improved) to set up opportunities for his FH. He can't create a combo like Federer or Safin or Guga can.

2. Federer doesn't allow you to hit a lot of winners against him. When was the last itme someone hit a bunch of outright winners against him? Even a red-hot Safin didn't hit 70 winners in a long 5 set match at the Australian Open.

3. Federer always moves you around so you can't hit big shots against him. Roddick doesn't hit well consistently on the run and Federer almost always had him on the run, especailly with some big BH's today along with some nice slice.

Other than the 1st set, Roddick did what he was capable of and his limitations and the matchup problems againt Federer were highlighted in the sets that he lost.

Federer would have lost today if he had played a mediocre match. In the past, he could always rely on crappy returning by Roddick or pathetic BH's into the middle of the court but that was clearly not the case today. Other than some key opportunities to pass roddick, Federer hit the ball as well as he could hit it today. People forget that Roddick playing really well is very difficult for anyone to beat on a surface like this because you aren't going to get too many opportunities to break. Even if you get some chances, many of them are going to be erased by a big serve.

mickymouse
09-11-2006, 08:08 AM
If it has been anyone else in the final, he would have won. As long as he doesn't lose his self-belief, his time will come. After all, he's been in 4 slam finals and has only lost to Federer.

Exodus
09-11-2006, 08:23 AM
i don't like roddick but u gotta give him credit for the way he fought last night. actually the 3rd set was very close and could have gone either way...
i seriously doubt that any besides roger could have beaten roddick last night maybe safin or blake

Mimi
09-11-2006, 08:35 AM
why to congratulate him when he lost :sad: :confused:

Exodus
09-11-2006, 08:37 AM
why to congratulate him when he lost :sad: :confused:

because he put up a fight when i thought that roger would slaughter him :)

Mimi
09-11-2006, 09:52 AM
thanks for explaining, but for me, if either being slaughtered or put up a fight and still lost = the same = pity, lol :p
because he put up a fight when i thought that roger would slaughter him :)

RonE
09-11-2006, 10:19 AM
Respect to Roddick, I hope he improves his fitness to a point where he can compete at this level for a long time.
Rogiman, you're scaring me here :eek: :eek: :eek:

*faints*

iva
09-11-2006, 11:54 AM
Well done! Just keep going you'll beat him next time!

njorker
09-11-2006, 03:09 PM
why to congratulate him when he lost :sad: :confused:


Because he played a great final against Fed. How many players can say that they took off, even a set, from the world #1? Some respect for Andy a lil bit please. :wavey: He made it all the way to the finals after a year of disappointment and had his confidence back which is very important for him.
The point here is that even though he lost, he has gained a new perspective on the game which will propel him to the top again and win him another GS.

Doesn't that deserve congratulations?

tangerine_dream
09-11-2006, 04:01 PM
Because he played a great final against Fed. How many players can say that they took off, even a set, from the world #1? Some respect for Andy a lil bit please. :wavey: He made it all the way to the finals after a year of disappointment and had his confidence back which is very important for him.
The point here is that even though he lost, he has gained a new perspective on the game which will propel him to the top again and win him another GS.

Doesn't that deserve congratulations?
Yes, it certainly does. :bigclap: The no-talent, washed-up, one-dimensional Andy Roddick turned his lousy year around in only a few weeks, won a masters title, and made it to the final of the slam that he had crashed out of in the first round last year. On top of that, he actually squeezed a set out of Federer when he wasn't even playing his best. :eek: He's made huge strides in his game and I'm very proud of him. :D