Roddick's curse in tight five-setters [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Roddick's curse in tight five-setters

Voo de Mar
08-24-2009, 01:43 AM
I don't want to bore you statistically but there is something what bother me lately. Namely, how is possible that Roddick who won the longest singles 5-setter in history, in terms of games, can't win another 5-setter when it comes to "6:6" in the 5th set :confused: You know, how is it possible that a player with such a gifted scoreline at the beginning of career can't use that experience in similar circumstances?

Here are Roddick's matches with "6:6" in the deciding set:

1) Australian Open 2003: El Aynaoui 4-6 7-6(5) 4-6 6-4 21-19
2) Roland Garros 2005: Acasuso 6-3 6-4 4-6 3-6 6-8
3) Davis Cup 2006: Tursunov 3-6 4-6 7-5 6-3 15-17
4) Wimbledon 2007: Gasquet 6-4 6-4 6-7(2) 6-7(3) 6-8
5) Australian Open 2008: Kohlschreiber 4-6 6-3 6-7(9) 7-6(3) 6-8
6) Davis Cup 2008: Ferrer 6-7(5) 6-2 6-1 4-6 6-8
7) Wimbledon 2009: Federer 7-5 6-7(6) 6-7(5) 6-3 14-16

He needs only to lose 6-7 in the 5th set at the US Open and will be completed :o

Black Adam
08-24-2009, 01:49 AM
For a hater you surely dedicate a lot of time researching information to bring the man down :retard::rolleyes:

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 01:51 AM
Well we already knew that. He's a clown and that explains why he only has 1 slam.

Voo de Mar
08-24-2009, 02:02 AM
Yeah, great, everyone is a clown these days :rolleyes:

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 02:11 AM
No just Clownduck Mugdrew.

GlennMirnyi
08-24-2009, 02:14 AM
I don't want to bore you statistically but there is something what bother me lately. Namely, how is possible that Roddick who won the longest singles 5-setter in history, in terms of games, can't win another 5-setter when it comes to "6:6" in the 5th set :confused: You know, how is it possible that a player with such a gifted scoreline at the beginning of career can't use that experience in similar circumstances?

Here are Roddick's matches with "6:6" in the deciding set:

1) Australian Open 2003: El Aynaoui 4-6 7-6(5) 4-6 6-4 21-19
2) Roland Garros 2005: Acasuso 6-3 6-4 4-6 3-6 6-8
3) Davis Cup 2006: Tursunov 3-6 4-6 7-5 6-3 15-17
4) Wimbledon 2007: Gasquet 6-4 6-4 6-7(2) 6-7(3) 6-8
5) Australian Open 2008: Kohlschreiber 4-6 6-3 6-7(9) 7-6(3) 6-8
6) Davis Cup 2008: Ferrer 6-7(5) 6-2 6-1 4-6 6-8
7) Wimbledon 2009: Federer 7-5 6-7(6) 6-7(5) 6-3 14-16

He needs only to lose 6-7 in the 5th set at the US Open and will be completed :o

I bolded the matches where he was definitely not a favorite.

He actually did well to get that far in those matches.

Sjengster
08-24-2009, 02:14 AM
It's an interesting stat, but I'm not sure it says much about Roddick given that epic five-setters going past 6-6 are pretty rare in every player's career; yes, winning one early on in his career in an important match was a good start, but I don't think it's enough to suggest that he should have had a great record in long fifth sets after that. His style of play is something of a disadvantage in that situation, I think, since he can't do that well on return games and the opponent just has to wait for him to tire out on his own serve (which is what happened in the two longest matches he lost against Tursunov and Federer).

abraxas21
08-24-2009, 02:20 AM
I bolded the matches where he was definitely not a favorite.

He actually did well to get that far in those matches.

wasn't he the favourite against acasuso and tursunov? even against ferrer maybe?

okay, i looked up his head-to-head against those players

with acasuso, he has a 4-1 record. he has beaten him 3 times on hardcourts and 1 time on clay.

with tursunov he also has a 4-1 record. he has beaten him on grass and hardcourts. his loss was on clay.

with ferrer he has a 3-4 record. he has beaten him on carpet and harcourts. his losses have been on clay.

so, it seems that he was clearly the favourite against acasuso and tursunov... not against ferrer, though.

doublebackhand
08-24-2009, 02:20 AM
I bolded the matches where he was definitely not a favorite.

He actually did well to get that far in those matches.

I disagree...he might not have been the favorite going into the match, but when u r that far along at 6-6 in the 5th, the chances are pretty much equal. its all in the head. there is no more such thing as favorite surface, higher ranking..etc except maybe the head-to-head which affects the player's mindset.

Skyward
08-24-2009, 02:22 AM
For a hater I surely dedicate a lot of time to bring Federer down. :retard: :rolleyes:

Corrected. :)

Voo de Mar
08-24-2009, 02:24 AM
It's an interesting stat, but I'm not sure it says much about Roddick given that epic five-setters going past 6-6 are pretty rare in every player's career; yes, winning one early on in his career in an important match was a good start, but I don't think it's enough to suggest that he should have had a great record in long fifth sets after that. His style of play is something of a disadvantage in that situation, I think, since he can't do that well on return games and the opponent just has to wait for him to tire out on his own serve (which is what happened in the two longest matches he lost against Tursunov and Federer).

That's interesting Sjengster because I see it otherwise. IMO a player with such a great serve like Roddick owns, has slightly advantage over an opponent in the long 5th set, because can win many games easily, looking for different ways to finally break the opponent's serve. Especially after first set 21-19 in those circumstances where A-Rod showed amazing patience and determination.
Maybe I wouldn't expect from him a great record in long 5-setters but I think he should have had at least 3-4 or 4-3, not pathetic 1-6. I don't know what to think about it, maybe this stats shows how pathetic receiver he is or maybe he can't draw positive conclusions from the past (match against El Aynaoui), maybe the mixture of both factors...

Sjengster
08-24-2009, 02:28 AM
That's interesting Sjengster because I see it otherwise. IMO a player with such a great serve like Roddick owns, has slightly advantage over an opponent in the long 5th set, because can win many games easily, looking for different ways to finally break the opponent's serve. Especially after first set 21-19 in those circumstances where showed amazing patience and determination.
Maybe I wouldn't expect from him a great record in log 5-setters but I think he should have had at least 3-4 or 4-3, not pathetic 1-6. I don't know what to think about it, maybe this stats shows how pathetic receiver he is or maybe he can't draw conclusions from the past (match against El Aynoui), maybe the mixture of both factors...

In a lot of those matches he's failed to convert on big chances to win more easily, and so perhaps he shouldn't have gone past 6-6 in the first place. Notably he served for the match against Tursunov at*6-5 in the fifth, but couldn't close it out, and likewise he led by an early break against Acasuso in the fifth and had a break against Gasquet in the third set when leading two sets to love. Come to think of it, it's worth noting that in the El Aynaoui match he a) saved a matchpoint on his own serve at 4-5 down in the fifth with a big forehand winner, but b) failed to serve the match out the first time round at *11-10 and so the fifth set lasted twice as long as it should have.

I think that on clay, the advantage Roddick normally has on his serve is nullified because it becomes all about physical fitness and winning long rallies, so he would always be more vulnerable if he was pushed into a long fifth set there than on other surfaces. And in the recent Wimbledon final, it was the fact that Federer was as dominant on serve as he was throughout the fifth set that ultimately hindered his chances of winning, as he wasn't able to put any pressure on him (besides the 15-40 game at 8-8) and the pressure mounted on his own service games since he was serving from behind all the time.

GlennMirnyi
08-24-2009, 02:29 AM
wasn't he the favourite against acasuso and tursunov? even against ferrer maybe?

Because it was on clay?

I disagree...he might not have been the favorite going into the match, but when u r that far along at 6-6 in the 5th, the chances are pretty much equal. its all in the head. there is no more such thing as favorite surface, higher ranking..etc except maybe the head-to-head which affects the player's mindset.

No it's not.

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 02:35 AM
Because it was on clay?



No it's not.

Because Tursunov is miles ahead of Roddick on clay. Even he will tell you so.

:retard:

Tursunov has went on record numerous times about his lack of clay court success. Roddick was definitely the favorite in that match.

Stop fanboying Clowndrew.

GlennMirnyi
08-24-2009, 02:39 AM
Because Tursunov is miles ahead of Roddick on clay. Even he will tell you so.

:retard:

Tursunov has went on record numerous times about his lack of clay court success. Roddick was definitely the favorite in that match.

Stop fanboying Clowndrew.

No he was not.

Roddick spent years and years without going past R2 at the FO.

straitup
08-24-2009, 02:40 AM
Because Tursunov is miles ahead of Roddick on clay. Even he will tell you so.

:retard:

Tursunov has went on record numerous times about his lack of clay court success. Roddick was definitely the favorite in that match.

Stop fanboying Clowndrew.

Roddick was the favorite in every match except Ferrer and Federer. He was the #2 seed at RG when he lost to Acasuso, and while Acasuso is a much better clay court player than Roddick, I don't think the majority of people chose him to actually beat Roddick and not choke. He was certainly the favorite against Tursunov because it was Davis Cup and Tursunov is not that great on clay.

Voo de Mar
08-24-2009, 02:44 AM
IMO A-Rod was the favorite in that match against Tursunov. Especially in that 5th set, Tursunov is a weak clay-courter, and was mentally weakened because had been close to win that match in straight sets. I don't understand how Roddick couldn't convert his serve at *6:5 in fifth.
Ok, Ferrer is a 5-set specialist, Federer was extremely tough to break in Wimbledon's final (but it doesn't explain everything about that last set... Roddick in the final game had 40-15 only to lose 4 straight points - reprehensible with his serve on grass!), but losing 4 straight matches in those circumstances to players like Acasuso, Tursunov, Gasquet and Kohlschreiber is pathetically astonishing :o

abraxas21
08-24-2009, 02:49 AM
Because it was on clay?


he had easily beaten acasuso 63, 62 in their only previous encounter on clay.

as for tursunov, they had never played on clay before but it's not like tursunov is such an awesome clay courter.

and also consider that those dramatic five sets losses have been the only losses that he has had against those players. overall he's 8-2.

Voo de Mar
08-24-2009, 02:53 AM
as for tursunov, they had never played on clay before but it's not like tursunov is such an awesome clay courter.


That's an euphemism. A couple weeks before encounter with Roddick, Tursunov was losing on clay to Waske 1-6 1:5 :retard: That year had 4-8 on clay (in Barcelona lost even to unknown Cuadrado).

TMJordan
08-24-2009, 02:56 AM
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm


Roddick Sucks.

GlennMirnyi
08-24-2009, 03:10 AM
he had easily beaten acasuso 63, 62 in their only previous encounter on clay.

as for tursunov, they had never played on clay before but it's not like tursunov is such an awesome clay courter.

and also consider that those dramatic five sets losses have been the only losses that he has had against those players. overall he's 8-2.

H2H is not that important.

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 03:17 AM
No he was not.

Roddick spent years and years without going past R2 at the FO.

and Tursunov has really been racking in the QF/SFs at RG? :rolleyes:

GlennMirnyi
08-24-2009, 03:20 AM
and Tursunov has really been racking in the QF/SFs at RG? :rolleyes:

He has made a couple of 3rd rounds and took Nalbandian to 5 there.

Pea
08-24-2009, 03:21 AM
Too bad the Olympics aren't best of 5 and he had the balls to play it.

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 03:21 AM
They are both inept on clay. Roddick was the higher ranked player. Had never lost to Tursunov going in. He was definitely the favorite.

Roddick has done more on clay than Tursunov for sure. A couple of Rome SFs probably easily overcomes anything Tursunov has done on clay.

Roddickominator
08-24-2009, 03:21 AM
Analyzing Roddick on clay stats is about the dumbest thing you could ever do to prove a point. Everyone knows he sucks on the most barbaric and amateurish of surfaces.

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 03:23 AM
He has made a couple of 3rd rounds and took Nalbandian to 5 there.

Plus Nalbandian can struggle with anyone anyplace how is that a valid excuse.

GlennMirnyi
08-24-2009, 03:23 AM
They are both inept on clay. Roddick was the higher ranked player. Had never lost to Tursunov going in. He was definitely the favorite.

Roddick has done more on clay than Tursunov for sure. A couple of Rome SFs probably easily overcomes anything Tursunov has done on clay.

Tursunov was in a better form.

Rome isn't indoor clay.

Voo de Mar
08-24-2009, 03:24 AM
Analyzing Roddick on clay stats is about the dumbest thing you could ever do to prove a point. Everyone knows he sucks on the most barbaric and amateurish of surfaces.

So how would you explain his defeats against Gascoke (on grass) and Kohli (on hard)?

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 03:27 AM
That's an euphemism. A couple weeks before encounter with Roddick, Tursunov was losing on clay to Waske 1-6 1:5 :retard: That year had 4-8 on clay (in Barcelona lost even to unknown Cuadrado).

Tursunov was on a better form.

Rome isn't indoor clay.

Such a fanboy for Clownduck.

abraxas21
08-24-2009, 03:30 AM
H2H is not that important.

hmm.. what's important then?

he was clearly the favourite against tursunov and especially against acasuso. i'm sure the betting sites were paying a lot less to roddick winning than to tursunov or acasuso winning.

straitup
08-24-2009, 03:30 AM
So how would you explain his defeats against Gascoke (on grass) and Kohli (on hard)?

Well Gasquet and Kohlschreiber were both on fire when they beat Roddick...well in Gasquet's case he started finding range on his backhand, and Kohlschreiber was able to expose Roddick's lack of power on groundstrokes

Roddickominator
08-24-2009, 03:35 AM
So how would you explain his defeats against Gascoke (on grass) and Kohli (on hard)?

What is to explain? We've seen plenty of garbage play from Roddick in spots over the years. Hell, he JUST lost to Sam Querrey.

abraxas21
08-24-2009, 03:37 AM
Well Gasquet and Kohlschreiber were both on fire when they beat Roddick...well in Gasquet's case he started finding range on his backhand, and Kohlschreiber was able to expose Roddick's lack of power on groundstrokes


the discussion is not about explaining why he lost; it's about explaining why acasuso and tursunov weren't the favourites against roddick, a contetion that GlennMirnyl thinks is equivocal. I'm not sure if there are others who agree with him on that.

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 03:38 AM
No, Gugu is just too in love with having Duck for dinner.

danieln1
08-24-2009, 03:38 AM
You forgot to say that in the US Open, there´s a Tiebreak at 6-6, and Roddick´s record in tiebreaks is very good I think, so this thread is unnecessary for the US OPEN... But he struggles a lot in the 6-6, that match against Kohlschreiber last year was Epic

Voo de Mar
08-24-2009, 03:45 AM
You forgot to say that in the US Open, there´s a Tiebreak at 6-6, and Roddick´s record in tiebreaks is very good I think, so this thread is unnecessary for the US OPEN...

Are you sure?

That's quotation from my 1st post.


He needs only to lose 6-7 in the 5th set at the US Open and will be completed :o

I think it's a good thread before US Open to show whether Roddick is able to turn around his "6:6 curse in the final set" thanks to a tie-break. He hasn't played a tie-break in the 5th set, what's a little bit surprising given the number of matches he played in New York. I'd like to see him at 6:6 in the 5th set next week :)

GlennMirnyi
08-24-2009, 03:47 AM
Such a fanboy for Clownduck.

Says a Fakervic/Mugray fangirl. :)

hmm.. what's important then?

he was clearly the favourite against tursunov and especially against acasuso. i'm sure the betting sites were paying a lot less to roddick winning than to tursunov or acasuso winning.

Form, surface, situation.

From your reasoning, Federer should be the favorite against Nadull the next time they play on clay but not on HC or grass. :lol:

the discussion is not about explaining why he lost; it's about explaining why acasuso and tursunov weren't the favourites against roddick, a contetion that GlennMirnyl thinks is equivocal. I'm not sure if there are others who agree with him on that.

I'm right.

Roddick never gave a flying f*** to RG, while players like Acasuso play RG as the biggest tournament of the year. The surface favored Acasuso heavily, but he sucks at returning, therefore he struggled.

MacTheKnife
08-24-2009, 03:55 AM
I would like to know in how many of those matches Roddick served from behind. I may be wrong about this, but he seems to serve better in tight situations when he serves with lead. (eg; he serves at 6-6 to go up 7-6) I think he's more inclined to tighten up when he serving to level it, or from behind.

Also, until this year, his return of serve has sucked so when matches got tight he felt more pressure. You don't win tight matches just holding serve, you win them breaking serve first. These are just observations and I'm to lazy to dig out stats to back it up, but I'd wager a guess if you looked at return stats, you'd do some scrolling to get down to Roddick. And it was even worse before this year. I believe that's one of the areas he's improved. He's actually attacking 2nd serves now.

But as someone pointed out, he just lost to Querrey for the first time, while having his best season in years. Go figure.

TMJordan
08-24-2009, 03:57 AM
05 RG Chucho over Roddick was expected with situation, form and surface. But Tursunov beating anyone of clay is hilarous. He just showed heart by winning that for the Russians, Roddick can't win big matches anyways.

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 04:00 AM
Says a Fakervic/Mugray fangirl. :)



Form, surface, situation.

From your reasoning, Federer should be the favorite against Nadull the next time they play on clay but not on HC or grass. :lol:



I'm right.

Roddick never gave a flying f*** to RG, while players like Acasuso play RG as the biggest tournament of the year. The surface favored Acasuso heavily, but he sucks at returning, therefore he struggled.

No because you don't look at the last meeting you look at all the meetings on that surface.

abraxas21
08-24-2009, 04:01 AM
Says a Fakervic/Mugray fangirl. :)



Form, surface, situation.

From your reasoning, Federer should be the favorite against Nadull the next time they play on clay but not on HC or grass. :lol:

errr? i don't know what you are talking about... roddick was in a good form against both tursunov and acasuso and arguably in an even sutation against acasuso. sure the surface wasn't his favourite one but clay isn't exactly something in which a guy like tursunov would feel most comfortable.

and facts are that roddick has beaten 4 times both tursunov and acasuso. his only losses have come in long five setters!



I'm right.

Roddick never gave a flying f*** to RG, while players like Acasuso play RG as the biggest tournament of the year. The surface favored Acasuso heavily, but he sucks at returning, therefore he struggled.

if he didn't give a flying fuck then he wouldn't even bother taking the trip to paris to compete in the first place. also, like i said before, roddick had easily beaten acasuso in straight sets back in the day.

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 04:05 AM
Gugu just stop fanboying Clowndrew.

Voo de Mar
08-24-2009, 04:06 AM
I would like to know in how many of those matches Roddick served from behind. I may be wrong about this, but he seems to serve better in tight situations when he serves with lead. (eg; he serves at 6-6 to go up 7-6) I think he's more inclined to tighten up when he serving to level it, or from behind.

He didn't serve from behind against Acasuso and Pics.
Therefore I emphasized his amazing win over El Aynaoui. It was tougher "21-19" than "21-19" serving with lead...
Usually such a win give you a comfort in similar situations in the future (Kohlschreiber is a great example of it, won 17-15 against Dlouhy, and won another 4 five-setters when came to 5:5 in the 5th set). I'm surprised it's not Roddick's case. For God's sake, he is a former No. 1 in the world, not any "Karlovic".

GlennMirnyi
08-24-2009, 04:18 AM
No because you don't look at the last meeting you look at all the meetings on that surface.

All the last meetings up to that time, not up to today.

errr? i don't know what you are talking about... roddick was in a good form and arguably in an even sutation against both tursunov and acasuso. sure the surface wasn't his favourite one but clay isn't exactly something in which a guy like tursunov would feel most comfortable.

and facts are that roddick has beaten 4 times both tursunov and acasuso. his only losses have come in long five setters!

if he didn't give a flying fuck then he wouldn't even bother taking the trip to paris to compete in the first place. also, like i said before, roddick had easily beaten acasuso in straight sets back in the day.

Hindsight is always 20/20. At the time Roddick had only beaten Acasuso once. The same about Tursunov. He had only beaten the Russian once and the match was decided in three tie-breaks.

Because players stay in Europe after RG for the grass season even if they don't care about RG? Because he was a high seed and players are supposed to play in every obligatory tournament?

Maybe you're too used to clowns like Faker and Nadull who simply don't show up at tournaments.

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 04:23 AM
I don't see how Roddick couldn't be the favorite as the higher ranked player playing someone who is just as bad, if not worse, than him on a particular surface. Also, the player had never beaten him before the match.

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 04:26 AM
Its clear by this fanboying that you are truly a Porky fan in disguise, Gugu. Please post the pics of you with your Babolat racquet and Nike gear.

GlennMirnyi
08-24-2009, 04:34 AM
I don't see how Roddick couldn't be the favorite as the higher ranked player playing someone who is just as bad, if not worse, than him on a particular surface. Also, the player had never beaten him before the match.

People should take statistics classes.

1 match isn't enough to determine anything. The sample quantity isn't enough to say if it were luck or not.

Its clear by this fanboying that you are truly a Porky fan in disguise, Gugu. Please post the pics of you with your Babolat racquet and Nike gear.

:lol:

You must be just frustrated Roddick humiliated your idols Mugray in Wimbledon and Faker just about everywhere else lately. That's why you hate him :hug:

I'm not a fan of Roddick, I'm just not dumb and blind.

abraxas21
08-24-2009, 04:35 AM
Hindsight is always 20/20. At the time Roddick had only beaten Acasuso once. The same about Tursunov. He had only beaten the Russian once and the match was decided in three tie-breaks.

and yet, roddick was/is a former number 1, a grand slam winner, a player who had won a number of important titles and certainly a player who in good form was expected to beat players like acasuso and tursunov in any type of surface, especially considering that he had beaten them before. i wish i had the betting payoffs of those matches. i'm sure they were pretty clear in their favouritism.

Because players stay in Europe after RG for the grass season even if they don't care about RG? Because he was a high seed and players are supposed to play in every obligatory tournament?

lol, if roddick doesn't care at all about RG, then he simply wouldn't play it. what you say is totally ridiculous because:
(1) he would simply prefer to stay in europe doing other things instead of playing RG, a tourney that according to you, is totally irrelevant to roddick, despite the fact that he has played it year after year.
(2) it's too easy to cook up any kind of injury and present it to the ATP. Remember Nadal this year at Wimby? the doc said he was ok to play but he choose not to given that he thought he wasn't ready yet. Did the ATP or the ITF get upset about that?


Maybe you're too used to clowns like Faker and Nadull who simply don't show up at tournaments.

:rolleyes: what does that imaginative thought have to do with any of this?

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 04:51 AM
People should take statistics classes.

1 match isn't enough to determine anything. The sample quantity isn't enough to say if it were luck or not.



:lol:

You must be just frustrated Roddick humiliated your idols Mugray in Wimbledon and Faker just about everywhere else lately. That's why you hate him :hug:

I'm not a fan of Roddick, I'm just not dumb and blind.

Which is why I listed other reasons like higher ranking, etc. Can you read? :unsure:

Roddick hardly humiliated Murray. He held his head high and realized that he would come harder next year.

Glad to see you embracing your Roddick fanboyism. Next is Porky. I want to be the first with the pics. Did you order RG gear from their online shop too?

GlennMirnyi
08-24-2009, 04:59 AM
and yet, roddick was/is a former number 1, a grand slam winner, a player who had won a number of important titles and certainly a player who in good form was expected to beat players like acasuso and tursunov in any type of surface, especially considering that he had beaten them before. i wish i had the betting payoffs of those matches. i'm sure they were pretty clear in their favouritism.

lol, if roddick doesn't care at all about RG, then he simply wouldn't play it. what you say is totally ridiculous because:
(1) he would simply prefer to stay in europe doing other things instead of playing RG, a tourney that according to you, is totally irrelevant to roddick, despite the fact that he has played it year after year.
(2) it's too easy to cook up any kind of injury and present it to the ATP. Remember Nadal this year at Wimby? the doc said he was ok to play but he choose not to given that he thought he wasn't ready yet. Did the ATP or the ITF get upset about that?

:rolleyes: what does that imaginative thought have to do with any of this?

It doesn't mean a thing.

Federer falls in the same category and when he plays Nadull he's not the favorite.

The fact that he doesn't care about it doesn't mean he won't play it. Just doesn't mean he'll give it all for it. :shrug: It is, but it's not the policy of every player. Just because Nadull, Faker and others like them use that expedient all the time that every player will use it. I don't know if that was the case, but if you're a top player and you're not injured or exhausted, you play Grand Slams. You make it sound like RG is the Casachallenger.

GlennMirnyi
08-24-2009, 05:09 AM
Which is why I listed other reasons like higher ranking, etc. Can you read? :unsure:

Roddick hardly humiliated Murray. He held his head high and realized that he would come harder next year.

Glad to see you embracing your Roddick fanboyism. Next is Porky. I want to be the first with the pics. Did you order RG gear from their online shop too?

Higher ranking is hardly a reason a player should be a favorite for a match. Maybe for people who don't follow tennis.

Yeah he did. Mugray went to that match thinking he'd cruise, that he's a bigshot. Too bad he was shown the door.

:lol: keep trying. Nobody's going to believe I'm a Roddick fan. :lol:

delpiero7
08-24-2009, 05:17 AM
:lol: keep trying. Nobody's going to believe I'm a Roddick fan. :lol:

Cmon Gu, we all know you're a Roddick fan. Even more so since he seems to have started taking tennis lessons from your other favourite Gilles Simon. :devil: ;)

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 05:18 AM
Higher ranking is hardly a reason a player should be a favorite for a match. Maybe for people who don't follow tennis.

Yeah he did. Mugray went to that match thinking he'd cruise, that he's a bigshot. Too bad he was shown the door.

:lol: keep trying. Nobody's going to believe I'm a Roddick fan. :lol:

So if #2 meetings #259 is a definite toss up. :rolleyes:

And everyone is believing it by the way you defend him all over the board. You're even to the point where you hate Del Trio because of the 3-0 H2H.

Do I need to call the people for you. Bed next to l_mac. Too bad she already recovered.

Do you need a beating instead of Uncle Toni or is Roddick catching them for you from Del Trio.

:spit:

GlennMirnyi
08-24-2009, 05:35 AM
Cmon Gu, we all know you're a Roddick fan. Even more so since he seems to have started taking tennis lessons from your other favourite Gilles Simon. :devil: ;)

What the hell has Simon to do with it?

So if #2 meetings #259 is a definite toss up. :rolleyes:

And everyone is believing it by the way you defend him all over the board. You're even to the point where you hate Del Trio because of the 3-0 H2H.

Do I need to call the people for you. Bed next to l_mac. Too bad she already recovered.

Do you need a beating instead of Uncle Toni or is Roddick catching them for you from Del Trio.

:spit:

No, it's not, but if a top 10 plays a top 20, 30, he's not always a favorite.

:lol: keep trying.

I hate Del Mugtro because he's just a tall Nadull/Faker mug without any skill. Couldn't care less about his H2H against Ducky.

Nah I won't take your place in the suicide watch after Frauderer schooled Murray and Faker back-to-back. :haha:

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 05:39 AM
What the hell has Simon to do with it?



No, it's not, but if a top 10 plays a top 20, 30, he's not always a favorite.

:lol: keep trying.

I hate Del Mugtro because he's just a tall Nadull/Faker mug without any skill. Couldn't care less about his H2H against Ducky.

Nah I won't take your place in the suicide watch after Frauderer schooled Murray and Faker back-to-back. :haha:

:spit: Maybe we need to look up the Frauderror/Stepanek H2H and see how many times you been to suicide watch. I'm just fine waiting to see who wins in the Big One.

You hate Del Trio because he has Duck for dinner. You even tried to block out the 3-0 H2H. Clowndrew is a joke. Stop fanboying saying that Tursunov was the favorite in a match with Roddick.

There you go again trying to block out Clowndrew losses. Did you recover from RG. :speakles:

Oh you just jumped on the Robin bandwagon to try to hide your severe depression.

GlennMirnyi
08-24-2009, 06:20 AM
:spit: Maybe we need to look up the Frauderror/Stepanek H2H and see how many times you been to suicide watch. I'm just fine waiting to see who wins in the Big One.

You hate Del Trio because he has Duck for dinner. You even tried to block out the 3-0 H2H. Clowndrew is a joke. Stop fanboying saying that Tursunov was the favorite in a match with Roddick.

There you go again trying to block out Clowndrew losses. Did you recover from RG. :speakles:

Oh you just jumped on the Robin bandwagon to try to hide your severe depression.

There's a huge difference. I'm a fan of Steps but not a fanboy like you are of Mugray and Faker.

To top it all, you're a WTA fangirl. :haha:

jcempire
08-24-2009, 06:49 AM
Most disappointment to me is Wim that lost to Federer couple months ago.

If He wins the Second set which would go to Roddick's way

HattonWBA
08-24-2009, 03:49 PM
No he was not.

Roddick spent years and years without going past R2 at the FO.

Roddick has won 5 titles on clay, how many has tursunov won? :retard:

philosophicalarf
08-24-2009, 03:59 PM
Looked it up, Roddick was a 1.6 favourite that match with Tursunov. Prior to the match, Tursunov had never beaten a top50 guy on clay.

Serenidad
08-24-2009, 04:01 PM
We know just let Gugu fanboy over his 2nd fave Roddick. Nadal his fave forever.

heya
08-24-2009, 11:15 PM
There's a reason why Roddick haters didn't hate him anymore.
There's a reason why Federer used to have more fans, but that changed when Nadal won more often, without acting like a spoiled brat. There's a reason many tennis fans don't watch much tennis anymore. Honestly, I'm bored by the fear shown on the players' faces.

Corey Feldman
08-24-2009, 11:28 PM
at least he has a nice collection of plates

andylovesaustin
08-24-2009, 11:45 PM
at least he has a nice collection of plates

:lol:

There ya go!

That's a good way of looking at it! :wavey:

Certinfy
08-24-2009, 11:48 PM
at least he has a nice collection of plates:lol:

Pea
08-25-2009, 12:04 AM
Roddick has won 5 titles on clay, how many has tursunov won? :retard:

LOL

Voo de Mar
09-06-2009, 02:18 AM
I don't want to bore you statistically but there is something what bother me lately. Namely, how is possible that Roddick who won the longest singles 5-setter in history, in terms of games, can't win another 5-setter when it comes to "6:6" in the 5th set :confused: You know, how is it possible that a player with such a gifted scoreline at the beginning of career can't use that experience in similar circumstances?

Here are Roddick's matches with "6:6" in the deciding set:

1) Australian Open 2003: El Aynaoui 4-6 7-6(5) 4-6 6-4 21-19
2) Roland Garros 2005: Acasuso 6-3 6-4 4-6 3-6 6-8
3) Davis Cup 2006: Tursunov 3-6 4-6 7-5 6-3 15-17
4) Wimbledon 2007: Gasquet 6-4 6-4 6-7(2) 6-7(3) 6-8
5) Australian Open 2008: Kohlschreiber 4-6 6-3 6-7(9) 7-6(3) 6-8
6) Davis Cup 2008: Ferrer 6-7(5) 6-2 6-1 4-6 6-8
7) Wimbledon 2009: Federer 7-5 6-7(6) 6-7(5) 6-3 14-16

He needs only to lose 6-7 in the 5th set at the US Open and will be completed :o

NEVER IN DOUBT :angel: :devil:

straitup
09-06-2009, 02:19 AM
:lol: Nice

Serenidad
09-06-2009, 02:21 AM
Good job exposing this clown. Some favorite. What fanboy bandwagoners.

habibko
09-06-2009, 02:29 AM
you were right Voo, the curse is just too strong for him, poor guy :hug:

abraxas21
09-06-2009, 02:39 AM
Looked it up, Roddick was a 1.6 favourite that match with Tursunov. Prior to the match, Tursunov had never beaten a top50 guy on clay.

Thanks for that. Goes to show that Glenn is indeed full of it...

As for Roddick, I kind of felt bad for him today. Given his history of losing final sets in the past three months (to Federer and Del Potro in finals and now this) I know he acts like like an asshole when he's winning against lower ranked players but he seemed so sad when he walked off the court tonight. Isner played a good tiebreak but I thought he was a little bit lucky with some of his shots, esp. that volley that went down right on the base line. Anyhow, such is tennis, I guess.

straitup
09-06-2009, 02:42 AM
Thanks for that. Goes to show that Glenn is indeed full of it...

As for Roddick, I kind of felt bad for him today. Given his history of losing final sets in the past three months (to Federer and Del Potro in finals and now this) I know he acts like like an asshole when he's winning against lower ranked players but he seemed so sad when he walked off the court tonight. Isner played a good tiebreak but I thought he was a little bit lucky with some of his shots, esp. that volley that went down right on the base line. Anyhow, such is tennis, I guess.

He might appear lucky with shots like those, but you have to remember that this guy is a stud at final set tiebreakers

abraxas21
09-06-2009, 02:48 AM
He might appear lucky with shots like those, but you have to remember that this guy is a stud at final set tiebreakers

Maybe he should start giving some advice to Rod... :)

Heners
09-06-2009, 02:53 AM
first upset of the mens draw - Roddick.

Macbrother
09-06-2009, 03:00 AM
NEVER IN DOUBT :angel: :devil:

Too big, Voo. Too big. :worship:

Voo de Mar
09-06-2009, 06:38 AM
It's almost like "ER curse": KohlschreibER, FerrER, FederER and now IsnER :D Who's next, Gilles Muller? ;)

Pea
09-06-2009, 06:39 AM
Right on.:o

Action Jackson
09-06-2009, 06:45 AM
Roddick has won 5 titles on clay, how many has tursunov won? :retard:

Yes, those events had as much quality as $3 steak.

stebs
09-06-2009, 01:31 PM
Yes, those events had as much quality as $3 steak.

The point isn't that the events have quality but that Roddick was able to win them. Tursunov has played equally poor events and won nothing. Roddick definately should be favourite to beat Tursunov on clay.

Voo de Mar
06-28-2010, 07:59 PM
Bump :wavey:

Roddick has extended his pathetic curse-streak to 8 in a row!

Roland Garros 2005: Acasuso 6-3 6-4 4-6 3-6 6-8
Davis Cup 2006: Tursunov 3-6 4-6 7-5 6-3 15-17
Wimbledon 2007: Gasquet 6-4 6-4 6-7(2) 6-7(3) 6-8
Australian Open 2008: Kohlschreiber 4-6 6-3 6-7(9) 7-6(3) 6-8
Davis Cup 2008: Ferrer 6-7(5) 6-2 6-1 4-6 6-8
Wimbledon 2009: Federer 7-5 6-7(6) 6-7(5) 6-3 14-16
US Open 2009: Isner 6-7(3) 3-6 6-3 7-5 6-7(5)
Wimbledon 2010: Yen-Hsun 6-4 6-7(3) 6-7(4) 7-6(5) 7-9

andy neyer
06-28-2010, 08:11 PM
kind of weird that half of those have ended in 6-8.