When it matters: Ljubicic vs Roddick H2H [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

When it matters: Ljubicic vs Roddick H2H

El Legenda
03-23-2010, 12:38 AM
2005 Davis Cup, Croatia up 2-1 @ USA, roddick needs a win to save the USA

Ljubicic beats Roddick


2010 Indian Wells Final

Ljubicic beats Roddick





this thread is for Tangy :wavey:

Apemant
03-23-2010, 12:52 AM
Yep but US Open mattered too, did it not?

Sjengster
03-23-2010, 12:54 AM
Don't forget Ljubo's retirement victory in the second round of the 2002 AO, their first ever meeting, which was followed by that unfortunate choke of the century against Ferreira in the next round.

croat123
03-23-2010, 01:06 AM
the ferreira match still creates knots in my stomach :o that was ridiculous

Sjengster
03-23-2010, 01:09 AM
Never mind, the good thing about MTF's obsession with the big names is that whenever "choke of the decade" threads are started, it's always things like the RG 04 final that are mentioned, rather than that Ferreira-Ljubicic match and Koubek's incredible comeback against Saulnier in the same event, which George mentioned in one of these threads. I also find it amazing that Ljubo was still a game away from victory in the fifth set after wasting the huge lead he had, but couldn't get over the finish line.

It's a pity he still has that subpar Slam record, my one remaining hope for him is that he gets to another QF which is still possible outside Wimbledon. I always maintain he had the second easiest run to a Slam SF of the last decade, not the easiest (considering the surface, that honour goes to Grosjean at Wimbledon 2004, just check out the list of giants he beat in that tournament), but there were so many early losses to poor players. Never mind the 2002 AO, I remember my disbelief at him exiting to Vadim Kutsenko in the first round the following year.

El Legenda
03-23-2010, 01:15 AM
Yep but US Open mattered too, did it not?

2nd or 3rd round match? no.

Sjengster
03-23-2010, 01:19 AM
2nd or 3rd round match? no.

It mattered quite a bit for Roddick, it's safe to say. And look at it this way, Ljubicic had a third-round meeting with the mighty Flavio Saretta waiting for him if he'd somehow got through, and instead he had to wait over two more years to reach the second week of a Slam. Mind you, I doubt he'd have won in the fifth even if he had taken his setpoint chances in the tiebreak.

Action Jackson
03-23-2010, 01:20 AM
For those about that Ferreira choke, try watching with a Croatian live at the venue.

The Slam record is the black mark against big Ivan.

Sjengster
03-23-2010, 01:24 AM
I do remember the days of RaVeR when being a Croat supporter on MTF seemed to be a masochistic badge of pride, full of disappointment and despair at losing close matches and puzzling over the Croat players' strange inability to win tiebreaks with their huge serves. That's something Ljubicic did well this past week, winning three in a row in his last two matches, but he and Karlovic still have very average records of around 50% considering their service quality.

KaiserT
03-23-2010, 04:30 AM
I do remember the days of RaVeR when being a Croat supporter on MTF seemed to be a masochistic badge of pride, full of disappointment and despair at losing close matches and puzzling over the Croat players' strange inability to win tiebreaks with their huge serves. That's something Ljubicic did well this past week, winning three in a row in his last two matches, but he and Karlovic still have very average records of around 50% considering their service quality.

I find Ljubo's mediocre tb record hard to fathom.

Karlovic is a bottle job, never seen anyone's service performance consistently dip so much from set into tb, when the level should ideally be raised.

n8
03-23-2010, 05:51 AM
Murray vs. Federer is another one where one player has done much better when it matters most. Murray's up 6-5 overall but Federer is 2-0 in Grand Slams (finals), and 3-0 in finals.

leng jai
03-23-2010, 06:25 AM
Sign of a true mug when their clown fans make several shitty threads after one decent tournament.

Sjengster
03-23-2010, 02:45 PM
The biggest mug of all, of course, being the one who enters threads only to spew pointless bile and negativity about virtually everything.

Johnny Groove
03-23-2010, 02:54 PM
Never mind, the good thing about MTF's obsession with the big names is that whenever "choke of the decade" threads are started, it's always things like the RG 04 final that are mentioned, rather than that Ferreira-Ljubicic match and Koubek's incredible comeback against Saulnier in the same event, which George mentioned in one of these threads. I also find it amazing that Ljubo was still a game away from victory in the fifth set after wasting the huge lead he had, but couldn't get over the finish line.

It's a pity he still has that subpar Slam record, my one remaining hope for him is that he gets to another QF which is still possible outside Wimbledon. I always maintain he had the second easiest run to a Slam SF of the last decade, not the easiest (considering the surface, that honour goes to Grosjean at Wimbledon 2004, just check out the list of giants he beat in that tournament), but there were so many early losses to poor players. Never mind the 2002 AO, I remember my disbelief at him exiting to Vadim Kutsenko in the first round the following year.

R1- Ascione
R2- Carraz
R3- Gambill
R4- Ginepri
QF- Flo Mayer
SF- loss to Federer

Sjengster
03-23-2010, 02:58 PM
That's the one - although in fairness to Grosjean, virtually every dangerous grass player in his section was taken out by Mayer en route to the quarters, he beat Arthurs, Coria, Ferreira and the Younger Johansson to make his first and so far only Slam QF. But just compare it with Grosjean's SF run the year before, where he had to take on Enqvist in the first round and then beat Ferrero and Henman back to back playing five consecutive days because of rain delays.

Start da Game
03-23-2010, 03:04 PM
R1- Ascione
R2- Carraz
R3- Gambill
R4- Ginepri
QF- Flo Mayer
SF- loss to Federer who himself had a clown draw till then........

at least grosjean faced one seeded player in his first 4 rounds........fed played 4 clowns (one WC, one qualifier and two unseeded) in the first 4 rounds.......

Sjengster
03-23-2010, 03:09 PM
The Elder Johansson and Karlovic were easier draws than Gambill and Ginepri, more brilliant reasoning on your part. And of course Hewitt is naturally a bigger clown than Mayer in the quarters of a Slam.

Persimmon
03-23-2010, 03:41 PM
Yep but US Open mattered too, did it not?

This.

Start da Game
03-23-2010, 04:04 PM
The Elder Johansson and Karlovic were easier draws than Gambill and Ginepri, more brilliant reasoning on your part. And of course Hewitt is naturally a bigger clown than Mayer in the quarters of a Slam.

yeah, grosjean the fake GOAT had it all easy.......it didn't matter who he played because he was the GOAT........fedmug had it brutally tough with unseeded karlovic who couldn't move his big frame 1 feet either side after he does the serve and also uber mug knee-fucked johansson........your reasoning is more brilliant than mine.......

Sjengster
03-23-2010, 04:13 PM
Foolish argument, Grosjean was Top 3 on grass back in 2004, it's not like he was some nobody. My point is simply that he had the easiest draw to the semis of a Slam of anyone in the last decade, that's an observation, not a major criticism. His other three visits to the last four were against much tougher opposition.

Start da Game
03-23-2010, 04:23 PM
Foolish argument, Grosjean was Top 3 on grass back in 2004, it's not like he was some nobody. My point is simply that he had the easiest draw to the semis of a Slam of anyone in the last decade, that's an observation, not a major criticism. His other three visits to the last four were against much tougher opposition.

wrong.......i am showing you in a more objective manner that in the very same tournament that fed had the easier route to the semis than grosjean........

4 unseeded clowns and one seeded player >>> a wild card, a qualifier, 2 unseeded clowns and one seeded player........deal with it........

Sjengster
03-23-2010, 04:34 PM
That's an utterly absurd argument, just because his first two opponents were weaker than Grosjean's - seeded players nearly always have an easy first two rounds anyway no matter who they are until they play their first seed in the third round. The three that followed make it a tougher draw overall. To illustrate the inherent stupidity of your viewpoint, compare Johansson ranked 123 with Gambill ranked 84, when one of them was fast climbing up the rankings and had just reached a final the week before, while the other was sliding down the rankings and had virtually the last notable result of his career in reaching the third round. You can't just look at the numbers in this case.

scarecrows
03-23-2010, 04:41 PM
That's an utterly absurd argument, just because his first two opponents were weaker than Grosjean's - seeded players nearly always have an easy first two rounds anyway no matter who they are until they play their first seed in the third round. The three that followed make it a tougher draw overall. To illustrate the inherent stupidity of your viewpoint, compare Johansson ranked 123 with Gambill ranked 84, when one of them was fast climbing up the rankings and had just reached a final the week before, while the other was sliding down the rankings and had virtually the last notable result of his career in reaching the third round. You can't just look at the numbers in this case.

bad use of your wisdom trying to convince the clown

Sjengster
03-23-2010, 04:43 PM
bad use of your wisdom trying to convince the clown

I know, you're right, although I do feel better knowing that he was the one who unnecessarily dragged Federer into a discussion that had absolutely nothing to do with him.

Start da Game
03-23-2010, 04:47 PM
That's an utterly absurd argument, just because his first two opponents were weaker than Grosjean's - seeded players nearly always have an easy first two rounds anyway no matter who they are until they play their first seed in the third round. The three that followed make it a tougher draw overall. To illustrate the inherent stupidity of your viewpoint, compare Johansson ranked 123 with Gambill ranked 84, when one of them was fast climbing up the rankings and had just reached a final the week before, while the other was sliding down the rankings and had virtually the last notable result of his career in reaching the third round. You can't just look at the numbers in this case.

even going by that, what's totally ridiculous in your argument is, federer did not have a seeded player until the quarterfinals, let alone 3rd round........grosjean already had one in the 4th round........

Start da Game
03-23-2010, 04:48 PM
bad use of your wisdom trying to convince the clown

look at yourself.......

Sjengster
03-23-2010, 04:52 PM
even going by that, what's totally ridiculous in your argument is, federer did not have a seeded player until the quarterfinals, let alone 3rd round........grosjean already had one in the 4th round........

But Federer's unseeded players from the third round onwards were tougher than anyone Grosjean faced, unless you imagine Ginepri on grass to be a tougher proposition than Johansson and Karlovic. You claim to be a fan of the natural surfaces, you of all people should know that rankings on clay and grass can be deceptive. You have to look at what they've done to earn them. I note that Ginepri had won a grass title at the legendary Newport event the previous year, this presumably explains why he was bumped up from his normal ranking of 34 to be 27th seed; that doesn't make him a tougher draw at Wimbledon than Karlovic, who was still yet to win a title at that time.

Start da Game
03-23-2010, 05:01 PM
But Federer's unseeded players from the third round onwards were tougher than anyone Grosjean faced, unless you imagine Ginepri on grass to be a tougher proposition than Johansson and Karlovic. You claim to be a fan of the natural surfaces, you of all people should know that rankings on clay and grass can be deceptive. You have to look at what they've done to earn them. I note that Ginepri had won a grass title at the legendary Newport event the previous year, this presumably explains why he was bumped up from his normal ranking of 34 to be 27th seed; that doesn't make him a tougher draw at Wimbledon than Karlovic, who was still yet to win a title at that time.

my point: either way, it's a close call and i have numbers on my side........so to brand a semifinal run of a player like grosjean's as the weakest of this decade is not a bright idea when you have the so called goat playing equally ridiculous clowns to get there........

besides, what is grosjean compared to fed? if we take that into account as well, grosjean for his relatively inferior tennis standards, had a much tougher draw in the same tournament than the so called goat.......

Sjengster
03-23-2010, 05:07 PM
Those draws are in no way comparable, and you know it. I already pointed out that Grosjean was the third best player on grass at that time, and furthermore that he was capable of beating very good players in Grand Slams, as his other SF runs indicate.

Corey Feldman
03-23-2010, 05:08 PM
Rafa = Fed Killa alias still going on like some demented parrot i see

rocketassist
03-23-2010, 05:10 PM
SDG has too much in-depth knowledge to be RFK- RFK thinks Fakervic is some Spartan hero, that says it all.

marcRD
03-23-2010, 05:29 PM
Those draws are in no way comparable, and you know it. I already pointed out that Grosjean was the third best player on grass at that time, and furthermore that he was capable of beating very good players in Grand Slams, as his other SF runs indicate.

You think Grosjean was better than Hewitt on grass 2004-2005?

Sjengster
03-23-2010, 05:33 PM
You think Grosjean was better than Hewitt on grass 2004-2005?

No, 2003-2004 to be precise. Two Wimbledon SFs in a row (the first against very tough opposition, so he could certainly beat them on grass), plus two Queens finals in a row, and he had his chances against Roddick in the 04 final; mind you, it's true that Hewitt also wasted chances in the SF the day before. Hewitt was still on the comeback trail in 04, that's why I wouldn't quite him put as the third best player.

Guybrush
03-23-2010, 06:01 PM
I always maintain he had the second easiest run to a Slam SF of the last decade, not the easiest (considering the surface, that honour goes to Grosjean at Wimbledon 2004, just check out the list of giants he beat in that tournament)

Thierry Ascione (Fra)
Gregory Carraz (Fra)
Jan-Michael Gambill (US)
Robbie Ginepri (US)
Florian Mayer (Ger)

:lol: :worship:

green25814
03-23-2010, 06:03 PM
Surely Schittler's run was easier?

DrJules
03-23-2010, 06:23 PM
yeah, grosjean the fake GOAT had it all easy.......it didn't matter who he played because he was the GOAT........fedmug had it brutally tough with unseeded karlovic who couldn't move his big frame 1 feet either side after he does the serve and also uber mug knee-fucked johansson........your reasoning is more brilliant than mine.......

If Federer is a mug with 16 grand slams then so is every other player.

Start being more objective.

rocketassist
03-23-2010, 06:25 PM
Surely Schittler's run was easier?

No.

Safin retired, which made it look easier. But other than that, a Blake in good form, Nalbandian and then Roddick. Not easy at all.

rocketassist
03-23-2010, 06:27 PM
Grosjean is one of the great underachievers in the modern game for me, there aren't many better all-round shotmakers.

Sjengster
03-23-2010, 06:39 PM
Well, he wasted that huge lead against Clement in the AO semis, and that was his one chance for the Slam final he deserved, he didn't win a set in his other three SF appearances. Mind you, judging from his meeting with Agassi in Australia a couple of years later he wouldn't have put up much better resistance than Clement did.

leng jai
03-23-2010, 09:18 PM
Grosjean is one of the great underachievers in the modern game for me, there aren't many better all-round shotmakers.

Grosjean was a dwarf with a clown backhand. His achievements were pretty good when you think about it.

marcRD
03-24-2010, 12:01 AM
No, 2003-2004 to be precise. Two Wimbledon SFs in a row (the first against very tough opposition, so he could certainly beat them on grass), plus two Queens finals in a row, and he had his chances against Roddick in the 04 final; mind you, it's true that Hewitt also wasted chances in the SF the day before. Hewitt was still on the comeback trail in 04, that's why I wouldn't quite him put as the third best player.

There is more than the results in a particular year that decides who is the 3rd best grasscourter in my opinion. Hewitt was a former Wimbledon champion and he had the potential to beat the nr2 grasscourter which was Roddick, I wouldnt really say Grosjean had that potential. Also Hewitt would most certanly be the favorite was he to play Grosjean in Wimbledon.

For example Gasquet had some good grasscourt results 2006-2007 and beat Roddick to get to the SF in Wimbledon but he was still not nr3, Roddick was clearly still the better grasscourter.

I wonder how big the differense is now between the nr2 and the nr3 grasscourter? Also, who is nr4?

marcRD
03-24-2010, 12:03 AM
Grosjean is one of the great underachievers in the modern game for me, there aren't many better all-round shotmakers.

I kind of remember Grosjean as an overachiever, but that is just me.

leng jai
03-24-2010, 12:06 AM
There is more than the results in a particular year that decides who is the 3rd best grasscourter in my opinion. Hewitt was a former Wimbledon champion and he had the potential to beat the nr2 grasscourter which was Roddick, I wouldnt really say Grosjean had that potential. Also Hewitt would most certanly be the favorite was he to play Grosjean in Wimbledon.

For example Gasquet had some good grasscourt results 2006-2007 and beat Roddick to get to the SF in Wimbledon but he was still not nr3, Roddick was clearly still the better grasscourter.

I wonder how big the differense is now between the nr2 and the nr3 grasscourter? Also, who is nr4?

Haas is a contender.

marcRD
03-24-2010, 12:12 AM
Haas is a contender.

I actually agree with you on this one, I think 32 year old Haas still has it in him to come back from injury and outplay the 10 years younger brittish pusher on grass.

That would be a fun 4th round in Wimbledon, then Haas could go on to beat Djokovic one more time in QF....

Sjengster
03-24-2010, 01:18 AM
There is more than the results in a particular year that decides who is the 3rd best grasscourter in my opinion. Hewitt was a former Wimbledon champion and he had the potential to beat the nr2 grasscourter which was Roddick, I wouldnt really say Grosjean had that potential. Also Hewitt would most certanly be the favorite was he to play Grosjean in Wimbledon.

For example Gasquet had some good grasscourt results 2006-2007 and beat Roddick to get to the SF in Wimbledon but he was still not nr3, Roddick was clearly still the better grasscourter.

I wonder how big the differense is now between the nr2 and the nr3 grasscourter? Also, who is nr4?

You may be right there, although I wouldn't necessarily use direct head-to-head to determine which one of two players was better.

El Legenda
03-24-2010, 01:37 AM
i really didnt want this thread to turn into serious talk...this was more a salt into wound for tangy thread :)

Sjengster
03-24-2010, 01:52 AM
i really didnt want this thread to turn into serious talk...this was more a salt into wound for tangy thread :)

I think it would have been OK if the thread had turned serious but stayed on topic, unfortunately we didn't manage that either. ;)

Sunset of Age
03-24-2010, 01:55 AM
If Federer is a mug with 16 grand slams then so is every other player.

Start being more objective.

You're asking an elephant to jump, here. :o

rocketassist
03-24-2010, 02:03 AM
Grosjean was a dwarf with a clown backhand. His achievements were pretty good when you think about it.

I kind of remember Grosjean as an overachiever, but that is just me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qejr9i0oKd8

This match begs to differ, some of his ball striking in this match was beyond unreal, but mentally he didn't have enough to close it out.

Havok
03-24-2010, 03:05 AM
Meh, Ljubicic either lost early or was seeded way too low to play more important matches vs Roddick. He payed the tournament of his life at IW and Roddick played like a clown. Likewise for their DC match. Somehow I doubt anybody really cares because Roddick had the better career by the time he was 21 years old compared to Ljubicic's entire career span.

leng jai
03-24-2010, 03:46 AM
I actually agree with you on this one, I think 32 year old Haas still has it in him to come back from injury and outplay the 10 years younger brittish pusher on grass.

That would be a fun 4th round in Wimbledon, then Haas could go on to beat Djokovic one more time in QF....

They played in 2008 where the Scottish dolt won pretty comfortably, although I do remember Haas serving at about 30% of first serves in for half the match. It would have been very interesting if they met in the SF last year.

Start da Game
03-24-2010, 08:16 AM
Those draws are in no way comparable, and you know it. I already pointed out that Grosjean was the third best player on grass at that time, and furthermore that he was capable of beating very good players in Grand Slams, as his other SF runs indicate.

how is all that relevant to what we are discussing? i did not say grosjean's run to the semis is greater than fed's run to the final in 2004, right?

and you also skipped my point that grosjean for his far more inferior talent compared to fed, had a much tougher draw(for his standards) compared to fed's semis run in that very tournament........what is grosjean compared to fed?

Start da Game
03-24-2010, 08:34 AM
sjeng, nothing against you, i am just pointing out how ridiculous it looks for us to brand a player like grosjean's run as the second easiest of the decade when he have the top player having it just as easy........even the numbers suggest the same........

do you think grosjean for his stature as a tennis player, should play better players than those to reach a semifinal?

leng jai
03-24-2010, 08:41 AM
sjeng, nothing against you, i am just pointing out how ridiculous it looks for us to brand a player like grosjean's run as the second easiest of the decade when he have the top player having it just as easy........even the numbers suggest the same........

do you think grosjean for his stature as a tennis player, should play better players than those to reach a semifinal?

When judging who had the easiest slam run why do we need to take into account the merits of the player? We're basing it on the quality of the opponents as a whole, not relative to the player in question. The only thing we might need to consider is potential matchup issues which would vary from player to player.

Start da Game
03-24-2010, 08:46 AM
When judging who had the easiest slam run why do we need to take into account the merits of the player? We're basing it on the quality of the opponents as a whole, not relative to the player in question. The only thing we might need to consider is potential matchup issues which would vary from player to player.

yes, that's true and even judging in that way, numbers are on grosjean's side........see one of my earlier posts in this thread........

why i pointed their individual statures as tennis players is, one poster claimed that his is the second easiest and another one comes up with the list of opponents he faced........i found it a bit silly to be honest.......

Matt01
03-24-2010, 11:18 AM
If Federer is a mug with 16 grand slams then so is every other player.

Start being more objective.


I thought it was common knowledge on this forum that every player is a mug :p



and bonnie the cat better stay out of my way........i am usually easy on the ladies........i hope i stay that way........


:eek: