ausopen ala 2005?!? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

ausopen ala 2005?!?

FSRteam
01-11-2007, 11:16 PM
What do you guys think!?!

fed is to play roddick in the semis.

In 2004 he struggled to beat safin at the masters cup and safin went on to beat him in the semis of the ausopen 2005!

In 2006 he struggled to beat roddick at the masters cup, so do you think history could repeat in 2007?!?

Do you think roddick will beat him and win the ausopen?

I have a strange feeling that this is what will happen...

Horatio Caine
01-11-2007, 11:17 PM
:rolleyes:

Roddick has a difficult draw to negotiate just to R4...SF is another story.

RickDaStick
01-11-2007, 11:19 PM
LOL duckman isnt making the semis

Jlee
01-11-2007, 11:23 PM
Well, I hope the quality of play is as good as it was in 2005. That was a great tourney.

Saumon
01-11-2007, 11:23 PM
I hope it'll have the same outcome :p

atheneglaukopis
01-11-2007, 11:31 PM
*checks* Yep, Marat's set to beat Fed in the semis and Hewitt in the final. :yeah:

Jimnik
01-11-2007, 11:46 PM
I'm sure Federer is quaking in his boots.

bellascarlett
01-12-2007, 12:21 AM
I hope it'll have the same outcome :p

Me too! :cool:

Deivid23
01-12-2007, 01:10 AM
Another Paranoic Fedtard :retard:

RonE
01-12-2007, 09:09 AM
Actually there are a couple of similarities with the 2004 tournament:

- We could get another Roddick-Safin encounter

- Blake played Moya in Sydney and drew him as a first round opponent in the AO back then as he did this time. (let's just hope the injury part for Moya does not happen again!)

MilMilCho
01-12-2007, 11:02 AM
yes, Roddick will beat Fed in the Semi and then go on to win Ausopen.
After this, he will get a couple of injuries and suck for the rest of the season just like Safin did in 2005.
If history always repeats this way, then you can tell the future winners of the next 3 grand slams just by taking a look at the draw. :p

DwyaneWade
01-12-2007, 02:33 PM
I'm sure Federer is quaking in his boots.

honestly if federer fears anyone in this tournament, it is Roddick.

RickDaStick
01-12-2007, 02:54 PM
honestly if federer fears anyone in this tournament, it is Roddick.

Roger Federer 12
Andy Roddick 1

Roddick played one close match with him last year and now everyone thinks Federer is scared of him? I dont think so. Roddick is the ultimate bitch of Club Fed.

FSRteam
01-12-2007, 03:27 PM
honestly if federer fears anyone in this tournament, it is Roddick.

I agree!

FSRteam
01-12-2007, 03:31 PM
Roger Federer 12
Andy Roddick 1

Roddick played one close match with him last year and now everyone thinks Federer is scared of him? I dont think so. Roddick is the ultimate bitch of Club Fed.

Two close matchs and we'll see in the kooyong final how it'll go for both of them...

I totally think that if someone is to prevent fed from winning his 10th grand slam, it is not rafa, safin, hewitt, etc... but it is a-rod!!!

DwyaneWade
01-12-2007, 04:16 PM
Roger Federer 12
Andy Roddick 1

Roddick played one close match with him last year and now everyone thinks Federer is scared of him? I dont think so. Roddick is the ultimate bitch of Club Fed.

I don't think Fed is scared of anyone. But if I had to pick one player to beat him in the tourney it would A-Rod based on 1) his HC results to close last year and 2) the fact they would meet in a SF, not a F

the answer
01-12-2007, 06:14 PM
So suddenly roddick is considered as a threat to Federer after one tight match in Shanghai. Some people really don't have a clue about tennis does 12-1 ring a bell. Did Federer even play his best in that match........NO . I think that some people are so sick of seeing Federer win that they start inventing scenarios that probably wont happen .I wonder how "the bashers" will react if Roddick does happen to beat Federer in Kooyong. Will it be viewed as the equivalent of a Grand Slam loss, probably.

Yappa
01-12-2007, 06:22 PM
Well, if I had to name someone who can defeat Federer right now, then my answer would be: :confused:

But Roddick might be the one who could at least make it an entertaining match.

DwyaneWade
01-12-2007, 06:32 PM
So suddenly roddick is considered as a threat to Federer after one tight match in Shanghai. Some people really don't have a clue about tennis does 12-1 ring a bell. Did Federer even play his best in that match........NO . I think that some people are so sick of seeing Federer win that they start inventing scenarios that probably wont happen .I wonder how "the bashers" will react if Roddick does happen to beat Federer in Kooyong. Will it be viewed as the equivalent of a Grand Slam loss, probably.

So let me ask a counter question. If you went to sleep and then woke up after AO and I told you Federer didn't win, who would be the first player you would guess took him out?

The point isn't that Roddick will beat Federer (I don't think he will); my opinion is that if anyone beats Federer the most likely person given the draw is Roddick.

sykotique
01-12-2007, 06:55 PM
No one thinks Roddick will beat Federer. Not even McEnroe and Bodo think Roddick will beat Federer. But if you had to pick a 2nd favourite based on form and surface, there is really no other choice besides Roddick.


Let's be fair. Any writer who doesn't pick Federer to win a Slam is going to be laughed at, teased, ridiculed, etc. And perhaps, rightfully so. But if you had to imagine a situation in which Federer could lose in an important match to a top seed, it would more than likely be Roddick. Yes, Roddick is 1-12, but the reason he's played 13 matches against Federer in the first place is because he generally goes deep in the slams. After which, he becomes Federer's bitch.


It's a hardcourt. Nadal's slumping. Roddick ended 2006 on a high and entered 2007 much improved. If you aren't going to pick Federer, who else are you going to pick??

the answer
01-12-2007, 07:00 PM
So let me ask a counter question. If you went to sleep and then woke up after AO and I told you Federer didn't win, who would be the first player you would guess took him out?

The point isn't that Roddick will beat Federer (I don't think he will); my opinion is that if anyone beats Federer the most likely person given the draw is Roddick.

If I woke up after AO and Federer ended up losing to a player I'm sorry but Roddick wouldn't be the player I'd bet on. What amuses me is how one match can have such an impact on some board members. I'm not saying that Roddick sucks (he has 3 slam Finals all lost to Federer) but he is not close to Federer's level. But if Federer ended up losing to Roddick he would have to play a crap match like in the 2004 Wimbledon Final and Roddick would have to play the best match of his entire career even then it would be unlikely. There are to many players at the AO capable of defeating Roddick to start with Safin. Marat is the last player to have defeated Federer on a hardcourt Slam. It's up to the rest of the tour it to step up, if Federer loses than fine he isn't invisible. But don't make wishful predictions that's all.

Fedex
01-12-2007, 10:58 PM
Two close matchs and we'll see in the kooyong final how it'll go for both of them...

I totally think that if someone is to prevent fed from winning his 10th grand slam, it is not rafa, safin, hewitt, etc... but it is a-rod!!!
One close match. The US Open Final wasn't a close match, and it was never in doubt. Besides, at this stage of his career, Roddick isn't looking for Moral victorys. There's only one stat means anything in tennis and thats wins and losses.

DwyaneWade
01-13-2007, 12:28 AM
If I woke up after AO and Federer ended up losing to a player I'm sorry but Roddick wouldn't be the player I'd bet on. What amuses me is how one match can have such an impact on some board members. I'm not saying that Roddick sucks (he has 3 slam Finals all lost to Federer) but he is not close to Federer's level. But if Federer ended up losing to Roddick he would have to play a crap match like in the 2004 Wimbledon Final and Roddick would have to play the best match of his entire career even then it would be unlikely. There are to many players at the AO capable of defeating Roddick to start with Safin. Marat is the last player to have defeated Federer on a hardcourt Slam. It's up to the rest of the tour it to step up, if Federer loses than fine he isn't invisible. But don't make wishful predictions that's all.

I am not making wishful predictions :rolleyes:
I am not a Roddick fan in the least, his game or his attitude. I was turned off by the ridiculous adultation for his one incredible run in 2003.

My point is that Roddick is just as likely as anyone in the top ten to defeat Federer at the AO.
Nadal? Not the way he has been playing recently
Nalby? Yeah right ("If I only had a brain....")
Davy, Ljubicic? Please

Anyways you didn't answer the question. Seriously, who would you pick if all you knew was that Federer had lost?
And I am sick of people comparing the current Safin to the Safin of 2005. This Safin is a shell of his former self; his movement is permanately damaged. He is still talented enough to be in the top15 but I would not be surprised in the least to see him be dumped in the first two rounds and I suspect Andy will handle him.

sykotique
01-13-2007, 01:48 AM
I am not making wishful predictions :rolleyes:
I am not a Roddick fan in the least, his game or his attitude. I was turned off by the ridiculous adultation for his one incredible run in 2003.

My point is that Roddick is just as likely as anyone in the top ten to defeat Federer at the AO.
Nadal? Not the way he has been playing recently
Nalby? Yeah right ("If I only had a brain....")
Davy, Ljubicic? Please

Anyways you didn't answer the question. Seriously, who would you pick if all you knew was that Federer had lost?
And I am sick of people comparing the current Safin to the Safin of 2005. This Safin is a shell of his former self; his movement is permanately damaged. He is still talented enough to be in the top15 but I would not be surprised in the least to see him be dumped in the first two rounds and I suspect Andy will handle him.

Have to agree. The question is not who will win the Australian Open. Most people can see that all the signs point to Roger.


The real question is, if not Federer, who? And Roddick is the first name that comes to mind, based on form, Slam history and surface. Roddick is not as ridiculous a 2nd favourite as people make him seem.


If Federer does not win Wimbledon 2003, then who does? If Federer does not win Wimbledon 2004, then who does? If Federer does not win Wimbledon 2005, then who does? If Federer does not win US Open 2006, then who does?


And now we pose the question again...if you had to choose ONE guy not named Federer to win the whole thing, then who do you think? Safin's won here before, but he's too inconsistent. Nadal has (or used to have) Federer's number, but he's out of form and out of his depth on a hard court. The only person you're left with is...well, Andy Roddick. It's not that hard to see.

DwyaneWade
01-13-2007, 03:17 AM
Have to agree. The question is not who will win the Australian Open. Most people can see that all the signs point to Roger.


The real question is, if not Federer, who? And Roddick is the first name that comes to mind, based on form, Slam history and surface. Roddick is not as ridiculous a 2nd favourite as people make him seem.


If Federer does not win Wimbledon 2003, then who does? If Federer does not win Wimbledon 2004, then who does? If Federer does not win Wimbledon 2005, then who does? If Federer does not win US Open 2006, then who does?


And now we pose the question again...if you had to choose ONE guy not named Federer to win the whole thing, then who do you think? Safin's won here before, but he's too inconsistent. Nadal has (or used to have) Federer's number, but he's out of form and out of his depth on a hard court. The only person you're left with is...well, Andy Roddick. It's not that hard to see.

This is exactly my point...I am glad someone else seems to get my logic, crazy as it is ;)

(though here's hoping the champ, if not Federer, is one of the young guns!)