Originally Posted by shiaben
This is what I've been trying to convey.
What part of this is so hard to understand for some Fedtards? (Or Roddicktards) for that matter...
People here pretend as if Roddick has quality comparable to Sampras, Agassi, and McEnroe (maybe to defend their argument that Fed had "tough" competition). Unfortunately, Roddick is one of the most one dimensional players, even during his prime, unfortunately not a good all around player. Tipsarevic has a good all around game, just a mentally weak and inconsistent player.
Roddick was pretty much a 2 weapon guy.. Big Serve, big FH (Then his FH went bye and bye and all he became was just a serve). He never improved the BH, was absolutely pathetic at the net, especially his transition game, and never worked on that despite it being a good strategy to follow his big serve, never really improved the aggressive overrall baseline game and resorted to pushing.. It was horrible to watch.. Horribly one dimensional.. You broke through his serve, he had nothing to fall back on really.. his on and off court antics only further damaged his credibility IMO.
Of course the fards will try until the end of time to make Roddick into a Mac, Courier, Pete Andre, Connors type rival to further their agenda and try to make Fed's main rival during a 4 year time span more impressive then he really was ( despite getting destroyed by OLD Sampras at the USO, and Agassi destroying him just about every time they met), most fans knew better.
Roddick was a good player.. Never a great player.. Not to say Tipsy is a great player but certainly you can argue he has more game then A-Rod does.