Mens Tennis Forums banner

Who is better?

  • Andy Roddick

    Votes: 45 59.2%
  • Michael Chang

    Votes: 21 27.6%
  • meh...

    Votes: 10 13.2%
1 - 20 of 75 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,716 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I said No

Michael got his first Slam at age 17. He got 7 1000 Masters titles in his career.

Andy done it at age 21 and been No 1 ATP Ranking at the end of 03 (but 2003 is the weakest year of tennis). If Andy played in 1990s which He possible got nothing (zero Master and zero slams) (and Rank Top 20 at the best)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,716 Posts
Discussion Starter #3

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,956 Posts
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

I would assume if Fed wasnt around, ROddick would have gotten 2-3 more slams anyways.. But he didnt regardless. We can use the same excuse for Chang as well.. If Pete wasnt around, he would have gotten more.


Its too close to call really.. Chang in his earlier years was a better player than ROddick IMO yes. But Andy may have been better in his older year than Chang was in his.



I dont think either deserve a HOF honor though. Chang got it and Im sure Roddick will get in. But neither should be
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
278 Posts
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

My vote goes to Roddick. The year-end No. 1 tips the scale in his favor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
870 Posts
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

I would assume if Fed wasnt around, ROddick would have gotten 2-3 more slams anyways.. But he didnt regardless. We can use the same excuse for Chang as well.. If Pete wasnt around, he would have gotten more.
I don't think Chang would have gotten more even if Sampras weren't around. Chang's H2H against Pete is 12-8; Roddick's against Roger is 19-2. The problem with Chang is that he was inconsistent and could lose to anyone when not playing his best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,956 Posts
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

I don't think Chang would have gotten more even if Sampras weren't around. Chang's H2H against Pete is 12-8; Roddick's against Roger is 19-2. The problem with Chang is that he was inconsistent and could lose to anyone when not playing his best.
Chang had the 1996 USO all wrapped up if not for Pete. A few others as well I think. Just like Roddick. Chang is was very good in his earlier years, in his later years, I agree he wasnt that great. But still a consistnet #2 in the world for quite a while. Most of Pete's success over Pete came after 95-96 rolled around. OR maybe it was a year earlier? Anyways that was around the time chang got thrashed and never regained his footing
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,956 Posts
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

I think its tough to say. But when looking at the reality of the situation, neither A Rod nor Chang could manage any more slams after winning their initial ones.


You have to beat who is in front of you.. Period
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,999 Posts
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

Even if you don't think the 2000s were weak I think it's safe to say Chang's peak during the first half of the 1990s was a stronger period. Without a weapon like Roddick's serve it was always easier for him to slip through the cracks but I think if anything, Chang was consistently good during his best more than Roddick is/was.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,956 Posts
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

Even if you don't think the 2000s were weak I think it's safe to say Chang's peak during the first half of the 1990s was a stronger period. Without a weapon like Roddick's serve it was always easier for him to slip through the cracks but I think if anything, Chang was consistently good during his best more than Roddick is/was.

Absolutely!!!


I'll reiiterate what Ive said before.. I think Pete's initial rise to the top came a way more difficult time than Roger. The early to mid 90s field was infinitely stronger than the ATP era during Roger's rise to the top 03-06 or so.


But I think the the later half of the 2000s was a stronger field than the later half of the 90s when Pete had already been on top. 07-09 was stronger fields than 97-99. But it can be argued about 99-01 which I dont think was very weak at all. 99 was when Andre came bursting back onto the scene. 97 and 98 sucked as far men's competition goes.. Thats when Rios, Kafelnikov and Moya had little runs at #1.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,062 Posts
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

I would assume if Fed wasnt around, ROddick would have gotten 2-3 more slams anyways.. But he didnt regardless. We can use the same excuse for Chang as well.. If Pete wasnt around, he would have gotten more.


Its too close to call really.. Chang in his earlier years was a better player than ROddick IMO yes. But Andy may have been better in his older year than Chang was in his.



I dont think either deserve a HOF honor though. Chang got it and Im sure Roddick will get in. But neither should be
I AGREE!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,062 Posts
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

I don't think Chang would have gotten more even if Sampras weren't around. Chang's H2H against Pete is 12-8; Roddick's against Roger is 19-2. The problem with Chang is that he was inconsistent and could lose to anyone when not playing his best.
Chang's main problem was that he was smaller than the top players and did not have the natural power they had. Like Henin, he had to expend more energy in order to keep up with the bigger players. This caused him to lose power at the end of his career, which caused losses to players he might have beat in his peak form. He was an overachiever, for sure!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,716 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

If forgot about Pete and Roger. Which is stronger 1990s or today?

In fact, 1990s' is way better than today
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,956 Posts
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

If forgot about Pete and Roger. Which is stronger 1990s or today?

In fact, 1990s' is way better than today
The field is deeper today I think from the perspective of 1-100 rankings.. In terms of being top heavy I think the early to mid 90s was stronger with more top heavy threats but the late 90s was no doubt weaker than it is today..

Just my opinion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,716 Posts
Discussion Starter #16 (Edited)
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

The field is deeper today I think from the perspective of 1-100 rankings.. In terms of being top heavy I think the early to mid 90s was stronger with more top heavy threats but the late 90s was no doubt weaker than it is today..

Just my opinion
You got it

the early to mid 90s was stronger.

(( the late 90s was no doubt weaker than it is today.)) (Which I don't agree it at all)

Look at Top 10 in 1998. are they weaker than today's????? I couldn't agree with it

In 2004, 2005, 2006 and even 2007 that we could easily name Roger as a champ before the Slam begins. But you wouldn't make a call in 1990s'
 

·
.
Joined
·
29,637 Posts
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

Chang played in, imo, the strongest period the game has seen with Sampras, Edberg, Courier, Agassi, Becker, Lendl although he was on the way out, same with Mac. So many great champions.

He could have won more had he played at any other time, whereas if Roddick of 2003 played now, he could have won more too. It's a close call between them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,285 Posts
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

A comparison between Roddick and Chang is close, but Roddick's accomplishments are slightly better.

In terms of slam results, Roddick is ahead:

Roddick: 1 win, 4 finals, 5 semifinals, and 7 quarterfinals.
Chang: 1 win, 3 finals, 4 semifinals, and 5 quarterfinals.

In terms of titles, Chang is ahead:

Chang: 34 titles (including 7 masters).
Roddick: 27 titles (including 4 masters).

In terms of rankings, Roddick is ahead (or will eventually catch Chang in Top 10 & 20 categories):

Roddick: 13 weeks at #1, 52 weeks at #2, 208 weeks in Top 5, 357 weeks in Top 10, and 422 weeks in Top 20.
Chang: 0 weeks at #1, 51 weeks at #2, 172 weeks in Top 5, 369 weeks in Top 10, and 471 weeks in Top 20.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
734 Posts
Re: Is Andy Roddick better than Michael Chang???

Career wise reaching no 1 decides it for Roddick, but they are close.

Roddick had at least some chances to win a 2nd Grand Slam title.
Change reached some finals, but never had a chance to win one.
 
1 - 20 of 75 Posts
Top