I'll be delighting if anyone can shed more light.


I was favouring Andy roddick to beat federer in the AO and US open but it’s only because I felt sorry for the series of thrashing he had been getting from the Swiss. Somewhere towards the end of the season last year, I started to enjoy his game. Now, watching this blokes backhand is like a nightmare for me. The hands look a bit too stiff and uncomfortable and his shoulders over placed. As for that serve once it is returned, well he does not have a clue how to handle what’s next.
Surely, Rafa will be able to get rid of him, probably not with as much sting as Federer will but a few rallies on roddicks serve and Rafa should be hearing game set match in his favour.

i would tend to favour Roddick in that match, although i agree his game is one dimensional. Having said that Nadals game is not exactly multi layered, but i don't think Nadal will handle Roddicks serve well.
Have they met before?

Good post chairman; you raise some interesting issues here.

Thoroughly agree about Roddick's one-dimensional game, the guy has a big serve (which incidentally isn't placed particularly well) and a good, but not spectacular forehand. As for his backhand and volleys, I'm convinced a quadriplegic could outrally him with these strokes. All this begs the question: Why is he still allowed to comfortably sit in the top 8 and reach so many Slam finals?

However, I feel he deserves praise for his mental side of the game. He's one player who I wouldn't have criticised too badly had he fallen totally off the rails in the wake of his continued defeats to Federer. He suffered a slump last year, but under Connors, was revitalised, winning Cincinatti and giving the number 1 a scare in the US Open final. He gave up far too easily in the Aussie Open semi in January, but even after that massacre, he's still fighting for the game's top honours. This is pretty commendable.

I also believe he'll beat Nadal tonight, sadly.

I think there is an over-analysis over Federers conspicuous dismantling of Roddicks game. Based on that argument, every player in the world looks like they have got glaring weaknesses, because Federer exposes these weaknesses and makes people look bad. Example:
Youzny who beat Nadal easily in the US Open was subsequently blown away by Federer with consumate ease later in the tournament. Similarly Gonzalez, who as good as thrased Nadal in the AO, was then shown up in the final.

I think Roddick has a pretty one-dimensional game, and I also criticised him so heavily after the AO, but I sympathise that he always seems to come up against Federers A-Game in the big events - and unfortunately Feds A-Game is simply too good for any player in the world at any time.

Nadal also has tactical weaknesses, he relies on grinding his opponents down, but if a mid match tactical shift is required, he's often caught up short. As can be evidenced in his three defeats this year to Gonzo, Youzhny and Malisse (players who you would expect Nadal to beat)

I still think Nadal is going to win, but I do expect it to be very close...having now calmed down from my inital Rafa cheer leading!

OK Hi Wise B)

you posted:

Come on this remarks are purely based on AROD against FED...Look the equation is quite simple: For FED AROd is an open novel, i.e. he knows how to read the beginning and from his first line (his serve) the drama (his movements on the court) and finally he seems always knowing where the end will be played so he can anticipate and send some missiles to change in his favour the outcome of the story :D ...

But come on, this is far from being the privilege of a lot of players out there in the tour. AROD has might be a simple way of writing his Tennis but still a lot of players took a while to read him and often this is enough to win: I mean, only to stress some recent successes, he was able to beat Marat at the AO and then Ancic...And these two they have more weapons than AROD: Still the guy is able to manage enough writing to eliminate these more talented players simply by using a (very difficult to master, in term of pace) serve and an (impressive) FH...Moreover, I like his fighting spirit his believe...So why not a good guy: Not really smart when he is playing against FED but this is due to his history...

Sara BTW I never notice that last year at the USO:

It was just AROD who took charge of eliminate Youzny in the semi of last year USO ... Showing once again that a A one-dimensional game (i.e executed very well) can be enough to beat a more complete player at least till a certain level :whistle: ...

But surely Roddick is just continuing a long tradition in tennis, i.e. the big server with perhaps a decent forehand but not a great deal else?

People haved said the similar things about Ivan Ljubicic, Ivo Karlovic in the current tour.

And similar things have been said in the past about Greg Rusedski, Goran Ivanisevic, Kevin Curran, Steve Denton, Roscoe Tanner, to name but a few (regardless of whether anyone might think that it is justified or not!).

The serve in tennis is one of the few in racquet sports where players can win a point frequently with one shot. It doesn't happen anywhere near as frequently in badminton, squash, table tennis.

So unsurprisingly given the ease with which players can win free points on it, there has been numerous players just like Roddick in the past. highly competitive sport, therefore people push home whatever advanatages that they have.

They may become less frequent if the courts slow further, but certainly in the men's game it's just part and parcel of the sport.

And many of the clay court players in the past have been described as one-dimensional too, merely baseline hitters. They often find that their game is exposed on grass, for example.

The one dimensional nature of players' games is probably being exposed by the likes of Federer, and I would suggest some of the other players who have taken Fed's example and worked on adding dimensions to their own game will also go on to give A-Rod a pretty tough time.

Harder for A-Rod to do, perhaps simply because it's not a skill that he's had to pay attention to too much, and he might simply not be able to develop it. Again, remember that there are many players today with fantastic backhands, and compared to them, he will get shown up, I guess. :shrug:

Oops, I thought it was Nadal! It must have been at another tournament :whistle:

Still-I think we're in accordance on the point...Roddick critiques have been heavily weighted due to him coming up against the Federer A-Game...

Petal...The one dimensional nature of players' games is probably being exposed by the likes of Federer, and I would suggest some of the other players who have taken Fed's example and worked on adding dimensions to their own game will also go on to give A-Rod a pretty tough time.

That's exactly it...

I also wonder if criticisms are also heavier as one of Roddick's slam defeats happened to be against a certain Andy Murray at Wimbledon..

I mean, in terms of British perceptions, it doesn't get much more high profile in terms of defeats.. :whistle:

And yet I think that Roddick's win-loss ratio on grass is something like 36-4 over the last 4 years? Certainly it's by far and away the best on that surface in the current game.. apart from the reigning champ at Halle, of course.. ;)

At Christmas I read Johnny Mac's autobiography 'Serious'. and in that there was an analogy that springs to mind about this thread.

A sports writer used golf as an analogy for tennis. I am categorically not a fan of golf, but I quite liked what he was saying.

He equated the number of shots that a tennis player had with the number of clubs a golfer might have in his bag. Borg had about 7 or 8 clubs, but used them extremely well,, Henri Leconte had about 15 clubs but didn't know when to use which one! :lol: And MacEnroe had 20+ clubs and seemed to have an ability to know which club to use for which shot.

Fast forward to 2007, and this analogy could easily be used for the current bunch of players :)

I see it this way....
What is one dimentional about:

-huge serve
-variety of service deliveries
-okay weak backhand but increasing use of slice backhand
-big forehand uses different spins though mainly flat
-is coming to the net alot more
-movement is quite good

Okay Roddick is not amazing at all of those things - infact he's quite bad at some of them but he uses them still and so is not 'one-dimentional'.

Hell if your saying the above things are one dimentional then I don't see even Federer being multi-layered as he does the same stuff (but about 10 times better admittedly).

Now if you were to say Nadal:

-Spin serve
-Spin groundshots
-Great movement

-Nadal rarely if ever hits variety (even if he is capable of it) on his groundstrokes.
-He hardly ever comes to the net.

Very good post. I don't agree with the very last sentence but that's a detail.....and Saraless maybe right all the way.

That doesnt necessarily describe one dimensional.For me its the approach at which you play every match.And Roddick just doesnt possess any kind of approach.Its the same thing against everyone even Federer.He has no variety in his artillery.

Now you made the comparison to Federer doing the above 10 times better,yes.But if you look at how he plays every opponent it is a mixture.Watch his net approaches against Nadal and see how they are different from him playing Roddick.Watch his baseline play against maybe a Nalbandian then Watch him play DavyDonkey.Its all different tennis and that what variety is about for!

Do hope you're watching the Nadal-Roddick semi, Sara :D

If ever you needed proof that Roddick was one-dimensional, this was it. If it wasn't for his huge ace count, he'd be looking at a double bagel or breadstick here. Chairman with yet another high quality analysis.

Please, who wants me to congratulated moi? :D

Thanks wise, I learnt from the wise himself.

I missed the semi, but am glad to hear that Nadal was at best. I predicted that he would win this tournament. Also, note that despite giving A-Rod the benefit of the doubt talent wise...I still didn't say he'd beat Nadal!! Not enough weapons for an on-form Rafa :D

Is it me or is roddicks backhand looking well better or even impresive today?

For once I agree with you...Definitely, it was a very solid match by AROD and his BH was good: He tries even to vary sometime with pace sometime slice...Nice job AROD happy for him :rolleyes: