I remember a few times when Federer was asked about who was his biggest concern during a grand slam, Novak or Rafa... Federer said actually Roddick was his concern because of Andy's serve...Respect.
Great respect for Roddick - he always gave it his all and never stopped improving his game after some tough losses against Federer. If he played in a different era, he could have picked up a couple more slams.
That was a classic, and a shame someone had the lose the match. Federer only broke his serve once, and it took him until the decisive moment at 14-15 in the 5th set. It took him 6.5 sets worth of tennis to break him, and it's still the only time someone has lost a GS final when only dropping serve once. Roddick was even up 6-2 in the 2nd set tie-break before losing it 8-6. There wasn't much else he could have done.
No no no. Come on. He never had the all court and shot making capability they have. He was a serve bot with a good forehand and a high motor.@@NicholasPeters1
@@cwolf208 I don't feel he was athletic or agile enough. Had he played in an earlier era, he likely would've gotten more slams. His serve alone could fetch a couple of old school wimbledons.
You’re just talking about a time where you could say what you want without fear of losing your job. A time when people could take a joke. A time when just men had balls
Amazing server. He is the most consistent server at his speed. Esp. when you take into account, he was not putting too much weight on his rackets if at all.
@@kingston4313 no he was a generation too late. He would have fared far better in the Sampras era when courts were faster and balls were smaller. He would lose to med for example, when Med stays so far back the court it’s hard to ace him.
@@kingston4313 sincerely, he was coached into a wrong style. He had the serve speed, and he was using a standard racket. If he had used a heavier racket, it would not have been easier for opponents.
Or he was not just good enough. All you talk is about his serve. Yes, Roddick and Karlovic were the best servers. But whats about Roddicks backhand? It was always crap. If he had put mote efforz in the backhand he would be a much better allround player and maybe would have wo actually more. I respect Roddick but fact is that for the level he was playing, the disadvantages of his backhand outweighted the advantages on his serve.
I miss this man A Rod. The best server tennis history. Every serve was a rocket. So sad that he could only win one GS at U.S Open. Imagine if his career was before Nadal and Federer time. A Rod would have won many GSs
or he wouldn't have even won one, because he wouldn't have had access to the same racquet technology, sports science, diet, training, psychologists, etc.
@@ugnug Hipotetical, I (and every other tennis noob from today) would be the best male tennis player in history if I played at Rod Laver era. Technicalities ignored of course. I always liked Roddick as a character but neither was his tennis eapecially good nor did he anything but the serve. Some will argue that he had a monster forehand, yes, but at which efficiency? His backhand was never on top 100 level and for me the biggest surprise isnt that he didnt win more because of his serve but that he was so good despite his backhand.
It's not even just the points, but the mental advantage this puts over your opponent is insane. Imagine just standing there helpless whilst tennis balls are just being launched against you and you can't do anything about it.
The low toss 's much harder to time and it doesn't give extra power. It's idiosyncratic. Roscoe Tanner did that, Dolgopolov, Roddick ... only few players were taught or probably developed that themselves. It's not being taught in tennis schools and since most top players are schooled early ...
Roddick's serve was fast, but Federer had better placement and disguise but I think the major factor in Federer out-acing Roddick in their matches was Roddick's lack of return
@@rabbethole8985There is a lot more to his serve than the toss, it was an example. Clearly, it is unique even an amateur can see that. You are being willfully ignorant.
@@TS-er2jc Medvedev is 26 while Zverev and Tsitsipas are soon going to turn 25 and 24 respectively, they're pretty much in the Prime phase of their careers!
@@quentinhirschfeld9382 Well, I suppose both us here are guessing that they are either in their prime or not. At the end of the day, we can only point out when their prime was after they retire. Take rafa and novak for example. It's arguable that they are in their prime right now at the respective ages of 35 and 34. Age does not tell primeness.
@@TS-er2jc No, they're not, the winning % of Djokovic has dropped massively in best of 3 sets while Nadal's winning % has dropped massively in best of 5 sets despite the current TOP 30 is much less competitive and consistent compared to 10 years ago! It catches the eye when you watch them play, Nadal has massive drop of performances during a match (even when he plays well) and Djokovic isn't as sharp and deadly with his groundstrokes (he compensate a little with a fantastic serve developed thanks to Ivanisevic, that's why he is still the best right now)!
This was the last tournament where Roddick actually looked like the Roddick under Brad Gilbert. When these two played a few months later in IW, Roddick played like a completely different player.
He started looking for answers on how to deal with Federer. Problem was that answer didn't exist and it messed up his game and confidence soon followed.
@@michaeledmondson4385 the answers were there, roddick just accepted the wrong ones. his problem was that early on he went for all out power, but basically hit it right back at roger, and roger handles power better than anybody. the answer was to put that power in the corners instead of up the middle; something he never tried.
Today's fans who say Federer had it easy, never actually watched these guys play. Not saying they were your Nadals or Noles, but they were certainly giving better fights than today's so called young gen. Back when the courts gave benefits to players who were brave and took risks. They slowed even Wimbledon down for god's sake. Sure, the rallies are much longer now, but the quality isn't there except it's Rafa v Nole. All these combined with the age difference, worked against one certain guy and they have the guts to call he had it easy.
respect for Roddick....he was right up there with Fed,Nadal and Djokovic....perhaps if he had a little better backhand and valley game....a whole lot of people would like to have a tennis career like his
@@BenTan89 and now you are going to tell me Michael Chang is the best thing ever. Puhlease. Thanks for telling me you have no idea at all what you are talking about. “Kitty kat??” Far from it.
I got to see him play Federer in the US Open final in 2006. What a match! My favorite thing about Roddick was his pace of play. He didn't waste a bunch of time between points adjusting his hair, fixing his shorts, bouncing the ball 23 times, or any of that nonsense. Just walk up to the line, toss the ball up, and smash it. That's why he got to marry Brooklyn Decker.
@@multiplemike If we just remove Federer and no-one else, I think Roddick could have won 2 or 3 more slams, before the competition overtook him. For a couple years it was only really Federer who was better, and he got unlucky to be facing him for most finals. Don't think Roddick could ever have been a truly dominant player though, his personality won him many fans but his game was never consistent enough.
This video doesn't even do full justice if you don't know the context. Not only was this 7 aces in a row. It was against Lleyton Hewitt: the world #2, former world #1, winner of 2 majors, and one of the best SERVE RETURNERS to ever play the game.
I calculated the average serve speed of these 7 serves, and it's a whopping 129.5 MPH. That's including a few sliders out wide. Roddick was one of the best servers ever and really deserved at least one Wimbledon, especially when his forehand was at its best. If not for Federer, Roddick would likely have 6-8 slams and some more time at No. 1. He'd possibly be in the conversation with Edberg and Becker.
Nice to watch. such modest, concentrated tennis players. No one yells vamos or grimaces at the audience like an idiot every time he win a point. Gold times
Andy's server motion is fantastic, compact with tremendous power. It's different than other top Server players like Isner, Karlovic or Sampras. His game is not based on server-volley like the others, he is not tall like the others, either. Unique player.
Bro, Played this coach this summer. Got him stumped on my serves and he comes over and says that my fast serves could be better if I “served right”. Told me I shouldn’t have my leading heel up. I should be rocking on it like Roger. Looks like Andy’s got it all “wrong” lol
