Im fortunate enough to be a hardcore fan of andy roddick from the time he was teenager till he was retired and every match upload in the youtube brought back thousands of memories from my childhood....
Nadal and Djokovic are younger, it was mainly Federer who stopped this from being the main rivalry. By the time Djokovic won his first slam and Nadal his first out of clay (both in 2008), Hewitt was past his prime, and Roddick would be two years later.
The view is incredible. I especially like it combined with the matches USTA sometimes uploads without commentary. It really puts you in the shoes of the player
Roddick's forehand was so flat here. It's too bad he didn't keep hitting his forehand with this much power. He could have won significantly more if he did.
His backhand was also noticeably better as a young player, and he hit it with more power. I always yelled at the screen in the later years of his career when he would slice most of his backhands. He's not going to beat Federer hitting slice backhands like that.
@Brendan Mather Yes but the shoulder injuries started mostly in 2008. In 2005 and especialy early 2006 his forehand had a big decline that was mostly mental, and also firing Gilbert was a mistake. He got it back for awhile after that but he lost a lot of momentum in that stretch and some people had climbed above him in the game (not just Federer).
@@robertofenloch9595 the thing is though, he wasn't going to beat Federer hitting the ball hard and flat either. Federer liked nothing better than someone hitting the ball hard and flat to him - he could use all their pace against them. The players Federer struggles against are those who can mix up the pace, and in particular get the ball up high on his backhand with heavy topspin. They also have to be amazing movers and be able to grind him down. Roddick was none of that - he was essentially very one dimensional, a very heavy footed mover, and with a lot of technical flaws and rigidities in his game. Federer had the racquet skills to really expose Roddick's weaknesses. Hitting his backhand harder would have probably made things even worse. I think probably we have to accept that at the end of the day, Roddick was at the maximum level where his talent could take him. He just wasn't good enough to beat the likes of Federer consistently.
I think it's a consequence of the same problem, Roddick started out with a gameplan to dictate points with power and he'd approach the net with powerful shots. He changed this to a counterpunching style and a lot of his approaches were chip and charge kamikaze approaches where his racket is too light to deal with pace at the net.
@@TheRampart I think part of those changes is due to the slowing down of surfaces. His aggressive flat game wasn't as effective on slowed down surfaces.
@@魚-c3dI wonder if ironically the slowing down of surfaces also didn’t help Hewitt. He could no longer use the opponent’s pace so well and had to generate his own
Andy is my favorite player and a couple things he should’ve never done imo is. He should never got rid of that French guy coaching him or brad Gilbert after that. His game went from being a power player to being a counter puncher type. He got to much spin on his forehand and hit to many slices, to many slice approaches by far. Roger never hits slices approaches even to this day and roddick almost always seemed to get passed when coming in on them. Roger for instance when he gets a short ball he could slice he hits a drop shot and comes to the net instead which Andy could’ve easily done to have more options. He also bulked up to much, he was a lot lighter pre 2005. Lastly I was watching a match with roddick the other day against Hewitt I think from early on in his career and he hit a ton of drop shots which he never seemed to do later on and he had a lot of success with it in that match I saw. Lastly unfortunately roddick not getting that Wimbledon in 2009 I think killed his motivation even though he won Miami in 2011. He quit way to soon considering how long all the guys are playing into there late 30s now. Roddick had one year falling to like 23 in the world in 2012 and pretty much gave up which is sad since he was only like 29/30 years old when he retired. Could’ve had like 5-6 slams if not for Roger. Bad timing honestly for him, Hewitt and Murray.
Brian Lee I read it was injury related. I agree with him about firing Gilbert though...he coached Andy to a major title. I don’t recall a lot of coaching changes for Federer, Djokovic, or even Nadal
I think the main problem with Roddick is that, essentially, he reached the limit of his talent. He was not a brilliant mover, often very clunky when having to make very quick adjustments, and didn't have very good touch or feel. His backhand was technically flawed too. In essence, he was something of a lumberjack. If he couldn't overpower an opponent, he had very few other options.
Worst ending of any match I've seen. Andy totally lost it over that line call- (and I think he was right, it was in). And on the next ball, he lost the match. And on top of that, it was a great match- both players hit amazing shots.
Never really knowing Hewitt, now seeing more of his play time……..this guy was a consistent base liner with few unforced errors. He’s sort of a “pusher” in his own right. His passing shots and winners placement is as good as it humanly gets
The roddick-Hewitt rivalry was very underrated. Is it just me or did Hewitt peak in 2001 and 2002? In my opinion, he played lights out in 2001 and 2002. But in the 2004 US open final, Hewitt played like crap. Of course, Roger was in God mode in 2004 but I feel like Hewitt’s game dropped off a cliff after 2002. Or that can just show you just how dominant Federer was.
@Enterfly yes I agree. And After the injury in 2003, he was never the same. Bulked up and it was downhill from that point. His body just couldn't keep up with his style of play.
To a certain extent it musta been like playing against a mirror from the baseline. Sure there are some differences but they aarent that visible here. they are so evenly matched.
@@supermovietimebros6770 Well he's lucky to even get that one Grand Slam. I think he faced Juan Carlos Ferrero in the finals so didn't have to face Federer. But he peaked at number 1 for I think 13 weeks and sadly he'll never taste another Grand Slam or number 1 again. But still that's more than most players ever hope to achieve. He was consistently top 10 for like 8 years. 👏
@@jonfreeman9682 Roddick faced Nalbandian in the SF who beat Federer in the R16. Roddick had to come back from 2 sets to 0 down and save a match point. That match was more or less the real final. Neither were losing to Ferrero. Roddick’s been retired for over 10 years now,so he obviously won’t win grand slam or become number one again. Not sure why you’re talking about him as if he’s still active lol
Hewitt was great. He had the misfortune of getting significantly better at tennis when he played every week and getting significantly worse when he didn't. It was too much wear and tear to sustain. After those two big years he never played that much again. If you could have figured out how to maintain top form with more weeks off his career would have been very different.
Great tennis- too bad the photography wasn't sharper, and it was odd that both players were dressed exactly the same (made it harder to figure out who was hitting the ball).
it's curious that here they go toe to toe but it would take Roddick two more years to finally win a slam while Hewitt would go on to win this one and another one less than a year later.
Hewitt was good in 2001 & 2002 he won Wimbledon and the US open, then he wanted to retire for some reason, the he decide to take on Federer and see if he can go toe to toe with him, but he was dreaming.
Both of these guys would of won more Grand Slams especially Roddick if it wasn't for Roger Federer. They were playing Federer when he was at his peak. Only Rafael Nadal could compete with him, then Djokovic came up. Players like Hewitt and Roddick faded when those 3 players took over men's tennis. This is why you never saw Hewitt and Roddick contened for more slams over the years with just 3 Grand Slams combined between them. Currently now Federer, Nadal and Djokovic have an combined total of 63 Grand Slams. They have dominated men tennis over the past 20 years
Had Roddick kept this style of playing, we would have had a big 4 instead of a big 3. Whoever convinced him it would have been a good idea to turn from a power player into a pusher whose only weapon was the 1st serve, was an utter charlatan.
Despite how good Roddick was, I remember him most for his bad boy behavior on the court and epic meltdowns. I wanted to like him more, but just couldn't.
@@forrest8012 Personal opinion and results. I mean 14 Grand Slams versus no grand slams is saying something. His serve was fast, but very predictable. It was just a case of stick your racket out, to return his serve.
his serve was better than Sampras' : he mad more Aces(even on slower surfaces) than Pete and had faster serve and better 1Serve%.if Sampras would play in Federer,Roddick,Safin,Hewitt Era he would win 0 GSs
