Is Nalbandian as great a player as Wawrinka?

[isabelle]

Roddick could have benefitted from being born a couple of years earlier. I'm not a fan of his game, but his focus, drive and commitment were admirable. And without Roger ripping his heart out at all of his best opportunities, he would have stayed longer in the game, IMO.

Unfortunately, his game was a bit lacking stylistically, particularly as he got older and his backhand motion became even more brittle. No one can doubt his determination, and he was tough. In a couple of those Wimbledon losses to Federer he was a little bit unlucky too.

Roddick's backhand actually improved in mid-2009/early 2010. The forehand was the real issue. In a desperate effort to find solutions for Federer, he turned it from a huge power shot to a mediocre spinny, angle-less, weight-less, shot...

I don't think Federer's the only problem for the A'Rod...he had many fails where Federer wasn't involved in. he disliked clay and wasn't able to play great on this surface, thats' another weak point
sometimes he looked bored and clueless on a court (this IW's final vs Ljubo)
If Federer didn't exist, I don't it'ld have changed Andy's career IMO

 

[calitennis127]

Roddick could have benefitted from being born a couple of years earlier. I'm not a fan of his game, but his focus, drive and commitment were admirable. And without Roger ripping his heart out at all of his best opportunities, he would have stayed longer in the game, IMO.

Unfortunately, his game was a bit lacking stylistically, particularly as he got older and his backhand motion became even more brittle. No one can doubt his determination, and he was tough. In a couple of those Wimbledon losses to Federer he was a little bit unlucky too.

Roddick's backhand actually improved in mid-2009/early 2010. The forehand was the real issue. In a desperate effort to find solutions for Federer, he turned it from a huge power shot to a mediocre spinny, angle-less, weight-less, shot...

I fully agree with this.....his forehand did become a joke. Instead of hitting flat and going for it, he tried to play a Nadal moonball game and pretend that he was some kind of finesse defender at the back of the court, and it just didn't work.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Unfortunately, his game was a bit lacking stylistically, particularly as he got older and his backhand motion became even more brittle. No one can doubt his determination, and he was tough. In a couple of those Wimbledon losses to Federer he was a little bit unlucky too.

Roddick's backhand actually improved in mid-2009/early 2010. The forehand was the real issue. In a desperate effort to find solutions for Federer, he turned it from a huge power shot to a mediocre spinny, angle-less, weight-less, shot...

I fully agree with this.....his forehand did become a joke. Instead of hitting flat and going for it, he tried to play a Nadal moonball game and pretend that he was some kind of finesse defender at the back of the court, and it just didn't work.

Well the problem is his rally forehand wasn't nearly as heavy as Nadal and lacked the angles Nadal created so it's not like he could use it to take you out of position like Nadal does. It ended up becoming an extremely harmless shot unless he decided to go for it. And that really became Roddick's undoing against the top guys, the way his game evolved (devolved?) meant he no longer had a clear way to get on top of the rallies and dictate, and he was pretty much the only top player who couldn't do so. He had to rely on craftiness, slices, changing rhythms and stuff like that, which while he's underrated at, shouldn't really have been his game.

 

[calitennis127]

Roddick's backhand actually improved in mid-2009/early 2010. The forehand was the real issue. In a desperate effort to find solutions for Federer, he turned it from a huge power shot to a mediocre spinny, angle-less, weight-less, shot...

I fully agree with this.....his forehand did become a joke. Instead of hitting flat and going for it, he tried to play a Nadal moonball game and pretend that he was some kind of finesse defender at the back of the court, and it just didn't work.

Well the problem is his rally forehand wasn't nearly as heavy as Nadal and lacked the angles Nadal created so it's not like he could use it to take you out of position like Nadal does. It ended up becoming an extremely harmless shot unless he decided to go for it. And that really became Roddick's undoing against the top guys, the way his game evolved (devolved?) meant he no longer had a clear way to get on top of the rallies and dictate, and he was pretty much the only top player who couldn't do so. He had to rely on craftiness, slices, changing rhythms and stuff like that, which while he's underrated at, shouldn't really have been his game.

Well I think everyone on this thread has zeroed in on the losses to Federer, although I think the changes you speak of also had to do with how he got his behind handed to him by Murray a couple times starting in 2006. Roddick got embarrassed in those losses at San Jose, Wimbledon, Shanghai, Doha, etc. I think that in 2006/2007, he really begin to re-evaluate and think that he needed to re-invent himself because, in his mind, the "tour was changing" in some kind of severe way. The early losses to Djokovic and Nadal didn't help either......but I remember the Murray losses in particular really seeming to mess with Roddick's mind. He and Murray didn't like each other very much, and Roddick really wanted to stick it to him. In the end, he was the one walking off the court with his tail between his legs and I think he took it harder than most people realized. The Brad Gilbert connection there didn't help either, regardless of what was publicly said.