Those years why players are struggling to win 3 major titles at least Andy Murray won 3 major titles He worked so hard to win it also Andy Murray reached finals 3 times and won 2 Wimbledon titles Andy Roddick never won Wimbledon title though he reached finals 3 times.
The greatest grass court players in open era are 1. Roger Federer=8 2. Novak Djokovic=7 3. Pete Sampras=7 4. Bjorn Borg=5 5. John McEnroe=3 6. Boris Becker=3 7. Jimmy Connors=2 8. Stephen edberg=2 9. Rafael Nadal=2 10. Andy Murray=2 Based on Wimbledon titles only.
The 6 best hard court players in open era are 1. Novak Djokovic=12 2. Roger Federer=11 3. Pete Sampras=7 4. Rafael Nadal=6 5. Andre Agassi=6 6. Ivan lendl=5 Based on major titles only The best grass court players in open era based on Wimbledon titles are 1. Roger Federer=8 2. Pete Sampras=7 3. Novak Djokovic=7 4. Bjorn Borg=5 5. John McEnroe=3 6. Boris Becker=3
@@Ben6164 I think 2019 was far more significant for Federer. Losing once to Roddick, whom he had beaten so many times, would not have made much difference in the big picture. But finally beating his biggest nemesis, who had denied him so many biggest trophies, would have made Roger the undisputed GOAT even without the highest slam tally. Perhaps only win against Nadal in the French open final would have been more significant for Roger than that in terms of legacy.
@viborrr Roger wouldn't have been the undisputed GOAT regardless of 2019 Wimbledon had he not won against Roddick ten years earlier and secured the Grand Slam record. He would have found it very tough to break it had he not won that day, on a mental and physical level. He was beginning to wind down slightly, and his loss at the 2009 US Open may have been worse and/or earlier had he not won this. He may not have gone on to win in Australia in Jan '10. Think about the mental strain on Roger a loss to someone he can always usually beat, when so close to 15 Slams, would have caused, especially with Rafa always lurking in the shadows at the time. He may not ever have done it.
One of the most underrated finals in Wimbledon ever. Many aces and short points, but very good quality and intensity. Gotta feel bad for roddick however, even from a big fed fan
Couple years late here on this comment but had 2008 not been the 2008 final it was I think we’d be talking about the greatness of this match way more often
Just wanted to say I love how you fade out the commentary from one cut to the next instead of chopping it off. You put a lot of work into this and it shows. Well done.
I'm Roger fan, i was watching the game. That break point 13:25 is the moment i started rooting for Roddick during this game. He was putting so much effort in this match, way over his skills. Really came natural to start symphatize with Rod during the game, because was really hard to not respect what he was doing against a player 8 times better than him on grass.
Roddick should have won and retired with this Wimbledon title, he never recovered from this loss and in the next 2-3 years his game was sloopy, back to that looping forehand we all seen before
Not quite. He won Miami-2010 with beating Nadal after reaching the finals in Indian Wells, so he had one more super-moment. But yep, that Wimbledon still was the one he should've won
I think he actually used that forehand a bit on purpose. He realized that flattened forehand would beat just about everyone but Roger, so he tried more top spin like Nadal to give the Fed backhand some problems.
Imagine Federer not losing that 2008 Wimbledon to Nadal and that 2009 US Open final to Del Potro. Roger would have an astounding 7 straight Wimbledon's and 6 straight US Open's in the same time period! This was a great match that Roddick let slip away. Roger's serving was unreal as he had a record 50 aces in this match....
That second set tiebreak has to haunt Roddick to this day. That ill advised shot he tries serving for the set at 6-5 was such a killer. Roger was then and is now my guy. Always liked Andy though., And just imagine what a second Grand Slam would have done for how Andy's career was viewed.
Then again he'd be nothing without his serve. His run to the final in that Wimbledon edition was quite lucky. Federer did to Roddick in the final what Roddick had done to several players leading up to that match you think of Melzer, Hewitt, Murray etc... Of course Roddick also needed Nadal to be injured that year otherwise he wouldn't have even come close.
even if he won a second grand slam, unfortunately wouldn't change much, given the success of the big 3. and murray would still have more GS than him. roddick was good but the only thing he had going was his serve. isner is the same way but just less skilled/successful than roddick
I wish John McEnroe commentated on this years final Alcaraz and Djokovic his commentary is like no other. You’ve done an excellent job editing this truly stunning final ! Thanks
As Roddick could never be crowned Wimbledon champion they decided to change the rules in the final set to a tie-break at 12-12 probably so Roddick can always at least have a consolation prize of being labelled the player with the most amount of games won in a Wimbledon final, which can't be bettered with these newer rules. His 39 games won in this 2009 final can't realistically be equalled, only in the extremely unlikely circumstance of there being a final where all 5 sets go to a tie-break and a player winning 3 of them. No one can ever win 39 games in a Wimbledon final again without winning the title.
@@martydav9475 I cant say that much. Federer has stated many times that this was his most prized Wimbledon final win (maybe even most prized of any major final win). It was neck and neck. I personally think 2008 Wimbledon final was his greatest.
i was never a big fan of Roddick but seeing the talent in Wimbledon since 2020 i think he would have been the second best player and biggest thread for Djokovic.
Great final, this seemed to be the never ending match from where i sat,,, thinking sometime around july 4th... was ruining for the Boca resident and Patch Reef alum.. good tennis... Cheer's 🍷🍻🍷🍻
It's crazy that Federer was looking invincible all tournament then Roddick of all people took him to a 5th set and held Federer to 0 BPs converted until late in the 5th set.
So disappointing that Andy choked in that tie breaker. Roger was so well rounded but i think he had the greatest slice in history. 16-14 final set is bananas.
I sincerely think Roger wouldn't have traded this for the 2019 win. But I also think that the similarities between this one and last year's match are astonishing. I hope Roger will also have another one very similar to 2008, with the opposite result.... It would close the circle
I was pleased Federer won 2009 vs Roddick but all the Nadal finals I wanted Nadal to win and let's be honest Federer was luckier to win 2007 than he was unlucky to not win 2008, which Nadal should've won in straight sets. Federer won 8 out of 15 sets in the 3 finals from 2007 to 2009 and didn't lose any tie-breaks but won 6 so only 2 out of 15 sets he won without the need for tie-breaks and he still walked away with 2 Wimbledons from 2007 to 09. It was certainly a lucky period for him and also just with Nadal being injured in 2009 was very lucky for both these finalists as Nadal was the best player in the world at the time. I'm glad Federer overtook Sampras though, not just after this match in total grand slams but in Wimbledon titles in 2017 winning his 8th. I had wanted him to win vs Djokovic in 2014 and then 2015 but had to wait a little longer but he did it in style not dropping a set in 2017.
@@cddb5408 Well, no, because Federer came out very strong in the fifth set of the 2007 final, and wiped the floor with Nadal, breaking his serve twice to close out the match.
SUPER EXCITED, EXCELLENT AND POWERFUL GAME........ SUPER EXTRAORDINARY, EXCELLENT AND SUPER TOP RANKING PLAYERS IN THIS GAME....... BOTH PARTICIPANTS IS SUPER PRACTICE FULL, TECHNICAL FULL, STAMINA FULL, ENERGY FULL, STRONG FULL, AND POWERFUL...... POWERFUL SERVICE, ENERGY FULL FOREHANDS, STRONG FULL SHORT, STAMINA FULL RETURN MANY ATTRACTIVE ACTION SEEN THIS GAME........... POWERFUL AND STRONG GAME, IN THIS SITUATION WINNER IS WONDERFUL.........
What happened to Roddick after this legit? U expect him to make semis and possibly another final at a slam, but only reached 1 more qf at the us open ..
This loss ripped his heart out. He played for another few seasons, winning a few more titles, even defeating Roger a couple of times, but I don't think he was ever the same after this match.
He made another quarter final at Australian open 2010 to be fair but still I don’t think he fully recovered from this loss. Wimbledon 2010 was a great chance for him to win it. He was playing well leading into the tournament with winning Miami and getting to finals of Indian wells.
He made an AO QF the next year, made the final of IW and won Miami, beat Federer in their last meeting in Miami 2012 and that was really it. He retired at the US Open in 2012. Also he did have a great championship point against Raonic in Memphis 2011. One of the best championship points ever in my opinion.
I am happy that fed fans are appreciating Roddick in this Wimbledon final in comparison to Wimbledon final 2019 where novak fans are mocking and degrading fed...what a contrast of fans.
No, Federer was the player leading those games you're talking about 40-30 at 5-4 and 40-15 at 6-5. Roddick was 6-2 up in the tie-breaker though although Roddick nicked the 1st set with 1 break point which was also set point after saving many break points in the previous game so after the 2 sets I think 1-1 was fair although yeah once Roddick won the 1st and had such a good lead in 2nd set tie-breaker Federer would've been the happier of the 2 after that set but I still think Federer had a reasonable chance of winning the match even if he went 2 sets down. I think he only lost the 4th set because he expected Roddick to capitulate when Federer went 2 sets to 1 up as Roddick already had psychological inferiority with Federer and Roddick only won 1 out of the 10 sets at Wimbledon they'd played together before this match. Notice how when Federer starts concentrating again in 5th set he doesn't have his serve broken in all 15 service games. I think Roddick only held out for so long in the 5th because he was the one with the positive momentum shift going into that set. Like if Federer was to have lost 2nd set and then pulled it back to 2-2 from 2 sets down he may have well thrashed Roddick in that final set because Federer would've been the one with the momentum just like when Federer did that to Fella in his very next match at Wimbledon after this final.
No, roger can lose against djokovic, nadal or murray (big four) but roddick cant comparize with these monsters, them are superlative leyends 》》》》》》to roddick.
@@lilslick2231 Murray never lost to Djokovic at Wimbledon or at the U.S.Open, beat Nadal at the U.S.Open and at the Australian Open, thrashed Federer in the Olympics and reached the final of eleven Majors. For a few years it was the big four alright.
If Rafa was not injured in RG, the most normal thing was that the final would have been between Nadal and Federer. We will never know what would have happened.
@@taylorpack7705 Obviously, Nadal will probably finish on most slams and he was definitely the best player in the world from 2008 to 2010 (He had come close to being able to call himself that in 2007). Wasn't just lucky for Roddick that he was injured for 2009 Wimbledon it was lucky for Federer but Roddick doesn't even come close that year if Nadal isn't injured. Roddick was actually very lucky in many matches on route to final that year if you think of Melzer, Hewitt (also injured but still took Roddick to 5 sets) Murray etc...
Roddick was in the top 10 10 straight yrs. Say what you wanna say about him but thats unbelievable. How many players have stayed top 10 consecutively. Not to many. Definitely deserved hall of fame
@@francescodecio4334 No, that's lame. To get rid of it for the final is a bit half-hearted. I say get rid of it entirely. If a match goes to 12-12, someone will probably break soon. Isner/Anderson or Isner/Mahut are extremely rare. Either have a tiebreak at 6-6 (like USO or AO) or be like RG.
@@francescodecio4334 To do it for all matches except the final seems a bit weird. Then, when a Semi Final is decided by 12-12, then we'll move it to QF, and then to R4, so we might as well either get rid of the tiebreak entirely, or keep it.
@@armstrongtixid6873 you do it to save the winning player, who'd have to keep on playing past 6-6 or 12-12, from an impossible recovery, that would sentence him to lose in the next round. In old matches they used to play without tiebreaks throughout the whole match, but that doesn't seem like a good idea, even if it should be weird to play the first set with a rule and the last one with another. In the golden master series events the final used to be 3/5 while the rest of the tournament was 2/3. So it wouldn't be knew to have different scores for different matches.
@@ErikCB912 You say that but didn't Roddick only break Federer's serve twice in how many games? You're acting like it was so 1 sided and also in the 1st set Federer had loads of break points to go 6-5 up then Roddick held serve by the skin of his teeth then Roddick gets 1 set point in the next game and nicks the 1st set. Besides Roddick had so many lucky wins on route to the final that year. Melzer, Hewitt, Murray etc... tie-breaks were instrumental in any success Roddick ever had not just that tournament but his whole career so what happened in the final was karma really. Roddick was also very lucky that Nadal was injured that year otherwise he wouldn't have even come close.
Great match. Sampras was the best of his generation from 1991-2000. Federer was the best of his generation from 2000-2010. Djokovic was the best of his generation from 2011-2020.
Taylor Pack Winning 1 grand slam a year doesn’t make you the best if another player is routinely winning 2 or 3 a year. During these eras, he was largely the second-best player in the world. Rafa was number 1 for a couple years years here and there near the end of Federer’s era of 2000-2010 and for a couple years here and there during Djokovic’s era of 2011-2020. But he never was able to dominate for several years in a row like Sampras, Federer, and Djokovic were.
@@metblvette but there are two hard court slams and only one clay slam. And Wimbledon plays very similar to hard courts so hard court players like Djokovic and Federer have advantage of more hard court slams and masters over clay players like Nadal. Wimbledon only skews the advantage over Nadal because it has similar bounce as hard court since change in perennial rye grass back in 2002 which the big 3 benefitted from after Sampras era. So imagine Nadal getting two clay slams instead of one? Nadal would be more dominant.
@@metblvette and Djokovic and Federer has a period where their best rivals weren’t at their peaks while Nadal literally faced either peak Federer or peak Djokovic when he was a teenager to the end of his prime. That’s more impressive. The fact that Nadal has won more hard court slams (at US alone) and more Wimbledon’s than Federer/Djokovic at RG says it all. Nadal is more we’ll rounded.
Dew Man Nah. Only the most loyal Rafa fans would say that Rafa is more well-rounded than Federer and Djokovic. Even Rafa and experts have acknowledged that he has evolved into a more all around threat, but he’s not as good as Djokovic and Federer outside of clay. If he were more well-rounded than they are, it would be reflected by him having more weeks at number one than them. If he were more well rounded, he would lead the H2H against them on more than just 1 surface. If he were more well rounded, his grand slam distribution would be more proportionate. Instead, he trails both of them by a lot in weeks at number one, indicating that across the entire year they perform more consistently. Instead, he trails the H2H against both of them on both hard court and grass. Instead, he only has 1 Australian Open, 2 Wilmbledons, 4 US Opens, and 12 French Opens. Whereas, both Federer and Djokovic’s distribution is a lot more evenly distributed.
I swear Andy Roddick never has played that good in his life, it was awesome. It as if Pete Sampras did voodoo that day and he was playing in Roddick body, and still could not beat the GOAT (he will be regardless of whatever people dojkocovid can do)
I don't know, I feel like 2004 Wimbledon Roddick was pretty good as well... but they're different types of good 2004 was explosive power (that forehand) and fitness good 2009 Roddick lost the explosive power, but he seems more patient and was tactically smarter also, I know I will get shit for this, but Federer was really playing below par in 2009 Wimbledon Final (I rarely see Federer return big serves that poorly)
Why? Federer scored 10 more points than Roddick in this match and he served less games than Roddick. People talk about 2nd set tie-break but Roddick had nicked the first set when Federer had quite a few break points to go 6-5 up with a break of serve but Roddick just held on then gets 1 break point in the next game and wins the set with it.
Guys sorry for not including the third set tiebreak, it wasnt in the full match file :( Nevertheless, I hope you enjoy the highlights :)
Do you have the full match?
Those years why players are struggling to win 3 major titles at least
Andy Murray won 3 major titles
He worked so hard to win it also
Andy Murray reached finals 3 times and won 2 Wimbledon titles
Andy Roddick never won Wimbledon title though he reached finals 3 times.
The greatest grass court players in open era are
1. Roger Federer=8
2. Novak Djokovic=7
3. Pete Sampras=7
4. Bjorn Borg=5
5. John McEnroe=3
6. Boris Becker=3
7. Jimmy Connors=2
8. Stephen edberg=2
9. Rafael Nadal=2
10. Andy Murray=2
Based on Wimbledon titles only.
Only few players have Wimbledon titles which is great honor and glory also
The 6 best hard court players in open era are
1. Novak Djokovic=12
2. Roger Federer=11
3. Pete Sampras=7
4. Rafael Nadal=6
5. Andre Agassi=6
6. Ivan lendl=5
Based on major titles only
The best grass court players in open era based on Wimbledon titles are
1. Roger Federer=8
2. Pete Sampras=7
3. Novak Djokovic=7
4. Bjorn Borg=5
5. John McEnroe=3
6. Boris Becker=3
In a perfect world, Roddick wins this one and Federer the 2019. But we're not in a perfect world.
Well, no, because this was more significant for Rog than 2019.
@@Ben6164 I think 2019 was far more significant for Federer. Losing once to Roddick, whom he had beaten so many times, would not have made much difference in the big picture. But finally beating his biggest nemesis, who had denied him so many biggest trophies, would have made Roger the undisputed GOAT even without the highest slam tally. Perhaps only win against Nadal in the French open final would have been more significant for Roger than that in terms of legacy.
@viborrr Roger wouldn't have been the undisputed GOAT regardless of 2019 Wimbledon had he not won against Roddick ten years earlier and secured the Grand Slam record. He would have found it very tough to break it had he not won that day, on a mental and physical level. He was beginning to wind down slightly, and his loss at the 2009 US Open may have been worse and/or earlier had he not won this. He may not have gone on to win in Australia in Jan '10. Think about the mental strain on Roger a loss to someone he can always usually beat, when so close to 15 Slams, would have caused, especially with Rafa always lurking in the shadows at the time. He may not ever have done it.
@@viborrr
Agreed, I would switch this win for 2019 in a heartbeat
@@viborrr shut up it's almost sickening how you think you know what you are talking about but you know nothing 😂
The similarities between the finals of Wimbledon 2009 and 2019 are scary
Except for how the matches were decided.
Like the very last shot of both finals miss-hits went into the sky.
One of the most underrated finals in Wimbledon ever. Many aces and short points, but very good quality and intensity. Gotta feel bad for roddick however, even from a big fed fan
Same here. Always been ride or die with Roger, but this was his only Grand Slam win I would not have hated to see go the other way.
@@seanmulloy854 agree.
Ruddick played really well and had this match in the bag until he lost his nerve. I'm also a big Fed fan.
Couple years late here on this comment but had 2008 not been the 2008 final it was I think we’d be talking about the greatness of this match way more often
Still remember this like it was yesterday; my father and I watched this match fully on a sunny sunday morning in upstate NY; im 26 now.
Just wanted to say I love how you fade out the commentary from one cut to the next instead of chopping it off. You put a lot of work into this and it shows. Well done.
That’s genius actually.
watching this live in 2009 is what got me into tennis.
I'm Roger fan, i was watching the game.
That break point 13:25 is the moment i started rooting for Roddick during this game. He was putting so much effort in this match, way over his skills.
Really came natural to start symphatize with Rod during the game, because was really hard to not respect what he was doing against a player 8 times better than him on grass.
Roddick should have won and retired with this Wimbledon title, he never recovered from this loss and in the next 2-3 years his game was sloopy, back to that looping forehand we all seen before
Not quite. He won Miami-2010 with beating Nadal after reaching the finals in Indian Wells, so he had one more super-moment. But yep, that Wimbledon still was the one he should've won
I think he actually used that forehand a bit on purpose. He realized that flattened forehand would beat just about everyone but Roger, so he tried more top spin like Nadal to give the Fed backhand some problems.
Nah he did have some success after, he won a masters in Miami and beat Roger 2 years later at the same place.
It's amazing the match was so long given how many aces there were... how I miss that Roddick serve
The fact that Roger still looks fresh after the longest final of the Wimbledon(until 2009), amazes me.
idk wat happen to roddick but he was on a very diferent level here, his best match by far
Imagine Federer not losing that 2008 Wimbledon to Nadal and that 2009 US Open final to Del Potro. Roger would have an astounding 7 straight Wimbledon's and 6 straight US Open's in the same time period! This was a great match that Roddick let slip away. Roger's serving was unreal as he had a record 50 aces in this match....
That second set tiebreak has to haunt Roddick to this day. That ill advised shot he tries serving for the set at 6-5 was such a killer. Roger was then and is now my guy. Always liked Andy though., And just imagine what a second Grand Slam would have done for how Andy's career was viewed.
Then again he'd be nothing without his serve.
His run to the final in that Wimbledon edition was quite lucky. Federer did to Roddick in the final what Roddick had done to several players leading up to that match you think of Melzer, Hewitt, Murray etc...
Of course Roddick also needed Nadal to be injured that year otherwise he wouldn't have even come close.
even if he won a second grand slam, unfortunately wouldn't change much, given the success of the big 3. and murray would still have more GS than him. roddick was good but the only thing he had going was his serve. isner is the same way but just less skilled/successful than roddick
The height of Roddicks power, and ironically afterwards, the beginning of the end.
I can only imagine the mental warfare going on for him. Playing the best tennis of his life but just can't get past 1 guy
Nah his height was 2003-05 with Brad Gilbert. It was over after he fired Gilbert and got away from the powerful forehand
No grunting just striking 👌
I wish John McEnroe commentated on this years final Alcaraz and Djokovic his commentary is like no other. You’ve done an excellent job editing this truly stunning final ! Thanks
14:36 I've never seen Roger slide into his shot like that on grass 😮
Roger is the most elegant tennis player I've witnessed.
The sound of the balls is so heavy...what a fight and a beautiful match !
Aces
Federer : 50 - Roddick : 27
Just passing through on my journey to watch every Federer match.
Watched this again, grass was so fast. Love it.
Loved that Roger won this. Roddick could not beat him even playing the match of his life.
As Roddick could never be crowned Wimbledon champion they decided to change the rules in the final set to a tie-break at 12-12 probably so Roddick can always at least have a consolation prize of being labelled the player with the most amount of games won in a Wimbledon final, which can't be bettered with these newer rules. His 39 games won in this 2009 final can't realistically be equalled, only in the extremely unlikely circumstance of there being a final where all 5 sets go to a tie-break and a player winning 3 of them. No one can ever win 39 games in a Wimbledon final again without winning the title.
14:34 surprised me seeing fed slide into his forehand on grass. He normally does this when he's on a deep run stretch. Only novak does it more often .
Thanks so much for this. Been looking for this for so long
This was Roddicks prime. He would have beatin anyone else on that court im convinced.
Literally came down to duffing one shot. But that is professional tennis. One lapse of concentration can cost you a legacy.
Rafa included
@@rodyaromanovic3741 I still think Federer would have found a way to win, even from two sets down, as Borg did against Connors in the '81 semi-final.
@@mickaellandryseri2356 Roddick would have certainly beaten Rafa. Grass favors people who hit flatter with more pace.
@@martydav9475 I cant say that much. Federer has stated many times that this was his most prized Wimbledon final win (maybe even most prized of any major final win). It was neck and neck. I personally think 2008 Wimbledon final was his greatest.
awesome match
I truly believe Roddick could have beaten ANYONE in there prime on this day. Except for Roger. I'm still not over this loss.
He's not beating djokovic lol. Djokovic is a much better returner than fed and would've definitely broken roddick atleast 4 or 5 times
Nadal destroyed Roddick in US open that year
THAT DAY.. DAY. ON THAT SINGLE DAY.
@@FraudkovicDjokovic wasnt beating anybody in 2009
i was never a big fan of Roddick but seeing the talent in Wimbledon since 2020 i think he would have been the second best player and biggest thread for Djokovic.
No one really cares about what you think but alright
@@TheseHoesAreLoyaland no one cares about what you think either
@@TheseHoesAreLoyalyou cared enough to comment.
@@dewman7477Novak fans think Roddick Hewitt safin are weak era.
Great final, this seemed to be the never ending match from where i sat,,, thinking sometime around july 4th... was ruining for the Boca resident and Patch Reef alum.. good tennis... Cheer's 🍷🍻🍷🍻
Roddick played the tennis of his life. Sorry that he didn't win
It's crazy that Federer was looking invincible all tournament then Roddick of all people took him to a 5th set and held Federer to 0 BPs converted until late in the 5th set.
So disappointing that Andy choked in that tie breaker.
Roger was so well rounded but i think he had the greatest slice in history.
16-14 final set is bananas.
I sincerely think Roger wouldn't have traded this for the 2019 win. But I also think that the similarities between this one and last year's match are astonishing. I hope Roger will also have another one very similar to 2008, with the opposite result.... It would close the circle
I was pleased Federer won 2009 vs Roddick but all the Nadal finals I wanted Nadal to win and let's be honest Federer was luckier to win 2007 than he was unlucky to not win 2008, which Nadal should've won in straight sets.
Federer won 8 out of 15 sets in the 3 finals from 2007 to 2009 and didn't lose any tie-breaks but won 6 so only 2 out of 15 sets he won without the need for tie-breaks and he still walked away with 2 Wimbledons from 2007 to 09. It was certainly a lucky period for him and also just with Nadal being injured in 2009 was very lucky for both these finalists as Nadal was the best player in the world at the time.
I'm glad Federer overtook Sampras though, not just after this match in total grand slams but in Wimbledon titles in 2017 winning his 8th. I had wanted him to win vs Djokovic in 2014 and then 2015 but had to wait a little longer but he did it in style not dropping a set in 2017.
@@cddb5408 Well, no, because Federer came out very strong in the fifth set of the 2007 final, and wiped the floor with Nadal, breaking his serve twice to close out the match.
@@Ben6164nadal returned the favour by not letting roger win a single grand slam match between them for 10 years . 😂😂
@@Fraudkovic Maybe, but I wasn't talking about that, just pointing out why Roger's victory over Nadal at 2007 Wimbledon wasn't luck
@@Ben6164 there's no luck. The better player always wins. Unless there are injuries in play
Both in god mode !
What a match, wow
Prime Federer I remember my child hood matches on that star sports channel
The only time I rooted agaisn't Fed. 😊
Beauty @01:40
Bravo
SUPER EXCITED, EXCELLENT AND POWERFUL GAME........
SUPER EXTRAORDINARY, EXCELLENT AND SUPER TOP RANKING PLAYERS IN THIS GAME.......
BOTH PARTICIPANTS IS SUPER PRACTICE FULL, TECHNICAL FULL, STAMINA FULL, ENERGY FULL, STRONG FULL, AND POWERFUL......
POWERFUL SERVICE, ENERGY FULL FOREHANDS, STRONG FULL SHORT, STAMINA FULL RETURN MANY ATTRACTIVE ACTION SEEN THIS GAME...........
POWERFUL AND STRONG GAME, IN THIS SITUATION WINNER IS WONDERFUL.........
What happened to Roddick after this legit? U expect him to make semis and possibly another final at a slam, but only reached 1 more qf at the us open ..
This was his swansong. Roddick peaked in the early to mid-2000s. Could've won 4 or 5 grand slams as well if it hadn't been for Federer.
This loss ripped his heart out. He played for another few seasons, winning a few more titles, even defeating Roger a couple of times, but I don't think he was ever the same after this match.
He made another quarter final at Australian open 2010 to be fair but still I don’t think he fully recovered from this loss. Wimbledon 2010 was a great chance for him to win it. He was playing well leading into the tournament with winning Miami and getting to finals of Indian wells.
He made an AO QF the next year, made the final of IW and won Miami, beat Federer in their last meeting in Miami 2012 and that was really it. He retired at the US Open in 2012.
Also he did have a great championship point against Raonic in Memphis 2011. One of the best championship points ever in my opinion.
Both Andy and Elena Dementieva got their hearts ripped out in 2009 Wimbledon
Was roddick using his old PDR stick here?
I am happy that fed fans are appreciating Roddick in this Wimbledon final in comparison to Wimbledon final 2019 where novak fans are mocking and degrading fed...what a contrast of fans.
Andy roddick 7-5 first set won and second Set 5-4 40-30 and 6-5 40-15 had set points but not capitalized, if he won that set would win the tittle!
No, Federer was the player leading those games you're talking about 40-30 at 5-4 and 40-15 at 6-5.
Roddick was 6-2 up in the tie-breaker though although Roddick nicked the 1st set with 1 break point which was also set point after saving many break points in the previous game so after the 2 sets I think 1-1 was fair although yeah once Roddick won the 1st and had such a good lead in 2nd set tie-breaker Federer would've been the happier of the 2 after that set but I still think Federer had a reasonable chance of winning the match even if he went 2 sets down.
I think he only lost the 4th set because he expected Roddick to capitulate when Federer went 2 sets to 1 up as Roddick already had psychological inferiority with Federer and Roddick only won 1 out of the 10 sets at Wimbledon they'd played together before this match. Notice how when Federer starts concentrating again in 5th set he doesn't have his serve broken in all 15 service games. I think Roddick only held out for so long in the 5th because he was the one with the positive momentum shift going into that set. Like if Federer was to have lost 2nd set and then pulled it back to 2-2 from 2 sets down he may have well thrashed Roddick in that final set because Federer would've been the one with the momentum just like when Federer did that to Fella in his very next match at Wimbledon after this final.
And then 10 years later Federer got Roddick’d by Djokovic 😭
No, roger can lose against djokovic, nadal or murray (big four) but roddick cant comparize with these monsters, them are superlative leyends 》》》》》》to roddick.
@@franciscoinfante7463 Murray was never at their level bro. There is and never was a big 4. It’s the big 3.
@@lilslick2231 Murray never lost to Djokovic at Wimbledon or at the U.S.Open, beat Nadal at the U.S.Open and at the Australian Open, thrashed Federer in the Olympics and reached the final of eleven Majors. For a few years it was the big four alright.
10 yrs is huge deal to play tennis at that level man.... Yes Federer lost the match but it's listed in legendary status match
Federer outplayed Djokovic completely in that Wimbledon 2019 final. Roddick fought like a lion but I’m the end was beaten by the better man.
How many aces man? Ace kings playing the match.
Actually how many points in the last round
Andy played his ass off..Roger is simply the best ever..
Overrsted final. But exciting!
If Rafa was not injured in RG, the most normal thing was that the final would have been between Nadal and Federer. We will never know what would have happened.
Federer would have won
@@viksinha5410
Good joke.
@@CHÁVARRI-d3b Really? Do you think he would let the 2008 disaster strike again?
Considering rafa just beat him at the Australian and Rafa won the next year id say rafa probably would have won.
@@taylorpack7705 Obviously, Nadal will probably finish on most slams and he was definitely the best player in the world from 2008 to 2010 (He had come close to being able to call himself that in 2007).
Wasn't just lucky for Roddick that he was injured for 2009 Wimbledon it was lucky for Federer but Roddick doesn't even come close that year if Nadal isn't injured. Roddick was actually very lucky in many matches on route to final that year if you think of Melzer, Hewitt (also injured but still took Roddick to 5 sets) Murray etc...
How are you up 6-2 in a tiebreak and lose?
choked mentally
The ultimate choke...it was all downhill from there for Andy
He was never the same after this match
Roddick was in the top 10 10 straight yrs. Say what you wanna say about him but thats unbelievable. How many players have stayed top 10 consecutively. Not to many. Definitely deserved hall of fame
Only because he possessed such a powerful serve.
Still depressing
2009 Finals in Wimbledon way better than the one in 2019, the level was far better in this one
Get rid of the final set tiebreaker, I say.
But only for the final of the tournament, also all grand slams should have the same rules.
@@francescodecio4334 No, that's lame. To get rid of it for the final is a bit half-hearted. I say get rid of it entirely. If a match goes to 12-12, someone will probably break soon. Isner/Anderson or Isner/Mahut are extremely rare. Either have a tiebreak at 6-6 (like USO or AO) or be like RG.
@@armstrongtixid6873 why half hearted?
@@francescodecio4334 To do it for all matches except the final seems a bit weird. Then, when a Semi Final is decided by 12-12, then we'll move it to QF, and then to R4, so we might as well either get rid of the tiebreak entirely, or keep it.
@@armstrongtixid6873 you do it to save the winning player, who'd have to keep on playing past 6-6 or 12-12, from an impossible recovery, that would sentence him to lose in the next round. In old matches they used to play without tiebreaks throughout the whole match, but that doesn't seem like a good idea, even if it should be weird to play the first set with a rule and the last one with another. In the golden master series events the final used to be 3/5 while the rest of the tournament was 2/3. So it wouldn't be knew to have different scores for different matches.
roddick & murray the most unlucky tennis players of the new era.
Because of Roddick cap he had lost many of points
here for rickth21
G O D E R E R
Arsenal's dream is over. Fantastic season but no trophy! What a shame!
Fed played sub par in this final. Roddick should have won.. if only his return of serve was slightly better...
Statistically Roddick returned better than Federer did in this match. He didn’t even break Roddick’s serve until the very end.
@@ErikCB912 You say that but didn't Roddick only break Federer's serve twice in how many games? You're acting like it was so 1 sided and also in the 1st set Federer had loads of break points to go 6-5 up then Roddick held serve by the skin of his teeth then Roddick gets 1 set point in the next game and nicks the 1st set.
Besides Roddick had so many lucky wins on route to the final that year. Melzer, Hewitt, Murray etc... tie-breaks were instrumental in any success Roddick ever had not just that tournament but his whole career so what happened in the final was karma really.
Roddick was also very lucky that Nadal was injured that year otherwise he wouldn't have even come close.
Great match. Sampras was the best of his generation from 1991-2000. Federer was the best of his generation from 2000-2010. Djokovic was the best of his generation from 2011-2020.
Yea no Nadal won at least one grand slam for 10 straight years
Taylor Pack Winning 1 grand slam a year doesn’t make you the best if another player is routinely winning 2 or 3 a year. During these eras, he was largely the second-best player in the world. Rafa was number 1 for a couple years years here and there near the end of Federer’s era of 2000-2010 and for a couple years here and there during Djokovic’s era of 2011-2020. But he never was able to dominate for several years in a row like Sampras, Federer, and Djokovic were.
@@metblvette but there are two hard court slams and only one clay slam. And Wimbledon plays very similar to hard courts so hard court players like Djokovic and Federer have advantage of more hard court slams and masters over clay players like Nadal. Wimbledon only skews the advantage over Nadal because it has similar bounce as hard court since change in perennial rye grass back in 2002 which the big 3 benefitted from after Sampras era.
So imagine Nadal getting two clay slams instead of one? Nadal would be more dominant.
@@metblvette and Djokovic and Federer has a period where their best rivals weren’t at their peaks while Nadal literally faced either peak Federer or peak Djokovic when he was a teenager to the end of his prime. That’s more impressive. The fact that Nadal has won more hard court slams (at US alone) and more Wimbledon’s than Federer/Djokovic at RG says it all. Nadal is more we’ll rounded.
Dew Man Nah. Only the most loyal Rafa fans would say that Rafa is more well-rounded than Federer and Djokovic. Even Rafa and experts have acknowledged that he has evolved into a more all around threat, but he’s not as good as Djokovic and Federer outside of clay. If he were more well-rounded than they are, it would be reflected by him having more weeks at number one than them. If he were more well rounded, he would lead the H2H against them on more than just 1 surface. If he were more well rounded, his grand slam distribution would be more proportionate. Instead, he trails both of them by a lot in weeks at number one, indicating that across the entire year they perform more consistently. Instead, he trails the H2H against both of them on both hard court and grass. Instead, he only has 1 Australian Open, 2 Wilmbledons, 4 US Opens, and 12 French Opens. Whereas, both Federer and Djokovic’s distribution is a lot more evenly distributed.
roddick fixed game that last point total fix
I swear Andy Roddick never has played that good in his life, it was awesome. It as if Pete Sampras did voodoo that day and he was playing in Roddick body, and still could not beat the GOAT (he will be regardless of whatever people dojkocovid can do)
I don't know, I feel like 2004 Wimbledon Roddick was pretty good as well... but they're different types of good
2004 was explosive power (that forehand) and fitness good
2009 Roddick lost the explosive power, but he seems more patient and was tactically smarter
also, I know I will get shit for this, but Federer was really playing below par in 2009 Wimbledon Final (I rarely see Federer return big serves that poorly)
Pederer is not the GOAT. Djokovic is.
Roddick took the ball far too late.
Looking at Roger stepped into the ball much sooner.
Federer
Too hard to follow with like one point from a game then on to the next game. Glad be at the score and 3 games have gone past. Shame
No defense at all in this match...
GOAT
This should’ve been Roddicks all day long
Why? Federer scored 10 more points than Roddick in this match and he served less games than Roddick.
People talk about 2nd set tie-break but Roddick had nicked the first set when Federer had quite a few break points to go 6-5 up with a break of serve but Roddick just held on then gets 1 break point in the next game and wins the set with it.
Not to mention how lucky Roddick was on route to the final
Federer's baseline was so awful in this game
roddick at his prime can beat djokovic
🤣🤣🤣 Djokovic was world ranking no 3 in 2010
He beat him two times in 2009, Roddicks prime year.
0 class Andy
What do you mean? He is incredibly class