Federer owns Roddick 10-1 in headto head match ups.
Well I like to consider that the old Roddick. This is the best I've seen Roddick play in a LONG time. I still obviously expect Federer to take this, but Andy should be able to give him a decent match. Because Let's be honest, Roger just doesn't lose unless it's to a guy named Nadal or a teenager from England. He's just too good. But Roddick will hold a lot, and I expect at least one tie break, and Roddick will definately have a chance to win any of those.
Federer is easily the greatest player of his era but i still don't buy into the GOAT label.
i think prime Sampras would serve and volley his way past Federer. Roger is more complete all around, but Pete's serve is better and his netplay was better. he's tougher to break. if Roger added serve and volley to his game i would definitely call him the GOAT.
and while Roger is the better player, i also think Agassi of the early 2000s would have a 500 record with Roger. he nearly beat him at 35.
6 yrs ago i thought she may end up the GOAT but it never happened. i cant see it now
I can see where you're coming from but remember she had a year playing through ligament injuries and a few years of retirement as well. Well that's my excuse but the way she plays using placement as her main weapon hopefully she'll have a long career and make up for some of that lost time.
Federer is great, but doesn't have any competition. The He doesn't let anybody look great, is a bad argument simply because nobody else even dominates the rest of the field.
Roddick hasn't been good since 2003, starting to come back, but only has been good for this tourny.
Safin is off and on, mostly off.
Nadal can't dominate anything but the clay. He was great during Wimbeldon, but you can see that he didnt even make quarters in the US. Maybe will grow into the other surfaces.
Agassi has been hurt since 03.
That Aussie dude has been off.
Federer may end up with the most ever titles. But I think the best ever goes to either Sampras or Agassie and I say Andre
Why Andre you ask? No I can't prove it or anything, but he could've won a lot more titles.
He had the best return of serve ever, and was a good server himself. Won 8 GS titles, but made many finals. And if he were as focused on the game as Sampras or as he became later on in his career, like when he was 30, he'd have won more. There were like 3 titles alone in the 80s he should've won. Then he had that long streak where he simply fell off, and came back the guy we all love now.
I just feel like if young Agassi wasn't trying to be such a big marketable star, and focused more on image, but the game. There'd be little question.
Not to mention he does have more tourny vicories and titles period, than Sampras