Roger Federer vs Andy Roddick — Wimbledon 2009 Final

Im guessing roddick's forehand was not that comsistant.

it was the backhand slice

Good question...Roddick played like a winner overall but I think his down the line forehand might have been off. It could have been used as a serious weapon to finish a point, or at let set up a winner, but his wrist was a little bit closed and didn't open up that down the line as much as he could have. When he DID, he actually was moving Federer all over the court like I've never seen Andy do. So I would say: down the line forehand.

That´s ridicilous. Federer deserved to win. He were more peaceful than Roddick...

that is absoloutely right thats what i thought too.

Best analysis of the match I have read so far.
Thanks for that.

Roddick certainly struggled with Federer's serve, but who wouldn't?

This day, I remember Roger painting lines in both boxed like I've never seen him do. I mean he was really sharp and never followed any predicatble pattern.

But, you seem to act like it's all Roddick's fault. You have to consider many of his peers consider Federer has being the hardest server to read on the tour. Kickers, slices, topspin, twists, flat on lines and corners... All that he never changes much his swing. The ball is always at the same spot, he always goes the same... Like he doesn't even change his motion at all. When you can notice what have changed, it's already too late because you have to face an incoming ball. Never tips his opponent. This makes it tremendously hard to play. All you can do is keep guessing and watch the ball.

You said Roddick serve is better than Federer's. I would hardly conceid Federer's sevre as being lesser good. On grass and clay, Roddick's power is merely effective. Speed is useful up to a certain extend and you can read the statistics; on grass and clay, effects and angles prime over power. Get through the numbers and see if you can get percentage of winning points off first and second serves if the ball is returned.

Compare Roddick and Federer and tell me who prepares the play better.

Yes Roddick had problem reading Federer's serve. Off Federer's own mouth, he says he sometimes sees all what Roddick is about to serve and sometimes not. If he cannot read it, the game is harder.

If Roddick didn't played Federer well on his serve, Federer was even worst on Roddick's. Aces tell me how accurate and disguised the shots were. Rallies won off first serves and second serves tells me how well you used it.

Both players were unable to read each other and were both serving really well. It happened Roddick didn't adjusted anything and lost, but he yet won two games off Federer's serve while Federer got only one out at the very end.

It tells me the game could have been lesser close on each side, but yet the game played is now history and Federer was the one able to get the important poitn off. Like he always did and always do.

Once again, great video Will (and everyone else involved in making FYB vids!). Been watching for some time now and I can't thank FYB enough for your insightful, interesting and high quality vids. Keep up the great work!

Anyways, before I watch the answer, I'm going to say Roddick's backhand slice. Been a while since I watched the match but I recall him netting that shot often. It was almost as though, despite his improved movement, he wasn't positioning himself well enough to hit the slice properly.

I would say return of serve also but I can't remember any specific occassions where it was really hurting him/where he gave away unforced errors and Roddick's return was never his strength anyway...

May be about to be proved wrong though...

Dunno if this has been mentioned, i just checked the stats from the atp website, and roger indeed had 127 first serves in. Don't you think it's a little misleading to bring up the 39% number there, considering you are just basically ignoring all second serves? It makes it look as if you're saying that roger hit 127 serves in the match, when he actually hit close to 200. I know you've said at the start of your video that you were counting only first serves, but my question is why? As far as i can see, there's no reason to exclude second serves from your statistic, and as i said, i believe that you mislead people that way.

Don't get me wrong though, i quite agree with your analysis. The serve did incredible damage. And if you include the second serves into your percentage, you'll get to about 25%, still a very high number considering the length of the match. And don't forget, that number doesn't include unreturned serves that don't count as aces.

Well done Will, It is really fantastic review. My question now is:
With improved Andy's backhand and movement, what should Federer do if he meet Andy again? It is obvious that his old strategy won't work against Andy now apart from those aces. If he has a trouble with his first serve then Andy might have a good chance to beat him.

t whom this may be coner
i am not a profeffsion tennis playere, but i cant tell something was not quiete write with andy rodick and roger feddeer final, poor andy roddick roddick is fighting for his life for a grans slam why fderer wants 15 looke at the points in the 5 sets socre andy 14 federer 16 poiunts i think the points were raise higher so fedderr can win, they didnot want andy roddick to come home with the wimbdelon trophy, no rafael nadal this year beacuse of an injoury, evethime theire is a major, like wimbelon asuraiona open, french open, and the us open,if rafaek nadal or federer makes the final one or the other must win, like wimbdleon 2009, they wanted fedderr to win just so he can beat peter samrus record 14 majors, this was a we beit unfair to andy roddick fans and family, i thing it was andy serve, that was helding him back from coming home with that wimbdelon trhopey,he almost won, next year rafael nadal will be back aabd and federer will be defeated by another player, i hope this is roger federer last wimbdelon title don t have anything aginst him, but we will lket to see sombdoy new come home witl the wimbdelon trhoopey,it si ashamed it wasnt andy roddcik year, andy is getting alittle older it is goiong to be hard for him, this would of been his second major, will federr already has 15,lets hope thsi is roger federer last maojor.

I think Andy wasn't playing enough drop shots and this may have been a reason of why he wasn't ab;e to pick up a few more points. With the power Andy has he seems to like making the opponent work but by hitting hard shots down the line using either his forehand or his backhand. This maybe where Andy needs to improve although Roger never used to use this shot that often until the french open where it was very success

I'll probably differ with many of what has been said. First I agree that Andy's backhand was so much improved but I thought that Roger was tight throughout the whole match. This meant he could not move well and therefore could not play great shots. he just played the balls over the net and hoped that Andy would make unforced errors but unfortunately Andy was in no such mood. That's why I think the game lasted longer than it did. Remember the 1st set at 5-5, Federer ,on any other day, would not make such mistakes.
In a nutshell I thought the idea of breaking the record and being on his own weighed heavily on him and could not therefore move well, play great shorts and return well. As someone has already said it is Roger's return that was poor.

Very usefull comments

return of serve

Great website, one of the best.
Yes, Roddick's lack of returns was the difference in the match and also a few key volleys torpedoed him. Hopefully, Stefanki spotted Roddick's lack of varied positioning and they will work on it.
Thanks.

will you did a great job...kudos...your quantitative analysis is awesome..some of your readers keep on giving qualitative comments that Roger is better..Opinions differ as to who is better but quantitative analysis shows who is better..not that im discounting nerves, attitude, psycho,,etc...

please continue what you are doing. you are a boon to tennis..

Thanks Peter (and everyone else) for the kind words!

will, that was terrific...is it possible to consider also the winners not on the serve only but the total play...volleys, forehands, backhands so we can have a total picture?..ivo karlovic has a lot of aces but still loses the game...

keep it up...i always read your articles...

The shot that held Roddick back from winning Wimbledon was the return of serve. I don't know how ANYONE on the planet, even Roger, can win a match after being aced 50 times. That's unreal and honestly shouldn't happen. Roddick needs to return high class quality first serves more effectively if he ever hopes to win a Grand Slam.

...I know it's easier said than done but he must.

nice. I just do think roger isn't at his best...anyway the tennis world does'nt seem to be capable to take advantage of that, hopefully the return of nadal will make things more interessting...

I would like to view the video of tennis lessions.

Thanks.

Aces alone do not tell the whole story. What about service winners? Bud Collins has the following stats on his blog: 62 service winners for Roddick, 22 service winners for Fed. If you add up Roddick's 27 aces he ends with 89 unreturned serves vs Fed's 72. So, I would say Federer had a worse returning day than Roddick.

According to the Wimbledon site, Roddick had 74 overall winners (including service winners) vs 107 winners for Federer. I am not sure how accurate Bud Collin's stats are because that would mean that Roddick had only 12 winners not coming off his serve while Fed had 85 winners. Assuming the stats are correct or close to correct, Federer played a much better match and was let down by his return of serve, especially during break points and all those 30-30 situations. What do you think?

I agree with you Will.Federer 's serve made the difference, while Roddick 's poor return put him in a lot of trouble.I think that Federer also had some issues with his return accept of the last two receiving games of the fifth set.Till then he was chipping Rondick 's serve and he wanted just to get the ball in the play.At the last 2 games he went a little bit further from the baseline and he started to hit the ball with his forehand and backhand top spin.In my opinion that is the reason why he broke Rondick for the first time in the match.
Keep up the good work Will!!

yep..totally agree with you..and the backhand slice did some damage too..

I'm in the UK, and the BBC showed some really interesting analysis during the match. They overlaid two of Federer's serves into the advantage court, and showed the whole action in slow motion. They were completely identical, same ball toss, same movement, same point of contact, but they ended up in opposite corners of the service box. Simply phenomenal ability to disguise his serve, and no wonder Andy was having trouble returning it.

Phenomenal match though, and credit to Andy for playing as well as he did. Like so many others, I thought he would get trampled on, but he gave a fantastic account of himself, sorry for him he couldn't push it over the line.

Just a final note on the Roddick/Fed match. Much has been made of Roddick not winning the tiebreak when he was so ahead in it. I think those things tend to even themselves out over a long match. To wit; in the first set Andy was serving at 5-5 set score. Fed had several break opportunities against Andy in that game. In particular, on the second (and final) break opptnty, Fed had a clear, no pressure down the line forehand shot to break Andy but Fed sailed it long. If Fed made that very makeable shot, he breaks Andy and then who knows what would happen in that first set. The point is that in a well matched hard fought competition, opptnties are there for both players to have.

i like the way u made people suscribe by malikng us suscribe before watching the video....smart move

You are spot on about Roddick watching so many aces go by without even moving for them. However, I'm glad he did cause I was for Roger all the way. I would have be happy for Andy to have beaten anyone else but not Roger.
I certainly hope Andy continues playing at this high level!

wow 50 aces=2 sets.......so roddick basically gave federer 2 sets, thats way too much heheh its like me vs a beginner usually my first serve is an ace against them sometimes against intermediates btw 90-110 km is the speed...i cant hit a kick serve my first serve is about 20-40% in my second serve is 20-30 km and 95-99% in all i need to do is to learn a kick serve or twist

Excellent.....

I answered correctly and my wife was amazed.
I just could not understand why Roddick was not giving Federer different looks - stepping back a few or even stepping in.
I really enjoy this site. It has tremendously improve my game. I am even learning the Kick serve and I have totally adjusted my first serve according to your specifications.

Kind Regards,
BJ

En français parbleu.
Salutations.HB.

great analysis...I learned much about tennis through FYB. Keep up the good work, Will.

I think the shot that held Roddick back was his return.

Spot on, Austin, FYB touched on it too in the analysis of Federer's service strategy against Roddick, in the final.

I personally think that Roddick lost the match because he could not hold his nerves during the most important points in the match. That was reflected in his 2 easy volleys missed in the 2nd set-tiebreak and also at the end of the match when his serve was broken by Federer. Although he served great during several break points, he failed to give his best during the most crucial points.

IMO, most of the times that Andy Roddick returned shots using a short (in depth) forehand slice -- often landing where Roger Federer could easily reach and set up whatever return shot he thought would be most effective to win the point, that is precisely what happened in fact. Those shots were "giveaways" that should have, if used by Andy, been placed in other areas of the court where Roger would not have had such an easy opportunity to put the shot away and win the point.

I came away from watching the match thinking it was more a lack of a shot rather than a specific shot that made the difference for Andy; and that was approaching the net off of his first serve. This was notable in the second set when he served at 6-2 in the tiebreak, and his first serve landed in to Federer's forehand side. As with nearly all first serve returns, Federer could not attack it and this one ended up floating back, albeit deeply. Had Roddick been at mid court or near the net, he would be in an advantageous position to hit a strong volley. Instead, by waiting back, he allowed it to turn into a ground to ground game rally where Federer had a small edge. Roddick in my view gave up an advantage by not taking the volley off a floating return.

Similarly, later in following points and in the later tiebreak, Roddick did not capitalize on the power of his first serve in the instances when Federer was able to return it, giving up a favorable volley shot and instead allowing it to turn into a ground to groundstroke rally.

The criticism of serve and volley play these days appears to be better equipment, slower balls, etc, and therefore stronger ability of players to hit passing shots more easily. I generally agree with this. However, Roddick's first serve is obviously unique and so powerful, and together with the advantage of grass surface, that he did not need to be so conservative off his first serve. I would say this was the one key factor for the match. Oh maybe also some polarized sun glasses in the fifth set as well, if it is allowed. Still, it was awesome play by Roddick and I hope he gets another title soon.

As a side, if Roddick worked with Sampras for a month, Wimbledon would be his. Sampras approached on both his first and often on his second serve. By approaching more often on the first serve alone for Roddick, even he wants to stay back on second serves, this would give him an important edge that belongs to him.

Andy roddic made approaches crosscourt. down the line would keep the ball in front of him. The match came down to a missed volley and tough shots coming out of the shadows. Roddic had a misshit or two in the final game

I definitely noticed the same thing, that Roddick failed to even make an effort on many service returns. There are times when you shrug off opponents' winners, but Wimbeldon shouldn't be one of them. On the other hand, maybe he was saving himself the trouble of ending up on the ground like he did after diving for a couple of shots. I don't recall any of his dives resulting in successful shots. I realized he was making this mistake because I do the same thing sometimes. Let a good shot go by and then wish I would have at least tried for it.

In my opinion, Roddick's servies were so fast but not accurate. On the contrary, Federer's services had keen angle so that Roddick had difficulties to return.
I think that if Roddick would focus more on the accuracy than on the speed, he will have more opportunities to overcome Federer.

I think if you look at stats to prove a point (i.e. 39% of first serves were aces for Fed - therefore Roddick couldn't return serves properly), then you have to delve deeper into the stats. Did you check and see, set by set, what Fed's aces were like? If you look it up maybe you will see that in the sets that Andy won, Fed was still throwing aces in at or about the same clip as in the sets that Fed won. I watched the match and saw a lot of Fed aces in the last set (of course - it was really two and a half sets). Could it be that Andy was just conserving energy as those Fed serves seemed unreturnable? In my opinion, you can throw out the stats in this match. Andy overall played a better match than Fed. He just didn't quite have it at the end to keep up with the Fed onslaught. I think Fed was holding easier at the end of the final set than at the beginning of the final set. Fed just imposed his will to win more than Andy did.

Well I think that begs the question -- what was Andy conserving his energy for? There wasn't going to be a tiebreaker in the 5th. Andy had to break to win the match. I suppose you could argue that once it got to 30 - 0 Andy figured he wasn't going to win the game anyway so then it might make sense to rest / that accounted for some extra aces... but that's a dubious argument imo.

Well, a player's serve plays a great role in grass courts. I'd actually venture to say that it has such an important role, that it is decreasing the games quality. Grass courts used to make the ball bounce much lower, now balls bounce a lot higher, allowing serves to be more hurtful. Additionally, with the destruction of the grass due to the constant use, dirt becomes the predominant element in the court, allowing the ball to bounce even higher. This said, the serve is establishing itself as a higher determinant of the match's outcome. That is why players such as Ivo Karlovic, who aren't talented at all but hit that first serve real hard have been able to reach the later phases of the tournament. I believe that grass should be redefined and taken back to its origins, where the ball bounced less, the serve was less determinant, and the game more qualitative and enjoyable. The exception to this would be, of course, last year's final. Becasue Nadal is such a great player, Federer's serve did not hurt him as much as it hurt Roddick. Meanwhile, Nadal's serve isn't his principal weapon, therefore Federer wasn't hurt much by it. Therefore, in that particular match, the match was decided by rallies and good tennis, not by fast serves as has become the case in most grass courts. I find that the quality in Wimbledon has decreased and I now find matches in clay courts (especially in Roland Garros) much enjoyable. However, I still acknowledge Wimbledon's sense of tradition and prestige. Well, I hope this comment has been constructive to this website and to viewers

First, I would like to say that this section is an excellent addition to your site!

While I agree with your comments regarding Roddick's movement, I am not sure that your analysis regarding rodddick's positioning on Roger's serves completely covers Roddick's possible strategy on his return of serve.

Often, if Roger is forced to go for the corners in his service game he sooner or later has a weak sevice game and gives his opponent a good chance of breaking him. If Roddick was confident on his own serve, staying in a postion that forced Roger to go for corners is not necessarily a poor strategy. Roddick does not have a great return of serve, so to put the pressure on the opponent to consistenly hit serves near the line does not sound like a bad strategy to me.

Best Regards,
Brian

Hey Brian. I think you're often right -- it's hard to hit corners all day. However, last Sunday wasn't one of those days. I think after a set or two of Federer serving the lights out Roddick should have made an adjustment.

Great web site!!!! you are a very good teacher, to me the shot that kept Roddick from winning was Roger's service

Agree with Aky - The loss was foreshadowed when AR started overhitting in last three games. The 2nd set tiebreak reversed at 5-2 when AR's nerves appeared.

Agree with Walter C. AR is not nearly as agile as RF/RN/AM/ND - would that he were! The return is tough for AR as it requires so much quickness when the opponent hits perimeter spots like RF. I would like to see him step in one step, and learn to block back and neutralize. When AR has the advantage on his return, he absolutely must give different looks and take chances.

I love AR's attitude, effort and improvements. He has so much to be proud of.

The shot that cost Andy the game, in my opinion, was his backhand slice. Everytime he used it, it came up short and played right into Roger's strike zone. The slower moving slice allowed Roger to run around and get into position to hit a forehand winner!

bang on... but his volleying is awful too (like in 2nd set breaker).... with a serve that big he NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO VOLLEY!!!

Não entendi porra nenhuma, poderia falar um pouco mais devagar?

With the statistics you mentioned, Roddick would have been better off guessing. Yes, he might have tried moving back. It's at least a different look even though getting to angled serves would require more distance.

He might have tried decoying by moving closer to the centre mark and perhaps, moving, or, not moving, on the toss. AT LEAST TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT to give Roger a different look!

Yes agreed, Andy played Great backhand in the match with Federer. He used the same backhand to tame Andy Murray too and other players in the tournament.
Additionally, In the last match of the 5th set Andy did some unforced errors and that probably was due to bad light i.e the ball was coming from the shade (federer's court) into his court and this seems to work at an advantage to Federer.
I think Andy had few unforced errors, the last 2 points of the tournament were just probably because of this bad light and allowed Rogerer federer to break the game.

Hi, I agree with everyone who has said that your website is great, it's probably one of the only few Tennis sites I eagerly return to.
With regard to Federer vs. Roddick final personally I don't think Federer played his best match what saved him was his serve on the day. I'm a big Federer fan but what I saw was when the ball was in play Roddick played by far better in rallies then Federer did; one of the few shots Roddick struggled was the low backhand slice to his backhand side.
I really thought Federer was going to lose but like I said his serve kept him in the match and it was lucky for him that Roddick choked on the big points (backhand volley in 2nd) and ran out of steam at the end also I do agree with someone here who mentioned the mental side of Roddick I didn't think he really believed he could beat Federer, but all credit to Federer as I do remember him mentioning after the Aussie Slam that he needed to work on his serve and boy did he do just that..!! Just a final note I do believe Roddick is now back to his best if not better I think mainly because he is now working the point rather then looking for that one big shot.

Hi Will,

I think you have the BEST tennis website. Kudos to you!!

I agree that a better return game could have been the difference. I didn't see much of the match, but some of the highlights showed some good touch volleys from Fed.

I thought your analysis of Fed's serving was spot on. I was thinking that the whole match... how can he be serving better than Andy? Andy is the serve king. And that was his key to winning... Andy could't touch most of Fed's serves and when he did he didn't have much on them; Roger was excellent in that.

Hi Will,

When asking a video question, you may want to wait a day or two before posting the answer. That will make it more thrilling. To encourage people to think more you could even add a small text box to the video answer (right before posting it) with the nickname of the person who gave, in your opinion, the closest answer. A symbolic prize.

You seem to have analyzed most of the top players already: Federer (multiple times), Nadal (indirectly), and Murray. The only top guy left to be covered is Novak Djokovic.

I think Roddick made too much error with his backhand slice shots. He could not hit good approach shots to let him do well at the net. This is easy for Federer to hit passing shots or Roddick himself to make errors at the net.

I think that your opinion is very very valid. Roddick should have done a little adjustment with Federer serves.

But, lets do not forget that Roddick played with the head and not with his heart. I always feel that Roddick tries to win with his first serve or with forehand winner stroke. In this time, Roddick understood that you have to work harder with every point.

POCH

I agree 100% about Andy Roddick not adjusting to fedrer's serve.

Hello,
As it is my first comment on this site, I take the opportunity to thank you for the amazing job you've done here. Especially in the lessons section. I found that really useful.

Anyway, I must say I agree with your overall analysis even though I think you forgot - or didn't chose - to talk about some points.
I agree of course when you say that Roger's serve was amazing (and I think most of the time people seems to forget that he is one of the best server in the world) and when you say that Andy's return let him down.

But in my opinion, this is why Andy did not win the 2nd and 3rd set, not why Andy lost the 5th set and the match.
The thing is, Andy looked stronger to me from the beginning of the match, to 10/10 in the 5th... Especially in the 5th, he was getting some break points at the beggining, he was having no problem at all keeping his games... Well, I really thought he was gonna win.
But in my opinion, the thing is Andy lost it PHYSICALLY... As the 5th set was going, he was loosing it because of his footwork that wasn't good enough anymore!
At this moment, what you said in your 1st video wasn't true anymore, he was getting back his bad footwork, because he was exhausted! He wasn't able to face Roger's slices anymore (he was late on the ball, so it ended in the net...).

In my opinion, Andy played his best match in a really long time, and he showed a really good mental attitude and I'm really looking forward to see him play on hard surface because he is doing his best season so far!

But he has to keep on working hard in order to get better physically.

Sorry for the bad english, and thank you again for all your work at FYB!
Nathan

Great Analysis!

Hello Will

Excellent analysis on the Federer - Roddick match. From what I got from the match, it came down to two critical aspects between the players; the number of weapons Federer possesses over Roddick and mental toughness. If I were honest with myself, Roddick could have very easily won that match if not for the missed volley in the second set tie breaker and the errors on the end of the match. I think it speaks more for Federer being mentally strong then Roddick making mistakes. Roddick did break Federer twice and it didn't look like Federer had any answers for Roddicks improved play.

What Roddick can take away from this match is he is now more prepared to challenge Federer then ever before. His conditioning, patience, and strategy should help take him far at the U.S Open along with the support of an American crowd.

On a separate note, I would graciously like to think you and your team Will for providing this site for all tennis lovers. Especially for kids who may not be able to invest in proper lessons or instructions. As you may know, tennis has taken a backseat to many other sports and anything that can get children interested in the sport can only help. This is just one the first steps in getting the attention of our young athletes to explore this wonderful game. obrigado! Will

I think the point that roger can state calm and relax throughout the match was the key to his win. Andy was getting more and more frustrated, especially when the challenges tend to favor roger.

Thanks for the kind words everybody! Who should I analyze next?

wow that was a very accurate awnser. btw i never watched the match and heard that he got 50 aces and forgot about them while watching this

Will, great job on the breakdown and analysis of the match.

I think that it was Federer´s backhand slice.

Every time Roger served, I held my breath, and hoped he would have to give Andy a chance with a second serve. That didn't happen enough. With 50 uncontested points, Roger had the advantage he needed to beat Andy. It was amazing to see Roger crank it up and take care of business when he needed to.
Andy made me proud to be an American!

Very good analysis

I think Roger's serve he's got 50 aces

The drop shot!! Both of these guys toyed with it. Andy could have used it more affectively and played the forward to back defense of federer rather than just the side side.

Ahh the shot was the return!.. good one.. on the day of the match I got my butt handed to me by a clud pro in malaysia. I had no answer to his kick serve and it spun off my left handed racket out wide to to the left every time. I moved back and powered it back into the court over time and adjusted as you say. That night this match was played and I took note of how close off the base line andy was playing.. it didnt occur to me that he was wrong in doing so.. just that he was close and that I must suck. As true as the latter may be... I never thought to yell at the screen.. "Move back Andy!!"

Overall volleys were often too week and of course he missed that one big choker in the 2nd set.

Yes, i have to agree somewhat. I have played against hard servers and taking a step back is a good defence. Why Roddick did not do this and why he kept making mistakes (Nadal, Hass, would not have let Federer dominate so much) is beyond me. Roddick should have won but he choked under the pressure which affected his entire gameplay and all of his shots. In tennis you have plan A, if this does not work you switch to plan B, plan C, etc, but Roddick kept doing the same thing. He was like a Rabbit caught in the headlights.

Mentally unprepared.

I have to disagree with you all!!!!

The reason why Roddick lost is that he doubted himself too much.

From the way he stammered and stuttered over crucial shots, and the way he tightened up, it was clearly obvious the pressure of being in the biggest match of his life, at the most prestigious of arenas, against the finest player of all time, was all too much.

Roddick was physically prepared, but not mentally. (After all he had only won one championship in his entire life)

Whereas Federer knew he could win, Roddick, by his very clear body actions, wondered if he could win.

Having a degree in human psychology, body language reveals a lot more than you would think. Trust me.

Thanks for listening. I would welcome any feedback.

This is a fantastic analysis.

But IMO, Federer was returning incredibly bad as well. Well, for his standards.
And I think the problem was that he too was returning far too close to the baseline. In fact only in the last games of the fifth did he start returning from a couple feet back. And go figure, it worked and he was finally able to break Roddick's serve, with a little help from a tired Andy, though.
Roger is usually very stubborn when it comes to changing his tactics, and it almost cost him the match. But he should have returned a couple feet back from where he was returning. But he never did until the end.
I love your website !!

great tennis

We had a Wimbledon finals party and most of the Roddick fans screamed NO! when he floated a backhand slice at Federer. He didn't seem to be hitting that shot deep enough and it let to an easy Federer winner most of the time.

I can't agree with the return of serve answer because it's not Roddick's fault Federer hit so many perfect serves.

Will,

I like your analysis and completely agree with you that the particular shot that prevented Roddick from taking the title was Federer's serve. I also thought it was the shot that helped Federer win the match. I don't know moving backing would help Roddick on his returns by cutting off the angles. I think Federer's serve was suddenly on more than usual on the fifth set and he was very lucky with it. Roddick played very well but still coun't win. It was really a heart-breaking loss for him.

It's totally the backhand volley . After Roddick had errors in that shot in the first half of the game . U can say he became worried of it and he stopped playing it and even if he had a slice from Federer , he hits it back with a topspin backhand although the slice shots height are low and it's better to hit them back with a slice . that's what I think and what i've noticed

At a guess, I'd say 1) return of serve, Roddick never threatened enough to make Federer change his serving routine / pace / placement; and 2) forehand, Roddick didn't play enough flat shots for winners, most forehands were rallying loopy forehands.

i think his forehand kept him from finishing federer off

my guess is that andy struggled the most with his serves. federer won almost 90% of his first serves points... ouch....

Will,

Excellent analysis in the video but I'd like to elaborate on the final point. Federer stabbed the ball in this case, because realistically that's all one do when a serve is coming so fast. Unfortunately, because Federer strings his racket loose, too many of his stab returns trampolined off his racket and landed out, usually deep but sometimes wide. If Federer would have kept an extra racket on hand strung a bit tighter, his stabbed returns would have landed in the court. That would have made a tremendous difference in the game right there.

Sampras, who also used to stab a lot of returns against fast servers used this strategy very successfully throughout his career, and even played with a tighter strung racket to begin with.

Hey Will,

I totally agree with you on the outstanding improvement on Andy's backhand and movement ... it really gave him an opportunity to stand against Federer in this match. I also thought it would be the same movie, Federer outdoing Roddick but this time it wasn't and Andy pulled out a great match. From the game Roddick was playing I could hardly see any Federer's signature inside-out forehand!!!

Honestly I don't really remember the details of the match but I think that it should be Federer's deep slice backhand that gave him an opportunity to come up and hit winners in this game.

I'm not sure with the answer but i'll go see your opinion in the answer section. Thanks!

very very good

I think Roddick played a great match, minus the return of serve and that massive choke volley in the second set tiebreak. Great breakdown of the match by Will.

I just want to say thanks for the great effort you have put forth at FYB. Been visiting this site for more than a year and it keeps getting better.

So true... if Roddick had Blake's or Fish's ROS, could've been a MUCH different story... but great analysis and GREAT MATCH!!!

Credit to roddick though. He served a high % of first serves but it was also where he served his first and 2nd serve that really let him hold serve. Sometimes Roddick would go down the T or out wide on the first serve and on the 2nd serve Roddick would serve close to or at Federer's body which didnt allow Fed to pounce and punish the 2nd serve. I felt that was a big factor for Andy to stay with Federer on the service games.

i think roger did a better job returning andy´s serve, at least he try and had more break points, but then roddick did a great serve and roger couldn´t break his serve. I think this was more like karlovic match but of course harder, but a lof or points were ace ace ace ace. and with roger agaisnt nadal they played more and u can really see who was better in the points. In this match it was more about aces and first serves than about playing tennis.

I've always felt that Roddick gives up too many free points on his return of serve, and it wasn't just evident in the final. Many times, I've just seen him camp out on the same spot and freeze up when his opponent throws him a different look. I'm not entirely sure if he's just bad at reading where the serve is going or if he's just lazy. For a great server like Roddick, he should at least be able to anticipate where or what kind of serve is coming. Also, Roddick has played Federer 20+ times now, so he should at least be able to get some kind of handle on his habits, but then again, maybe not.

I think the difference is Federer serving placement. He has better placement compared to Roddick and that's why he got higher aces.

That dead ball bounce in the 16th game was key. Who knows what could of happened if Roddick put it back in play. Does anyone know what caused it ? Did the ball hit a chunk of chalk on the line ??

I think the shot that Andy needed was the explosive forehand.
Andy was incrediible and I hope he feels good about taking 2 sets from
Federer!

I thought Fed relied far more on his serve the whole tourniment than he has previously. Sure, his serve is wonderful and often pulls him out of a jam but I'm sure I got the sense that other parts of his game aren't clicking so well. His forehand isn't quite the weapon it once and is it just me, or is he lacking a little of the magic of his glory years. He hasn't dominated a ranked opponent for a while now. He clawed through the French and, while he didn't drop many sets, never really hit his stride in Wimbledon. Not to take anything away from the guy, the French/Wimbledon double is a fantastic achievement but I am feeling his peak has passed.

You RIGHT ON regarding Roger's serve......on most of them, Andy did even make an attempt!!!
Even though it went to five, the real clincher for Roger was Andy's club level strike on the floater at the net in the second set tiebreaker.......................if it weren't for that, Andy would be the Wimbledon Champion today!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The analysis is spot-on; others have said similar things, as well. Also, as another post pointed out, Andy did break Fed twice. These are all very good things for Andy, if he can keep mentally tough about the defeat - it says that he can beat Fed, if he plays him correctly. I hope some day he does - Andy is too fine a player to be saddled with one slam victory. How many players records would look different if they didn't have to play with both Federer and Nadal in the mix at the same time?

This is a really hard question. Because both the players serves were so big that the rallies were few and far between. Although I thought Andy's game was much improved, I think that Andy generally approaches to Federer's forehand which sets him up most of the time. You can make a highlight reel of federer passing roddick on that side.

Hey Fuzzy Will, always great to get your analysis. I'd love to see you do one (analysis or how-to) on Roddick's abbreviated serve.

In this game, I think Roddick just got tired first. They were so evenly matched, but Fed always looks so much more relaxed than anyone he plays. Roddick looks like he'd be in better shape, but all that intensity has to be wearying after a while. ;)

Backhand volley at 6-5 in the second set breaker!

RODDICKS SHOT THAT ALLOWED ROGER TO TAKE HOLD IS
HIS DOWN THE LINE FORHAND WHICH WAS TOO SHORT OR TOO CLOSE TO THE
CENTER LINE. RODDICK DOD NOT COVER THE PASSING SHOT WELL

well guyz we all knw tht roger have alwayz been the king of grass courts and even the best player on other surfaces except for clay(which in fact is a surface he is gr8 at-kind of permenant finalist in roland garros-), the point is this guy was able to reserve the #1 ranking for 4 years on a row, and ive never seen a guy who has the confidence roger has especially in making big points in the most difficult times, however we all sensed some kind of tention in roger's playing especially his groundstrokes(u seriously don think tht your chance to break several records at a time n becoming the gr8est player in history is smthn easy on the pshycological level) and that in my point of view was what gave some opportunities for andy not his high level of play, n yet after all tht decline in federer's skill in the final he was able to win over roddick, which means he rly is the greatest in tennis history no doubt cuz when he plays badly he wins over ppl who are at the top of their game.
don u think Will.

Great analysis. I did notice that Federer was acing Roddick too easily, and he was not threatened much in his second serves either.In turn, Federer was able to capitalize on Roddick's second serve at crucial stages of the match-second set tiebreaker and the last game when he finally broke Andy, while he was serving with the sun on his face.Once Roger got the ball back in play after returning, odds of him gaining the point improved, because of his better groundstrokes,forcing Roddick to take chances or come to the net.
Could you show us how to direct the ball with similar toss, like master servers such as Federer or Sampras.What drills can we practice? How can one learn to use the wrist effectively?

Was it Andy's returns? After all, if Andy broke in the 2nd or 5th set, it would've been over for Roger.

Of the big 3 weaknesses in Andy's game, he's greatly improved on two of those - his movement, and his backhand. His return still lets him down. I don't know if he's not reading it or just slow off the starting gun, but hopefully Stephenik can help him out with it.

Federer and Andy are my two favorite players, but I wish Andy could have pulled it out. It was a great match.

I really enjoyed your analysis. Great insight! Also, I think this is the first time for me to recieve your videos without momentary interuptions.

Wonderful instructions for us dummies!!! Keep them and your instruction videos coming, Please
WTM

Nice job on both videos. I now have a clear understanding of why Mr. Federed hit so many aces (39 % of 1st serves WOW).

I also believe that Mr. Roddick's backhand slice came up short quite a few times during the match. It seemed as if Mr. Federer was consciously exploiting the backhand slice of Mr. Roddick, based upon the frequency with which Federer was playing short low slices to Roddick's backhand. Leaves me to wonder the possibilities for Roddick if he executed better with his backhand slice.

In my opininion the physical condition of both players was also important in the long fifth set. Roddick had a couple of though matches while Roger relatively easly reached the final.
Andy seemed to become more tired which affected his footwork and thereby his groundstrokes. He started to make more unforced errors in the final games which soon ended in the break.

Dead right on as usual, I did not know the percentage but DID notice the unusually high ace count. Nice job Will!

The inability to covert at 6-2 in the second set tiebreaker was the matchbreaker for Roddick. A couple of years ago he lost 7-6.7-6.7-6 and I felt that he just needed one break in the tiebreakers to turn things around. He also needs a stronger inside out forehand which he failed to convert a number of times. I think he's almost back on top-certainly his improved fitness showed and let's not forget that he tweaked his ankle at queens and his shoulder sometime in the match against Fed. Sure would be nice for him to collect a second major. I'll be rooting for him to win at the Open.

If you watch the last game of the set, the one game that Fed won, Fed hits to Andy's backhand and he miss hits the ball. The commentators said it was because of the shade that was developing on Andy's backhand side of the court. Once Fed saw that Andy missed that backhand shot he hit another shot to his backhand on a different point within that game and Andy missed that too. I think the last game that Fed broke he was using the shade on the court to go after some points. The commentators said once that ball is in the shade and then comes out of the shade to the sun it is very hard to keep an eye on the ball and hit a good shot back. I think if there was not shade on the court Andy would have held that game and the match would have gone on longer. Fed is smart, he used mother nature and the time of day to help him win is 15th. I was hoping Fed would win so I am glad he found out how to do it.

I actually like Roddick's return game better in this. With the way Fed was serving this whole tourney, even if Roddick was standing further back he might have gotten a racket on the ball but still lost point.

Lunging after a well placed first serve trying to get your racket on a ball is pretty damn physically demanding as I'm sure you know. Then just to get ran ragged and toyed with if he actually got the ball in play, its bad for Roddick who doesn't move around gracefully as the match goes on.

Roddick basically said just let him hit the ace, save my legs and my back, and wait for a weak serve. Roddick was very effective in turning this into a serving match instead of a baseline match.

Everyone is crediting Roddick's improved fitness, but I think him conserving energy and picking which serves and points to go after was the bigger factor. I think it helped him a lot mentally as well to know that Fed was simply going to win a lot of easy points against him on his serve... so he just let it be and carried on.

That's my take anyway.

The return of serve

I agree. I noticed the same phenomenon....although Roddick was never broken on his serve until the end (and Roger was early on), it was obvious that Roger was cruising on most of his service games (winning a majority at 40-0) wherease Roddick seem to have more trouble (several deuce and ad-out games) ..even though in the end he pulled every service game out. I though this ratio favored Federrer in the set tie breakers but was concerned for him after the 5th set began.

I signed up for the newsletter a very long time ago. I still can't see the 2nd video. Do I have to sign up every time I want to leave a comment? Thanks.

Hi Jim. Our website puts a cookie on your computer -- if your comp clears cookies every time you close your browser you'll have to re-enter your info.

you're pretty right about the serve of Federer. But Roddick only has a harder serve then Federer. I think federer has a way more placed serve and a way more surprising serve. The BBC showed the point when Roger is hitting the ball at an ace to the right side and an ace to the left side, at both he's hitting the ball at the same point. But yeah the serve was important.

If Andy could, he should ask Agassi, who has one of the best returns in tennis, for some tips. That would make an interesting analytical video: why does Agassi return serve better than most players?

I can't knock Roddick for what he did out there. Breaking Federer twice in the match is a huge accoplishment and shows that his return was sufficient to give him a legit look at winning the title. I'm of the opinion that Andy's court positioning played a big part in getting that look. There's just no way of knowing when it would have been appropriate to abandon the strategy since it was so effective to getting him where he needed to be. To me it looked like Roger's ground game got stronger as the match progressed, possibly as a direct result of Andy's ground game starting to deteriorate late in the fifth set.

In my mind, there's no reason to suppose that if Andy had chosen to give up court positioning in order to get more balls back that he would have been able to maintain the length that was wreaking havoc with Fed's ground game.

Very good! I like your site and information a lot. I think you are exactly right, it was like watching Rocky just stand there and take it. BUT Roddick is doing something right and I hope to see him keep it there!

The second video can't be found......Where is it?

You made a good analysis about return of serve. However, commenter Chartzz mentions about a Service Winners stat. Here is the stat according to Bud Collins' website :
Roger had 50 aces and 22 service winners = 72 points from serve.
Andy had "only" 27 aces but had 62 Service Winners = 89 points from his serve.

This confirms your point that Roger was able to get his racquet on many of Andy's serves. But it also shows that Andy won many points with his serve, not only with the pure Ace. He won 17 more points from his serve than Roger did.

Stats from Wimbledon website : Roger had 107 Winners, including the 22 service winners , and 38 unforced errors.
Andy had 74 Winners, including the 62 service winners and only 33 unforced errors.

Hard to believe that Roger could have so many balls available to hit winners, after Andy got 89 points from serving.

I think if Andy moved back he will open a bigger angle to Federer and therefore will have to move a lot more out of the court, if it was Nadal then yes bcz Nadal is a bigger runner than Andy..
I think Federer wod have cut the match off if Any has given him a chance to get into his rhythm which didnt happen since we saw lots of unforced erros from Federer,

Andy is a great player but misses the variety of strategies in his match and has only one weapon " his serve " that's my though and i might be wrong, cheers

I kinda empathize with Roddick. I have a pretty decent serve myself and sometimes, I rely on it too much to my detriment. It's a dangerouse mindset. If you know you're going to win on your own serve, you naturally let up a bit when receiving. So, I completely understand Roddick not having developed a better return of serve over the years. I'm sure he knows and understands this too but to put it into practice, to be flexible and adaptive in the middle of the match is really hard. Maybe that's what separates the great players from the great legends.

In my opinion it was the service return - the part of roddick's game that was always weak. Even though it is much improved and has allowed him to attacked Federer much more often, Federer still won a large number of points on his serve...particularly the first serve.

I don't know where I saw the video (seems some sort of TV video clip) but it compared Federer's serve with Roddick's. Andy's was faster through the air and flatter but Roger's had so much spin that in addition to the bounce & angle it actually arrived more quickly to the returner than Andy's. Also, very dry conditions made the serve more effective. I would want a video analysis on the actual match before concluding that Andy could have done much more with Roger's serve than he did.

the high backhand volley he missed in the 2nd set tiebreaker

Without a doubt, Roddick's ROS was the deciding factor! Of course, we always see what the player do not as we perch ourselves in front of the television with the remote control in our hand while acting as though we can speak to the players directly...but, somehow, I believe everyone watching had the same analysis. It was just hard to believe Roddick himself did not make this observation and at least attempt a new position in return. Regardless, both players were spectacular yet in my opinion, Roddick played at his best and deserved a win.

Andy looked good and that big miss was huge. His backhand slice was consistent but did not set him up to win points.

I believe one of the reasons Andy lost was because he was trying to go for too much at times when he should have just stayed in the point and kept the rally going. On Sunday, his judgment was much better than in the past and he was more patient before trying to attack. That kept him in more points and gave Federer fewer free points. I believe the second reason he lost is acceleration or lack of it when returning serve. So many times Andy barely moved to return serve. Was he guessing because Roger disguised his serve to either side (like Sampras used to do) with the same toss ? The match came down to Andy's serve being more dominant but Roger returned it better than Andy was able to return Roger's serve. How can I say that Andy had the more dominant serve after hitting fewer aces than Roger ? Well, Roger's placement is second to none, his variety in changing speeds when serving makes Andy hit a little too far ahead of the ball or a little too late and that created some weak returns and helped Roger to win key points.

Slice.

I would think it would be his return of serve because Federer aced him so much or his 2nd serve becuase he won a low percentage of points off it.

Sorry I just can't find answer below the video?

Great analysis!

I agree that Roddick's ROS sucked, but that has never been a strong facet of his game.

Additionally, I felt that Federer's ground game was really so-so in this match. I don't know if it was because he was nervous, or because Roddick hit the ball with pace, but I have never seen a match where Federer's ground game was worse than Roddick's. He shanked too many with the forehand. Also, why does Federer slice so much with the backhand ? Its been ages since I saw a backhand DTL from him, and he seems to have lost pace and depth with his backhand. Do you agree ?

Roger does hit his backhand down the line.....you usually see it more often against Nadal as he tries to keep it away from his forehand. However, now that Nadal's backhand has improved, it is not as effective.

Great videos. Thanks!

I agree Roddick's return could have been a tad better. He didn't seem to change his approach for the return for some reason, and this enabled Fed to hit the high number of aces. A minor addition to the win is second serve points: Looking at the stats Fed won around 60% on his second serve, whereas Rod had around 40%;

But back to your point. "Receiving Points Won" is an interesting stat: Roddick won 42 points out of 197 (21%), but Fed won 68 points out of 239 (28%) way, way, way more points in play for Fed. Thus your suggestion of Rod's "weak" return is right on the nose (even though he did break Fed twice and, as we know, Fed only broke Rod in the final game...)

Great stuff, keep up the great work here my man!

I just started to play tennis two months ago after watching for many years..as far back as the Chris Everett, Jimmy Connors era. This site is a great resource for someone like me and has encouraged me to even take lessons to test some of the things that I learned from you...it actually woks!!! As for the Final between Federer and Roddick. In short it seems as if Mr. Roddick has an issue with serves, he's didn't respnd to some as if he was unable to discern direction or pace...he had the same problem during the Andy Murray match. Murray had aces in the low 100's.

on the bbc they showed a slo-mo of 2 of fed's serves laid over each other.
the service action, stance and contact point were exactly the same for both points but the direct of the serve was different - 1 was out wide, 1 was down the line.
his serve was impossible to read and roddick didn't move for many of them.

That's the first time that I don't agree with you in 100%.
The serve kept Federer in play, that's right. But on TV during the match it was show how Federer serves in the different corners of service box. There was no difference in his and ball's move! You could say where the ball was coming, much after he had hit. And his balls are fast, so you really couldn't do any thing.

I'd like to point one more thing.
Federer's play was incredible at the beginning and he would have defeated Roddick in short 3 sets, if he had broke Andy in the first set. After those 4 break points and slight outs, you could see on Federer's face how tensed he had become. His game changed significantly. He made simple errors and stopped playing aggressively. That's why it took him so long to win.
Roddick played one of his best matches, but as you could see it still was not enough. Though, I wish him luck on the USO.

Andy did not have a half-volley, which prevented him from approaching the net.

But still I doubt if standing backward really does help. To me, I feel like its more of a personal choice of a player (completely not sure about this). Because I remember Murray tends to stand very far away from the baseline whereas Federer tends to stand pretty close to the baselines, regardless of which player they are facing.

Will, if you could, would you mind explaining what leads to the choice of player's standing position for returning serves?

Nice analysis!

I would like to add that Federer didn't seem to take lots of risk on his shots but rather played pretty safe (for his standard) through the match. At the end, it was obvious that Andy was out of steam and that is another reason why he lost at the end.

As of the percentage numbers that you showed regarding the Rodger's serve, I think that you should have added one very important point in all of that - percentage of unreturned serves by both guys! With those numbers I think the picture would look slightly different, since Andy definitely won more free points on his serve overall (not just access as you where using above).

Still, at the end, for the conclusion that you brought up, I can't agree more then Andy should have done more with the returns!!

Thanks!
Fedja

I agree with your analysis but with federers ability to really swing the ball out wide I'm not sure if andy going back to give himself more time would help him a lot if he was not reading the fed serve in the 1st place.
was a great match tho I am amazed at how fit Andy was I expected him to fade by the 3rd after the workout he had with hewitt and murray but he held on

yea, comparing with any other players, roddick seems to have a slower reflex. The more significant example would definitely be his return of serve, where most players would at least move and jump to hit the ball but roddick is always motionless when reacting to serves.

Another example, which I think is also a major reason why he loses in matches, would be his reflex in rallies. Like in the murray game, he always didn't have time to do enough backswing before hitting the shot, and the commentator also said Roddick has a slower reflex than murray.

The worst thing that happens ( for tennis) that day were the white trousers and the blouse with golden aplications. Roger seems to be thinking about fashion deals - not about pure sport anymore.

Hi Will, as you will see from my first post, I got the right answer to your question. Although I do respectfully disagree with your statement that Fed's serve is not as good as Roddick's. Roddick has more power and can achieve more speed on his serve, but that might be the only aspect of his serve, in my view, that is superior to Fed's. However, I am sure you and most players would agree that it is not necessary to always hit a serve over 130 mph to ace someone or even to force an unreturnable shot on the return (although it surely does not hurt to hit it that fast). Placement, spin, and angles can achieve the same even at lower velocities. And it is these aspects where Fed's serve is a little superior to Roddick's I think (although Roddick can do these well too). Fed's serve is still one of the best in the game today and perhaps ever, similar to Sampras's but maybe not quite as good as Sampras. However, like Sampras, Fed has superior placement as he can serve anywhere in the service boxes (e.g., out wide, down the middle, to the body) and at a decent velocity (e.g., 120 mph or more). He can also simultaneously put spin on the ball forcing it to slide out wide after it bounces. His serve is very hard to read too like Sampras's which is why he was likely able to ace Roddick so often. In this match though, Roddick's serve was a little better than usual. Fed even said he had trouble getting a read on it the whole match and that is why he could not break him until the very last game of the match. But had it not been Fed's serve that kept him in the match, Roddick I think would have won because he was the better player that day in virtually every other aspect of the match. Fed was making a lot of errors I thought during rallies. There were several times during Roddick's service games that Fed got the serve back, but then made uncharacteristic errors on his ground strokes. Virtually the whole last set was a serving slug fest and came down to basically hanging in there with your own serve until you can figure out how to break the other guy's serve. Fed somehow accomplished this first and that is the primary reason he won I think. Match otherwise I think was Andy Roddick's. I am not really sure how Andy could have returned serve better other than maybe getting a better read on Fed's serve. Because Fed's serve must be very difficult to return since it is so good. That is why I also respectfully disagree with your suggestion that Roddick should have moved back. That may work against someone who has a powerful serve with not much variety (e.g., serves hard down the middle a lot or to the body) as that would give the returner more time to see where the serve is going and time to react, adjust, and swing. I find that when I move back against a big server who does not have much variety in his serve in terms of angles, I return better by moving back and giving myself more time. But, I find that this does not work against a big server who has more variety and can hit serves out wide. Because then moving back opens the out wide angle more for them (e.g., to a righty's forehand on the deuce side and backhand on the ad side). So Roddick moving back may have done just that because it would have opened the out wide angles more and Fed, having such great placement on his serve, would take advantage of that by serving way out wide with spin probably.

It was Roddick's return of serve particularly when Federer served near the T. On both the deuce and the ad court. On the deuce court, his unwillingness or inability to even take wild chances on the down the T serve early in the match, cost Roddick even more later on, since he could not physically move that fast in the fifth set. That gave Federer a lot of cheap points in the 5th set. He did better in the ad court where a lot of Federer's serves were aimed wide.

I would say the lack of movement, and the unwillingness to even guess sometimes on Roddick's return of serve cost him a lot.

His approach shots too at times were poor. Roddick has this habit of slicing cross court with a 1BH on the approach, only to get blasted with a passing shot. He is not that good of a volleyer, and I cannot understand why his coaches do not point this out. You do not approach cross court with a slice in the modern game unless the slice paints the corner and the opponent had been drawn wide with the previous shot.

The one thing Stefanki has done though, is discouraged him from playing the net as though it was his strength. Roddick was never a good serve-and-volley player -- it was bad advice from a lot of people I think, that led to believe otherwise. His bread and butter is the serve-and-crush-the-forehand. He has done more of that recently, and has a sense of purpose in rallies where he uses a improved backhand in vastly improved point construction.

Oh, sorry, got carried away :-)

50 aces. I'd say return of serve.

On a more positive note (for Andy), I was not only surprised by those Nadal-like outstretched backhands down the line, but very much by the feathery shots around the net. Where did those come from? Wow! He also didn't try to hit every forehand like it was going to be the last shot he would ever hit. The way he usually wallops that forehand usually knocks his body out of control and leaves him vulnerable to players that can control his heat and redirect the ball to the parts of the court he leaves open. What is amazing is that Roddick has made it to other Grand Slam finals with the one-dimensional game he had before 2009.

Thanks for Will for another thought-provoking analysis.

Here's my comments.

Yes, I basically agree that this was a issue for A-Rod in this match (maybe deciding issue). For me, it is interesting to think about why this was. Did Andy not know to make adjustments on return of serve in this situation? Was he trying some tactic from his coach Stefanik? Was he so overconfident in holding his own serve, that he was more lax on return of serve? It seemed like that the situation was like when Tsonga was trying to return Dr. Ivo's serve in that earlier round (at least Tsonga was trying to guess which way the ball was going).

On the other hand, it seems that whatever he (Andy) did in set 4, it was good enough to win 6-3, and handled the return of serve of Fed.'s serve in that set. Why did he not or could he not continue that in set 5? Was it mental?

Fed. was on the ropes. I think he pulled it out with some good luck.

Thanks again for the video analysis.
Gary

Hi Gary. Not really sure what his thought process was on the serve. Perhaps Roddick felt his court positioning would be too compromised starting 10 feet behind the baseline -- he doesn't move as well as Nadal so it's harder for him to give up so much real estate at the start of each point.

Some of those approaches were sort of awkward approaches. Federer would hit a short ball, and Andy felt compelled to come in. He typically went down the line with the slice, but it's hard to slice a good approach shot these days. Top players like Federer and Nadal aren't bothered by slice and can hit great passes on them. This let Roger use his forehand to pass Roddick.

I think they need a new stat. Unreturnable serves. They can divide this into aces and any shot that doesn't lead to the server having to hit a second shot. (Tennis stats are ancient, I saw a match between Chris Evert and Evonne Goolagong, and they had basically the same stats then as they do now--even aces, which women almost never hit in those days). I believe if we had those stats, Roddick's serve would look more formidable. That is, even though Federer got his racquet on a lot more serves, many floated deep. Will's observation is still relevant because at least there's a chance you can do something if you can get a racquet on it.

The commentators pointed out that Andy served more into Roger's body (makes you wonder why more people don't do this) and that made it tougher for him to read. Normally, Roger reads Andy's serve better. Roger's return stats aren't actually that great overall. If you look at the ATP site, Roger's return stats aren't even in the top 10. Not surprisingly, Nadal and Murray are at the top.

Excellent analysis. Two areas where Andy can (must) raise his game are return of serve and volleys, but I will say that Andy has GREATLY improved his volleys--it's simply a case of more work to be done. On return of serve he can improve this, however, as a big guy he will be slightly slower than his smaller counterparts. Agassi was the best returner I ever saw, very compact person and very compact strokes. A bigger guy has a slightly better chance to get to farther away balls (in theory) but since he is moving more mass, he is slower. In reality, losing the 2nd set in the tiebreak eventually lost Andy the match--a case where he seemed to rush his motion just a bit. But the most telling thing was he did not collapse there and surrender the match--his head and heart are much better now than a couple of years ago. He could win at the US Open or Australia in the 12 to 24 months imo.

most of the time when they meet, federer out aces roddick. I think federer served huge this match. Andy outplayed roger from the baseline, but he couldn't overcome the huge serve.

i agree with brooks. i think roddick's service return is a little weak still. he doesn't do much to setup the point with it.

fed, even when he just chips it back is trying to open something else up.

Note too that in the tie-breakers Fed would kick it up a notch and become a much better returner of Andy's serve. Andy seemingly couldn't do that.

Nice Analysis.
I think Federer's advantage over other players is his ability to evolve, to analyse and to adapt during the match. Even in a game as important as a Wimbledon final. He can do it because technically, he has the skills to change his style during the match. And I think it will be more and more difficult for other players to do it because of the standardization of styles. Thinlk about the fields, they are becoming the same and don't encourage players to diversify their way of playing.

I thought that Andy, particularly in the last set, reverted to his weak return game. Perhaps he was tired -- he definitely seemed tired in those last few points. This happened in his match with Murray too. As the 5th set wore on, I had the feeling that Fed was getting more and more free points on his serve, while still being able to occasionally return Andy's serve. Nadal would have found a way to return some of those Fed serves. Fed and Murray both served great against Andy, but Nadal would have found a way to at least make Fed work a little for those points. For all the fantastic improvement in Andy's game, he still needs to improve his service return, I think. But congratulations to Andy for giving us an unexpectedly epic match. And congratulations to Rog for attainting sainthood. Also, thanks to FYB for the great instruction and insights.

I agree with your whole annalysis, I just wanted to talk a bit about the whole service/ace topic. I don't think they keep stats on this, but how many of Roger's aces came when he was up 30-0 or 40-0? I might be completely off on this but it seemed like Andy didn't try on a lot of those serves when he realized he was pretty much out of that game. The commentators kept talking about Andy's 5-set QF against Hewitt and a tough 4-set SF against the home-town boy. They also thought that Roger would have an easier time if the match got to a 5th set because he hadn't played as munch as Roddick. I think Andy understood this and didn't use all his energy once certain games were out of reach, which game Federer a lot more aces. Let me know if i'm completely off track on this...

Passing shots were amazingly well played by Federer, which probably made Andy pretty nervous on approaching shots and volleys. Let us not forget Fed's trademark backhand slice to kill of the pace.

Hi Will, Your analysis is great and you are number 1 in what you are doing.
Suggestion: Please include statistics to represent the unforced errors, winners,
1st serve percentage and the etc. This would provide a more vivid graphical presentation and the true shade of the game. Thanks.

forhand volley in the second set tie breaker

You said that Federer is not as good a server as Roddick. I disagree. He's not as fast, but according to many of his contemporaries, he has one of the most unreadable, accurate, and varied serves in the game. Even Nadal has had a hard time with it. In the 2007 final of Wimbledon, Federer had 23 or so aces. Now, that's obviously a lot fewer than 50, but when you consider that there were probably about twice as many total games in this final, the number is comparable. I'm not saying Roddick shouldn't have tried something different, but Federer is just a great server for many reasons other than pace.

Subscribed

well, i agree that roddick didn't do much with fed's aces. but so was fed with roddick's serves.

i think key was to just hang in there. that's exactly what fed did. play defensive and consistent.

i think roddick lost because he gave up. roddick's game was flawless.

I noticed Andy hit quite a few volleys and approach shots right back to Roger and he got burned several times by that.

I guess that was the slice, because force rodick to hit the ball very low with his backhand, and rodcik can make any powerfull shot in this conditions.

In the past, Andy would simply rally with opponents and rely on his serve for winners. In the finals, Andy showed more movement and fitness and was more agressive. Roger won the match because of his serve and because he had more determination and will. He is content to play relatively conservatively, setting up points , avoiding errors andand waiting for an opportunity to pounce and hit a winner. His movement on the court is a thing of beauty. A contrast to Serena, who by temperament, wants to swing for the fences on every shot. Incidentally, what a contrast in styles in the women's doubles final, the classically trained Aussies versus the Williams sisters, who muscled their way to victory.

This is spot on. I was amazed watching the match how easy it was for Federer to hold. Roddick did not challenge his serves enough and let him ace his way out of trouble. Great analysis Will.

definitely agree Will. I was impressed by the fact that Andy was literally frozen on many of those aces. He just didn't move. I also was thinking about he couldn't read Rogi' serve. (actually during time there was an analysis by the commentators about this. there was a short video where two first serves of Rog from two different matches were layered. It was incredible to watch. the starting positions (from the mid court line) were almost identical (I mean identical) the body alignment was identical but the shots were poles apart. one in the middle, one on the far side. Incredible. so precise. until the ball left the string bed I couldn't spot any difference.)
Roger, after the first 4/5 games or so, started to (similar situation happened some months ago with Del Potro' amazing serve at the French Open) "get the eye" for Andy' serve. he always tried any in many occasions he could put the ball back in the court and start his strategies.
Anyway. huge thanks for your work guys. it's just amazing.
"woo-hoo" from italy.
ale

I think it was Andy Roddick's Forehand that let him down to be honest. Federer was feeding most of his returns to Andy's Backhand. He did quite a few times feed it to Andy's forehand but he did nothing with the occasions he was presented with.

I totally agree with you. But I think he makes up for it with his massive serve but no doubt Federer can also match it. Fed has what..50 aces that match? Intense...

Volleys, backhand volleys particularly. Loved the match, loved seeing Andy continue to work hard to improve his game. Glad to see he is not satisfied to just make his millions and be ranked in the top ten. If he improves his volleys he can pick up a couple more grand slam's before he retires.

I think, the shot that enabled Federer to keep Roddik behind and ultimatly enabled him to win was a forehand. The one he uses (abuses) to send the ball deep on Roddick's left [backhand] when he (Federer) is on the left side of his court. He missed one of these during the first set when he got a break point.
Everytime Federer released it, he won the point. It is risky because he often uses it when he is in a "backhand position".
Don't know if you see what I'm talking about

i think it was roddick's return of serve because after 6-6 in the final set federer was holding easily at 40 love in most service games. Roddick was mistiming his split step left and right and was flat footed on most of the serves. It was either this or his slice approach shot. He wasn't cutting through the ball as well as federer and missed most of his slice approach's.

I think it was Andy Roddick's return of serve. I think the one shot that Federer had that kept him in the match was his serve. Had it not been that, it would have been Andy's match. If Andy could have returned serve better, maybe by being able to read Federer's serve better, he could have won I think by breaking Federer more than twice.

about the stats, I'm pretty sure the TV showed that Federer has hit more than 100 aces in that match. Are you sure the 50 is correct Will?

Roddick tasted his own medicine... plus the additional natural talent Fed has... and even with this he played a great match and almost made it.

Tennis is GREAT!!! LOVE IT!!!

Gonzo

Hi Will,

Insightful as always.

Question: if you move back when you are returning serve, isn't that making it easier to ace you (as opposed to more difficult)? Well, perhaps its not that simple, but I guess my point is that the extra time that you as the returner get is compensated by the less extreme angle that's required to get the ball by you. If I were Roddick, I would have played around with both standing back, and also being forward on the return of serve.

The other thing I would have done is guessed more on the return, to one side or the other. I don't recall if Roddick did much of that. If Federer's serving that well, you really do have to do that. If you do it on the "set-up points" (30-30 or deuce), and you guess right, get a nice return that helps you control and eventually win the point, now the pressure is on Fed...

I rarely see so much aces from Federer,, does he already served as much as this match in the past ?...anyway it deserve the result as maybe the pressure gave him wings to make those additional aces he needed, that the power of a real champion, but at a time he usually dont serve as much serve as this match...so he created his own luck and I am happy he gets his 15 Grand Slam ! go fed go and now its done, I hope Roddick to win the us open !! :-)

Federer certainly won many many free points by just serving. He broke the record on the number of aces in a wimbledon match by serving over 100 aces.

The shot that prevented Roddick to take the match? I reckon it's his cross-court forehands. (inside out or not). Many times throughout the match he would have won the points if he hit the shot down the line but didn't. The other problem with his groundstrokes were that they weren't deep enough. They would land near the service box, making it easier for Roger to get to.

Picture perfect analysis. Exactly what I saw throughout the match and the statistics tell the story.

I would say Andy's backhand approach shot. Most of the time, he played it crosscourt, he had to cover a lot of open court to get to the net, and the ball bounced high, giving Federer time to hit a comfortable passing shot.
Great video again Will!
Regards,

I hope Rodick keep him game up...it was a really nice game....

Andy was much improved - but he was still trying to beat Federer from the baseline. He needed to come in on his second serve - at one point he was only winning 38% on second serves - because it ended in a baseline rally - and who do you think is going to be winning that? FED. Andy needed to put pressure on Federer's second serve whenever he had a chance - and come in! You only have to win 51% of those points at the net to end up as the winner!

I would pick up the fed's serve ?

I agree with Chadley, Roddick didn't "put enough" on his aproach shots.

I would say Roddick's volley. That backhand volley at 6-2 in the 2nd set tiebreak that he mis-hit (hit out) killed his chances.

Ya that was a huge miss -- completely changed the complexion of the match. But there was a shot that was consistently sub-par over the course of the match... that shot is what I'm asking about in the video.

I agree with your analysis as well. Good stuff.

I would have to say the one shot that hurt Andy was his approcach shots particularly on the backhand side. He was not effective enough with the approach slice on many occasions.

it was a good game, and i was suprised as to how close it really was

Serve , Serve Serve,.................. 50 aces , second all time behind Karlovic