^ don't hate me but I am soooo not a fan of Roddick. Never have and never will be.
I played competitive tennis in junior high, high school and for a year at NYU and been a tennis fan for...well, for more years than you are prolly alive.
Roddick was always a 1 gear kind of player. Ginormous serve but not enough real firepower or consistency or tactical skills to fill out his game. In many ways, I found Roddick to be the poster boy of what went started going wrong with men's tennis a number of years ago - almost mindless crushing of the ball on every attempt. No finesse whatsoever. Though in fairness, he has gotten better in recent years on this score.
This is primarily the reason why I am such a Fed fanboy, not just because of his technical skills, but also for his creativity on court [something he will have to rely more on from now on].
But the nail in the coffin for me with Roddick was his brief time with tennis demigod Jimmy Connors. That relationship only lasted a couple of years and I read that rumours abounded that Roddick was not necessarily open to some of the things Connors was suggesting over their time together. No one knows what happened, but even Connors influence was not enough to push Roddick to another Slam though Connors' presence did seem to lift Andy's game for a while.
My take is: when a guy like Jimmy Connors speaks, I think I would listen and listen pretty hard.
And now, losing in the 3rd round at Wimbledon, a surface that actually can favor Roddck's game? Granted, Lopez played probably the best match of his Wimbledon life against Roddick today but Lopez also out served Roddick and out-volleyed him as well.
Gonna be real tough for Roddick to ever win another Slame. Still, 1 is more than 99% of the players will ever have.
not a rant, just nice to talk tennis once in a while
