Stats? You mean, like how many sets you win? I like tennis a lot, but it isn't a stat-heavy game.

Now that I read the article, I see that Roddick did bring up a couple of stats early in the interview:

Q. You walked in with a stat sheet in your hand. What do you look at, and what can you tell by looking at that?

ANDY RODDICK: I mean, I kind of just ?? I mean, I guess you know a little bit, or you have expectations of what you see. First?serve percentage is big for me. Points won receiving second serves is big for me. And the other one is just feeding my curiosity.

it isn't a stat-heavy game.

It is.

First?serve percentage is big for me.

Because it's all you have Andy.

Because it's all you have Andy.

This.

Roddick then proceeded to beat the questioner with a frying pan.

I used to dislike Roddick, so defending him still isn't completely natural to me. But I will say that in addition to the monster first serve (which is pretty unhittable when he's on) he has great ground strokes, athleticism, and decent enough volleying. I think he would be viewed much differently if Federer had not existed. In that parallel world he would likely have at least four major titles. (In addition to winning the '03 US Open he's lost to Federer in two Wimbledon finals and one US titles.) He was also the last player to be ranked number one in the world before Federer's 237 week reign at the top began. Roddick may not have been Sampras or Agassi, but he's been better than most people seem to realize and is likely much better than history will remember.

I think he's quite good. He's just no Federer. But then again, that's like saying that Derek Jeter is good... He's just no Honus Wagner.

He has a solid overall game, but suffers with controlling tempo and moving his feet. A technician like Federer will do that to you. No shame, there. Among the current tennis greats, his athleticism is second only to Nadal. And, these days, Nadal's hurt. Roddick's durability is perhaps his greatest strength, and if not, then second only to his earlier mentioned serve.

Agreed with 7 & 8. Roddick spent several years as the game's second-best grass and hardcourt player, but happened to do so at the time when the best was the best ever. Plus, he came up with a late-90s style game just as the grass courts were being slowed down to counter that very game.

I like Roddick. He gives great interviews, and can be brutally honest in them, especially about himself. He's struggle to adjust over the years as the game (and his opponents) changed, but he's hung in there well. I don't think he will win another major, but I sure hope he does.

he just so underachieves !! great talent but don't know just falls apart

Count me as a big Roddick fan. I agree with 7 and 8 that he'd probably have a couple more majors if Federer wasn't around, and really, being consistently ranked in the top 5 or top 10 in tennis is quite an achievement. He wins a lot of tournaments, even these days.

He has 27 singles titles, and lost to Federer in finals six times in his career. Now, you could say that someone who's in the top 5 should be able to beat Fed at least 1/5, but Federer is probably an especially poor matchup for Roddick's style.

I watched the press conference after the second time Federer took him apart at Wimbledon, and it was his interview there that really made me a fan. The humility and respect he had for Federer and the game was just really impressive, and the determination to get better and win next time was pretty inspiring.

Q. What was it like for you just being there at the end of that?
ANDY RODDICK: It was frustrating. You know, it was miserable. It sucked. It was terrible. Besides that, it was fine.

Q. Can you just take us from 4?All on. Up to 4?4, you’re in the match. Then you got broken.
ANDY RODDICK: Yeah, I got broken. Then I got broken three more times. Then I got broken two more times in the third set. Then it was over 26 minutes later. Is that what you saw, too?
Q. Is he getting better? Is he getting progressively better?
ANDY RODDICK: I don’t know. I mean, better than what? You’ve been around the last three years, haven’t you?
Q. Yes.
ANDY RODDICK: So it’s been about the same.

Q. How much would you have paid in order not to come too this press conference tonight?
ANDY RODDICK: That’s about the best question that’s been asked.
Well, I mean, I can’t really say an amount because I would have gotten fined, what, 20 grand. Obviously, it would have to be less than that, right, if we’re thinking logically? It really wouldn’t be about the money; it would be about running away and not facing it. I would pay a lot of money if everyone would just make up stuff that I said and pretend like I was actually here. That would be fine. My dad didn’t raise me to run away from it, so here I am.

Q. What did Jimmy say? Did you talk about that before the match, if Roger gets on a roll, try to do X, Y or Z, slow it down?
ANDY RODDICK: Yeah, there’s a lot of strategy talk. It’s not so much like, If you’re down 6?4, 6?0, 2?0. We didn’t really talk about that. Oops.
Q. How would you write it if you had to write it?
ANDY RODDICK: Probably something similar to what you guys are going to do, I’m sure.

Q. Your performance here is better than on court.
ANDY RODDICK: No #### (laughter). If there were rankings for press conferences, I wouldn’t have to worry about dropping out of the top five, I hope.
Q. After a night like this, do you sleep well?
ANDY RODDICK: It depends on how much I drink tonight.
Q. Where are you going after this?
ANDY RODDICK: No idea, actually.

i've been looking for some tennis guys to ask about this. nadal's fragility has to count against him, right? i mean, tennis is not a team game. if he's not able to play, he can't win anything. obviously he loses his ranking if he keeps resting his knees, but also in the 'best ever' sweepstakes he kind of comes down a notch if his playing style ends up hurting him physically.
i actually like nadal, but i really really like federer.

Q. What was it like for you just being there at the end of that?
ANDY RODDICK: It was frustrating. You know, it was miserable. It sucked. It was terrible. Besides that, it was fine.

Q. Can you just take us from 4?All on. Up to 4?4, you’re in the match. Then you got broken.
ANDY RODDICK: Yeah, I got broken. Then I got broken three more times. Then I got broken two more times in the third set. Then it was over 26 minutes later. Is that what you saw, too?
Q. Is he getting better? Is he getting progressively better?
ANDY RODDICK: I don’t know. I mean, better than what? You’ve been around the last three years, haven’t you?
Q. Yes.
ANDY RODDICK: So it’s been about the same.

Q. How much would you have paid in order not to come too this press conference tonight?
ANDY RODDICK: That’s about the best question that’s been asked.
Well, I mean, I can’t really say an amount because I would have gotten fined, what, 20 grand. Obviously, it would have to be less than that, right, if we’re thinking logically? It really wouldn’t be about the money; it would be about running away and not facing it. I would pay a lot of money if everyone would just make up stuff that I said and pretend like I was actually here. That would be fine. My dad didn’t raise me to run away from it, so here I am.

Q. What did Jimmy say? Did you talk about that before the match, if Roger gets on a roll, try to do X, Y or Z, slow it down?
ANDY RODDICK: Yeah, there’s a lot of strategy talk. It’s not so much like, If you’re down 6?4, 6?0, 2?0. We didn’t really talk about that. Oops.
Q. How would you write it if you had to write it?
ANDY RODDICK: Probably something similar to what you guys are going to do, I’m sure.

Q. Your performance here is better than on court.
ANDY RODDICK: No #### (laughter). If there were rankings for press conferences, I wouldn’t have to worry about dropping out of the top five, I hope.
Q. After a night like this, do you sleep well?
ANDY RODDICK: It depends on how much I drink tonight.
Q. Where are you going after this?
ANDY RODDICK: No idea, actually.

It's pretty hard to read that and not be rooting for Andy Roddick. I especially like the discussion about the fine. It's so rooted in logic.

Like everyone else has said, great first serve, moves poorly, does not play well at net. I like him quite a bit, and Federer/Nadal are the worst possible matchups for him, Nadal because he wears Roddick down. Federer because he picks Roddick apart.

Federer is, in my opinion, exactly the worst possible matchup for Roddick. All of those matches go the same way: Roddick starts out hot, like he always does, and slowly Federer gets a read on his serve, eventually just effectively blocking it back into a relatively neutral position. Once the position is neutralized, Federer just abuses Roddick's footspeed with his variety of weapons. Roddick just doesn't have the weapon to back up the serve in order to keep himself on the offensive, and once he is not on the offensive, Federer's angles and forehand just tear Roddick to bits.

That said, I'm a huge Roddick fan, and now that Safin is retiring, the undoubted world #1 in press conferences.

the undoubted world #1 in press conferences

Completely agree. When the Aussie open is on in January, Roddick is pretty much the only interesting interview in the men's game. He's very popular down here because he's solid player, a good interview and never gives in.

However saying things like, "well if Federer wasn't around" is just silly. If Nadal wasn't around, Federer would have like another 5 titles. If Borg hasn't existed, than McEnroe and Conners would each have an additional 5 titles.

While admitting 'if x wasn't around, y would have been amazing!!' is a little silly, I think the really interesting case is Nadal. I think Nadal is doomed to a short career, but he would (minus Federer) have very likely pulled a Borg and won Wimbledon and the French both for several consecutive years.

I've always thought Roddick was a tool. But those are good press conference answers -- basically the way all such interviews should go, since the questions are always retarded. And he did stab Mandy Moore. So respect due.

I think Nadal's wearing himself down, he plays to hard a style and it's starting to show.

Rodick looks like such a tool, but seems pretty cool.

However saying things like, "well if Federer wasn't around" is just silly. If Nadal wasn't around, Federer would have like another 5 titles. If Borg hasn't existed, than McEnroe and Conners would each have an additional 5 titles.

It's silly, but it is true that Federer beats him so much not only because he is dominant, but his counterpunching, power baseline style is the perfect counter to Roddick's power style. I mean, really, it's kind of really good against everything, but especially against Roddick.

Whereas, say, he's 2-5 vs. Nadal (who's also better than him, but with durability issues), 3-2 vs. Djokavic and 2-6 vs. Murray. Still not great, but you gotta figure he'd win about 40% of the time against the other top players of his era, or against Federer if he played a different style.

Found a clip of that press conference:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGiSrj97txc

It's actually after an Aussie Open semifinal, and there's some crappy music in the background, but his personality really comes through in it.