Originally Posted by Mountaindewslave
the reality is that Roddick prime on grass is better than the latter 3 by a huge margin. he would have wiped anyone else out easily in a Wimbledon final in the 2000s just bad luck with Federer there
No. His prime is probably better than Djoker's despite not having won Wimbledon, but it's not better than Agassi's. Roddick had Fed, Agassi had Pete. If not he would have more titles there too (1999, maybe 1993). Not to mention he had to faced another great grass court players like Becker or Rafter, which Roddick didn't. If not he would have more Wimbledon finals too.
I don't think Roddick could have a ran like Agassi had in 92'. He was great though and it's a pity he didn't win it in 09'.