Actually, my response was not about this point of view (bolded). It was about this bolded part underneath. I understand posters like you suffer from ignorance and a lack of reading skills, but please get real. Federer at no point in sets 3 and 4 outplayed Roddick. Roddick should have won the 4th set, and really should have won that 3rd. Now, I'm not saying 100% that Roddick would have won that match if the rain didn't come, but I actually watched that match and am entitled to an opinion. My opinion is that Roddick would have won the 3rd set. Not necessarily the 4th or a hypothetical 5th set. What happens if Roddick wins the 3rd? Gets confident and easily takes the 4th (he could have been a double break up in the fourth remember)? Who knows, but to dismiss the argument as if Federer would have won regardless is silly to say the least.