So why hasn't Any Roddick won more? guy hits it harder than anyone ever and is a great athlete....It's about the surface period....the clay does not set up for guys that aren't stricly baseliners.....if you look at people that have had sustained success on it, it's people that grew up playing on it.....you receive the ball totally different on clay than you do grass, deco, hard, anything else.....Besides Borg, Federer is in better shape than anyone that has ever played the game....if Nadal was superior to Federer from an athleticism perspective he would have Australian, U.S. Opens, and Wimbledons on his mantle....

Andy Roddick is one of the least athletic guys to ever make it as a pro tennis player.He does hit the ball hard.That's it,So,he gets his behind tossed quickly from the French,but can stay around for the quarters or semis of the power favoring tournaments.Power is a separate entity from athleticism.Winning all 4 of the Grand Slam tournaments in men's tennis requires a very high level of power and athleticism.Federer does have high levels of each,but(without the power factor helping him) he is not a good enough athlete to beat a great athlete like Nadal.A poor athlete with power can beat a great athlete that lacks power.Next month Roddick will overpower some guys who are much better athletes than him. Men's tennis is primarily about power.This is why the the best athlete who has power wins all these tournaments.Federer and Roddick have about the same power,but Federer is the much better athlete.Nadal is a better athlete than Federer,but he usually can't beat Federer when power is a factor.Federer's mix of power and athleticism usually works in tennis tournaments,but he is easily beatable at the one tournament that totally takes power out of the equation.Nadal's quicker,and is the better shot maker.If Federer was a better athlete than Nadal,then he would beat Nadal at the French.Tennis is a game that normally requires both power and athleticism.If you have a tennis tournament that negates power,then all you have left is a fight about athleticism.Give me every reason why Nadal beats him at the French.If Federer was the better athlete,then none of those reasons would be enough.

BTW if you want to know what requires both athleticism and power it would be the position of linebacker in Football.Ronnie Lott,Ray Lewis etc. have very high levels of each. Also,winning the Grand Slam in tennis(in one year) requires a person like this.Federer comes close,and we know it isn't power that he is lacking.He is slightly lower in athleticism.This is why he comes up a bit short each year.He is not quite as good an athlete as somebody else is.

You not serious are you? Federer is the best shot maker that ever walked on the court.....period. You do make some valid points about athletisicm, (statement about Roddick not one of them) but this all boils down to Nadal is in Federer's head.....38% first serve percentage!!! that's not points won on the first serve, that's first serves in.... 1/16 in break points....50+ unforced errors in 2 sets....that has nothing do with power and everything to do with psych....