After witnessing how well Karlovic played on clay, and the fact that he is enormous and has a heinous ground game by clay court standards, I can't help but think that he is the exception to the traditional school of thought about different surfaces in tennis. First off, he just won a title ON CLAY. Obviously, clay is seen as a surface where speed and consistent, safe groundstrokes are viewed as a key, but Ivo has neither of those. Not to mention that he has arguably the worst return in the top 100. I seem to think that Ivo's serve is so good that he flat out changes the rules. Obviously, for a serve and volley player, you want to get into the net as quickly as possible. Normally on clay you do get closer to the net for the first volley, but the fact that the serve is slowed down so much makes this harmful for most serve and volley players. Ivo's serve is so big though, it seems like he does get closer to the net without having his serve significantly hampered by the clay court. Additionaly, Ivo still holds serve easily on clay. Normally players hold much less but since his serve is so good he doesn't have to worry about being broken regardless of the surface. As a result, because the clay is so slow, he really does get a better look at the return. Compare this to grass or hardcourt where yes, Ivo holds easily, but can't break often because he doesn't get a look at a return. Anyway, I'm just surprised I guess. What do you think?