Originally Posted by joeri888
You make that up. He nowhere blames the surface for the loss. However, just compare this surface to the one in 2006 and 07 in Shanghai and tell me that it's the same. The only reason you think the surfaces are fine is because it suits your buddy. Just imagine in 5 years when both are retired. Do we only want defensive tennis with zero reward for offensive plays? No we don't. And there's n historical argument to back up that the surfaces are fine. They've never been this way and never should be. I am already over Fed's loss and I can actually cope with slow surfaces as long as Roger plays. The problem lies AFTER Roger. When Roger's retired. Who'll come to the net? The guy chasing down a dropshot to get passed that's who, and nobody else.
I don't like big servers or fast surfaces so I'm probably the wrong person to ask for support about the issue. I feel like a lot of hard courts are currently medium paced which I like because it allows a balance of offense and defense. Clay and grass are natural surfaces with distinct characteristics and I wouldn't want to change them either. The only change I'm lobbying for is to keep European clay red. Other than that, I love the matches the way they are today and do I want to favor serve fest galore? Hell no. That is exactly the kind of tennis I don't like to see. Once or twice a year is more than enough for me. (I do not understand the net complaint either. I just watched a final where both players went to net regularly. I don't think net play is gonna get extinct. Serve and volley maybe but not net play in general)