Originally Posted by dominikk1985
well the problem was that in the 90s we didn't see short rallies but mostly aces and service winners. those ace fests by becker, goran, sampras or krajicek were really not good to watch. they had to slow down the courts.
in the 70s those courts were OK but when modern rackets, bigger players and modern swing mechanics came in the game there was too much power. courts were made for wood rackets and not 140 mph serves and 100 mph FHs.
however while I think the slowing down was necessary I think they went a little too far. they should only have slowed down them a little but not so much.
I don't really care whether fed or nadal win or lose more slams due to the surface. I'm more a player than a fan and whoever deals best with the given conditions deserves the win. fed did plenty well with today's surfaces he cannot really complain about them.
however I do think that some more one dimensional power servers like kraji or goran would not have won today and guys like isner or roddick might have won back then.
but if you are a versatile player like fed you can win on all kind of surfaces for him it does not make a big difference because he can play all kind of styles.
Maybe it would be good to have clean fast courts, and clean soft courts, this way we can see some short point Serve & Volleying for those who want to watch that, then the slower courts for those who like longer rallies.
It's my understanding they aren't doing that, they are slowing down ALL COURTS, giving a huge advantage to types of players who have a distinctive style. Imagine training all of your life on fast courts as a SV, only to find out they've changed the surfaces. Again it's like training to be a pure boxer in a 20X20 ring only to find out they've changed it to 10X10, not too cool in my opinion.