Originally Posted by edmondsm
Well considering that it is becoming far and away the most common surface on tour, it IS the superior surface by any objective measure. Accept it. It is the surface that rewards the most points to those who are good on it.
As I pointed out, and you conveniently ignored, if a player was extremely dominant on grass but couldn't get it done anywhere else they would be chastised by this board for focusing their game so narrowly.
This is why Nadal gets a lot of crap. His style was structured to succeed solely on a surface that was in decline while the rest of the tour adapted to playing a lot of HC tennis. It took him too long to adapt (he never fully did imo) and this is why his body has given him so many fits. On top of that, he and Tony whine endlessly about hardcourts being the prevailing surface on tour.
Don't try to use logic on him, it makes his head hurt. Faster surfaces-grass long ago, and hard courts since-have ALWAYS been the most important surface, except for a 3 year period in the mid 1970s when the USTA went berserk and put the US Open on dirt. It was expressly introduced by the French so their bandy legged 4 Musketeers could mute the power of the player voted the greatest of the first half of the 20th century, Bill Tilden. It hurts players who can hit winners and helps those who can bore their opponents to death, excuse me, "construct points." EVERY Slam has a number of one hit wonders who won, but the Dirtball Open has way more than the others, and that isn't an accident. The Dirtball to the Slams is as Ringo is to the Beatles, get over it.