Martin J
Rookie
Yeah, I clearly disagree with that. I believe the main reason for their losses is the type of game they play on the surface, rather than the change/evolution of the sport.Incredibly impressive, of course. I'm not trying to take anything away from Pete, it just doesn't hold up when making a 1:1 comparison with Fed & Novak.
Losing to Nadal & Murray in 08/13 says more about how the game changed than Fed/Novak's specific skills on grass. If those matches were played in like 93 & 98, you couldn't fathom Pete losing to baseliners like that on grass. But that's not the world Fed & Novak were playing in at the time. If Pete tried to play his way in 2008 & 2013 against returners like Nadal and Murray, you better believe he's getting broken more than 4 times.
You had a player like Kevin Anderson who blew the best returner in today's game (or in the last 20 years) off the court with 40 aces and almost beat him during his best Wimbledon run (vs Djokovic in 2015), you had a journeyman serve and volley player with a winning record against Nadal at Wimbledon, out of three matches they played, and it says something about the skills that are highly effective on this surface.
Sure, the 2008 version was a formidable opponent, but the match was still played on his terms, he managed to drag his opponent into a baseline contest, who couldn't exploit his biggest weakness on grass (the return of serve). Old or new grass, it's still grass and it rewards huge serves, sharp volleys, first-strike tennis, etc.