Jeff Stelling wrote:

---

My words from the Madrid thread looking increasingly like the shrewdest comment made on this board in a good number of decades.

I have copied it below for posterity.


"If I was Andy then I'd retire forthwith from clay. It's an appalling surface to play and spectate on and merely a necessary evil to endure if you wish to target ranking gains.

These weekly s*** shows getting duffed up by no-marks don't do anybody any favours and is just superfluous strain on a body that is clearly starting to creak a little. This latest one really extracts the urine, getting schooled by an individual on an even more alarming career skid than Kyle.

He'd be best off heading back to London, licking his wounds and getting sharp for the grass - a proper surface to play on and considerably more enjoyable to watch."

---

That part is still spectacularly wrong though.

Jeff I realise times are hard with the demotion of your beloved Hartlepool from the football league, I feel your pain but don't let it spill into spiteful invective about what is the god of all surfaces, yes clay.

Admittedly for the one dimensional it may be a struggle to appreciate the nuances of a game which are a product of a variable that most others do not have ie. the surface on which it is played. Of course then there is clay and there is clay! There are wet days and dry days and days that are neither, or both; all part of the rich tapestry of tennis for the coniseur.

How dull would tennis be as both a player and spectator without dirt!, fantastic for player development primarily because of the capacity to sustain a rally of more than three strokes and mould ground strokes through hours of practice, its premium on serving accuracy over power and what I enjoy most is the capacity to glide makes it easy on the body particularly the green variety where moisture retention also softens impact.

Realistically top top pros can't really stop playing on any surface per sae given the way the ATP tour works (with unless injured) they can however be pragmatic about their outcomes and we are where we are.

Andy was duffed up yesterday but by Fogini on clay in Rome and it was a masterclass, he was on the mark not a no mark you might say. You may not have enjoyed the outcome but not to have enjoyed the contest and the context could be interpreted as well.errr..... but I will forgive you given Hartlepool demise only to be replaced by all things vegan.

-- Edited by Oakland2002 on Wednesday 17th of May 2017 02:35:06 AM

indiana wrote:

---

Oakland has given what would have been much of my expanded thoughts and probably more lucidly.

As well as our shared liking of clay ( I like watching points being constructed ) I would add that it just was not and won't for some time be on the cards for Andy to turn away from clay as long as he is fit enough. The past couple of years' clay court runs, especially his French Open final last year have led him to believe ( he has said so ) that a French Open title is not beyond him. With 3 Slams to his name plus 2 Olympic titles he clearly wants to add to that legacy and the Australian Open title and French Open title and hence Career Grand Slam are the biggest way to do that.

It is a great pity that for whatever combination of reasons that his form has been so poor this year so I can't see him being anywhere close to a French Open title this year, but he won't be running away from clay anytime soon.

---

 I think as World #1 Andy also has a moral duty to play the slams - the sport should need and expect that the number one, whoever they are, play in these events. Clearly Serena on the ladies side has a good excuse, but poor form wouldnt be one! He will play!

Oakland2002 wrote:

---

Well played Mr Fogini

---

 in other words Fab Fab!