GREY 1769 wrote:It was a under a closed roof, so the conditions should have favoured the better player, Novak, but Federer simply schooled him. This was their first time against each other on grass here, I think, and Novak still has some things to learn on this surface. He couldn't get his footwork to work for him what with all the slipping and mistimed shots. Fed, on the other hand, was beautiful to watch - great balance, footwork and shot variety. If you look at his head it stays so still with the shot, and he almost never takes his eye off the ball, cheating to where he'd like to hit it.
Unless I'm missing something here, it sounds to me like you're underestimating the complexity of the situation quite a bit. Frankly, I'm sometimes guilty of oversimplifying (because even the pros tend to be unsure of specific weather effects), but I see more complications than you do.
Assuming by "favoured the better player" you mean that the better grass court player should win, what you need to understand is that a surface changes when it has moisture on it. Not so much hard court because it's so dangerous that play is stopped quickly, but clay's characteristics get damped by moisture while grass's gets exaggerated. Why?
Well, damp clay court weighs the ball down and muddies the surface which makes the ball bounce less high, which means that it hurts someone like Rafa who relies on getting massive ball bouncing. This is why during the French final I said "Nola's never going to get a better day to beat Rafa at Roland Garros", but long story short, he kinda blew it.
A damp grass court on the other hand makes the grass more slick which makes the ball move faster, and it also makes the ball bounce less high, and both of those traits are already grass court traits. So it can make the court like a more extreme grass court. A grass court, frankly, which seem a bit more like grass courts used to play more like. Federer's really never relinquished the title of world's best fastcourt player, so Djokovic was driven even more on to Fed's home turf. So quite possibly, analogously to what I said about the French, Fed was never going to get a better day to beat Nola at Wimbledon, and he nailed it.
It really is interesting these distinctions:
Fast-court: Fed
Slow-court: Rafa
Middle-cout: Nola
In the old days the bulk of matches were played on grass or carpet, Fed would probably have looked even more impressive generally. Instead they've both been phased out a good deal (for very understandable reasons), which shifts what we want our ideal tennis player to be.