:Thanks for your contribution. Your post doesn't appear to be signed but I appreciate your acknowledgement of previous involvement. I also take your point that other editors might respond to any changes. But I don't think we can (or even should) second guess what they might do. Even if we could, that doesn't get us any closer to understanding whether the section is CURRENTLY neutral. What I think would really help here is if someone could explain what purpose is served by the paragraph in question, esp the first sentence. It seems clear to me that its purpose is to imply that Nadal's lead in the H2H is due to a disproportionate number of matches played on clay. If that's not the purpose, what is it? Assuming that is indeed the purpose, then fair enough - it's a legitimate opinion - but let's spell it out and put the counterargument for balance. If it serves no purpose, let's delete it. I'm happy either way. This may seem a minor issue but it's one of basic fairness.