Why is it players seem to have more winners on clay count than on any other surface?
Apr 6th, 2005, 01:53 AM
i think that that u have a bit more difficult to move to get the ball is a factor. oh and u get tired much more easy in clay then in hardcourt.
i didnīt knew that there were more winners in clay then in hard
Apr 6th, 2005, 02:04 AM
You don't hit more winners on claycourt, necessarily. The points go longer and no player is EXTREMELY dominant. The games are longer and winners are hit more often because of the length of the games.
Apr 6th, 2005, 02:14 AM
claycourt tennis is more about manoeuvering the opponent out of position and opening up the court for a winner. players tend to hold back and wait for the right moment, whereas on a faster surface, they take more chances earlier in the point and make more errors and fewer winners
just a theory. i hadn't really noticed it, although i prefer to watch clay court tennis. maybe that's why? i wonder if an analysis could be done at this year's roland garros tournament, and compare the results with the other surface Slams??? anyone?
Apr 6th, 2005, 02:18 AM
they probably hit more winners in general but that usually goes with a far greater number of unforced errors. it is partly in the way statistics are decided but if you look at stats at wimbledon the unforced errors are usually much lower because the points are quicker.
the ball definitely sits up a lot more clay and allows people to hit winners but as i said i think it's unforced errors that usually are higher.
the stats at the amelia island tournament are just wrong. it had ruano pascual with like twenty winners after a set and she isn't exactly an attacking player (she's probably hit less winners this year).