PDA

View Full Version : Are surface specialists coming through at the GS's?


TomTennis
Jul 3rd, 2005, 07:17 PM
Australian Open 2005- Serena Williams wins for the second time. Marat Safin wins after reaching the final for the third time.

French Open- Justiene Henin-Hardenne is known for great clay court play, and wins for the second time. Rafeal Nadal continues his clay court dominance with a first GS title.

Wimbledon 2005- Venus Williams wins for the third time in her fifth final in the past six years. Roger Federer wins for the third time in his third final.




Is it fair to say that these players are the best on their surface!??? Are they shining like this for a reason or just mere conincidence that they were playing the best for those 2 weeks of the year????

KoOlMaNsEaN
Jul 3rd, 2005, 08:05 PM
i dont think there are surface specialists in tennis. most of them are all rounders

SJW
Jul 3rd, 2005, 08:13 PM
most of them are all rounders yes. but i think Serena is the best hardcourter, Justine the best clay courter and Venus the best grass courter so maybe there's something in that.

VeeReeDavJCap81
Jul 3rd, 2005, 08:16 PM
Seems like it....so that means Lindsay should win the US Open.

njnetswill
Jul 3rd, 2005, 08:32 PM
On the men's side there are obvious specialists who do better in their Grand Slam of choice. (Mainly Grass of Wimbledon and Clay of Roland Garros). But on the women's side, the draw is more or less predictable based on rankings, not surface "specialists".

KoOlMaNsEaN
Jul 3rd, 2005, 08:40 PM
Your right but its not like the atp where players are only good on clay

Fingon
Jul 3rd, 2005, 08:51 PM
I don't think so,

you can't say surface specialist as all those players are good on several surfaces (and have proven it).

And if you see previous winners, very rarely a player not considered "good" at that surface won.
Wimbledon going backwards
Venus, Maria, Serena, Serena, Venus, Venus, Lindsay, Novotna, Hingis.

until you get to Hingis, all winners were considered "grass specialists" or at least very good on grass.

French Open:

Justine, Myskina, Justine, Serena, Jennifer, Mary, Steffi, Arantxa, Iva, Steffi ...

All considered good claycourters except Serena and Jennifer.

Australian Open is more difficult to say, because all players are supposed to play ok on hardcourts, it's more a play leveling surface (or rebound ace whatever).

VeeReeDavJCap81
Jul 3rd, 2005, 08:56 PM
I don't think so,

you can't say surface specialist as all those players are good on several surfaces (and have proven it).

And if you see previous winners, very rarely a player not considered "good" at that surface won.
Wimbledon going backwards
Venus, Maria, Serena, Serena, Venus, Venus, Lindsay, Novotna, Hingis.

until you get to Hingis, all winners were considered "grass specialists" or at least very good on grass.

French Open:

Justine, Myskina, Justine, Serena, Jennifer, Mary, Steffi, Arantxa, Iva, Steffi ...

All considered good claycourters except Serena and Jennifer.

Australian Open is more difficult to say, because all players are supposed to play ok on hardcourts, it's more a play leveling surface (or rebound ace whatever).

I disagree with you about Jennifer. She's a great clay courter.

manu
Jul 3rd, 2005, 09:04 PM
I disagree with you about Jennifer. She's a great clay courter.

I agree, I was about to say the same thing: Jen is a very decent claycourter, no? I would consider Anastasia Myskina much less of a claycourt specialist: besides her 2004 win, she's made 4 first round exits and 1 second round! Her all-time record at the FO stands at 8-5, whereas Jennifer's record is 39-10 (with 3 4th rounds, 2 QFs, 2 semi's and a win), her best Slam record after AO.

Fingon
Jul 3rd, 2005, 09:07 PM
I disagree with you about Jennifer. She's a great clay courter.

I don't disagree with that, but she was never "perceived" as a great claycourter.

Serena could also play great on clay, her wins at Rome and RG prove it. But neither is considered a great claycourt player.

SJW
Jul 3rd, 2005, 09:09 PM
i perceived Jen as the best clay courter out of the Americans :shrug: her record is pretty good on the dirty stuff.

manu
Jul 3rd, 2005, 09:12 PM
IMO Wimbledon and Roland Garros will always be more likely to have surface specialists come out as winners, because these are the Slams with the most extreme surfaces. It's more even for the US Open and especially the Australian Open, which supports the most all-around surface. I'm not sure, but I think rebound ace is some kind of an if only slightly slower hardcourt. So it keeps a perfect balance between fast- and slow-court specialists.

Fingon
Jul 3rd, 2005, 09:12 PM
i perceived Jen as the best clay courter out of the Americans :shrug: her record is pretty good on the dirty stuff.

out of the americans is the key phrase here.

bobcat
Jul 3rd, 2005, 09:12 PM
Hmm, Jennifer grew up playing on Florida clay and did beat Graf and ASV on red clay to win the Olympics, so I think she was always considered a very good clay court player. She moves pretty naturally on it, that's for sure, unlike Serena.

sartrista7
Jul 3rd, 2005, 09:14 PM
I don't disagree with that, but she was never "perceived" as a great claycourter.

Serena could also play great on clay, her wins at Rome and RG prove it. But neither is considered a great claycourt player.

But that's because Serena's greatest accomplishments have consistently come on faster surfaces. Capriati's had her best results on clay and slow hard courts throughout her career.