PDA

View Full Version : What do you guys think bout these suppose to be fast courts gone slower??


Direwolf
Oct 6th, 2007, 04:08 AM
i hate it..
Venus shots r suppose to be like a laser shot..
but..:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Ntour
Oct 6th, 2007, 04:14 AM
well it doesn't change their speed through the air so really if it was going to be a clean winner it still will be

Donny
Oct 6th, 2007, 04:15 AM
well it doesn't change their speed through the air so really if it was going to be a clean winner it still will be

So ummm... what about clay? Or is the air in Paris slower or something?

Ntour
Oct 6th, 2007, 04:16 AM
no i mean a hard surface the speed doesn't differ that much, it will never be any where near as slow as clay

i meant in regards to hard courts, clean winners will be clean winners, but generally the shots won't force as many errors

Direwolf
Oct 6th, 2007, 05:59 AM
no i mean a hard surface the speed doesn't differ that much, it will never be any where near as slow as clay

i meant in regards to hard courts, clean winners will be clean winners, but generally the shots won't force as many errors

like duh..!!
clean winners will always be a clean winner anywhere..
the shots are usually straight through...

but...now, it seems like theres more air to it..

Lunaris
Oct 6th, 2007, 06:27 AM
I am mainly annoyed with Wimbledon. The grass there is way slower than it used to be. There is no variety anymore. Nowadays you can switch from clay to grass without too much effort and that's just wrong. In past decades winning RG and Wimbledon in a row was considered as one of the greatest achievements in tennis because of the difference between both surfaces and utterly different style of play you had to use to win it. Now it's not as difficult anymore. On every surface nowadays we basically see baseline hardcourt tennis. Players don't have to be skilled volleyers to go far in Wimbledon (btw. 75% of the current top 20 players are horrible at the net :rolleyes: ). I appreciate long rallies but I also miss the variety. Remember how Federer played to win his first Wimbledon in 2003, he served and volleyed, last years he didn't. Also to have a player like Nadal (nothing against him) in Wimbledon final back to back is ridiculous. Claycourts on the other hand have been speed up a bit. There is no significant difference among the surfaces anymore and that's not good.

cartmancop
Oct 6th, 2007, 06:41 AM
I am getting kind of tired of what appears to be a blending of the surfaces into all medium speed :lol:

Wimbledon has become ridiculous.. the fact that a player can advance through the draw without having to hit a volley means something is wrong. Those that mentioned that a majority of the top players can't volley is right. With the exception of Justine, Amelie, Hingis, Venus & Davenport, top women players with above average volley skills are rare... :lol: & yes the fact that Rafael Nadal can advance to the Wimbledon final, regardless of if you like him or not, shows the surface is ridiculously slow. Players wouldn't have had any chance to run down certain shots on grass even a couple of years ago. I'm not saying I want to see Venus, Davenport or Molik, etc. trade aces for an entire match, but having variety among the surfaces is what made each GS unique.

Also, some are saying the AO surface is an echo of the USO... idk much about what they've installed, but if that's true it's disappointing.

Lunaris
Oct 6th, 2007, 07:03 AM
As for Australian Open, I am not sure whether it will be a US Open clone. The new surface is made by the same company that made the surface used at Indian Wells which is considered as a slower hardcourt.

I tried to google something more about it.
http://www.plexipave.com/systems/tennis/plexicushion/plexicushion.html

Il Primo!
Oct 6th, 2007, 07:09 AM
So ummm... what about clay? Or is the air in Paris slower or something?

:lol:

Ntour
Oct 6th, 2007, 07:37 AM
wimbledon has been slow for a grasscourt since around 2000

Ntour
Oct 6th, 2007, 07:39 AM
the AO will be very similar to the Rebound ace it had in the past, just it doesn't hold the heat and get sticky

mankind
Oct 6th, 2007, 09:30 AM
So ummm... what about clay? Or is the air in Paris slower or something?

'Tis a little-known fact that Paris air is indeed the slowest in the world.

Solitaire
Oct 6th, 2007, 09:58 AM
Honestly the court surface really doesn't matter on the WTA tour until you get to the higher levels of the game. Women on the whole can play on anything. The WTA really doesn't have court specialist like they have on the ATP.

tennnisfannn
Oct 6th, 2007, 10:21 AM
I am mainly annoyed with Wimbledon. The grass there is way slower than it used to be. There is no variety anymore. Nowadays you can switch from clay to grass without too much effort and that's just wrong. In past decades winning RG and Wimbledon in a row was considered as one of the greatest achievements in tennis because of the difference between both surfaces and utterly different style of play you had to use to win it. Now it's not as difficult anymore. On every surface nowadays we basically see baseline hardcourt tennis. Players don't have to be skilled volleyers to go far in Wimbledon (btw. 75% of the current top 20 players are horrible at the net :rolleyes: ). I appreciate long rallies but I also miss the variety. Remember how Federer played to win his first Wimbledon in 2003, he served and volleyed, last years he didn't. Also to have a player like Nadal (nothing against him) in Wimbledon final back to back is ridiculous. Claycourts on the other hand have been speed up a bit. There is no significant difference among the surfaces anymore and that's not good.
When was the last timea woman won Rg then wimby, it was serena who couuld have pl;ayed on ice had she been asked to. Top women are not as surface specific as the lower ranked ones.
Nadal has become an all surface player even though he reamians the king of clay.

chris whiteside
Oct 6th, 2007, 11:02 AM
Some great posts here. Having the Slams on four different surfaces should make the game exciting. There's room for all of them. Admittedly Wimbledon probably had to slow the surface to counteract the serve's dominance but unfortunately has gone much too far.

Forehand_Volley
Oct 6th, 2007, 11:07 AM
Some great posts here. Having the Slams on four different surfaces should make the game exciting. There's room for all of them. Admittedly Wimbledon probably had to slow the surface to counteract the serve's dominance but unfortunately has gone much too far.
Venus and Roger have dominated Wimbledon this decade. I really don't see how Wimbledon's slower grass has affected the results.

Solitaire
Oct 6th, 2007, 11:16 AM
Venus and Roger have dominated Wimbledon this decade. I really don't see how Wimbledon's slower grass has affected the results.


Last just say in Pete's day Rafa wouldnt have gotten to the finals...

Im a Rafa fan by the way ;)


As I said the surface doesn't matter in the womens game until you get into the top ten then it matters but VERY little.

thrust
Oct 6th, 2007, 11:51 AM
Justine is Queen of Clay-specialist- yet gets to Wimbledon finals, wins Eastbourne twice, and wins the USO and has won the AO.

wally1
Oct 6th, 2007, 12:20 PM
Last just say in Pete's day Rafa wouldnt have gotten to the finals...In Pete's day Agassi made multiple Wim finals, as did Jim Courier playing from the baseline. The main reason there's not as much volleying at Wimbledon is that better racket/string technology means it's too easy to hit passing shots, hence no-one learns to play the game attacking the net. It's probably still feasible to play that way on grass but who's going to play a whole different style of tennis for 2 weeks in a year (except maybe Mauresmo)? The movement of the AO away from grass was good for the tournament, but one of the worst things that happened for variety in tennis.

So you have lots of people standing at the baseline hitting shots with extreme topsin, and QED the ball bounces higher (at least compared to when the syle was using continental grips hitting sliced approach shots). The fact that fewer people are now rushing to the net digging up the court also makes the bounce more consistent, making baseline play easier. All this has way more effect than any particular effort to slow down the courts/balls (plenty of aces are still hit at Wim). Grass is still grass and a well hit slice/non top spin shot will still stay low and skid through. If you get the chance go and watch the play on the outside courts at RG and then at Wim a couple of weeks later - they are still very different surfaces, it's just that players now play the same style on both.