Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface - MensTennisForums.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 03:08 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 33
Posts: 1,562
                     
Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

I notice a big difference in the speed between these 2 courts. Monte-Carlo is the ideal surface for Nadal. He really can't be blown off the court in Monte-Carlo. The courts are too slow but still pretty high bouncing. Rome to me seems like a high bouncing hardcourt that is slippery. If you can deal with the high bouncing and slipperiness and you hit flat and hard like the many players Nadal struggles with on hardcourts, you got a shot against Nadal. That is what Gulbis was able to do for one set. Interesting that Fed always seems to struggle at Rome. You would think Fed could be more effective here with his serve and all-court game. History shows that this is probably the tournament least suitable to him. He seems to prefer Monte-Carlo though like Nadal. I've heard that Rome is clay put on top of asphalt while Monte-Carlo is clay on top of a softer surface. Anyways thought I would share my knowledge on the differences between these 2 tournaments and if anyone wants to share more about the differences, that would be great.
Topspin Forehand is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 04:51 AM
Registered User
 
kobulingam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,129
                     
Re: Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

Fed prefers the lower bouncing clay courts.
kobulingam is offline  
post #3 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 06:02 AM
Registered User
 
CyBorg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,166
                     
Re: Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

Excellent observations. It was amazing watching Gulbis smack all of those serves and just drive his groundstrokes from angle to angle with power. If he had a bit more maturity and consistency he would have won.

But at the French Open it'll be more like Monte Carlo. The opponent's groundies, no matter how flat, will stay up and Nadal will get to every ball. And you can't outgrind the man.

Unless he's hurt.

'This isn't right. This isn't even wrong'.
- Wolfgang Pauli upon seeing a paper by a young physicist

'A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.'
- Bertrand Russell
CyBorg is offline  
post #4 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 09:01 AM
Registered User
 
Kolya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Munich
Posts: 11,324
                     
Re: Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

Well before beating Nadal in Hamburg and Madrid when Nadal was clearly fatigued. Federer was closest to win in Rome in the 5 set final.

Robin Bo Carl Söderling
Kolya is offline  
post #5 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 01:28 PM
Registered User
 
yesyesok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 219
                     
Re: Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

He wasn't fatigued in Hamburg.


And Soda hit him off the French court last year, and even if Nadal was injured it didn't show.
yesyesok is offline  
post #6 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 05:02 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 33
Posts: 1,562
                     
Re: Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

Quote:
Originally Posted by yesyesok View Post
He wasn't fatigued in Hamburg.


And Soda hit him off the French court last year, and even if Nadal was injured it didn't show.
Um yes he was tired in Hamburg in both finals to Federer and found a way to win the second one. What a warrior. And Nadal's movement was like his legs were in cement. Not usual the way he played and Soderling made him pay for it.
Topspin Forehand is offline  
post #7 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 05:58 PM
Registered User
 
lurker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,731
                     
Re: Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

Monte Carlo is higher bouncing, court is better for movement. Nadal looked like he got stuck moving a couple of times here in Rome, and the forehand cannot penetrate due to the lower bounce. He has trouble getting to control the baseline from his forehand like he can in Monte Carlo. The rainy gloomy conditions doesn't help his cause either.

And I don't agree with whomever said if Nadal was injured it didn't show in last year's French. He was moving like s*&^! all season, he even struggled in Monte Carlo last year.
lurker is offline  
post #8 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 06:01 PM
Registered User
 
kobulingam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,129
                     
Re: Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

French Open used faster balls last year. It is faster than MC now.
kobulingam is offline  
post #9 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 06:09 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 33
Posts: 1,562
                     
Re: Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

Quote:
Originally Posted by kobulingam View Post
French Open used faster balls last year. It is faster than MC now.
Agreed. Some need to stop saying Monte-Carlo is similar to RG. RG is much faster now unless they went back to the old balls. Which I doubt.
Topspin Forehand is offline  
post #10 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 06:09 PM
Registered User
 
M4RC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: BCN
Age: 26
Posts: 431
                     
Re: Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

Rome has less clay and it is much looser. I don't like the quality of the courts actually. In Barcelona, for example, they're much better prepared.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafaella Nadull
You have a pain there, in your famoose ass, no?
M4RC is offline  
post #11 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 07:05 PM
Registered User
 
LinkMage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Buenos Aires
Age: 30
Posts: 11,328
                     
Re: Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

Quote:
Originally Posted by Topspin Forehand View Post
Um yes he was tired in Hamburg in both finals to Federer and found a way to win the second one. What a warrior. And Nadal's movement was like his legs were in cement. Not usual the way he played and Soderling made him pay for it.
Yeah, by taking a fake injury timeout in the 1st set when Fedmug was spanking him. What a warrior indeed (more like what a cheater).

Schweni

Lahm

Kroos :fuck you:
LinkMage is offline  
post #12 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 07:13 PM
Banned!
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sleeping in the house of my latest jumpoff.
Posts: 34,908
                     
Re: Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

I don't get it when people say Rome is low-bouncing. The truth is, it is very high bouncing and the balls go through the air quicker than at MC or RG.

Also, Rome isn't necessarily slippery, it's actually a harder surface than MC or RG. It's easier for traction but harder to slide effectively.

Federer struggles at Rome in comparison to MC because his backhand is easier exposed, and he has less time to execute his shots, less time to come to the net behind his serve, things of that nature.
Filo V. is offline  
post #13 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 07:40 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,535
                     
Re: Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

Djokovic on Rome: "The ball bounces a lot higher than on other (clay) surfaces. The courts are really fast and the fact that they are slippery makes them even faster."
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...uW6KZ5YbXMXBiA


That was 2008, Rome was having one of its quicker years, but wasn't far different this year. 2009 was pretty slow and dead from the rain though.


If you want a low bouncing clay court, look at Barcelona.
philosophicalarf is offline  
post #14 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 07:41 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,132
                     
Re: Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

Quote:
Originally Posted by kobulingam View Post
Fed prefers the lower bouncing clay courts.
That's why he won Hamburg multiple times.
Persimmon is offline  
post #15 of 23 (permalink) Old 05-02-2010, 08:31 PM
Registered User
 
ossie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Age: 30
Posts: 6,437
                     
Re: Rome Compared to Monte-Carlo Surface

rome seems to be quicker with less bounce
ossie is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome