Wimbledons 2012: Unpompous Lawn Tennis Chat [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Wimbledons 2012: Unpompous Lawn Tennis Chat

BigJohn
02-03-2012, 02:25 AM
have at it. the lawn is at your disposal. tell us what you really think is going to go down at Wimbledon, either the GS or the Games this year.

can Nole repeat? how about Fed or Murray? what are their chances?


Considering that RG is just a few weeks before Wimbledon and that there are 2 events at Wimbledon this year, this thread is as valid as the RG thread.



lets get this party started.

Mjau!
02-03-2012, 02:43 AM
Nole is very unlikely to defend. He mostly loses against Murray and Roger on grass... mostly.

I hope one of those two wins... preferrably Roger. He can even beat Rafa at Wimbledon if he serves well.

Sauletekis
02-03-2012, 02:45 AM
:facepalm:

I'm going to create a thread of AO 2013...

Mjau!
02-03-2012, 02:50 AM
Can Rogi win Wimbeldon and the Olympics??? The Golden Grass Slam?

BigJohn
02-03-2012, 03:31 AM
what about the grass warrior? is it wise to write him off? if uninjured, isn't he the real favorite? some might say the real #1...

ballbasher101
02-03-2012, 03:31 AM
Nole is very unlikely to defend. He mostly loses against Murray and Roger on grass... mostly.

I hope one of those two wins... preferrably Roger. He can even beat Rafa at Wimbledon if he serves well.


Oh dear we have an optimist among us :facepalm:. Federer is never going to beat Nadal at a major. Sad but true. Federer can only hope that someone takes out Nadal for him. Federer is my favourite for Wimbledon but if he falls in Nadal's half then the jig is up.

2003
02-03-2012, 05:44 AM
I expect big things from Tomic

And one last hurrah from Poo Witt

Jimnik
02-03-2012, 06:01 AM
Chances of winning:

Djokovic 30%
Nadal 30%
Federer 20%
Murray 13%
Tsonga 2%
Berdych 2%
Tomic 1%
Roddick 1%
other 1%

finishingmove
02-03-2012, 06:48 AM
Excellent thread.

True Spartan tennis will prevail at Wimbledon.

I expect another Djokovic - Nadal final.

leng jai
02-03-2012, 06:52 AM
Nole winning Wimbledon again would renew my faith in tennis. Ajde.

Hewitt =Legend
02-03-2012, 07:36 AM
If Nole doesn't win, tennis is dead.

Ajde.

tripwires
02-03-2012, 08:01 AM
B-Nard the new Grass GOAT is obviously going to win by beating Nole in five sets.

leng jai
02-03-2012, 08:03 AM
B-Nard the new Grass GOAT is obviously going to win by beating Nole in five sets.

:stupid:

Sauletekis
02-03-2012, 08:09 AM
If Nole doesn't win, tennis is dead.

Ajde.

I can see you're trying to make an impact Raquel. :superlol:

Nole Rules
02-03-2012, 08:18 AM
B-Nard the new Grass GOAT is obviously going to win by beating Nole in five sets.

True spartan this B-Nard.

ossie
02-03-2012, 10:10 AM
Can Rogi win Wimbeldon and the Olympics??? The Golden Grass Slam?´rogi´ hasnt won a slam over 2 years now..

chalkdust
02-03-2012, 10:42 AM
For Wimbledon:
Djokovic 49%
Nadal 30%
Federer 15%
Murray 3%
Tsonga 1%
Other 1%
Berdych 0.5%
Tomic 0.5%

For Olympics:
Don't care.

Vida
02-03-2012, 10:55 AM
premature indeed.

Time Violation
02-03-2012, 11:11 AM
^^BigJohn is obsessed with CD, there's no other purpose to this thread :)

Vida
02-03-2012, 11:17 AM
^^BigJohn is obsessed with CD, there's no other purpose to this thread :)

Ive seen CD do that to people. its a vicious cycle BigJohn should not have allowed himself to get into. now there is no escape - for ever.

BigJohn
02-03-2012, 11:48 AM
premature indeed.

Did you make a similar statement about the FO thread?

BigJohn
02-03-2012, 11:53 AM
^^BigJohn is obsessed with CD, there's no other purpose to this thread :)

Ive seen CD do that to people. its a vicious cycle BigJohn should not have allowed himself to get into. now there is no escape - for ever.

On topic please.:)

Harmless
02-03-2012, 12:09 PM
what about the grass warrior? is it wise to write him off? if uninjured, isn't he the real favorite? some might say the real #1...
GGL ?

Time Violation
02-03-2012, 12:41 PM
On topic please.:)

Nole wins it /thread :p

Vida
02-03-2012, 12:58 PM
Did you make a similar statement about the FO thread?

no but Im fine with that one. its the next slam.

leng jai
02-03-2012, 01:00 PM
no but Im fine with that one. its the next slam.

In other words Clay Death arouses to you.

Vida
02-03-2012, 01:09 PM
In other words Clay Death arouses to you.

clay death has his good sides.

Hewitt =Legend
02-03-2012, 01:19 PM
I can see you're trying to make an impact Raquel. :superlol:

Don't know what gave you that idea mate.

I'm a long term supporter of Nole and Portugal.

Ajde.

Captain Piranha
02-03-2012, 01:30 PM
Rafa or Nole to win, Federer after that. Murray needs to find above 60% first serves on more regular basis, with his return game and free points he's have a chance but I can't see him dethroning Nole or Rafa just yet.

Tsonga a threat, Berdych too.

BigJohn
02-03-2012, 09:30 PM
GGL ?

The other grass warrior...

Nole wins it /thread :p

/credibility ;)

no but Im fine with that one. its the next slam.

Double standards... very MTF.

Ibracadabra
02-03-2012, 09:35 PM
Nalbandian finally wins his first slam.

NID
02-03-2012, 09:38 PM
Good to see BigJohn alive and kicking even after the AO final. :)

Sunset of Age
02-03-2012, 09:39 PM
Good to see BigJohn alive and kicking even after the AO final. :)
I think he's back after some temporary "injury", aka a ban. :p

NID
02-03-2012, 09:48 PM
i am sure it was undeserved...

BigJohn
02-03-2012, 09:52 PM
I think he's back after some temporary "injury", aka a ban. :p

A very debatable ban, if you ask me. But people, please, stick to the topic!

Is there a legitimate contender for the semis outside of our current top 4?

Could an hungry unseeded warrior show up?

swanpm20
02-03-2012, 09:54 PM
Can't believe noone has mentioned James Blake yet.

Fresh off his first clay court title in Paris, Blake will undoubtedly be the favorite to win SW19.

Sunset of Age
02-03-2012, 11:13 PM
A very debatable ban, if you ask me. But people, please, stick to the topic!
No probs, BigJohn. ;)

Is there a legitimate contender for the semis outside of our current top 4?

Could an hungry unseeded warrior show up?
Yes, why not? I'm not counting out guys like Tsonga, just to name just one.
Should quit his clowning, but who knows he might be able to do so, just for one fantastic run in his tennis lifetime? :D

Johnny Groove
02-03-2012, 11:23 PM
Murray, finally.

lucyfur
02-03-2012, 11:37 PM
Ivo and Isner in a 10hour marathon final.

Raferminator
02-04-2012, 09:07 AM
This is like one of Clay Death's conversational threads. I appreciate the OP picking up the slack while Clay Death and Start da Game seem nowhere in sight. Ok, I'll get the ball rolling here...

I say we have seen the dawn of Rafa 2.0 as of Sunday's AO Final. No longer will Nole 2.0 be able to dominate this series as he has done in the past year. Rafa has upgraded every part of his game, and now he has the confidence to match his new game. There is NOTHING that Rafa cannot do now. Last year, he had a weak backhand, injuries to his feet and knees, and a cream-puff serve. he has fixed every single one of those issues and Nole 2.0 was obviously shocked, because he saw Rafa 2.0 on the other side of the net and he didn't like what he saw one single bit. It was like looking in a mirror...That is how it is going to go down at SW19 this year.

Rafa Nation, it is now time to stand up and fight, for you KNOW we are right. We must strike at the lies that have spread like disease through Fedtard minds. Soon we'll have power, and every Spartan will rest, and we'll spread out our kindness to all who our love now deserves. Of course, some of us are going to die; Martyrs of course to the freedom that Rafa himself shall provide. And this provision will come at Roland Garros and then SW19.

The ONLY question is whether Rafa, the most single-mindfully driven warrior in Spartan history, can learn from his past experiences and enter thesee slam Finals ready for war. He needs to learn that the Title isn't his divine right for just showing up as was the case when he was humiliating Muger Frauderer for all those slams, devouring them off Muger like they were potato chips. His B+ game may be good enough to steamroll that worthless stooge Frauderer, but it isn't going to get the job done against Nole 2.0.

Rafa needs to bring his A+ game and make CERTAIN he is injury free coming into SW19 despite the long clay season. Maybe he could have a foot that was almost broken, arm and shoulder problems and a bum knee and STILL whip Muger's butt and prove for all with eyes that can see that there are no clothes in that False King's gaudy looking man purse.

But Nole 2.0 isn't going to let him have it easy, see...Nole knows how to enter Sparta and play a REAL match and give Rafa everything and more back with interest. Rafa needs to adjust his mindset and not take that final Sunday for granted any longer. Muger is no longer here for Rafa to use as low hanging fruit to grab a slam.

But if there is ANYONE that can adjust and put in the hours of work it will take to beat Nole, that man is Rafa Nadal! Rafa has time to reflect on the fact that Muger is finished and Nole isn't just showing up to be a bridesmaid. Rafa is not going to go into this slam looking for Runner-Up shiny silverware, I can assure you of that. Just like Nole 2.0 used Rafa's level of performance as a barometer for his own improvement in 2011, Rafa 2.0 will use Nole 2.0's current level and train accordingly.

Will Rafa 2.0 be motivated!? That is a complete joke that some people think he will roll over. Even some haters noted that Rafa fought the Australian Open final on sheer will and determination. He WILL be more motivated than he has been in his ENTIRE career for SW19 and another slam to devour like cotton candy. He finally has a legitimate rival, and Rafa 2.0 wants to win all the slams. He is already known as an obsessive workaholic, and that has gotten him into trouble with injuries. Motivation has NEVER been the problem with Rafa, if he has something to Motivate him. Frauderer is finished! It is time, Spartan Warrior, time enough indeed....

BigJohn
02-04-2012, 02:50 PM
Clay Death and Start da Game seem nowhere in sight.

You say this like it was a bad thing...

Jimnik
02-04-2012, 08:12 PM
Nalbandian finally wins his first slam.
Just in time before the world ends.

BigJohn
02-04-2012, 10:05 PM
Could Nalbandian really do it? Difficult with one transitional champ at #1, two greats of the game past their prime but still dangerous at #2-3 and a very capable underachiever at #4?

leng jai
02-04-2012, 10:05 PM
Hass

Jimnik
02-04-2012, 10:10 PM
Hass
Can't see him beating Nalbandian in the final.

BigJohn
02-04-2012, 10:15 PM
It seems uncertain at the moment that either Nalbandian or Haas will have the opportunity to win the 2012 Wimbledons double.

leng jai
02-04-2012, 11:30 PM
Nalbandian is Hass' bitch so no worries in the final.

Gagsquet
02-04-2012, 11:38 PM
gasquet first slam

nah I'm joking. Even Haas has more chance.

BigJohn
02-06-2012, 10:37 PM
You are a little bit hard on your man right there...

leng jai
02-06-2012, 11:08 PM
Hass and Gasquet will S&V to the final and then play a 6 hour match from 3 metres behind the baseline in final. Both will retire from cock cramp at 39-39 in the fifth.

Ajde

luie
02-06-2012, 11:32 PM
Hass and Gasquet will S&V to the final and then play a 6 hour match from 3 metres behind the baseline in final. Both will retire from cock cramp at 39-39 in the fifth.

Ajde

Does haas & Gasquet have the necessary
Ahem supplement , I mean stamina for a
6 hr final.

tripwires
02-07-2012, 03:58 AM
gasquet first slam

nah I'm joking. Even Haas has more chance.

Obviously. :rolleyes:

yesh222
02-07-2012, 04:29 PM
Am I the only one who feels like the Olympics this year will matter more to tennis players than any time before (or since) because they're being played at Wimbledon?

StevoTG
02-07-2012, 06:15 PM
Am I the only one who feels like the Olympics this year will matter more to tennis players than any time before (or since) because they're being played at Wimbledon?

I'd say that's the case for a lot of the players. You do feel that some of them see this as another slam (or for the more patriotic guys, halfway between a slam and a Davis Cup, being played at a very special location).

Hensafmurrafter
02-07-2012, 07:00 PM
Ivo and Isner in a 10hour marathon final.

Yeah, if it was still 2001.

Farenhajt
02-07-2012, 07:06 PM
Gasquet's first slam as a ballboy.

Johnny Groove
02-07-2012, 07:07 PM
My prediction is that RG, Wimbledon, and the Olympics will have 3 different winners.

RG- Nadal
Wimbledon- Murray
Olympics- Federer

And then the whole year comes down to the USO :D

tektonac
02-07-2012, 07:48 PM
Gasquet's first slam as a ballboy.

not sure if he qualifies tho. look at the skills required to be in the finals:

pjyfMCTAqKU

BigJohn
02-07-2012, 10:51 PM
Am I the only one who feels like the Olympics this year will matter more to tennis players than any time before (or since) because they're being played at Wimbledon?

That's an understatement.

BigJohn
02-18-2012, 01:50 AM
Dibs.

Slice Winner
02-18-2012, 10:36 AM
Are they using the same slow-ass balls at the Olympics as at Wim then?

TennisOnWood
02-18-2012, 10:54 AM
Nothing to do with ''Lawn'' for years back I'm affraid

reery
02-21-2012, 04:47 PM
have at it. the lawn is at your disposal. tell us what you really think is going to go down at Wimbledon, either the GS or the Games this year.

can Nole repeat? how about Fed or Murray? what are their chances?


Considering that RG is just a few weeks before Wimbledon and that there are 2 events at Wimbledon this year, this thread is as valid as the RG thread.



lets get this party started.

I think either Federer or Murray will win Wimbledon.

BigJohn
02-21-2012, 10:15 PM
The two best scenarios on the table for sure. Either case, tennis wins.

GOAT in progress
02-21-2012, 10:27 PM
How people do not understand that Federer will never again win a Grand Slam, and absolutely 100% never. His only chance for GS is indoor Wimbledon :)

BigJohn
02-21-2012, 10:31 PM
So winning a GS title is beyond the capabilities of the #3 player in the world?

GOAT in progress
02-21-2012, 10:42 PM
So winning a GS title is beyond the capabilities of the #3 player in the world?

That there is no thouse two over him who terrorize old man you would be right (especially Nadal)

Ash86
02-21-2012, 10:43 PM
I think it'll be either Murray or Nadal. It'd be a travesty if Djokovic won it again despite being the 4th best grass courter out of the top 4. Murray and Nadal are currently the best on grass IMO - Fed has historically been the best but his struggles the last few years suggest it's not the best surface for him anymore... In a best of 5 I'd give Nadal & Murray the edge.

Could see Raonic or Isner taking a scalp but not going all the way. Possibility for Tsonga to take out someone too... Still can't see beyond the top 4 though. Would love a Nadal-Murray final - all of their grass court matches have had some great tennis & they really match up well. Murray-Djokovic would be odd to see on grass but a possibility.

BigJohn
02-21-2012, 10:45 PM
That there is no thouse two over him who terrorize old man you would be right (especially Nadal)


So confirming: you believe that winning a GS is not possible for the #3 player in the world?

Just want to check if my tard-o-meter is acting up for the right reason or if it needs some tuning.

GOAT in progress
02-21-2012, 10:56 PM
Just when the time comes and the year overrun and when there is no fuel in your body for physically demanding matches in three sets, no matter who you are on the list, this is reality of the natural process of aging and change of generations. Ask Sampras, Agassi and all the great former players no matter how talented they are.

Vida
02-21-2012, 10:57 PM
So confirming: you believe that winning a GS is not possible for the #3 player in the world?

Just want to check if my tard-o-meter is acting up for the right reason or if it needs some tuning.

before djokavic won it in 08, it was hardly possible for years before, because of fed.

since the poster said 'not possible', clearly, he was implying that nole > fed.

and as we know, nothing tardsih about that.

BigJohn
02-21-2012, 11:01 PM
before djokavic won it in 08, it was hardly possible for years before, because of fed.

since the poster said 'not possible', clearly, he was implying that nole > fed.

and as we know, nothing tardsih about that.

nole > fed...

You are to Nole what Fart da Lame is to Nadal.

GOAT in progress
02-21-2012, 11:07 PM
Slotere Nice Zarkovo ti klice :) Odakle si Vida?

Vida
02-21-2012, 11:15 PM
nole > fed...

You are to Nole what Fart da Lame is to Nadal.

nole creams klutz fed left right and center.....and you know it :)

Slotere Nice Zarkovo ti klice :) Odakle si Vida?

iz grada na uscu dunava i save. mada dosta putujem :)

Slice Winner
02-21-2012, 11:25 PM
Feds could win Olympics, cus it's 3 sets. Wim would be harder.

Vida
02-21-2012, 11:29 PM
funny shit, out of all the slams, wimby turned out the hardest for fed these past few years. one would think it should've been the other way around. any ideas why?

pressure? lack of luck? joke return? what?

Jamoz
02-21-2012, 11:41 PM
funny shit, out of all the slams, wimby turned out the hardest for fed these past few years. one would think it should've been the other way around. any ideas why?

pressure? lack of luck? joke return? what?

Lack of good and real cow worthy grass. I don't know what shit they use these days, but it's not a real grass! maybe it's that plastic shit they use in every place these days :silly:

Vida
02-21-2012, 11:56 PM
Lack of good and real cow worthy grass. I don't know what shit they use these days, but it's not a real grass! maybe it's that plastic shit they use in every place these days :silly:

must be it. I guess than he'll be sucking balls this year as well.

nole_no1
02-22-2012, 12:01 AM
what about the grass warrior? is it wise to write him off? if uninjured, isn't he the real favorite? some might say the real #1...

GGL ?

I think he's talking about Rajeew Ram though

BigJohn
02-22-2012, 12:42 AM
Who ever said either GGL or Ram were the real #1?

masterclass
02-22-2012, 01:08 AM
Lack of good and real cow worthy grass. I don't know what shit they use these days, but it's not a real grass! maybe it's that plastic shit they use in every place these days :silly:

Yes. They purposely changed the grass and foundation to favor all-court play so that clay court baseline player coaches would be appeased. The new foundation produces more consistent, and most importantly, higher bounces, especially during the second week.

This is the primary reason why Mr. Federer has not done as well recently. Players like Nadal, Djokovic benefit from the higher bounces as it gives them more time to retrieve, and puts pressure on not so tall attacking types to attempt riskier, flatter and line shots to make outright winners. Taller attacking players like Berdych (196 cm vs Federer's 185) are at an advantage because the ball bounces into their strike zone and they can still hit produce winners if they are on. More powerful players like Tsonga can cope with Federer, because if they are on, they can still hit winners without as much risk. So who has beaten Federer in the last few years? Nadal, Berdych, and Tsonga. Djokovic then beat Tsonga because he is one of the top retrievers in the game and because Tsonga wasn't in the zone for 3 sets like he was versus Federer.

In the second week and with sunny hot weather, once the grass wears out a lot more all you are left with is a higher bouncing dirt, much like a clay court. The only chance for it to play more like normal grass (low bounce) is for there to be rainy weather that soaks the foundation prior to the tournament and/or intermittent rain at night during the tournament and not too sunny.

Respectfully,
masterclass

reery
02-22-2012, 06:07 PM
It'd be a travesty if Djokovic won it again despite being the 4th best grass courter out of the top 4.


Once can happen. Nadal is the 4th best HC player out of the top 4 but he won the AO once as well as the USO once. So Nole who is the 4th best grasscourt player out of the top 4 winning Wimbledon was possible. I will be stunned if Djokovic wins Wimbledon again just like I would have been stunned if Nadal won a second AO or a second USO.

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
02-22-2012, 06:43 PM
nole wins if he faces nadal

nole loses if he faces fed in the final

nole is 50/50 against murray in the semis

Hellraiser
02-22-2012, 06:58 PM
Tomik and Raonik nice underdogs @ Wimbledon.

BigJohn
02-22-2012, 11:51 PM
nole wins if he faces nadal



Even on "grass"?

Yolita
02-23-2012, 05:14 AM
Yes. They purposely changed the grass and foundation to favor all-court play so that clay court baseline player coaches would be appeased. The new foundation produces more consistent, and most importantly, higher bounces, especially during the second week.
Respectfully,
masterclass

Do you have any evidence for this statement? I would love a link... Because the man in charge of the grass in Wimbledon gave an interview last year and said that no change had been made to the grass. That the soil had been changed in 2001 in order to make the grass last longer during the tournament, and that no changes had been made since.

Thank you. :)

masterclass
02-23-2012, 10:41 AM
Do you have any evidence for this statement? I would love a link... Because the man in charge of the grass in Wimbledon gave an interview last year and said that no change had been made to the grass. That the soil had been changed in 2001 in order to make the grass last longer during the tournament, and that no changes had been made since.

Thank you. :)

The changes were made with purpose to encourage participation from the clay-court and baseline players so that all the stars of the game would be able to successfully compete, despite the Wimbledon "company line" that there was no intention to do so.
The evidence is all there for those who chose to do the research.
I've given the links in other threads and now I will give them here as well.
As you will note in several of the references below, the grass was changed from a 70/30 mix of rye and creeping red fescue to 100% perennial rye and the soil foundation is repeatedly replaced, compacted, and the particular grass encourages the soil to be thinner, dry out quicker, and therefore be harder.
Please read on for the substantiation...

Mr. Eddie Seaward is well known for minimalizing and defending the changes they made. Of course he has to. It's his job.
And he has to state the official Wimbledon line (which is there has been no intention to produce slower courts or make them suited to a particular game. But the very fact that they go out of the way to prominently say so in the official Wimbledon information court sheet (http://www.wimbledon.com/news/media-centre/grass-courts) belies the truth. Wimbledon states now that the changes were made solely to improve the durability and maintenance of the court. Mr. Seaward and Wimbledon have taken criticism for the change, from Britain's own - Tim Henman, Greg Rusedski, and others (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/4121364.stm). Note that Mr. Seaward is retiring after this year (Mr. Neil Stubley will take over- see the fact sheet referred to above).

The history of changes started with this kind of talk (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/in_depth/2001/wimbledon_2001/sol_at_wimbledon/1410606.stm) from David Lloyd (former British Davis cup captain), and John Inverdale (BBC Wimbledon tennis coverage anchor).

At around the same time, Eddie Seaward spoke with several coaches and asked them what they wanted (as you'll read in the article referenced below), probably ones like Brad Gilbert, and they told him. We all know what a fan Brad Gilbert was of the old Wimbledon grass. His best performance ever there was in 1990 (his peak year) where he was whipped in the QF in 3 sets by Boris Becker. Other than that he reached the round of 16 once. And even when he won matches in the 1st or 2nd round, his matches were never easy 5 setters. His game simply was not suited to the fast low bouncing grass courts. On the Wimbledon grass courts of the last few years, he probably would have a great chance.

Mr. Seaward has been interviewed many times, and though he defends the company line on most occasions, he has said enough in some interviews to help us glean the reasoning behind the change (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/tennis/2011-06-24-wimbledon-groundskeeper-eddie-seaward_n.htm), and the results speak for themselves. Perhaps the speed of the ball coming off the court is hardly different (though some would differ), but the bounce is admittedly (by Seward), higher and more consistent. Even here Seaward minimizes the change saying it gives them only a split-second more time. The reality is that the changes have slowed play enough (especially when the weather is dry and sunny, which accentuates the soil changes made), that the baseline retriever types can win Wimbledon, when they rarely did before and because they can, the serve and volley is going the way of the dodo, because approach shots sit up more, and once the player reaches the ball, the equipment of today allows the players to hit powerful passing shots.

I think they need to reduce the bounce some, not drastically, but enough where good serve and volley play will be rewarded.

Respectfully,
masterclass

masterclass
02-23-2012, 12:53 PM
Oh, and don't even take the reasoning that changes were made to improve the durability of the court at face value. The changes made that have encouraged play from the baseline to succeed have simply reduced and almost eliminated net play and thus wear on most of the court. I've worked on grass courts and know how difficult they are to maintain, especially when there is the type of wear that can occur in a 128 player draw and 2 weeks of constant play. What Seaward has done has subtly done has made his work easier.

Look at some videos of Wimbledon Finals from the 70's or 80's, like Borg's matches ( I think I have a thread about this, but I can't find it), and compare it to recent video, like Nadal's winning final. In the older video, you will see how the court has worn over 2 weeks. Wear is more even all over, like a sideways H, with wear especially near the net and vertically down the middle on the approach path to the net and some around the baseline. Notice how in the recent video it is all almost in front of the baseline and has extreme wear behind the baseline. For the most part, the main court is not getting trampled by players (only ball-boys ;)). Serve and volley net play has greatly diminished and baseline play dominates.

Maintenance becomes simpler. If the players don't run on most of the main court, it doesn't wear out. ;) They simply have to over-seed a bit in the main part of the court. Then around the baseline, they probably replace the sod or completely reseed after the tournament is over.

Here are videos over the open era. Enjoy, and judge for yourself.

Wimbledon Serve and Volley Grass:
1969
fU8xQMGhdso
1980
L-BwXwUzMLo

----------------------------------------------

Wimbledon baseliner grass:
2007
gvG4VpHSvUU

2011
v9LNItqMLmM

BigJohn
02-23-2012, 10:24 PM
Sir, you fully deserve your name.

Yolita
02-23-2012, 11:32 PM
The changes were made with purpose to encourage participation from the clay-court and baseline players so that all the stars of the game would be able to successfully compete, despite the Wimbledon "company line" that there was no intention to do so.
The evidence is all there for those who chose to do the research.
I've given the links in other threads and now I will give them here as well.
As you will note in several of the references below, the grass was changed from a 70/30 mix of rye and creeping red fescue to 100% perennial rye and the soil foundation is repeatedly replaced, compacted, and the particular grass encourages the soil to be thinner, dry out quicker, and therefore be harder.
Please read on for the substantiation...

Mr. Eddie Seaward is well known for minimalizing and defending the changes they made. Of course he has to. It's his job.
And he has to state the official Wimbledon line (which is there has been no intention to produce slower courts or make them suited to a particular game. But the very fact that they go out of the way to prominently say so in the official Wimbledon information court sheet (http://www.wimbledon.com/news/media-centre/grass-courts) belies the truth. Wimbledon states now that the changes were made solely to improve the durability and maintenance of the court. Mr. Seaward and Wimbledon have taken criticism for the change, from Britain's own - Tim Henman, Greg Rusedski, and others (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/4121364.stm). Note that Mr. Seaward is retiring after this year (Mr. Neil Stubley will take over- see the fact sheet referred to above).

The history of changes started with this kind of talk (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/in_depth/2001/wimbledon_2001/sol_at_wimbledon/1410606.stm) from David Lloyd (former British Davis cup captain), and John Inverdale (BBC Wimbledon tennis coverage anchor).

At around the same time, Eddie Seaward spoke with several coaches and asked them what they wanted (as you'll read in the article referenced below), probably ones like Brad Gilbert, and they told him. We all know what a fan Brad Gilbert was of the old Wimbledon grass. His best performance ever there was in 1990 (his peak year) where he was whipped in the QF in 3 sets by Boris Becker. Other than that he reached the round of 16 once. And even when he won matches in the 1st or 2nd round, his matches were never easy 5 setters. His game simply was not suited to the fast low bouncing grass courts. On the Wimbledon grass courts of the last few years, he probably would have a great chance.

Mr. Seaward has been interviewed many times, and though he defends the company line on most occasions, he has said enough in some interviews to help us glean the reasoning behind the change (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/tennis/2011-06-24-wimbledon-groundskeeper-eddie-seaward_n.htm), and the results speak for themselves. Perhaps the speed of the ball coming off the court is hardly different (though some would differ), but the bounce is admittedly (by Seward), higher and more consistent. Even here Seaward minimizes the change saying it gives them only a split-second more time. The reality is that the changes have slowed play enough (especially when the weather is dry and sunny, which accentuates the soil changes made), that the baseline retriever types can win Wimbledon, when they rarely did before and because they can, the serve and volley is going the way of the dodo, because approach shots sit up more, and once the player reaches the ball, the equipment of today allows the players to hit powerful passing shots.

I think they need to reduce the bounce some, not drastically, but enough where good serve and volley play will be rewarded.

Respectfully,
masterclass

Thank you very much for these links. Very interesting to read them. But I'm sorry to say they do not provide evidence for your claim. I'm not saying your claim is false. I just would like evidence before accepting it.

The Wimbledon link states that there's no intention of slowing the ball. They also mention the following: "Courts are sown with 100% Perennial Ryegrass (since 2001)", which is exactly what I remembered: that the courts have been the same since 2001. If they slowed them down, it was 11 years ago, not recently. Or so they say. I haven't seen any evidence that they are lying.

The second link is about Tim Henman blaming the slowness of the courts for his poor performance in 2005. Allow me to be a little sceptical, the amount of pressure he was under to perform, he had to find excuses. Maybe it was an excuse, maybe it wasn't...But I see no reason to believe him in opposition to Seaward. It's hearsay on both counts.

The third link is from 2001, when people were complaining about tennis being unwatchable. So maybe they slowed them down in 2001 after those comments. Again. It's hearsay.

In the fourth link, we have this paragraph, which also supports my original claim that any changes took place in 2001, and no later:

"Seaward's meticulous research has helped usher in a form of grass-court tennis that meshes very well with the game of the modern baseline player. Due to the 100% perennial ryegrass seed that has been in use at Wimbledon since 2001, the soil is drier, thus harder beneath the feet. This makes balls bounce higher, and the perceived speed of the court slower."

So, thank you for all those links, they either support my original statement that the courts haven't changed since 2001 or are neutral, They don't provide any evidence about any recent changes.

So I don't see why 11 years later people are saying that they are getting slower. They have been the same for the last 11 years. I know they changed in 2001. But they have been using the same mix ever since. If you have any evidence that changes have been made more recently, I would love to see it.

Thank you very much for the links. I had read some of those articles, that's how I remembered the year. But others were new. I enjoyed reading them.

I loved the videos, too, although we all know that a change awas made in 2001. So it's not surprising that the courts were faster in 1969 and 1980. But the other 2 are not comparable. Roger plays much faster than Nadal and Djokovic. Why don't you check the Roger-Tsonga in 2011? I remember it being as fast as the 2007 that you posted between Rafa and Roger. Different players may have different rhythms, even on the same surface.

masterclass
02-24-2012, 02:49 AM
Yes. They purposely changed the grass and foundation to favor all-court play so that clay court baseline player coaches would be appeased. The new foundation produces more consistent, and most importantly, higher bounces, especially during the second week.

Do you have any evidence for this statement? I would love a link... Because the man in charge of the grass in Wimbledon gave an interview last year and said that no change had been made to the grass. That the soil had been changed in 2001 in order to make the grass last longer during the tournament, and that no changes had been made since.

Thank you. :)

Please take the time to read these top two statements again. Do I make any claim in the top post that they changed the grass since 2001? No. Whereas in your initial response to mine, your post doesn't say anything about you knowing they changed the grass in 2001, does it? You say plainly that "he said that no change had been made to the grass, and only the soil had been changed in 2001.", and so you wanted substantiation of my claim where the grass had changed,etc. So my entire post was based on that, and attempted to give you a history of what happened to put all in context. If you can't see that, then I can't help you.

They changed the grass type in 2001 period. But to take some of your latest post's next comments about how it only changed at that time and so nothing else has changed since, is just ignorance of how a living court behaves. You need to realize that the effect of the initial change in 2001 continues to change the court over a period of years. It's a living court, not an artificial surface. That initial grass change allows the soil to get thinner over a period of time, makes it have properties of drying out faster, and the soil gets harder. You can take my experienced word on that, or you can do the research if you'd like, it's all there.
It is also somewhat weather dependent. Sunny, dry weather accentuates the change made, producing even a harder base, and as the court wears, especially in the back where it almost all dirt by the end of the tournament, the base is more exposed, and the balls bounce even higher. On the other hand, if it rains significantly, such as in 2001 or I think 2007, the base can soften up and the bounces will be lower.

Additionally, the other main point I tried to make is that they didn't just make the change to make the court more durable as the Wimbledon line states. They did it to help attract the clay-court stars to play and for them to be more competitive.

The second link is about Tim Henman blaming the slowness of the courts for his poor performance in 2005. Allow me to be a little sceptical, the amount of pressure he was under to perform, he had to find excuses. Maybe it was an excuse, maybe it wasn't...But I see no reason to believe him in opposition to Seaward. It's hearsay on both counts.

The third link is from 2001, when people were complaining about tennis being unwatchable. So maybe they slowed them down in 2001 after those comments. Again. It's hearsay.

The Henman link I provided was indeed an article from 2005, but his complaints (and other players complaints) started in 2002 and continued in 2003 and beyond. Please google it if you want to find them. Also, I don't believe you know what hearsay means, perhaps you meant to use the word "opinion". Quotes directly from Henman, Seaward, and others are not hearsay. Hearsay is when someone other than the original speaker says that the original speaker said something. By saying it is hearsay, you imply that he may have never said it. Of course if your claim is that all news articles are hearsay, even if they quote the speaker, then providing links to articles is pointless. Now depending on the source, it's always possible a quote can be taken out of context, or mistranslated (ala Federer's recent DC doubles "quote"), and therefore be misleading, which is why one should look closely at the source. In this case, there is no doubt that Henman and the others said what they were quoted as saying. Again, I won't provide you with more links. You are welcome to do your own research if you want.

My videos where only intended to give you a simple before-after idea of how the change affected the prevalent style of play by showing the appearance of the court. I'm not trying to compare individual players rhythms like Federer, or Nadal and Djokovic as you have somehow interpreted. In the "before" videos, I chose the late 60's because there you can see by the appearance of the court that they played almost no baseline style at all at the time. I chose 1980, because the video showed the clear wear on the court of a serve and volley game, plus it showed that there was some baseline play. I chose 2006 and the most recent 2011 purely because the videos most clearly show how the play was heavily accentuated towards baseline play. I could have shown videos from more years, but I thought that was more than sufficient to make my point.

Respectfully,
masterclass

masterclass
02-24-2012, 02:54 AM
Sir, you fully deserve your name.

Thanks BigJohn.

And by the way, I hope the accidental deletions of your posts stop. They really were fairly innocuous by MTF standards.

Respectfully,
masterclass

Yolita
02-24-2012, 03:03 AM
OK. I'm sorry I misunderdstood you. I thought you were claiming that Wimbledon was getting slower nowadays and I wondered whether you had some evidence for that. That's all. I just wondered.

I'm not really all that interested, so I won't be doing any research about that. But I'm sorry to say that I'm a mathematician, so it's impossible for me to take your word for it (or anybody else's, for that matter). Nothing personal. Just the way we scientists work.

Cheers and thanks again. :)

v-money
02-24-2012, 03:11 AM
OK. I'm sorry I misunderdstood you. I thought you were claiming that Wimbledon was getting slower nowadays and I wondered whether you had some evidence for that. That's all. I just wondered.

I'm not really all that interested, so I won't be doing any research about that. But I'm sorry to say that I'm a mathematician, so it's impossible for me to take your word for it (or anybody else's, for that matter). Nothing personal. Just the way we scientists work.

Cheers and thanks again. :)

That's how science works, huh? I missed the memo, so I better get on proving the theory of relativity for myself. I don't trust that Einstein mug. Nothing personal but I must work like a scientist.

BigJohn
02-24-2012, 03:12 AM
Thanks BigJohn.

And by the way, I hope the accidental deletions of your posts stop. They really were fairly innocuous by MTF standards.

Respectfully,
masterclass
Sweet as pie I am.

I doubt it was accidental and I hope it's a compliment.

BigJohn
02-24-2012, 03:14 AM
That's how science works, huh? I missed the memo, so I better get on proving the theory of relativity for myself. I don't trust that Einstein mug. Nothing personal but I must work like a scientist.

Somebody is on a (t)roll...

Yolita
02-24-2012, 03:26 AM
That's how science works, huh? I missed the memo, so I better get on proving the theory of relativity for myself. I don't trust that Einstein mug. Nothing personal but I must work like a scientist.

Somebody's word doesn't count as evidence. Einstein's theory is accepted, not because he said it, but because of its rigourous nature. You don't have to prove it again, you have to understand its argumentation.

The same with even the simplest facts, like Pythagoras Theorem, that we all learnt at school. I bet your teacher didn't tell you: "This is true because Pythagoras said it". I'm sure he/she proved it to you. Convinced you through reason. :)

Mechlan
02-24-2012, 03:31 AM
The major change at Wimbledon over the past 10 years is not the grass, it's the strings. How anybody who even remotely understands tennis could watch a match in 2001 and 2011 and think that things haven't changed is beyond me.

Yolita
02-24-2012, 03:38 AM
The racquet strings? So it's not a question of the surface? How would that work? (If it's not too complicated to explain, I'm not very mechanically-minded).

We can all see that tennis has evolved in the last decade. Some people think it's the grass. You think it's the strings. A variety of factors, more likely.

leng jai
02-24-2012, 03:42 AM
This thread is becoming pretty pompous guys :speakles:

Ajde.

masterclass
02-24-2012, 03:45 AM
OK. I'm sorry I misunderdstood you. I thought you were claiming that Wimbledon was getting slower nowadays and I wondered whether you had some evidence for that. That's all. I just wondered.

I'm not really all that interested, so I won't be doing any research about that. But I'm sorry to say that I'm a mathematician, so it's impossible for me to take your word for it (or anybody else's, for that matter). Nothing personal. Just the way we scientists work.

Cheers and thanks again. :)

You're welcome.
You don't have to take my word, but if you're not interested or willing to do the research to prove it to yourself, then one would seriously question why you bother challenging it.

I also have a math and science background.
In my experience, mathematicians and scientists do normally use others axioms, theorems, and research and build on it.
Without it, we would be starting where previous great minds started and doing everything all over again.
Usually, one questions previously accepted work only if one finds that their theoretical reasoning or experiments contradict previous work. Sometimes, some set out to disprove accepted work as an exercise. But in all cases one does the research before publicly stating they don't believe it, don't agree with it, or claim that it is wrong.

In this particular case we are not talking about math. But it is agronomic science. Seaward and others have said what I have stated about the characteristics of the particular grass they are now using, and it's affect on the soil's properties over time (in years). It's all there. Believe it or not. ;)

Thanks for your time.

Respectfully,
masterclass

masterclass
02-24-2012, 03:48 AM
Sweet as pie I am.

I doubt it was accidental and I hope it's a compliment.

Yes.:)

Respectfully,
masterclass

Mechlan
02-24-2012, 03:49 AM
The racquet strings? So it's not a question of the surface? How would that work? (If it's not too complicated to explain, I'm not very mechanically-minded).

We can all see that tennis has evolved in the last decade. Some people think it's the grass. You think it's the strings. A variety of factors, more likely.

Racket technology has changed a lot in the past few years, specifically string technology. It's the reason players are able to hit more offensive shots from impossibly defensive positions, to generate incredible amounts of spin, to hit passing shots so much more effectively than they used to. These factors hold true regardless of surface. Obviously they did change the type of grass used, and the courts will play differently every year based on weather conditions etc. and the ball changes, but racket technology is the main reason play is so different now than it used to be. It's a matter of opinion whether it's better or worse, but there's little doubt that it's different.

v-money
02-24-2012, 03:51 AM
Somebody's word doesn't count as evidence. Einstein's theory is accepted, not because he said it, but because of its rigourous nature. You don't have to prove it again, you have to understand its argumentation.

The same with even the simplest facts, like Pythagoras Theorem, that we all learnt at school. I bet your teacher didn't tell you: "This is true because Pythagoras said it". I'm sure he/she proved it to you. Convinced you through reason. :)

Oh I see. So when someone suggests a theory like the slowing down of surfaces you can just say: I need solid proof to accept the theory but "I'm not really all that interested, so I won't be doing any research about that." You need proof to believe something but you don't care about finding the proof, so I suppose you just have to keep living your life in ignorance. Ajde NoleGOAT!

Yolita
02-24-2012, 04:05 AM
You're welcome.
You don't have to take my word, but if you're not interested or willing to do the research to prove it to yourself, then one would seriously question why you bother challenging it.

I also have a math and science background.
In my experience, mathematicians and scientists do normally use others axioms, theorems, and research and build on it.
Without it, we would be starting where previous great minds started and doing everything all over again.
Usually, one questions previously accepted work only if one finds that their theoretical reasoning or experiments contradict previous work. Sometimes, some set out to disprove accepted work as an exercise. But in all cases one does the research before publicly stating they don't believe it, don't agree with it, or claim that it is wrong.

In this particular case we are not talking about math. But it is agronomic science. Seaward and others have said what I have stated about the characteristics of the particular grass they are now using, and it's affect on the soil's properties over time (in years). It's all there. Believe it or not. ;)

Thanks for your time.

Respectfully,
masterclass

OMG Did I upset you? I'm very sorry.

If you read my first post, yesterday, I never said I didn't believe it, or that it was wrong, I didn't challenge it. I just asked if you had any evidence, that I would love to see it... I was interested enough to ask for evidence. That's standard behaviour among scientists. Nobody gets upset if somebody asks for evidence.

But don't worry. I shan't do it again. I'll keep quiet. :)

This goes for you, too, v-money. No need to get aggressive. I should have known better. This is mtf after all... :devil: But the fact that it was masterclass made me think that perhaps it would be all right.

No problem. Bye. :wavey:

masterclass
02-24-2012, 04:08 AM
Racket technology has changed a lot in the past few years, specifically string technology. It's the reason players are able to hit more offensive shots from impossibly defensive positions, to generate incredible amounts of spin, to hit passing shots so much more effectively than they used to. These factors hold true regardless of surface. Obviously they did change the type of grass used, and the courts will play differently every year based on weather conditions etc. and the ball changes, but racket technology is the main reason play is so different now than it used to be. It's a matter of opinion whether it's better or worse, but there's little doubt that it's different.

The biggest racquet and string changes came in the 90's. The surface changes, including Wimbledon, where a reaction to that.
What they didn't realize is that by changing the surfaces, they were merely shifting the effect of the technology.

When conditions were faster, the equipment changes favored the serve and volley players almost to an extreme, especially on the faster, lower bouncing surfaces, almost eliminating any baseline rallies. After they purposely changed the courts to make things "more fair", it shifted the equipment advantage to the baseliners. Because the conditions are slower, baseliners can get to the ball. And when they get to it, they are able to hit the offensive shots from defensive positions, as you state. And they continue to improve the equipment technology, which is only making the current situation worse.

The problem is, that play has simply gone to far in the other direction, and almost eliminated the serve and volley style om the grass at Wimbledon and on the hard courts, where consistent, grueling, long, baseline play is most damaging to the joints. They need to bring it back to a happy medium, where each style has a fair chance, depending on execution.

Respectfully,
masterclass

Yolita
02-24-2012, 04:14 AM
Racket technology has changed a lot in the past few years, specifically string technology. It's the reason players are able to hit more offensive shots from impossibly defensive positions, to generate incredible amounts of spin, to hit passing shots so much more effectively than they used to. These factors hold true regardless of surface. Obviously they did change the type of grass used, and the courts will play differently every year based on weather conditions etc. and the ball changes, but racket technology is the main reason play is so different now than it used to be. It's a matter of opinion whether it's better or worse, but there's little doubt that it's different.

Well, I'm very glad to hear that. It's the normal evolution of a sport played witth racquets, based on racquet technology. It's bound to happen. I guess they could regulate the type of racquet allowed if they wanted the game to remain what it was...

Personally, I find the sport as it is now just perfect. I love long rallies, but I love really fast games too, like the one between Benneteau/Llodra and Milos/Nestor for Davis Cup. Great match. We get great variety these days. :D

Mr. Oracle
02-24-2012, 04:15 AM
Chances of winning:

Djokovic 30%
Nadal 30%
Federer 20%
Murray 13%
Tsonga 2%
Berdych 2%
Tomic 1%
Roddick 1%
other 1%

I tell you what after putting the names through an advanced algorithm, i got djokovic at 81% with a margin of error of +/- 3%.

masterclass
02-24-2012, 05:17 AM
OMG Did I upset you? I'm very sorry.

If you read my first post, yesterday, I never said I didn't believe it, or that it was wrong, I didn't challenge it. I just asked if you had any evidence, that I would love to see it... I was interested enough to ask for evidence. That's standard behaviour among scientists. Nobody gets upset if somebody asks for evidence.

But don't worry. I shan't do it again. I'll keep quiet. :)

This goes for you, too, v-money. No need to get aggressive. I should have known better. This is mtf after all... :devil: But the fact that it was masterclass made me think that perhaps it would be all right.

No problem. Bye. :wavey:

No worries, I was and am not upset, only bemused. :)

You obviously seem to want "evidence" in the strictest sense of the word, whereas I believe that substantiation that provides a *quote of the expert's analysis is sufficient for this forum. Even a court of law accepts an expert's opinion, granted under oath. But this is not a court of law nor a scientific review board. This is a tennis forum, whose main audience is probably bored to tears by now over this discussion. If you seriously want to see a treatise or study on the subject - agronomy abstract xxxx - study of perennial rye grass effects on soil composition and density, I'm sure there are papers out there... maybe on the internet, maybe elsewhere.

*Here's the quote again for those that didn't want to read through all the links and are still interested :)
Referring to the new grass, Seaward says, "It also creates a slightly thinner soil, so there's a little bit air movement between the leaf, which then dries the soil and makes it harder."

"The hardness rating that we used to achieve on Day 13, we're now seeing on Day 1," Seaward says. "And that gives the players a split second more to play the ball."

Hmm, so one has to wonder what the hardness rating is on Day 13 now...especially if there is little or no rain ;)

Ok, more than enough said. :)

Respectfully,
masterclass

Sophocles
02-24-2012, 10:39 AM
If you read my first post, yesterday, I never said I didn't believe it, or that it was wrong, I didn't challenge it. I just asked if you had any evidence, that I would love to see it... I was interested enough to ask for evidence. That's standard behaviour among scientists. Nobody gets upset if somebody asks for evidence.

Surely the "evidence" that matters is the evidence, freely available on the web & constantly reposted here, that the ball bounces higher at Wimbledon now than it did when the first change was made in 2001? The question then becomes, why?

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
02-24-2012, 01:10 PM
Even on "grass"?

indeed.

it is no longer about surface variance as both are good on all (homogenzied) surfaces

secondly- 90% of the match is mental (unless you have a situation like roddick trying to slide on clay) and i believe nole has nadal mentally tea-bagged

(tea-bagging for the uninitionated is crouching and extending your nether regions into the face of your downed opponent- your testicles being a sort of tea bag like instrument used to humiliate your victim)

reery
02-24-2012, 01:20 PM
I tell you what after putting the names through an advanced algorithm, i got djokovic at 81% with a margin of error of +/- 3%.

:lol:

reery
02-24-2012, 07:02 PM
I don't know about your talents little joanna,but you sure do have a very big mouth.Nole can win Wimby again.


DOOOBAAAR.

Djokovic had a cream puff draw at Wimbledon last year. Playing all his beetches.

If he met Federer or Murray, he would not have won Wimbledon.

The only way Djokovic wins Wimbledon this year is if he avoids Federer and Murray.



Winning percentage on grass. (where's Djokovic?)



1. Roger Federer 87.18 102–15
2. John McEnroe 85.61 119–20
3. Björn Borg 84.72 61–11
4. Jimmy Connors 84.00 168-32
5. Pete Sampras 83.47 101–20
6. Rafael Nadal 82.76 48–10
7. Boris Becker 82.27 116–25
8. Andy Roddick 80.41 78–19
9. Andy Murray 80.33 49–12
10. Stefan Edberg 78.57 99–27

minimum 40 wins

Rafa is the GOAT
02-25-2012, 09:40 AM
Rafa is the favorite and will win, how can the bookies say that Nole is the favorite. He and Murray have even chances, 2nd fave is Fed, and Rafa is the 1st. Would be so happy for another Rafa Roger Final. last time they played there it was the Greatest Match of All Time

munZe konZa
02-25-2012, 03:33 PM
Surely the "evidence" that matters is the evidence, freely available on the web & constantly reposted here, that the ball bounces higher at Wimbledon now than it did when the first change was made in 2001? The question then becomes, why?

It's because of the Moon ,the Sun and the Milky way galaxy combining together their gravitational forces to propel a Serbian guy or some Spanish guy to win wimbledons and all the other tournaments.They put a hold on that yellow ball to make sure that they have enough time to hit that ball because those guys are so slow otherwise and could not hit ball 10 years ago. All the other playes are fast enough they could hit the ball 10 years ago when it was lightning speed fast but can't do so now but can't do so now. It's a conspiracy theory of the highest order, good luck to you again in proving it.

BigJohn
02-25-2012, 07:25 PM
It's because of the Moon ,the Sun and the Milky way galaxy combining together their gravitational forces to propel a Serbian guy or some Spanish guy to win wimbledons and all the other tournaments.They put a hold on that yellow ball to make sure that they have enough time to hit that ball because those guys are so slow otherwise and could not hit ball 10 years ago. All the other playes are fast enough they could hit the ball 10 years ago when it was lightning speed fast but can't do so now but can't do so now. It's a conspiracy theory of the highest order, good luck to you again in proving it.

My dear, are you going for humor with this post? No need to force things like that if your intention is comedy, your regular posting style is much more efficient.

Don't do that again.

Mjau!
02-26-2012, 03:44 AM
Surely the "evidence" that matters is the evidence, freely available on the web & constantly reposted here, that the ball bounces higher at Wimbledon now than it did when the first change was made in 2001? The question then becomes, why?

Players hit with more spin now?

Johnny Groove
02-26-2012, 03:51 AM
I'd like to see Murray win it.

mark73
02-26-2012, 04:00 AM
My dear, are you going for humor with this post? No need to force things like that if your intention is comedy, your regular posting style is much more efficient.

Don't do that again.

Great imitation of CD throughout the thread. :)

But you need to pick up the slack and write at least 30 percent of the posts.:p

mark73
02-26-2012, 04:02 AM
Does anyone give Raonic a chance? If his serve is on, like now, who knows.

Mr. Oracle
02-26-2012, 04:58 AM
Rafa is the favorite and will win, how can the bookies say that Nole is the favorite. He and Murray have even chances, 2nd fave is Fed, and Rafa is the 1st. Would be so happy for another Rafa Roger Final. last time they played there it was the Greatest Match of All Time

I have a couple questions:

1) Why would you want to watch a final where the outcome can be predicted with certainty?

2) Have you been in a coma since January 2011?

BigJohn
02-26-2012, 09:48 AM
Great imitation of CD throughout the thread. :)

But you need to pick up the slack and write at least 30 percent of the posts.:p

Not gonna happen. For that, I would have to answer every post, including my own posts, and reply to my own answers.

rutinos harcos
02-26-2012, 10:11 AM
Does anyone give Raonic a chance? If his serve is on, like now, who knows.
To win the whole thing?Hardly.But,he could kick Fed's ass,for example.That'd be nice,a youngster spanking an old fart.

LawrenceOfTennis
02-26-2012, 10:23 AM
Raonic on grass :lol:
He is horrible on it. Big serve but crap return and absolutely no variety.
He would be trashed by top players.

echf
02-26-2012, 01:47 PM
I also have a math and science background.


From the "ATP/ITF calendar suggestions" forum:


What is ln?


These two posts are incompatible (this is basic high school math...)

masterclass
02-26-2012, 02:19 PM
From the "ATP/ITF calendar suggestions" forum:



These two posts are incompatible (this is basic high school math...)

Sorry for my lack of familiarity regarding that form.
I suppose it depends on how and where one was taught. ln appears to be a more recent calculator convention.

I was taught the loge(x) form long ago. (e being a subscript). We didn't have calculators then.
Since then I've rarely had the occasion to use natural logarithms.

Respectfully,
masterclass

BigJohn
03-04-2012, 04:25 PM
Does the Dubai result give more clues about what will unfold during grass tennis season?

Was the absence of the Clay Warrior merely a ploy to make his opponent forget about the danger he represents?

BigJohn
03-18-2012, 05:00 AM
Some more food for thoughts after this stormy Saturday.

Is Djokovic series of failing to defend title continue until the first of this year's Wimbledons? The second Wimbledon?

What if similar weather happens during a Nadal match? Would the weather defeat Nadal on grass?

Filo V.
03-18-2012, 05:01 AM
The tournament is not until June.

BigJohn
03-18-2012, 05:02 AM
The RG thread was created 2 seconds after the AO... This thread is as legit. ;)

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 12:56 AM
25.06.2012 Wimbledon
Wimbledon, Great Britain Grass £ TBD SGL 128 DBL 64 +44-20-8971-2473

wimbledon 2012 is just 18 days, 16 hours, and 8 minutes away. it will be here now before you can blink.

lets get this party started. who are your favorites for the title and why?

also what about murray? he stumbled out of RG. can he bounce back in london?

here are my entries for the title. i will go ahead and fire the first shot:

1. Fed
2. Clay Warrior
3. Tsonga
4. Nole


I dont believe nole goes in as the favorite at wimbledon. RG campaign is going to take a lot out of him. also nadal will have siezed the all important mental edge/advantage at RG once it is over.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 01:02 AM
25.06.2012 Wimbledon
Wimbledon, Great Britain Grass £ TBD SGL 128 DBL 64 +44-20-8971-2473


it will be nice if somebody can provide some pics of the centre court at wimbledon.

it will add some color and character to this thread.

Moozza
06-07-2012, 01:03 AM
Murray will win or get to the final.

Also he has nothing to recover from, QF at RG is a good result for him.

Mark Lenders
06-07-2012, 01:04 AM
Tsonga will win the title beating Rafa in the final.

Topspindoctor
06-07-2012, 01:04 AM
Give the title to Murray already. He'll crush his unworthy rivals into oblivion.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 01:05 AM
tsonga could do well here. he has to iron out a few things obviously but he is going to do some damage on grass.

Certinfy
06-07-2012, 01:06 AM
There's only 6 real contenders to me:
Djokovic
Nadal
Federer
Murray
Berdych
Tsonga

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 01:08 AM
what about isner folks? does he deserve a spot on our lists?

Mark Lenders
06-07-2012, 01:09 AM
tsonga could do well here. he has to iron out a few things obviously but he is going to do some damage on grass.

He has made great progress in his backhand, will be tough to beat on grass for sure.

Isner? No way. Fast surface + low bounce = Isner out before the second week.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 01:11 AM
let isner and mahut play for 3-4 days again. they will both be happy to be in the history books.

Mark Lenders
06-07-2012, 01:11 AM
There's only 6 real contenders to me:
Djokovic
Nadal
Federer
Murray
Berdych
Tsonga

Sounds about right.

munZe konZa
06-07-2012, 01:11 AM
Not again this annoying $^#^%R

rocketassist
06-07-2012, 01:13 AM
A quiet chat on the London Eye or alcoholic cocktails in the Trafalgar Square gardens would be better. I'll get the rounds in, even for my sparring partners.

As I said in the other thread, Andy is a contender here albeit not the fave, who I think is Nadull personally (Murray's only losses this decade on the lawn were the two to him) as Nole's title last year seemed a bit flash in the pan and he's susceptible to an exit more than the Spaniard is. Fed's susceptible to big hitters as the last two Wimbledons suggest but I think he can beat any of Rafa, Andy or Nole here.

Whichever two of the top 4 seeds get Berdych and Tsonga will be in a spot of bother. I hope Rafa gets Tsonga and Nole draws Berdych.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 01:14 AM
i have lost confidence in berdych.

tsonga stock could be on the rise on quicker surfaces.

SheepleBuster
06-07-2012, 01:20 AM
I think Murray might win actually. He should have beaten Rafa last year after that first set. He is capable of competing with Rafa and I think he can handle Djokovic and Federer too. What he can't seem to do is stupid 5 setters against guys like Gasquet or Wawrinka. Losing to Roddick was stupid too

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 01:22 AM
i have dumped the murray stock too. recurrent back issues, weeping, whining, and bitiching issues, and of course that new coach who goes by the name of "Ostravaghost".

i am not sure how much help he has been.

anyway berdych and murray stocks can be picked up pretty cheap now.

and earlier i dumped the nole stock as well.

Looner
06-07-2012, 01:22 AM
This title is Nadal's to lose after he creams Olderer or Djoker at RG. Sorry to say but I might not watch Wimbledon this year as it'll be too depressing.

Fireballer
06-07-2012, 01:25 AM
hey mods time to bad this Rafatard troll Clay Death.Guy is awful on this forum

ossie
06-07-2012, 01:26 AM
There's only 6 real contenders to me:
Djokovic
Nadal
Federer
Murray
Berdych
Tsongai don't think murray belongs there, does he even have a final at wimbly? i know tsonga does not either but he beat fed there coming from 2 sets down.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 01:26 AM
well we will just have catch up with you at the bass fishing tournaments then Looner.

that is your next best bet. tennis is not working out for you.

Topspindoctor
06-07-2012, 01:27 AM
hey mods time to bad this Rafatard troll Clay Death.Guy is awful on this forum

Bold words for a double account. Maybe you should lay low, lest the mods take note and ban you from these forums.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 01:29 AM
Fireballer is a double account ejacuzee. and now struck down with neuroejaculitis.

that has to hurt.

hiperborejac
06-07-2012, 01:29 AM
1. Nadal with best form

2. Djokovic - not his 2011 GOAT form but he'll up his game as a preparation for Olympics. If miracle happens and eventually wins RG he's 1st favorite.

3. Federer - last chance to get No 1.

4. Tsonga - good form but unsure how his loss ag. Novak will affect him

5. Berdich - if he up his game and all others go downhill

6. Tipsarevic - not really title contender but I see him as a dark horse if in Murray's quarter: he could reach semis here...

7. Murray - home crowd favorite but not really in form: however he could find it in Queens... Will probably fold under pressure on his shoulders

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 01:31 AM
excellent post hiperborejac.

rocketassist
06-07-2012, 01:36 AM
Indeed, since 2006 only one man besides Nadal has defeated Murray here, so that shows you how consistent he is at this slam in particular.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 01:42 AM
what about the draw?

does murray land in clay warrior`s 1/2 again?

also did we forget about roddick? he is probably not going to be seeded this time around. he could be trouble for somebody very early.

rocketassist
06-07-2012, 01:43 AM
what about the draw?

does murray land in clay warrior`s 1/2 again?

also did we forget about roddick? he is probably not going to be seeded this time around. he could be trouble for somebody very early.

After the last two Wimbledons he won't want it, he will want to be in the Serb's half- at the slam he's got the best chance of beating him in.

Yep no one will want Roddick early on especially when the grass is as quick/green as it is all tournament. He needs to get some form at Queens though.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 01:46 AM
i would like to see murray in nole`s 1/2 this time around too.

murray has to win queens and get some confidence and momentum going fast.

now he can get a good start on grass.

hope he is on grass ASAP.

Johnny Groove
06-07-2012, 01:47 AM
Assuming Nadal wins RG, I'm rooting Murray to win Wimbledon.

Should Nadal lose RG, I'm rooting him to win Wimbledon.

The market calls Nadal and Djokovic basically co-favorites, then Federer slightly behind, with Murray a good 4th.

Tsonga and Berdych the next faves.

Delpo, Raonic, Isner, are the only ones who else have a shot.

Looner
06-07-2012, 01:49 AM
I don't even think it's possible but it'd be pretty ironic for Murray to win the one major that eluded his great coach. Quite funny actually.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 01:51 AM
jonathan your avi is too distractive. she is hotter than a furnace.

i could not read your post because of her.

PitsOfTheWorld
06-07-2012, 01:54 AM
http://www.onlineticketexpress.com/files/images/tournaments/wimbledon_banner.jpg


http://wimbledonchampionships.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/wimbledonb.jpg


http://www.corporatehospitalitygroup.com/manager/venueimages/venue_193.jpg

Fujee
06-07-2012, 01:54 AM
I really would love this tournament to be Rogers :)

God, I love Wimbledon.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 02:03 AM
http://www.onlineticketexpress.com/files/images/tournaments/wimbledon_banner.jpg


http://wimbledonchampionships.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/wimbledonb.jpg


http://www.corporatehospitalitygroup.com/manager/venueimages/venue_193.jpg



well done and thanks. we really needed those wonderful wimbledon pictures here.

now this is what really gets this party started.

SheepleBuster
06-07-2012, 02:38 AM
I wonder how Tsonga does no grass. He was great on clay and could be dangerous

BigJohn
06-07-2012, 03:25 AM
So Wimbledon is just a few weeks away?

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 03:48 AM
tsonga blew that match at RG but i can see the progress. he should do well on grass.

leng jai
06-07-2012, 03:56 AM
Do we need two WImbledon chat threads?

BroTree123
06-07-2012, 03:56 AM
I disagree. I don't think Tsonga will go far.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 03:57 AM
why not?

BroTree123
06-07-2012, 03:58 AM
He's mentally fucked right now. I think he will fall between 1R-3R.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 03:59 AM
i see your point general.

BroTree123
06-07-2012, 04:01 AM
Tsonga is falling IMO.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 04:06 AM
So Wimbledon is just a few weeks away?


it is your thread. why dont you know the answer?

do you know anything? anything at all?

leng jai
06-07-2012, 04:07 AM
CD's thread merged with Big John's. Now there's a match made in heaven.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 04:14 AM
i was not aware of this old thread when i made the new one.

no worries.

ahadabans
06-07-2012, 05:31 AM
A lot depends on the outcome of RG IMO. If Nadal meets Djokovic in the final at RG and trounces him, then I think Nadal becomes the favorite to win at Wimbledon. If he loses or doesn't end up facing Djokovic, you have to like Djokovic's chances to repeat.

Federer is always a contender. His form at the previous Wimbledons has been poor though, so if that trend continues he is headed for a quarter or semi exit. Should he get Nadal's half of the draw, I like his chances even less.

I'd love to see Murray win this, but I think he has too many mental demons. Unless he gets super lucky and lands someone who doesn't belong in the final (like Berdych), I just don't see him rising to the occasion and beating Nadal/Djokovic/Federer in a match of that magnitude.

As a Nadal fan, I am of course pulling for a French/Wimbledon combo.

Outside the top 4, I just don't see anyone else winning this. You have some dangerous guys in Del Potro and Tsonga, but dangerous enough to beat two or three of the top 4 guys? Because that what you need to do if you are ranked outside the top 4. It's a ridiculous task and you can clearly see that by the stranglehold the top 3 have on slams won over the last half a decade.

Chase Visa
06-07-2012, 05:52 AM
I think Nadal should be the favourite, for two reasons.....

1. His game matches up very well with big hitters. Doesn't really lose to the likes of Tsonga and Berdych, whereas the others might. Only really Fed he loses to here, and he has the mental advantage there.
2. He seems in better form.

I reckon Djoker's win here last year was a little bit of a fluke, and Fed surely won't lose early again. Murray is good on grass, but he's lacking confidence.

Of course, Tsonga and Berdych will be dark horses. It's not impossible that they smash the dominance of the Big 3.

leng jai
06-07-2012, 05:53 AM
Haas will win Halle and make the SF.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 06:03 AM
haas is baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack.

Clay Death
06-07-2012, 06:44 AM
affirmative general.

TigerTim
06-07-2012, 10:28 AM
I am looking forward to Queens myself, I reckon Tsonga has that, he'll get to the Final of Wimbledon this year, I can feel it :). Probably beating Murray and Nole on the way. Unfortunately that prediction would leave Rodger and Rafa in the other Semi :rolleyes:. Rafa to win.

Nr 1 Fan
06-07-2012, 10:47 AM
Tsonga has a very good shot at Wimbledon, I'd rank him higher as a favorite then Murray.

Moozza
06-07-2012, 11:30 AM
Tsonga has a very good shot at Wimbledon, I'd rank him higher as a favorite then Murray.

Murray has made 3 semis there in a row. He is definately 3rd or 4th favorite. Tsonga is not too far behind though, easily top 5.

TigerTim
06-07-2012, 11:32 AM
Hopefully there is another Murray vs. Tsonga match @ Queens.

lucyfur
06-07-2012, 11:39 AM
Andy Murray, hobbled by a bad back, says he may not play in Wimbledon warmup at Queen's Club: http://ow.ly/bpsiA

From twitter.

TigerTim
06-07-2012, 11:47 AM
Andy Murray, hobbled by a bad back, says he may not play in Wimbledon warmup at Queen's Club: http://ow.ly/bpsiA

From twitter.

he said in his BBC interview the plan is still Queens. I hope so, I have tickets there for the final and semis :). If not then the likes of Jo are fun to watch.

Fireballer
06-07-2012, 12:55 PM
Tsonga has a very good shot at Wimbledon, I'd rank him higher as a favorite then Murray.

he has zero shots.Fluking 1 win against Fed is not a great shot for the next year.He cant beat Djoker,Rafa or Murray there they would break him all day long

BigJohn
06-09-2012, 04:09 PM
CD's thread merged with Big John's. Now there's a match made in heaven.

Sadly, it is against the unpompous requirement of the thread...

TigerTim
06-09-2012, 04:17 PM
Roddick will beat Federer here. Put your house on it. R3.

xdrewitdajx
06-09-2012, 04:24 PM
Nole is very unlikely to defend. He mostly loses against Murray and Roger on grass... mostly.

I hope one of those two wins... preferrably Roger. He can even beat Rafa at Wimbledon if he serves well.

im sure this has been pointed out at some point over the past 4 months or so, but whatever.

djokovic mostly loses against murray and federer on grass? really? so, not only has djokovic played murray and fed on grass, but he's played them a minimum of 3 times each (for the "mostly" thing to make the slightest amount of sense)?

orly

RIboy
06-11-2012, 01:31 PM
what will happen?

what will Tio Toni do?
how will Srđan respond?
will Severin Luthi step up?

Action Jackson
06-12-2012, 01:25 PM
Wildcards

Goffin, Goodall, Golding, J Baker, Ward, Haas, Hewitt

Chase Visa
06-12-2012, 01:53 PM
Wildcards

Goffin, Goodall, Golding, J Baker, Ward, Haas, Hewitt

Are those confirmed?

Expected choices for the most part.

leng jai
06-12-2012, 01:56 PM
That's a shame. I was looking forward to Haas winning 10 matches in a row.

dencod16
06-12-2012, 03:28 PM
1. Jamie Baker
2. David Goffin
3. Oliver Golding
4. Joshua Goodall
5. Tommy Haas
6. Lleyton Hewitt
7. James Ward
8. TBA

Wimbledon has been one of those slams that give wildcards to deserving players over their own, which i like. Good wild cards in my opinion.

Fat Camel
06-12-2012, 03:40 PM
Good list.
I hope Clement or Baker will get the last one.

Horatio Caine
06-12-2012, 04:05 PM
1. Jamie Baker
2. David Goffin
3. Oliver Golding
4. Joshua Goodall
5. Tommy Haas
6. Lleyton Hewitt
7. James Ward
8. TBA

Wimbledon has been one of those slams that give wildcards to deserving players over their own, which i like. Good wild cards in my opinion.

Yep, good decisions on the foreign players.

Hewitt obviously isn't match fit, but everyone loves his attitude and he is a former champion...
Haas has made an impressive return up the rankings, considering his age and list of injury problems.
Goffin is a logical choice. A young, talented, very fluent player. Impressive at the French Open, and also introduced to Brits courtesy of the most recent Davis Cup tie. Might be a bit too light-weight for grass though.


Brit wildcards are also logical.

I like the theme of rewarding our Davis Cup squad. Golding is one of our players for the future, so he obviously needs some exposure to these bigger matches. Needs to improve on his awful serving from Queen's though. Baker deserves his WC - excellent attitude to his career and life in general. Many could learn from him.


I'd like to see the last WC go to either Brian Baker or Dan Evans.

Evans has barely played since April, so I'm guessing that he has some kind of physical problem - maybe he isn't ready. Otherwise, he was the standout performer in Team GB's Davis Cup ties this year, so it would be grossly unfair to overlook him in the immediate short-term.

As for Baker, I'm a little surprised that he was only given a WC into Queen's qualifying, and not into the MD. Again, the AELTC seemingly holding back on him here. I wonder why?

Edit - also a case for giving Clement a WC.

Action Jackson
06-17-2012, 08:59 PM
Grega Žemlja gets the last wildcard after winning Nottingham,

BigJohn
06-19-2012, 12:20 AM
Do the Halle results change your expectations?

Henry Chinaski
06-19-2012, 05:35 AM
this seems like an ok thread to plug a blog post in.

some thoughts on R1 qualies

http://shanktennis.com/2012/06/19/au-revoir-arnaud-and-other-thoughts-from-round-one-of-wimbledon-qualifying/

BigJohn
06-25-2012, 01:36 PM
As you can all see, there has been a lot less methane gas emission in MTF the weeks preceding Wimbledon this year. This can be explained by the Unpompous label attached to this thread. It's a good thing. It's good for the environment.

If everyone did that, the quality of the threads would be greatly improved. It kindly reminds posters suffering with grandiose delusions to STFU and keeps a certain category of tards out of the discussion.

An experience to be repeated with future Slam threads.

You are all welcome.

BigJohn
07-05-2012, 02:39 PM
And now, this unpompous chat moves on to the Olympics.

uxyzapenje
07-05-2012, 06:13 PM
Favourites:
1. Iusedtoretirealotbutnotanymoreovic
2. Olderer
3. Kneedull
4. Pushray
5. Clownga
6. Servovic
7. Ferror
8. Birdshit
9. Delpot (http://www.womenshomepage.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/black-tea-pot.jpg)ro
10. Fixarevic

Roger the Dodger
07-05-2012, 06:15 PM
Whoever wins Wimbledon is the automatic favorite for Olympics.