The 3 Clay TMS events in relation to Roland Garros success [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

The 3 Clay TMS events in relation to Roland Garros success

Pages : [1] 2

Action Jackson
04-15-2005, 03:25 AM
This maybe useless to some people and in many ways it is. Here are the champions from 1975 onwards of Monte Carlo, Rome and Hamburg events and to see which one of them produces the most Roland Garros winners. The winners will be bolded in the respective events. Players who made finals in that year have been bolded in green.


Monte Carlo

Past Champions Finalists
2013 Novak Djokovic (SRB) Rafael Nadal
2012 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Novak Djokovic
2011 Rafael Nadal (ESP) David Ferrer
2010 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Fernando Verdasco
2009 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Novak Djokovic
2008 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Roger Federer
2007 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Roger Federer
2006 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Roger Federer
2005 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Guillermo Coria
2004 Guillermo Coria (ARG) Rainer Schuettler
2003 Juan Carlos Ferrero (ESP) Guillermo Coria
2002 Juan Carlos Ferrero (ESP) Carlos Moya
2001 Gustavo Kuerten (BRA) Hicham Arazi
2000 Cedric Pioline (FRA) Dominik Hrbaty
1999 Gustavo Kuerten (BRA) Marcelo Rios
1998 Carlos Moya (ESP) Cedric Pioline
1997 Marcelo Rios (CHI) Alex Corretja
1996 Thomas Muster (AUT) Albert Costa
1995 Thomas Muster (AUT) Boris Becker
1994 Andrei Medvedev (UKR) Sergi Bruguera
1993 Sergi Bruguera (ESP) Cedric Pioline
1992 Thomas Muster (AUT) Aaron Krickstein
1991 Sergi Bruguera (ESP) Boris Becker
1990 Andrei Chesnokov (RUS) Thomas Muster
1989 Alberto Mancini (ARG) Boris Becker
1988 Ivan Lendl (USA) Martin Jaite
1987 Mats Wilander (SWE) Jimmy Arias
1986 Joakim Nystrom (SWE) Yannick Noah
1985 Ivan Lendl (USA) Mats Wilander
1984 Henrik Sundstrom (SWE) Mats Wilander
1983 Mats Wilander (SWE) Mel Purcell
1982 Guillermo Vilas (ARG) Ivan Lendl
1981 Guillermo Vilas (ARG) and Jimmy Connors (USA) n/p

1980 Bjorn Borg (SWE) Guillermo Vilas (ARG)
1979 Bjorn Borg (SWE) Vitas Gerulaitis
1978 Raul Ramirez (MEX) Tomas Smid
1977 Bjorn Borg (SWE) Claudio Barrazutti
1976 Guillermo Vilas (ARG) Wojtek Fibak
1975 Manuel Orantes (ESP) Bob Hewitt


Rome

Past Champions
2013 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Roger Federer
2012 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Novak Djokovic
2011 Novak Djokovic (SRB) Rafael Nadal
2010 Rafael Nadal (ESP) David Ferrer
2009 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Novak Djokovic
2008 Novak Djokovic (SRB) Stanislas Wawrinka
2007 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Fernando Gonzalez
2006 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Roger Federer
2005 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Guillermo Coria
2004 Carlos Moya (ESP) David Nalbandian
2003 Felix Mantilla (ESP) Roger Federer
2002 Andre Agassi (USA) Tommy Haas
2001 Juan Carlos Ferrero (ESP) Gustavo Kuerten
2000 Magnus Norman (SWE) Gustavo Kuerten
1999 Gustavo Kuerten (BRA) Pat Rafter
1998 Marcelo Rios (CHI) Albert Costa
1997 Alex Corretja (ESP) Marcelo Rios
1996 Thomas Muster (AUT) Richard Krajicek
1995 Thomas Muster (AUT) Sergi Bruguera
1994 Pete Sampras (USA) Boris Becker
1993 Jim Courier (USA) Goran Ivanisevic
1992 Jim Courier (USA) Carlos Costa
1991 Emilio Sanchez (ESP) Alberto Mancini
1990 Thomas Muster (AUT) Andrei Chesnokov
1989 Alberto Mancini (ARG) Andre Agassi
1988 Ivan Lendl (USA) Guillmero Perez Roldan
1987 Mats Wilander (SWE) Martin Jaite
1986 Ivan Lendl (USA) Emilio Sanchez
1985 Yannick Noah (FRA) Miloslav Mecir
1984 Andres Gomez (ECU) Aaron Krickstein
1983 Jimmy Arias (USA) Jose Higueras
1982 Andres Gomez (ECU) Eliot Teltscher
1981 Jose-Luis Clerc (ARG) Victor Pecci
1980 Guillermo Vilas (ARG) Yannick Noah
1979 Vitas Gerulaitis (USA) Guillermo Vilas
1978 Bjorn Borg (SWE) Adriano Panatta
1977 Vitas Gerulaitis (USA) Antonio Zuggarelli
1976 Adriano Panatta (ITA) Guillermo Vilas
1975 Raul Ramirez (MEX) Manuel Orantes


Hamburg/ Madrid from 2009
2013 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Stanislas Wawrinka
2012 Roger Federer (SUI) Tomáš Berdych
2011 Novak Djokovic (SRB) Rafael Nadal
2010 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Roger Federer
2009 Roger Federer (SUI) Rafael Nadal
2008 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Roger Federer
2007 Roger Federer (SUI) Rafael Nadal
2006 Tommy Robredo (ESP) Radek Stepanek
2005 Roger Federer (SUI) Richard Gasquet
2004 Roger Federer (SUI) Guillermo Coria
2003 Guillermo Coria (ARG) Agustin Calleri
2002 Roger Federer (SUI) Marat Safin
2001 Albert Portas (ESP) Juan Carlos Ferrero
2000 Gustavo Kuerten (BRA) Marat Safin
1999 Marcelo Rios (CHI) Mariano Zabaleta
1998 Albert Costa (ESP) Alex Corretja
1997 Andrei Medvedev (UKR) Felix Mantilla
1996 Roberto Carretero (ESP) Alex Corretja
1995 Andrei Medvedev (UKR) Goran Ivanisevic
1994 Andrei Medvedev (UKR) Yevgeny Kafelinkov
1993 Michael Stich (GER) Andrei Chesnokov
1992 Stefan Edberg (SWE) Michael Stich
1991 Karel Novacek (CZE) Magnus Gustafsson
1990 Juan Aguilera (ESP) Boris Becker
1989 Ivan Lendl (USA) Horst Skoff
1988 Kent Carlsson (SWE) Henri Leconte
1987 Ivan Lendl (USA) Miloslav Mecir
1986 Henri Leconte (FRA) Miloslav Mecir
1985 Miloslav Mecir (CZE) Henrik Sundstrom
1984 Juan Aguilera (ESP) Henrik Sundstrom
1983 Yannick Noah (FRA) Jose Higueras
1982 Jose Higueras (ESP) Peter McNamara
1981 Peter McNamara (AUS) Jimmy Connors
1980 Harold Solomon (USA) Guillermo Vilas
1979 Jose Higueras (ESP) Harold Solomon
1978 Guillermo Vilas (ARG) Wojtek Fibak
1977 Paolo Bertolucci (ITA) Manuel Orantes
1976 Eddie Dibbs (USA) Jan Kodes
1975 Manuel Orantes (ESP) Jan Kodes














Here is what the results are of that above list taken only from titleholders of that year.

- Monte Carlo has 11 winners and 5 finalists
- Rome has 7 winners and 3 finalists
- Hamburg has 3 winners and 1 finalist

Other facts.
- Nadal has won the big 4 in one season
- 2 losing finalists in Monte Carlo have won Roland Garros in the same year ( Bruguera and Wilander)
- Guga lost the Rome final twice, and won RG in the same year.
- Nadal is the only losing Hamburg finalist to win Roland Garros.
- Nadal runner up in Madrid and Rome but won Roland Garros.

Auscon
04-15-2005, 03:30 AM
fairynuff

....Monte Carlo has all the frontrunners still kicking....Federer/Nadal/Gaudio v Coria most likely

Personally, if either Nadal or Gaudio win Monte Carlo, then they will have taken out Nadal/Gaudio, Federer, and Coria (assuming no upsets in the draw), so they'd have to have good odds for Roland Garros

Auscon
04-15-2005, 03:31 AM
At the very least we'll probably see an 05 RG finalist come out of the MC final

Domino
04-15-2005, 03:37 AM
Carlos Moya won the French and Rome, so that's six

Lendl won Monte carlo and the french so that's eight, and Wilander so that is nine; you counted Borg twice, but that's because you probably were trying to highlight Vilas.

The numbers basically say the same stuff, Monte Carlo is a good indicator of RG success.

Auscon
04-15-2005, 03:41 AM
Carlos Moya won the French and Rome, so that's six

Lendl won Monte carlo and the french so that's eight, and Wilander so that is nine; you counted Borg twice, but that's because you probably were trying to highlight Vilas.


but Lendl didnt win Monte Carlo and the French in the same year...he only got to the QF of RG in 88

Domino
04-15-2005, 03:42 AM
Or, as I see, you probably mean when they win in the same year.

Action Jackson
04-15-2005, 03:43 AM
Carlos Moya won the French and Rome, so that's six

Lendl won Monte carlo and the french so that's eight, and Wilander so that is nine; you counted Borg twice, but that's because you probably were trying to highlight Vilas.

The numbers basically say the same stuff, Monte Carlo is a good indicator of RG success.

I highlighted the ones that won it in that respective year.

Example Rios won Rome in 1998, but Moya won Roland Garros.

NYCtennisfan
04-15-2005, 06:44 AM
Is it fair to say that MC's clay courts are the most similar to RG's?

ATPTOUR
04-15-2005, 06:45 AM
Is it fair to say that MC's clay courts are the most similar to RG's?

Very fair.

NATAS81
04-15-2005, 06:45 AM
Agreed.

Dirk
04-15-2005, 07:27 AM
Great thread GWH. I think we need to start a thread on who has all the clay masters and Rg. I think it's extremely odd that Borg doesn't have a hamburg title.

Action Jackson
04-15-2005, 07:33 AM
Great thread GWH. I think we need to start a thread on who has all the clay masters and Rg. I think it's extremely odd that Borg doesn't have a hamburg title.

I could name them off the top of my head. :) A thread like could derail quite easily.

Borg didn't like playing in Hamburg much and that was the same as Muster. I remember in 95 when Muster went on that tear he didn't bother playing Hamburg.

Aphex
04-15-2005, 07:50 AM
Wasn't Muster's not playing Hamburg also a scheduling issue, i.e he didn't want to overplay in order to peak at RG. I read a long freaking article about "periodisering"( how to optimize training and match play in order to reach peak form at a particular moment), on a Swedish tennis coaches site, and Muster's 95 build up to RG was almost spot on compared to the article's formula.

Action Jackson
04-15-2005, 07:53 AM
Wasn't Muster's not playing Hamburg also a scheduling issue, i.e he didn't want to overplay in order to peak at RG. I read a long freaking article about "periodisering"( how to optimize training and match play in order to reach peak form at a particular moment), on a Swedish tennis coaches site, and Muster's 95 build up to RG was almost spot on compared to the article's formula.

If you could send me that link or put it in the Polar bear thread I'd love to read it.

Yes, Muster peaked so well for that event. It wouldn't surprise me, but Muster never did well in Hamburg when he went there.

Aphex
04-15-2005, 07:56 AM
I go see if it's still there.

JeNn
04-15-2005, 07:58 AM
And to think that some people claim that the clay season doesn't start until Rome :o

Nice thread GWH.

Aphex
04-15-2005, 08:00 AM
ok go to this site http://www.tennisnews.nu/
click on 'gästkrönikor' below 'meny'
click on 'Modern fysiologisk träning'

enjoy!
or whatever :p :lol:

Aphex
04-15-2005, 08:03 AM
Scroll down to 'Exempel på tävlingsplanering ...'
Compare to Muster's RG build up 95.

Action Jackson
04-15-2005, 08:04 AM
ok go to this site http://www.tennisnews.nu/
click on 'gästkrönikor' below 'meny'
click on 'Modern fysiologisk träning'

enjoy!
or whatever :p :lol:

Takk for det and I'll bookmark it as I have quite a busy weekend.

Interesting Kent and Edberg were the only Swedes to win there.

I remember when Mecir made Wilander look stupid there in 1985, players didn't make Wilander look stupid on clay.

Action Jackson
04-15-2005, 08:18 AM
And to think that some people claim that the clay season doesn't start until Rome :o

Nice thread GWH.

That isn't surprising, they are the ones who are waiting for Wimbledon to start.

Then again not all of them can have played an event since 1988 and never had a difficult draw in all those years. :)

Roger-No.1
04-15-2005, 08:23 AM
Monte Carlo... a pattern in the last decade

Action Jackson
04-16-2005, 02:34 AM
I wonder if Coria, Ferrero or Nadal will be the winner or a finalist this year. It'll be interesting to come back to this thread after Roland Garros.

World Beater
04-16-2005, 02:57 AM
That means federer wont win it

Action Jackson
04-16-2005, 03:00 AM
That means federer wont win it

That depends on how serious you take what I posted in the original thread.

sigmagirl91
04-16-2005, 11:57 AM
I was right-Monte Carlo. I thought so. Thanks for the information.

federer express
04-16-2005, 12:00 PM
hamburg 86!! :bounce: :clap2: :bigclap: :bowdown: :woohoo:

Action Jackson
04-16-2005, 12:02 PM
hamburg 86!! :bounce: :clap2: :bigclap: :bowdown: :woohoo:

Hamburg 88 was much better. :)

federer express
04-16-2005, 12:07 PM
Hamburg 88 was much better. :)

was expecting and waiting for that reply ;)

Action Jackson
04-16-2005, 12:09 PM
was expecting and waiting for that reply ;)

Even a hard man like you, would have to respect a guy who hit topspin lob return winners when Leconte was serve/volleying.

Carlsson and Wilander caused the great Henri some pain that year.

federer express
04-16-2005, 12:12 PM
Even a hard man like you, would have to respect a guy who hit topspin lob return winners when Leconte was serve/volleying.

Carlsson and Wilander caused the great Henri some pain that year.

lets not forget about their meeting in monte carlo! :nerner:
as for leconte against wilander..... :bolt:

Action Jackson
04-16-2005, 12:19 PM
lets not forget about their meeting in monte carlo! :nerner:
as for leconte against wilander..... :bolt:

That was really bad how the French treated Leconte after he lost to Wilander in 88.

Yes, Henri was nasty and stopped an all-Swedish final then in 88. :)

Funny enough the Barcelona champion has actually had better success than Hamburg in the same time frame.

federer express
04-16-2005, 12:28 PM
looking at that list of winners...wow! some great names there. i once before said 'more grass' but to be fair the greats of the game perform either on clay or grass. both of which are the most aesthetically pleasing (in terms of courts and the play they produce). so now i am revising it to 'more clay and more grass'
lets scrap the hardcourts and get rid of the fish and ginepri people! (or is that too controversial and gonna get me a 100 bad reps? :p )

Action Jackson
04-16-2005, 12:30 PM
looking at that list of winners...wow! some great names there. i once before said 'more grass' but to be fair the greats of the game perform either on clay or grass. both of which are the most aesthetically pleasing (in terms of courts and the play they produce). so now i am revising it to 'more clay and more grass'
lets scrap the hardcourts and get rid of the fish and ginepri people! (or is that too controversial and gonna get me a 100 bad reps? :p )

For one thing they are more natural surfaces and that it's easier on the body. Actually I am going to add Barcelona as well.

I think there should be a Fish/Ginepri who will win thread. :)

Action Jackson
04-16-2005, 12:37 PM
Barcelona just for fun.

Past Champions
2008 Rafael Nadal (ESP)
2007 Rafael Nadal (ESP)
2006 Rafael Nadal (ESP)
2005 Rafael Nadal (ESP)
2004 Tommy Robredo (ESP)
2003 Carlos Moya (ESP)
2002 Gaston Gaudio ( ARG)
2001 JuanCarlos Ferrero (ESP)
2000 Marat Safin (RUS)
1999 Felix Mantilla (ESP)
1998 Todd Martin (USA)
1997 Albert Costa (ESP)
1996 Thomas Muster (AUT)
1995 Thomas Muster (AUT)
1994 Richard Krajicek (NED)
1993 Andrei Medvedev (UKR)
1992 Carlos Costa (ESP)
1991 Emilio Sanchez (ESP)
1990 Andres Gomez (ECU)
1989 Andres Gomez (ECU)
1988 Kent Carlsson (SWE)
1987 Martin Jaite (ARG)
1986 Kent Carlsson (SWE)
1985 Thierry Tulasne (FRA)
1984 Mats Wilander (SWE)
1983 Mats Wilander (SWE)
1982 Mats Wilander (SWE)
1981 Ivan Lendl (USA)
1980 Ivan Lendl (USA)
1979 Hans Gildemeister(CHI)
1978 Balazs Taroczy(HUN)

Melvins
04-16-2005, 01:35 PM
Monte-Carlo, no doubt! Last year Guillermo Coria (winner of MC) almost win Roland Garros. Guillermo Coria was in 2004 the "Clay King".

Hamburg is a nice TMS, with big champions (Federer, Kuerten, Safin).

federer express
04-16-2005, 01:38 PM
carlsson, muster, medvedev and gaudio all past champions. hmm.... :scratch:
have anything to do with your decision to put that list up now too? :)

Action Jackson
04-16-2005, 01:40 PM
carlsson, muster, medvedev and gaudio all past champions. hmm.... :scratch:
have anything to do with your decision to put that list up now too? :)

You forgot Lendl, Mantilla, Krajicek, Jaite and both Costas.

The finalist in 2002 and 2004 both won RG.

Action Jackson
04-16-2005, 01:41 PM
1990 and 1995 produced RG winners.

Melvins
04-16-2005, 01:46 PM
Did you know?

In 1997 and 2004, the champion of Roland Garros won the doubles in Estoril Open and did make a poor result in singles.

In 1997, Gustavo Kuerten lost in 2nd Round in singles at Estoril Open, won the doubles title, and in the same year was the Roland Garros's Champion.

In last year (2004), Gaston Gaudio lost in 1st round (?!) in Estoril's Singles Draw, won the doubles title, and in the same year was the Roland Garros's Champion.

federer express
04-16-2005, 05:48 PM
Did you know?

In 1997 and 2004, the champion of Roland Garros won the doubles in Estoril Open and did make a poor result in singles.

In 1997, Gustavo Kuerten lost in 2nd Round in singles at Estoril Open, won the doubles title, and in the same year was the Roland Garros's Champion.

In last year (2004), Gaston Gaudio lost in 1st round (?!) in Estoril's Singles Draw, won the doubles title, and in the same year was the Roland Garros's Champion.

hmm...can honestly say i had no idea :)

Tennis Fool
04-16-2005, 08:16 PM
I'm not that great with stats, but interesting to me that since 1998 (with the exception of Pioline) all the MC winners got to the finals of RG that year. And with Ferrero, Coria and Guga--they all became RG champs within 2 years of losing MC.

If recent stats hold up, the RG 2005 champ will be...Guillermo Coria. Nadal will win RG within 2 years.

Action Jackson
04-17-2005, 06:18 AM
Did you know?

In 1997 and 2004, the champion of Roland Garros won the doubles in Estoril Open and did make a poor result in singles.

In 1997, Gustavo Kuerten lost in 2nd Round in singles at Estoril Open, won the doubles title, and in the same year was the Roland Garros's Champion.

In last year (2004), Gaston Gaudio lost in 1st round (?!) in Estoril's Singles Draw, won the doubles title, and in the same year was the Roland Garros's Champion.

A very interesting fact and not one that most people would have noticed, so thanks for that piece of information.

Action Jackson
04-18-2005, 05:11 AM
The question is will Nadal join the ranks of Monte Carlo champions that win Roland Garros in the same year.

Tennis Fool
04-18-2005, 05:14 AM
Probability says it will be Coria.

Action Jackson
05-14-2005, 02:27 PM
Nadal has won Rome and Monte Carlo.

It's either Federer or Gasquet winning Hamburg, will the winner come from those 3 I'll come out and say no.

Chloe le Bopper
05-14-2005, 02:28 PM
Who are you picking? ;)

Action Jackson
05-14-2005, 02:28 PM
Who are you picking? ;)

I'll say that in the thread that has a poll in it.

Rogiman
05-14-2005, 02:30 PM
Monte Carlo is the most indicative, Hamburg is the least.

Action Jackson
05-14-2005, 02:34 PM
Monte Carlo is the most indicative, Hamburg is the least.

Monte Carlo has the closest conditions to RG that is the main reason and boredom does funny things and that's why I decided to do all the stats for it.

Even the runners up have done well there.

Action Jackson
05-15-2005, 01:32 PM
The winners of the 3 lead up events are Nadal and Federer, but will that translate to RG success well we'll see soon enough.

vincayou
05-15-2005, 05:53 PM
Hamburg is the most indicative for the French players.
Noha won it in 1983 and Leconte reached the final in 1988.

I'm sure you can see the pattern with this year. ;) French media won't miss this of course, what could add some more pressure on Gasquet, if this is possible.

mitalidas
05-15-2005, 09:10 PM
This maybe useless to some people and in many ways it is. Here are the champions from the last 20 years of Monte Carlo, Rome and Hamburg events and to see which one of them produces the most Roland Garros winners.

In 16 of those 30 years, the French open champ had won neither Monte Carlo, Rome or Hamburg
so the odds are slightly in in favor of skipping these if you want to win in Paris ;)

these are the years

2004
2002
1999
1997
1996
1994
1991
1990
1989
1988
1985
1984
1982
1981
1977
1975

Action Jackson
06-06-2005, 07:24 AM
Monte Carlo and Rome have produced the RG winner this year.

Action Jackson
06-06-2005, 09:40 AM
The last 2 Rome winners were part of the Monte Carlo, Rome and RG treble 10 years apart and both lefthanders, who both won their 1st Slam in Paris.

Action Jackson
04-03-2006, 05:03 AM
Later when I can bothered I will add the finalists to list of tournament winners and see how the losing Monte Carlo, Rome and Hamburg finalists have done in the 20 year period at RG.

Action Jackson
04-03-2006, 05:37 AM
i was unaware of roger federer winning roland garros last year. he must already have the career slam, no?

Were you aware only Guga, Lendl and Noah are the only Hamburg/RG winners in the same year?

That part was not updated, but typos do happen now and then. Duly noted.

Merton
04-03-2006, 05:43 AM
Great thread George. It is important to go back as deep in the past as you can to add statistical validity. For example, looking at last two years Miami tournaments, the Miami finalist makes the RG final. Of course, Ljubo will make the RG final this year :lol:

Action Jackson
04-03-2006, 05:49 AM
i was not. i do appreciate the educational benefits of the thread despite my joking way of pointing out the typo. next time i'll just say, "federer didn't win the french dumbass." because every gm post needs the word "dumbass", no?

Nah, that was cool actually and thanks for pointing out the typo. Didn't know Federer wins everything :p

Action Jackson
04-03-2006, 08:15 AM
Updated now to include finalists as well.

Monte Carlo has had a total of 10 winners coming from the respective finalists. Only Wilander and Bruguera were runners up in Monte Carlo to win RG that year.

Rome has had a total of 8 winners and same as Monte Carlo the runner up that year in Rome went onto win the title and that was Guga twice.

Hamburg has 3 winners and no Hamburg finalists in this timeframe have won RG in the same year.

Dirk
04-03-2006, 12:47 PM
I would love to see Roger improve the Hamburg champion % as a RG champion. That poor event doesn't get any respect. :sad:

Jairus
04-03-2006, 01:04 PM
Is it possible that Monte Carlo simply has a better draw than the other TMSs? I feel like people doing well on clay usually skip either Rome or Hamburg, since they are so close together. This would naturally make MC the most indicative of all the TMS...
Also potentially confirming this, no one has won Rome and Hamburg the same year, if I am not mistaken (surely one of you will tell me if I am)

alfonsojose
04-03-2006, 01:59 PM
Family Circle Cup :p

hitchhiker
04-03-2006, 03:15 PM
who cares?
might as well work out which TMS event produces most wimbledon champions.

RogiFan88
04-03-2006, 04:10 PM
Gaudio still hasn't won a TMS on any surface and he won RG in 04... I just love it! ;)

DrJules
04-03-2006, 06:50 PM
Is it possible that Monte Carlo simply has a better draw than the other TMSs? I feel like people doing well on clay usually skip either Rome or Hamburg, since they are so close together. This would naturally make MC the most indicative of all the TMS...
Also potentially confirming this, no one has won Rome and Hamburg the same year, if I am not mistaken (surely one of you will tell me if I am)

I notice they are in successive weeks. If this has always been the case I am not surprised. It is very difficult to win master series events in consecutive weeks. Especially if the first has long/5 set final.

Action Jackson
04-04-2006, 04:00 AM
Is it possible that Monte Carlo simply has a better draw than the other TMSs? I feel like people doing well on clay usually skip either Rome or Hamburg, since they are so close together. This would naturally make MC the most indicative of all the TMS...
Also potentially confirming this, no one has won Rome and Hamburg the same year, if I am not mistaken (surely one of you will tell me if I am)

Actually the closeness of the court conditions in Monte Carlo to RG relative to the other two is a better indicator. As for a better draw it depends on who you want to look at it, in relation to rankings or to players who are much better on clay.

Action Jackson
04-05-2006, 06:36 AM
I would love to see Roger improve the Hamburg champion % as a RG champion. That poor event doesn't get any respect. :sad:

Well Hamburg is a tough one to win for different reasons to the others, but it's clear that it's least indicative of potential RG winners in that particular year.

Guga has done it and the irony is that the last man to serve and volley winning RG was another.

Jimnik
04-05-2006, 12:29 PM
Monte-Carlo has always been my fav AMS event. It's the only AMS which doesn't take place next to another AMS event, so it has arguably the strongest field.

It will be very interesting to see how Gasquet, Djokovic and Murray do. Andy Murray claims that clay is his favourite surface. Coria and Ferrero have had shit years and Safin has been making a comeback but I bet any of those three could win the tournament.

One could almost argue that Monte-Carlo is a better indicator than Roland Garros of clay court form. With all due respect to Costa and Gaudio (who totally deserved their titles), Ferrero and Coria seemed to let the occasion of a grand slam final get to them.

Action Jackson
04-15-2006, 07:06 PM
Monte-Carlo has always been my fav AMS event. It's the only AMS which doesn't take place next to another AMS event, so it has arguably the strongest field.

One could almost argue that Monte-Carlo is a better indicator than Roland Garros of clay court form. With all due respect to Costa and Gaudio (who totally deserved their titles), Ferrero and Coria seemed to let the occasion of a grand slam final get to them.

This year it has withdrawals and a lot of them, but most of them are clay pigeons, so it really doesn't effect the field too much.

It doesn't matter it's who wins on the day and Gaudio didn't let the occasion to him come on, what match were you watching? He just got through, whereas Costa was a clear winner.

Tennis Fool
04-15-2006, 07:12 PM
Hah! Copycat :p I started my thread in 2003 (had to cut and paste from the old WTAWorld men's forum).

Action Jackson
04-15-2006, 07:14 PM
Hah! Copycat :p I started my thread in 2003 (had to cut and paste from the old WTAWorld men's forum).

:nerner: :nerner: :nerner:

This one is comprehensive and takes in a wider range of results.

Tennis Fool
04-15-2006, 07:20 PM
:nerner: :nerner: :nerner:

This one is comprehensive and takes in a wider range of results.



Yes, but it also is comparing players of different generations. Although, MC is still the best predictor. I wonder if Rome used a different type of clay than it does now :confused:

Action Jackson
04-15-2006, 07:21 PM
Yes, but it also is comparing players of different generations. Although, MC is still the best predictor. I wonder if Rome used a different type of clay than it does now :confused:

No, it's always been the quickest. They don't put down as much as clay on the surface and it's warmer, though there was a time it was played after Hamburg.

Even within the generations, there are still familiar patterns, hence it needed to go back that far.

Doctor Dance
04-16-2006, 08:04 AM
very interesting thread

Action Jackson
04-22-2006, 09:35 AM
This will be updated on Sunday and then we'll see how the Monte Carlo factor is at RG soon enough.

Dirk
04-22-2006, 09:50 AM
I hope it does otherwise TF's theory on a non master will have to come true for RG in order for my man to win it. :)

hitchhiker
04-22-2006, 10:03 AM
nadal wins both mc and rg. update the thread now for next 6 years at least.

Action Jackson
04-22-2006, 10:07 AM
Hitch man, how is the pie business?

hitchhiker
04-22-2006, 10:11 AM
Hitch man, how is the pie business?

needs roddick to win wimbledon/uso to become a cash cow

hitchhiker
04-22-2006, 11:23 AM
hey gwh can you provide some statistics on which clay TMS event produces the best cure for insomnia?

Action Jackson
04-24-2006, 05:01 AM
hitch, I will work on a response to that thoughtful question.

Lets see if Nadal can take out RG again or fail like Muster did when he defended it in 96.

Action Jackson
05-09-2006, 01:08 AM
Time to see if Nadal can complete the third part of the hat trick like Muster did in 96.
If he wins here then he will more than likely withdraw from Hamburg.

Dirk
05-09-2006, 01:23 AM
hitch, I will work on a response to that thoughtful question.

Lets see if Nadal can take out RG again or fail like Muster did when he defended it in 96.

Kafel won it thanks to Stich. :)

Saffy will be the Stich of 06. :)

Primal
05-09-2006, 10:06 AM
looking at that list of winners...wow! some great names there. i once before said 'more grass' but to be fair the greats of the game perform either on clay or grass. both of which are the most aesthetically pleasing (in terms of courts and the play they produce). so now i am revising it to 'more clay and more grass'
lets scrap the hardcourts and get rid of the fish and ginepri people! (or is that too controversial and gonna get me a 100 bad reps? :p )


I'm with you!
Like for me hard courts are too artificial (I was raised on clay). It's like basketball or some other indoor game.
Ok, the matches on the hard court are more spectacular, but from the other hand they are a bit plain and mechanic. (IMHO)

Sorry for off topic.

Action Jackson
05-09-2006, 10:27 AM
Kafel won it thanks to Stich. :)

Saffy will be the Stich of 06. :)

You wish, but anything can happen.

Action Jackson
05-15-2006, 03:49 AM
Nadal has equalled the Muster feat of 1996, but will he defend at Roland Garros unlike Muster after taking Monte Carlo, Barcelona and Rome.

Merton
05-15-2006, 04:11 AM
A curious difference was that Muster went undefeated on clay to RG in 1995, winning in Mexico, Estoril, Monte Carlo, Barcelona, Rome. In 1996 he won Mexico, Estoril, Monte Carlo, Barcelona, Rome but he lost to Moya in Munich. Nadal on the other hand went to RG with two losses on clay last year but he is undefeated on the surface so far this year.

Action Jackson
05-15-2006, 04:17 AM
Good point there Merton, but there are some similarities for sure. Muster was a huge favourite for RG that year, just like Nadal is this year. Then in 96 it decided to be very warm in Paris and it was almost a hardcourt event hehe.

Action Jackson
05-16-2006, 04:07 AM
Good to see Nadal has skipped Hamburg again.

Merton
05-16-2006, 04:50 AM
Good to see Nadal has skipped Hamburg again.

Another difference with Muster who played in St. Poelten in 1996. I imagine that the pressure for him to play the local event would be huge.

Action Jackson
05-16-2006, 07:12 AM
Well I think Muster's coach and manager had some organisational capacity for St Pölten and he does have it now, so that was the main reason he played it and of course the extra ticket sales and he'd make some more cash.

oz_boz
05-16-2006, 07:21 AM
Nadal has equalled the Muster feat of 1996, but will he defend at Roland Garros unlike Muster after taking Monte Carlo, Barcelona and Rome.

One of the rare forecasts on tennis climate from you, George? Du verkar inte vilja förutse resultat särskilt ofta ;)

Action Jackson
05-16-2006, 07:35 AM
One of the rare forecasts on tennis climate from you, George? Du verkar inte vilja förutse resultat särskilt ofta ;)

Ja, at the same time I am happy at least Kent is on the list :)

Action Jackson
05-21-2006, 04:08 PM
Surprise winner in Robredo at Hamburg, but he won't be there on the last day of the tournament unless he is playing doubles or had a big night in Paris the night before.

vogus
05-22-2006, 01:18 AM
Surprise winner in Robredo at Hamburg, but he won't be there on the last day of the tournament unless he is playing doubles or had a big night in Paris the night before.


he won't be there on the last day, but he is a fair pick to be there on semifinals Friday.

Jimnik
05-22-2006, 02:26 AM
The winner of Hamburg has gone on to win Wimbledon, for the last 2 years. So...

ALL HAIL :worship: TOMMY ROBREDO :worship: Wimbledon Champion 2006

:crazy:

lucashg
05-22-2006, 02:28 AM
The winner of Hamburg has gone on to win Wimbledon, for the last 2 years. So...

ALL HAIL :worship: TOMMY ROBREDO :worship:
Wimbledon Champion 2006

:crazy:

And the US OPEN! Tommy new #1 :worship: :bowdown:

Nacho
05-22-2006, 08:17 AM
2005 Tommy Robredo (SUI) Radek Stepanel

I can see at least 3 typos in that line :lol: ;)

Action Jackson
03-22-2007, 07:34 PM
Well this thread title will have to change eventually.

CyBorg
03-22-2007, 07:39 PM
De Villiers' retarded logic:

"Federer and Nadal skipped Hamburg again??? That's prepostreous. There is only one solution to this... sack Monte Carlo."

Action Jackson
04-15-2007, 08:50 AM
They have reduced these events to best of 3 sets, but even then I doubt whether Fed or Nadal will play all 3 of them, especially if Nadal wins Monte Carlo and Rome.

All_Slam_Andre
04-15-2007, 09:33 AM
Yeah there's no way that he'll be playing in Hamburg if as expect he goes deep at Monte-Carlo, Barcelona and Rome again. I've read opinions from some of his fans who want him to skip Barcelona, and instead try and concentrate on achieving the clean sweep of all 3 masters series events. However considering he's a member of the club that hosts the Barcelona event, that simply won't happen.

Action Jackson
04-21-2007, 03:31 PM
What a surprise it's the same finalists as in 2006 and will it be any different from then?

Merton
04-21-2007, 04:33 PM
It will be huge for Roger if he pulls off the win in the Monte Carlo final, the most interesting thing to see is whether he will be more aggressive than the last time those two played on clay. But ultimately, Nadal is just a bad match-up.

JackPumpkinHead
04-21-2007, 05:25 PM
Fed has assured that he will play Hamburg. Which is good, he will get some more clay matches under him and help cushin his number 1 ranking. Although I think the real reason he has been so adamant to play it this year is to show support of the event in hopes they can stop it from being downgraded

Merton
04-23-2007, 02:00 AM
Nadal is the winner in Monte Carlo for the 3rd consecutive year. Before the tournament the market gave similar odds to Nadal and Federer about winning the French Open, they were both around 2.5:1. It will be interesting to see how the market reacts to the result in Monte Carlo.

Kolya
04-23-2007, 02:29 AM
When was the last time Federer was not favourite for a Grand Slam?

Merton
04-23-2007, 05:29 AM
When was the last time Federer was not favourite for a Grand Slam?

Last year at RG. After Rome Nadal was the favourite.

Action Jackson
05-14-2007, 05:00 AM
Nadal has continued on the same path as before and yes we know this is a huge surprise, but will it continue on into RG?

Action Jackson
05-21-2007, 05:20 AM
Mr.Hamburg does it again, but can Federer win the one that really counts.

CyBorg
05-21-2007, 05:32 AM
Mr.Hamburg does it again, but can Federer win the one that really counts.

Now that Roger no longer employs Tony Roche, he can use the money he'll save to hire a sniper. Is there a really tall tower anywere in Roland Garros? A tidy assassination of senor Nadal would be the ticket.

Action Jackson
05-21-2007, 05:35 AM
Now that Roger no longer employs Tony Roche, he can use the money he'll save to hire a sniper. Is there a really tall tower anywere in Roland Garros? A tidy assassination of senor Nadal would be the ticket.

They would have to hide behind the bushes and do it like that.

Thing is I think Nadal will even be a bigger favourite after having this result.

CyBorg
05-21-2007, 05:40 AM
They would have to hide behind the bushes and do it like that.

Thing is I think Nadal will even be a bigger favourite after having this result.

Steel helmet?

Action Jackson
06-12-2007, 05:46 AM
Once again winning Hamburg does nothing for winning RG in comparison to Rome and Monte Carlo.

RonE
06-12-2007, 06:54 AM
Surprise surprise :yawn: :zzz:

Action Jackson
06-12-2007, 06:59 AM
Surprise surprise :yawn: :zzz:

Enjoy your ace fests.

RonE
06-12-2007, 07:04 AM
Enjoy your ace fests.

What ace fests? I think you are still stuck somewhere in the late 90's / early 2000's ;)

Action Jackson
06-12-2007, 07:12 AM
What ace fests? I think you are still stuck somewhere in the late 90's / early 2000's ;)

You are the one stuck in the old days when it comes to clay tennis.

Mimi
06-12-2007, 07:29 AM
correct predicition :bowdown: :bowdown:
Once again winning Hamburg does nothing for winning RG in comparison to Rome and Monte Carlo.

Mimi
06-12-2007, 07:31 AM
why i can't see my reply :confused:

Action Jackson
04-09-2008, 05:48 AM
Time to bump this up and see if the trends still continue or not.

FedFan_2007
04-09-2008, 07:07 AM
There's no trend other then Nadal wins every big event on clay.

The Pro
04-09-2008, 07:57 AM
I wonder if Hamburg produces less winners because they are taking time off before RG?

Action Jackson
04-09-2008, 07:58 AM
I wonder if Hamburg produces less winners because they are taking time off before RG?

No, it's the conditions are the least similar to RG.

Rogiman
04-09-2008, 08:23 AM
There's no trend other then Nadal wins every big event on clay.I tend to agree here with Fed_Fan :eek:

Although Hamburg as a predictor is really as good as a coin toss.

All_Slam_Andre
04-09-2008, 09:09 AM
Borg only played at Hamburg once, and Lendl and Wilander often skipped the tournament as well.

Spartan
04-09-2008, 11:36 AM
Interesting idea. As much as I would enjoy reading through the whole thread discussion, I'm curious to know how Barcelona winners have faired in RG? You could strongly argue that an event such as Barcelona has more prestige and worth than Hamburg. So it would be interesting to see if there is a correlation here?

Action Jackson
04-09-2008, 11:37 AM
Interesting idea. As much as I would enjoy reading through the whole thread discussion, I'm curious to know how Barcelona winners have faired in RG? You could strongly argue that an event such as Barcelona has more prestige and worth than Hamburg. So it would be interesting to see if there is a correlation here?

Type in Barcelona in the thread and all the answers are there.

Spartan
04-09-2008, 11:52 AM
Barcelona just for fun.

Past Champions
2007 Rafael Nadal (ESP)
2006 Rafael Nadal (ESP)
2005 Rafael Nadal (ESP)
2004 Tommy Robredo (ESP)
2003 Carlos Moya (ESP)
2002 Gaston Gaudio ( ARG)
2001 JuanCarlos Ferrero (ESP)
2000 Marat Safin (RUS)
1999 Felix Mantilla (ESP)
1998 Todd Martin (USA)
1997 Albert Costa (ESP)
1996 Thomas Muster (AUT)
1995 Thomas Muster (AUT)
1994 Richard Krajicek (NED)
1993 Andrei Medvedev (UKR)
1992 Carlos Costa (ESP)
1991 Emilio Sanchez (ESP)
1990 Andres Gomez (ECU)
1989 Andres Gomez (ECU)
1988 Kent Carlsson (SWE)
1987 Martin Jaite (ARG)
1986 Kent Carlsson (SWE)
1985 Thierry Tulasne (FRA)
1984 Mats Wilander (SWE)
1983 Mats Wilander (SWE)
1982 Mats Wilander (SWE)
1981 Ivan Lendl (USA)
1980 Ivan Lendl (USA)
1979 Hans Gildemeister(CHI)
1978 Balazs Taroczy(HUN)

Surprising indeed that so few have gone on to win RG, and I also had forgotten that Gaudio's victory here came a few years prior to his RG win.

Action Jackson
04-09-2008, 11:56 AM
Surprising indeed that so few have gone on to win RG, and I also had forgotten that Gaudio's victory here came a few years prior to his RG win.

Actually it's a lot more than Hamburg and not so bad compared to Rome.

Costa and Gaudio won RG, when they lost their finals to Gaudio and Boredo respectively.

Spartan
04-09-2008, 12:00 PM
Actually it's a lot more than Hamburg and not so bad compared to Rome.

Costa and Gaudio won RG, when they lost their finals to Gaudio and Boredo respectively.

Hamburg is always a tournament I never felt managed to lift off. I visited the tournament too, and it was one of the most dull and stale atmospheres I have observed. Hamburg is a tournament that seems to have no impact on anything. In my opinion, Barcelona should be made into a Masters series event and Hamburg scrapped. That brings me onto the point of proposed challenges, I remember reading some articles last year about the calendar being changed and one claycourt tournament being removed. Has this materialised?

Action Jackson
04-09-2008, 12:03 PM
Hamburg is always a tournament I never felt managed to lift off. I visited the tournament too, and it was one of the most dull and stale atmospheres I have observed. Hamburg is a tournament that seems to have no impact on anything. In my opinion, Barcelona should be made into a Masters series event and Hamburg scrapped. That brings me onto the point of proposed challenges, I remember reading some articles last year about the calendar being changed and one claycourt tournament being removed. Has this materialised?

Nothing has happened as of yet, when it comes to the calendar. Hamburg, well they used to play it before Rome, that was stupid.

Barcelona used to be played after RG, but they have found the right dates for it now.

elessar
04-09-2008, 12:04 PM
Hamburg is always a tournament I never felt managed to lift off. I visited the tournament too, and it was one of the most dull and stale atmospheres I have observed. Hamburg is a tournament that seems to have no impact on anything. In my opinion, Barcelona should be made into a Masters series event and Hamburg scrapped. That brings me onto the point of proposed challenges, I remember reading some articles last year about the calendar being changed and one claycourt tournament being removed. Has this materialised?
http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=99185

Rogiman
04-09-2008, 12:13 PM
Todd Martin is a legendary Barcelona champ and one of the open era's greatest claycourters.

Action Jackson
04-09-2008, 12:15 PM
Todd Martin is a legendary Barcelona champ and one of the open era's great clay courters.

Todd Martin is better than any modern day Yank on the clay. This lot are a bunch of tourists.

Rogiman
04-09-2008, 12:18 PM
Todd Martin is better than any modern day Yank on the clay. This lot are a bunch of tourists.Now when Duck got the monkey off his back by demolishing peak Federer nothing can stop him from conquering the red European clay.

Action Jackson
04-09-2008, 12:22 PM
Now when Duck got the monkey off his back by demolishing peak Federer nothing can stop him from conquering the red European clay.

Hahaha. The Austrians in Portschach are going to get a lot of tourists this time around. Ginepri, Fish, Isner, they must be honoured.

Seriously, at least before this generation, besides Querrey. The Americans used to play the better clay events and it improved their games on their prefered surfaces. Sampras won Kitzi even.

NyGeL
04-09-2008, 01:15 PM
You didn't put Federer in green

stebs
04-09-2008, 01:22 PM
Well this thread is likely to prove true again as Nadal is HUGE favourite for both MC and RG. However, when someone is winning everything on clay it proves a lot less than guys who are just winning two titles a year on clay and it is MC and RG. That said it is clear that the conditions at the two are closer than those of the other AMS events.

Bernard Black
04-09-2008, 03:36 PM
Todd Martin is better than any modern day Yank on the clay. This lot are a bunch of tourists.

Argh, don't get me started on the Americans.

The Brits with their serve and vollying had greater success than these guys. Henman has a much better French Open record than both Roddick and Blake. Even Rusedski has a higher winning percentage there than Roddick and he barely even tried on clay, only straining to shake his opponents hand usually.

rocketassist
04-09-2008, 03:57 PM
Argh, don't get me started on the Americans.

The Brits with their serve and vollying had greater success than these guys. Henman has a much better French Open record than both Roddick and Blake. Even Rusedski has a higher winning percentage there than Roddick and he barely even tried on clay, only straining to shake his opponents hand usually.

Henman did things on clay that Roddick could dream about (two Monte Carlo semis and an RG semi)

Merton
04-09-2008, 04:26 PM
Thanks for the bump, Monte Carlo clearly has the best success rate as a predictor of RG success. In recent years it is even more remarkable, the exceptions in the last ten years are in 1999, 2000, 2002, 2004. In 1999, 2002 and 2004 the favourites for RG were the winners of Monte Carlo (Guga, Ferrero and Coria respectively). In 2000 it had to do with the fact that the favourite (Guga) peaked later than Monte Carlo that year, reaching the final in Rome and winning in Hamburg.

gnaz
04-09-2008, 10:19 PM
Monte Carlo clearly has the best success rate as a predictor of RG success.

Agree.

FedFan_2007
04-09-2008, 11:24 PM
How can you talk about trends when Nadal is rewriting the clay recordbook? Before him, nobody had won Monte Carlo/Rome 3 years in a row. He's in uncharted territory here, sort of like Fed winning 4 consecutive US Opens(which is an astonishing feat, nobody seemed to talk about it).

leng jai
04-09-2008, 11:46 PM
Henman did things on clay that Roddick could dream about (two Monte Carlo semis and an RG semi)

But can Henman match Roddick's stellar Houston record?

Action Jackson
04-10-2008, 09:27 AM
Argh, don't get me started on the Americans.

The Brits with their serve and vollying had greater success than these guys. Henman has a much better French Open record than both Roddick and Blake. Even Rusedski has a higher winning percentage there than Roddick and he barely even tried on clay, only straining to shake his opponents hand usually.

You aren't a big fan of the American tourists on clay, it seems? I mean before they used to come to Europe and play. Krickstein, Courier, Arias, Agassi, Sampras and Chang in their early years did. Todd Martin used to as well.

Rusedski made the 4th round in 99, that was hilarious and he beat Boredo, when he made the top 10.

Henman did things on clay that Roddick could dream about (two Monte Carlo semis and an RG semi)

But can Henman match Roddick's stellar Houston record?

Great exchange above. Houston streak is underrented.

Action Jackson
04-27-2008, 03:01 PM
No surprise that Nadal won at Monte Carlo again.

Adler
04-27-2008, 03:10 PM
And it will be a big surprise if he fails to win RG. Fed, Djoko, Nalby and Davy won't defeat him, only fatigue can (but there's alway this 1 week break after Hamburg, so this won't be a factor I think)

Action Jackson
05-08-2008, 02:19 PM
Finally I can put someone else in the list besides Nadal for Rome.

kafemotor
05-08-2008, 03:07 PM
This maybe useless to some people and in many ways it is. Here are the champions from 1975 onwards of Monte Carlo, Rome and Hamburg events and to see which one of them produces the most Roland Garros winners. The winners will be bolded in the respective events. Players who made finals in that year have been bolded in green.

Monte Carlo
Past Champions Finalists
2008 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Roger Federer
2007 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Roger Federer
2006 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Roger Federer
2005 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Guillermo Coria
2004 Guillermo Coria (ARG) Rainer Schuettler
2003 Juan Carlos Ferrero (ESP) Guillermo Coria
2002 Juan Carlos Ferrero (ESP) Carlos Moya
2001 Gustavo Kuerten (BRA) Hicham Arazi
2000 Cedric Pioline (FRA) Dominik Hrbaty
1999 Gustavo Kuerten (BRA) Marcelo Rios
1998 Carlos Moya (ESP) Cedric Pioline
1997 Marcelo Rios (CHI) Alex Corretja
1996 Thomas Muster (AUT) Albert Costa
1995 Thomas Muster (AUT) Boris Becker
1994 Andrei Medvedev (UKR) Sergi Bruguera
1993 Sergi Bruguera (ESP) Cedric Pioline
1992 Thomas Muster (AUT) Aaron Krickstein
1991 Sergi Bruguera (ESP) Boris Becker
1990 Andrei Chesnokov (RUS) Thomas Muster
1989 Alberto Mancini (ARG) Boris Becker
1988 Ivan Lendl (USA) Martin Jaite
1987 Mats Wilander (SWE) Jimmy Arias
1986 Joakim Nystrom (SWE) Yannick Noah
1985 Ivan Lendl (USA) Mats Wilander
1984 Henrik Sundstrom (SWE) Mats Wilander
1983 Mats Wilander (SWE) Mel Purcell
1982 Guillermo Vilas (ARG) Ivan Lendl
1981 Guillermo Vilas (ARG) and Jimmy Connors (USA) n/p

1980 Bjorn Borg (SWE) Guillermo Vilas (ARG)
1979 Bjorn Borg (SWE) Vitas Gerulaitis
1978 Raul Ramirez (MEX) Tomas Smid
1977 Bjorn Borg (SWE) Claudio Barrazutti
1976 Guillermo Vilas (ARG) Wojtek Fibak
1975 Manuel Orantes (ESP) Bob Hewitt


Rome
Past Champions
2007 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Fernando Gonzalez
2006 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Roger Federer
2005 Rafael Nadal (ESP) Guillermo Coria
2004 Carlos Moya (ESP) David Nalbandian
2003 Felix Mantilla (ESP) Roger Federer
2002 Andre Agassi (USA) Tommy Haas
2001 Juan Carlos Ferrero (ESP) Gustavo Kuerten
2000 Magnus Norman (SWE) Gustavo Kuerten
1999 Gustavo Kuerten (BRA) Pat Rafter
1998 Marcelo Rios (CHI) Albert Costa
1997 Alex Corretja (ESP) Marcelo Rios
1996 Thomas Muster (AUT) Richard Krajicek
1995 Thomas Muster (AUT) Sergi Bruguera
1994 Pete Sampras (USA) Boris Becker
1993 Jim Courier (USA) Goran Ivanisevic
1992 Jim Courier (USA) Carlos Costa
1991 Emilio Sanchez (ESP) Alberto Mancini
1990 Thomas Muster (AUT) Andrei Chesnokov
1989 Alberto Mancini (ARG) Andre Agassi
1988 Ivan Lendl (USA) Guillmero Perez Roldan
1987 Mats Wilander (SWE) Martin Jaite
1986 Ivan Lendl (USA) Emilio Sanchez
1985 Yannick Noah (FRA) Miloslav Mecir
1984 Andres Gomez (ECU) Aaron Krickstein
1983 Jimmy Arias (USA) Jose Higueras
1982 Andres Gomez (ECU) Eliot Teltscher
1981 Jose-Luis Clerc (ARG) Victor Pecci
1980 Guillermo Vilas (ARG) Yannick Noah
1979 Vitas Gerulaitis (USA) Guillermo Vilas
1978 Bjorn Borg (SWE) Adriano Panatta
1977 Vitas Gerulaitis (USA) Antonio Zuggarelli
1976 Adriano Panatta (ITA) Guillermo Vilas
1975 Raul Ramirez (MEX) Manuel Orantes


Hamburg
2007 Roger Federer (SUI) Rafael Nadal
2006 Tommy Robredo (ESP) Radek Stepanek
2005 Roger Federer (SUI) Richard Gasquet
2004 Roger Federer (SUI) Guillermo Coria
2003 Guillermo Coria (ARG) Agustin Calleri
2002 Roger Federer (SUI) Marat Safin
2001 Albert Portas (ESP) Juan Carlos Ferrero
2000 Gustavo Kuerten (BRA) Marat Safin
1999 Marcelo Rios (CHI) Mariano Zabaleta
1998 Albert Costa (ESP) Alex Corretja
1997 Andrei Medvedev (UKR) Felix Mantilla
1996 Roberto Carretero (ESP) Alex Corretja
1995 Andrei Medvedev (UKR) Goran Ivanisevic
1994 Andrei Medvedev (UKR) Yevgeny Kafelinkov
1993 Michael Stich (GER) Andrei Chesnokov
1992 Stefan Edberg (SWE) Michael Stich
1991 Karel Novacek (CZE) Magnus Gustafsson
1990 Juan Aguilera (ESP) Boris Becker
1989 Ivan Lendl (USA) Horst Skoff
1988 Kent Carlsson (SWE) Henri Leconte
1987 Ivan Lendl (USA) Miloslav Mecir
1986 Henri Leconte (FRA) Miloslav Mecir
1985 Miloslav Mecir (CZE) Henrik Sundstrom
1984 Juan Aguilera (ESP) Henrik Sundstrom
1983 Yannick Noah (FRA) Jose Higueras
1982 Jose Higueras (ESP) Peter McNamara
1981 Peter McNamara (AUS) Jimmy Connors
1980 Harold Solomon (USA) Guillermo Vilas
1979 Jose Higueras (ESP) Harold Solomon
1978 Guillermo Vilas (ARG) Wojtek Fibak
1977 Paolo Bertolucci (ITA) Manuel Orantes
1976 Eddie Dibbs (USA) Jan Kodes
1975 Manuel Orantes (ESP) Jan Kodes



Here is what the results are of that above list taken only from titleholders of that year.

- Monte Carlo has 10 winners and 5 finalists
- Rome has 7 winners and 3 finalists
- Hamburg has 3 winners and 1 finalist

Other facts.

- 2 losing finalists in Monte Carlo have won Roland Garros in the same year ( Bruguera and Wilander)
- Guga lost the Rome final twice, and won RG in the same year.
- Nadal is the only losing Hamburg finalist to win Roland Garros.

Very good statistics as well as the summary ... Tnx bro

elessar
05-08-2008, 03:12 PM
Finally I can put someone else in the list besides Nadal for Rome.
If you're lucky you'll be writing Rogi's name soon :hug:

Action Jackson
05-12-2008, 03:40 AM
List updated with Djoko winning Rome, it was good to put someone elses name there besides Nadal, still doesn't change the fact that Nadal is the overwhelming favourite.

RonE
05-12-2008, 11:55 AM
List updated with Djoko winning Rome, it was good to put someone elses name there besides Nadal, still doesn't change the fact that Nadal is the overwhelming favourite.

Sad but true.

Action Jackson
05-19-2008, 04:58 AM
Could be a bit of history the Monte Carlo and Hamburg winner is a huge fave to win RG.

almouchie
05-19-2008, 06:15 AM
i cant see rafa losing this one
par a major injury or serious tiredness
on par he can bear federer esp in a 5 set match
on clay can overcome novak

Merton
06-08-2008, 06:55 PM
Could be a bit of history the Monte Carlo and Hamburg winner is a huge fave to win RG.

If I am not mistaken, Medvedev in 94 was a winner in both Monte Carlo and Hamburg, but lost against Bruguera at RG. Monte Carlo easily remains the best predictor of RG success.

Jimnik
06-08-2008, 08:20 PM
First time in 8 years the Hamburg winner went on to win RG. And who would have thought it would be the most exciting of the clay events this year. Maybe RG should import German clay next year to keep things tighter.

Action Jackson
04-05-2009, 03:50 AM
Will have to add Madrid in the Hamburg slot, but of course there will be an explanation for it.

Nadal keeps breaking the records on clay, the streak will continue.

Action Jackson
04-05-2009, 03:57 AM
I'm not that great with stats, but interesting to me that since 1998 (with the exception of Pioline) all the MC winners got to the finals of RG that year. And with Ferrero, Coria and Guga--they all became RG champs within 2 years of losing MC.

If recent stats hold up, the RG 2005 champ will be...Guillermo Coria. Nadal will win RG within 2 years.

TF was right on this one.

alfonsojose
04-05-2009, 04:08 AM
:lol: I'm pretty sure you have an excel file with all the threads you create :shrug: It's ok :hug:

Action Jackson
04-05-2009, 04:23 AM
:lol: I'm pretty sure you have an excel file with all the threads you create :shrug: It's ok :hug:

The evidence is there and considering it's a 34 year period that was this taken over. That out of the 3 TMS events that Monte Carlo is clearly the best indicator of RG success.

Does this mean that players who don't win there or a TMS that year can't win RG, of course not, but this was not the point, it was to show which TMS event has the most success relative to RG.

Action Jackson
04-09-2009, 04:01 PM
Fedclown wants to play at Monte Carlo again, just hope this is not the repeat of the 2008 MC and RG final.

duong
04-10-2009, 08:57 AM
Leconte 1988 Hamburg should be in green.
In 2007 Federer should not be bolded in Monte-Carlo.

Thanks for the stats (not for the so useless and stupid "Fedclown" :shrug:) : young people can see that in the old time, seldom the players could win the Masters clay events and get through in Roland-Garros.

And many great players concentrated their efforts on only one or two masters series. Especially the attacking ones like Sampras or MacEnroe or Becker especially.

Action Jackson
04-11-2009, 02:45 PM
They didn't always have to play them either, there were times when Hamburg was played before Rome.

Most of the attacking players played these events, they had their odd moments.

HarryMan
04-11-2009, 03:11 PM
Interesting thread AJ. :yeah:

Going through the initial pages now and I can see that not many, including you, could have predicted what has happened in the last 5 years during the clay court season.

If someone had asked me in 05 if you think Nadal can keep dominating the clay court season for the next 5 straight years, I would have laughed my ass off then, considering his extremely physical game style. It is quite unbelieveable what this guy has and continues to do on this surface and I have accepted the fact now that it might take more than a miracle to beat him there.

Action Jackson
04-11-2009, 03:30 PM
I mean I knew Nadal would win RG one day, just not dominate to the level he has, where he is like the father and the rest of players are like kids.

HarryMan
04-11-2009, 03:35 PM
^^^:lol:

Thats exactly how I felt back then, I thought a couple of RG titles and a few MS events and then perhaps he will fade away. Never thought this kind of a domination was possible.

Action Jackson
04-13-2009, 05:25 AM
I suppose it's good be surprised, he is even more dominant than Fed was on grass.

Merton
04-14-2009, 09:52 AM
It will be interesting to watch how Madrid winners perform in Paris but my bet is that the players that matter on clay will continue to give more weight to Monte Carlo. Of course this is a long term prediction, for this year we know what to expect.

duong
04-15-2009, 02:44 PM
I suppose it's good be surprised, he is even more dominant than Fed was on grass.

The only possible comparison is Borg's domination on clay.

And even that ... as you see Nadal's won 2 MS on clay every year since 2005 + Roland-Garros.

Borg didn't win so much before Roland-Garros : he concentrated on RG.

Even if it's true that the statistics don't show some important tournaments from the past, especially Forest Hills or Madrid which used to be important events in the beginning of the 80's.

Action Jackson
04-15-2009, 02:52 PM
It will be interesting to watch how Madrid winners perform in Paris but my bet is that the players that matter on clay will continue to give more weight to Monte Carlo. Of course this is a long term prediction, for this year we know what to expect.

It has been like that for a long time. I mean Borg played Monte Carlo a lot more than he did at Rome where he got some harsh treatment from the crowd and Hamburg. Guga, Lendl, Muster and Wilander did the same thing. Muster hardly played Hamburg, the others did, but Monte Carlo has always had a good reputation.

Mafia prick says he is going to use a heavier ball.

Action Jackson
04-20-2009, 02:21 AM
Surprise surprise Nadal wins Monte Carlo again, at least there was a different finalist this time around.

Action Jackson
05-04-2009, 11:23 AM
More things change, the more they stay the same.

Nadal_Fanatic
05-05-2009, 04:42 AM
I'm getting the feeling Rome (and Barcelona) is playing more like Roland Garros. I know I'm going against the stats but Rome is a little quicker and higher bouncing than Monte Carlo. But I feel RG is very unique clay. Nothing is the same.

Action Jackson
05-17-2009, 07:14 PM
Federer is the first winner of AMS Tiriac, see how this goes in relation to RG.

dorkino
05-17-2009, 07:44 PM
Concerning the court surface,i guess Madrid differs a lot. All through the tournament this week i thought this looks more like a fast hard court covered with a thin layer of clay. :retard:.

But then again anything can happen. New tactics and wills are being tried so who knows?

Nacho
06-09-2009, 09:16 AM
sorry to bump this thread, but I had to :p

is Madrid now the best indicator or RG success? :lol:

obviusly not, but it's kinda interesting

Action Jackson
04-15-2010, 01:00 PM
Rafalala on the way on to making it number 6 in Monte Carlo.

andy neyer
04-15-2010, 01:36 PM
Interesting thread.

rocketassist
04-15-2010, 02:21 PM
Federer is the first winner of AMS Tiriac, see how this goes in relation to RG.

This turned out to be an early correlation, even if it's a $$$$ event with no history it has produced one RG winner already.

Action Jackson
04-15-2010, 02:26 PM
Rafa likes Monte Carlo and for good reason, but there are always going to be the odd ones.

Barcelona has a better record of producing winners than Hamburg/Madrid. This was before the Rafa show there. The 2002 and 2004 finalists there won RG.

RogiFan88
04-15-2010, 03:45 PM
still my fave is Gaston Gaudio not winning ANY clay TMSes ever, esp the year he won RG, in 2004... in fact, RG was the ONLY title he won that year... and I love him for it! ;)

RogiFan88
04-15-2010, 03:48 PM
Federer is the first winner of AMS Tiriac, see how this goes in relation to RG.

:cool: :rocker2:

Jimnik
04-16-2010, 03:32 AM
Well Federer pretty much picked up in Madrid where he left off in Hamburg. The enclosed stadium with almost indoor conditions must be similar to Rothenbaum.

Wonder how the new Roland Garros stadium with retractable roof will affect the conditions.

andy neyer
04-16-2010, 03:42 AM
Interestingly enough, Hamburg was the MS Federer where Federer succeed the most in terms of wins-losses Percentage. He did better there than in all of the others, including hardcourt MS.

Jimnik
04-16-2010, 03:54 AM
It was like a home tournament to him, being the only Masters in a German speaking country.

Topspin Forehand
04-16-2010, 05:52 AM
Interestingly enough, Hamburg was the MS Federer where Federer succeed the most in terms of wins-losses Percentage. He did better there than in all of the others, including hardcourt MS.
The ball stayed pretty low there due to the heavy conditions. Indoors feel to it suits him more as well. Madrid helps Federer as it plays just as fast if not faster than some hard court tournaments due to the altitude. But I think Rome is the most similar to RG since RG got sped up somewhere in the last few years.

Action Jackson
04-16-2010, 06:40 AM
The ball stayed pretty low there due to the heavy conditions. Indoors feel to it suits him more as well. Madrid helps Federer as it plays just as fast if not faster than some hard court tournaments due to the altitude. But I think Rome is the most similar to RG since RG got sped up somewhere in the last few years.

It's Monte Carlo that is the most similar and no hardcourt tournament is slower than clay. Madrid is not at high altitude, 580m does not make massive difference.

Topspin Forehand
04-16-2010, 05:55 PM
It's Monte Carlo that is the most similar and no hardcourt tournament is slower than clay. Madrid is not at high altitude, 580m does not make massive difference.
Monte-Carlo is so much slower than RG. You gotta be blind to not see that. Rome is very similar speedwise. There is nothing really like RG but Rome (or Barcelona) is the closest. And Madrid altitude does make a difference. So much harder to break with the ball kicking up high and fast. Nadal will tell you that. Unless you think you know more than Rafa?

andy neyer
04-17-2010, 08:14 AM
I guess most of you know this but I just found out: The MC masters is actually held in France. That explains Nadal's success :)

*bunny*
04-17-2010, 08:43 AM
Monte-Carlo is so much slower than RG. You gotta be blind to not see that. Rome is very similar speedwise. There is nothing really like RG but Rome (or Barcelona) is the closest. And Madrid altitude does make a difference. So much harder to break with the ball kicking up high and fast. Nadal will tell you that. Unless you think you know more than Rafa?

:wavey:
Here is what Rafa said after his win over Berrer:

Q. If you had to compare the three different clay surfaces, clay in Monte Carlo, clay in Rome, and clay in Paris, what is the difference from your point of view?
RAFAEL NADAL: Clay is clay (smiling). Probably between here and Paris is very similar, very similar, the clay. In Rome is a little bit different.

Q. Faster?
RAFAEL NADAL: I don't know. I don't know if is faster. But the clay is not the same clay, you know. There is different clays, different material.
So probably here is closer. I don't know if is the same, exactly the same, but my feeling is very close to the same like Paris. And in Rome is a little bit more similar than the clay we have in Spain.

http://www.monte-carlorolexmasters.com/News/Tennis/2010/Interview-Transcripts/Rafael-Nadal-Thursday.aspx

andy neyer
04-17-2010, 08:52 AM
What does Nadal know about clay anyway? :)

Action Jackson
04-17-2010, 09:42 AM
Monte-Carlo is so much slower than RG. You gotta be blind to not see that. Rome is very similar speedwise. There is nothing really like RG but Rome (or Barcelona) is the closest. And Madrid altitude does make a difference. So much harder to break with the ball kicking up high and fast. Nadal will tell you that. Unless you think you know more than Rafa?

580m is not enough to make a significant difference. When they play at places like Quito, Johannesburg, Bogota, Medellin, Mexico City and Gstaad to a lesser extent, then this is where the altitude comes into play. Check their elevation above sea level and you may see a pattern.

You are the blind one, and Nadal is not exactly stupid when it comes to this sort of thing or is he cause he contradicted what you said.

Persimmon
04-17-2010, 02:31 PM
The most similar MS to RG is MC.

Arkulari
04-17-2010, 06:58 PM
MC is the most similar to RG, followed by BCN
Rome used to be the fastest clay one but now the dubious honor goes to Madrid, not only for altitude (I have seen matches in cities at 2600m and the ball goes crazy there, something you would not see in european tournaments) but the fact that the court composition and clay are disgraceful (way too fast) :o

Har-Tru
04-17-2010, 07:02 PM
It's Monte Carlo that is the most similar and no hardcourt tournament is slower than clay.

Both IW and Miami are slower than Madrid.

andy neyer
04-17-2010, 07:19 PM
MC is the most similar to RG, followed by BCN
Rome used to be the fastest clay one but now the dubious honor goes to Madrid, not only for altitude (I have seen matches in cities at 2600m and the ball goes crazy there, something you would not see in european tournaments) but the fact that the court composition and clay are disgraceful (way too fast) :o

The differences in speed and bounce on clay in the three MS aren't as big as you're trying to make them seem, imo. MC is the most similar to RG but that doesn't mean Rome and Madrid are played on totally different surfaces. Like Nadal said, clay is clay and I'm 100% sure even the clay in Madrid is more favourable to his game than any hardcourt surface.

Start da Game
04-17-2010, 07:30 PM
The differences in speed and bounce on clay in the three MS aren't as big as you're trying to make them seem, imo. MC is the most similar to RG but that doesn't mean Rome and Madrid are played on totally different surfaces. Like Nadal said, clay is clay and I'm 100% sure even the clay in Madrid is more favourable to his game than any hardcourt surface.

concurred.......montecarlo, rome and french clay are almost similar, the differences are not that big........the thing is, french clay has more bounce and the topspun balls shoot up better.......that deludes us to think that french clay is slow but it is not as slow as people think.......

if any clay is slow as ass, it's the hamburg clay.......and forget about madrid, it's a clown event with shit clay........

rocketassist
04-17-2010, 07:35 PM
concurred.......montecarlo, rome and french clay are almost similar, the differences are not that big........the thing is, french clay has more bounce and the topspun balls shoot up better.......that deludes us to think that french clay is slow but it is not as slow as people think.......

if any clay is slow as ass, it's the hamburg clay.......and forget about madrid, it's a clown event with shit clay........

MC and RG are alike. Rome's a bit quicker than those two, fast court players have always done better there than they have the other events.

DrJules
04-17-2010, 07:37 PM
The differences in speed and bounce on clay in the three MS aren't as big as you're trying to make them seem, imo. MC is the most similar to RG but that doesn't mean Rome and Madrid are played on totally different surfaces. Like Nadal said, clay is clay and I'm 100% sure even the clay in Madrid is more favourable to his game than any hardcourt surface.

The biggest difference between surfaces is the movement of the player on the surface. That is what makes clay, hard courts and grass each unique more than anything else.

Action Jackson
04-17-2010, 11:07 PM
Both IW and Miami are slower than Madrid.

Don't be naughty. Can't compare apples and oranges except they are both fruits.

Har-Tru
04-17-2010, 11:19 PM
Don't be naughty. Can't compare apples and oranges except they are both fruits.

True, you can't. But you can compare absolute values like speed.

Har-Tru
04-17-2010, 11:22 PM
The biggest difference between surfaces is the movement of the player on the surface. That is what makes clay, hard courts and grass each unique more than anything else.

Very true.

Action Jackson
04-17-2010, 11:25 PM
True, you can't. But you can compare absolute values like speed.

So when the composition of the courts aren't the same, then weather especially on clay can influence how it will play. Topspin Forehand tried to be a smart arse and Nadal contradicted him :).

Jules has nailed it with the surface thing.

Har-Tru
04-17-2010, 11:31 PM
So when the composition of the courts aren't the same, then weather especially on clay can influence how it will play.

Yes, of course.

That's what makes Miami slower than IW and partially what made Madrid faster than Miami. But if conditions are the same for every court, Madrid last year was still faster than both IW and Miami. Calling that thing "clay" though, that's a travesty.

Topspin Forehand tried to be a smart arse and Nadal contradicted him :).


You lost me there.

Topspin Forehand
04-17-2010, 11:35 PM
580m is not enough to make a significant difference. When they play at places like Quito, Johannesburg, Bogota, Medellin, Mexico City and Gstaad to a lesser extent, then this is where the altitude comes into play. Check their elevation above sea level and you may see a pattern.

You are the blind one, and Nadal is not exactly stupid when it comes to this sort of thing or is he cause he contradicted what you said.
He said nothing about the speed of courts. He only said the material is more similar. I agree with that. Monte-Carlo and RG look very similar in the material used and how comfortable Nadal moves out there. RG is however faster and higher bouncing due to few possible reasons.
1. Warmer conditions (Ball flys in the air more).
2. Livelier tennis balls
3. Less top layer.
4. Dryer courts. But I do think the comfort Nadal has with the surface is more important than the speed itself. Miami is pretty slow but Nadal doesn't like that material used on those hardcourts. And Nadal cited the altitude hurting his rhythm as he knows from experience playing in Madrid. Even if it's not much of a difference, it still is noticeable to professional players like Nadal. And it was visably noticeable as well with the ball kicking up real high and hard to return. Federer and Djokovic were real hard to break for Nadal there.

Action Jackson
04-17-2010, 11:37 PM
Yes, of course.

That's what makes Miami slower than IW and partially what made Madrid faster than Miami. But if conditions are the same for every court, Madrid last year was still faster than both IW and Miami. Calling that thing "clay" though, that's a travesty.

Indian Wells is about the same altitude as Madrid. The way they play is the clear difference due to climatic factors not speed alone. Miami is humid when they play there.

Might as well say Wimbledon is quicker than RG and actually mean it. Unlike grass which is cut very short, how can a natural surface like clay be faster underfoot unless the layer is so thin you can see the base be faster than a hardcourt? Madrid is not high enough for altitude alone to be a factor.

You lost me there.

Read back, the clown said I am an idiot because Rome was most like RG, as if you know more than Nadal, then Rafa comes out and says Monte Carlo is the closest.

Topspin Forehand
04-17-2010, 11:49 PM
Read back, the clown said I am an idiot because Rome was most like RG, as if you know more than Nadal, then Rafa comes out and says Monte Carlo is the closest.
I did not call you an idiot. I just stated my opinion and you got all worked up about it. If anything, you are disrespecting me.

Har-Tru
04-17-2010, 11:51 PM
Indian Wells is about the same altitude as Madrid. The way they play is the clear difference due to climatic factors not speed alone. Miami is humid when they play there.

Might as well say Wimbledon is quicker than RG and actually mean it. Unlike grass which is cut very short, how can a natural surface like clay be faster underfoot unless the layer is so thin you can see the base be faster than a hardcourt? Madrid is not high enough for altitude alone to be a factor.

The surfaces at IW (Plexipave IW) and Miami (Laykold Plus) are both placed in Category 1 (Very Slow) by the ITF Court Pace Ratings. Clay courts fit into this category too, automatically. Hard courts can play slower than fast clay. It takes the right combination of sand granules and rubber acrylic (like Laykold) or a very high porosity with hard cement (like Plexipave IW) combined with the right climatic conditions (high humidity in Miami), and on the other hand an irregular, fine clay in a semi-indoor environment at relative altitude like in Madrid, and yes, it does happen that the balls gets to you quicker in Madrid that in Miami.

You're right though in that climatic and other factors have to be taken into account, that's why lab research can be the starting point but not the only one when measuring speed and bounce.

Read back, the clown said I am an idiot because Rome was most like RG, as if you know more than Nadal, then Rafa comes out and says Monte Carlo is the closest.

Oh Topspin Forehand is a poster, ok...

well it doesn't take a genius to see MC is closest to RG. :confused:

Action Jackson
04-18-2010, 12:50 AM
The surfaces at IW (Plexipave IW) and Miami (Laykold Plus) are both placed in Category 1 (Very Slow) by the ITF Court Pace Ratings. Clay courts fit into this category too, automatically. Hard courts can play slower than fast clay. It takes the right combination of sand granules and rubber acrylic (like Laykold) or a very high porosity with hard cement (like Plexipave IW) combined with the right climatic conditions (high humidity in Miami), and on the other hand an irregular, fine clay in a semi-indoor environment at relative altitude like in Madrid, and yes, it does happen that the balls gets to you quicker in Madrid that in Miami.

You're right though in that climatic and other factors have to be taken into account, that's why lab research can be the starting point but not the only one when measuring speed and bounce.


How are the ratings actually done? Of course there are slow hardcourts, just as there are faster ones and this is the same as clay. Look at Rome that is fast as clay courts go, but that is going to depend on climate as I said, some years it's very fast and others not so.

The way people (not you) go on about Madrid and its altitude it's like double of Mt.Everest. Slow hardcourt is a relative thing and cross surface speeds can't be accurately measured for obvious reasons and besides they don't play the same. Of course it's easier to do a comparison between Paris, Monte Carlo, Barcelona and Rome than between Monte Carlo, Indian Wells and Wimbledon for example.

Arkulari
04-18-2010, 01:07 AM
The differences in speed and bounce on clay in the three MS aren't as big as you're trying to make them seem, imo. MC is the most similar to RG but that doesn't mean Rome and Madrid are played on totally different surfaces. Like Nadal said, clay is clay and I'm 100% sure even the clay in Madrid is more favourable to his game than any hardcourt surface.

Last year I witnessed tournaments in both Buenos Aires and Bogotá and the difference was abysmal, clay is clay but ambiental factors do matter (and of course the courts composition is a major factor as well), that's why in Bs As they use the standard clay balls and in Bogotá they use the high altitude ones ;)

Rome and Madrid are different speeds but are closer amongst them than they are to MC or BCN which are another group of slower clay courts, the slowest being Hamburg and maybe Umag

It's not like one clay surface plays like mud and the next plays like decoturf, but there are different speeds amongst the clay courts, just like there are differences amongst hard courts (much more pronounced due to the different surfaces used)

Har-Tru
04-18-2010, 12:00 PM
How are the ratings actually done? Of course there are slow hardcourts, just as there are faster ones and this is the same as clay. Look at Rome that is fast as clay courts go, but that is going to depend on climate as I said, some years it's very fast and others not so.

The way people (not you) go on about Madrid and its altitude it's like double of Mt.Everest. Slow hardcourt is a relative thing and cross surface speeds can't be accurately measured for obvious reasons and besides they don't play the same. Of course it's easier to do a comparison between Paris, Monte Carlo, Barcelona and Rome than between Monte Carlo, Indian Wells and Wimbledon for example.

The ratings are done in labs, where conditions are the same for all surfaces. That's why they're relative.

Madrid is fast clay primarily because of the way the clay is laid and the semi-indoor conditions (very light wind), and also because it's usually hot and sunny. Altitude isn't that important at 580m, true.

Action Jackson
04-18-2010, 12:07 PM
The ratings are done in labs, where conditions are the same for all surfaces. That's why they're relative.

Madrid is fast clay primarily because of the way the clay is laid and the semi-indoor conditions (very light wind), and also because it's usually hot and sunny. Altitude isn't that important at 580m, true.

They can't exactly replicate the outdoor climatic conditions. It's like growing a greenhouse tomato and one not in a greenhouse, both are tomatoes but they aren't going to be the same are they.

What ball they use, how the courts are laid, what base they are laid upon and climatic factors. I know why Madrid is fast, less topsurface, light ball and hot weather isn't going to make a court slow is it, same as Rome, but it's not still not faster than a slow hardcourt.

We are never going to agree on this at all, for the reasons that have been stated, comparing across different court surfaces when it comes to speed is always going to pose more questions and there are enough of them when surface comparisons are done on the same surface.

Har-Tru
04-18-2010, 12:12 PM
They can't exactly replicate the outdoor climatic conditions. It's like growing a greenhouse tomato and one not in a greenhouse, both are tomatoes but they aren't going to be the same are they.

What ball they use, how the courts are laid, what base they are laid upon and climatic factors. I know why Madrid is fast, less topsurface, light ball and hot weather isn't going to make a court slow is it, same as Rome, but it's not still not faster than a slow hardcourt.

We are never going to agree on this at all, for the reasons that have been stated, comparing across different court surfaces when it comes to speed is always going to pose more questions and there are enough of them when surface comparisons are done on the same surface.

Yes... too many factors, so too subjective to make an absolute point. :)

Action Jackson
04-18-2010, 12:16 PM
Yes... too many factors, so too subjective to make an absolute point. :)

But we do know Monte Carlo is the closest to RG in terms of conditions :).

Action Jackson
04-18-2010, 02:07 PM
6 in a row for Nadal at Monte Carlo, too good.

Har-Tru
04-18-2010, 02:30 PM
But we do know Monte Carlo is the closest to RG in terms of conditions :).

Absolutely, but you can have a cold, damp day at MC and then a mighty hot one in Rome and then Rome can play faster or bounce higher in that particular day.

See? We can play all day long. :lol: ;)

Action Jackson
04-18-2010, 02:37 PM
Absolutely, but you can have a cold, damp day at MC and then a mighty hot one in Rome and then Rome can play faster or bounce higher in that particular day.

See? We can play all day long. :lol: ;)

Monte Carlo has more clay than Rome, so it would have to be very cold and wet in Rome for it to be slower. But you think slow hardcourts are slower than clay and that's funny :p

Har-Tru
04-18-2010, 03:29 PM
Monte Carlo has more clay than Rome, so it would have to be very cold and wet in Rome for it to be slower. But you think slow hardcourts are slower than clay and that's funny :p

No I think slow hard courts can be slower than fast clay. A typical day in Miami vs a typical day in Madrid last year... Miami played slower.

Action Jackson
04-18-2010, 03:33 PM
No I think slow hard courts can be slower than fast clay. A typical day in Miami vs a typical day in Madrid last year... Miami played slower.

The circle thing again. Green clay must be the fastest surface besides grass then.

Har-Tru
04-18-2010, 04:58 PM
The circle thing again. Green clay must be the fastest surface besides grass then.

You know too well hard courts vary a lot in speed... DecoTurf II and the Miami surface are two worlds.

Topspin Forehand
04-18-2010, 07:37 PM
Imo the fastest conditions in Monte-Carlo are slower than the slowest conditions in RG. Nadal loves both surfaces since they suit his movement the most and conditions don't hurt him that much slightly one way or the other. With faster conditions, Nadal gets a higher bounce to use his spin. With slower conditions, Nadal has more time to set up his shots and get returns back. Rome clay is laid out on cement while Monte-Carlo clay is laid out on a softer surface. Thus why the surface feels different to Rafa. His knees are a big part why Monte-Carlo suits him the most. Many times the commentators mentioned how fast RG was playing last year. Even in heavy conditions. They mentioned the court are supposed to play slower and they aren't. I believe it was Cliff Drysdale. Del Potro mentioned RG was playing more like a hard court speedwise. I definitely believe they did their best to speed things up to give Fed a better chance. Monte-Carlo always plays the same and I respect that tournament for that.

Action Jackson
05-02-2010, 09:17 AM
Nadal going for his 100th Monte Carlo/RG double.

Topspin Forehand
05-02-2010, 05:36 PM
Nadal going for his 100th Monte Carlo/RG double.
RG is faster now I tell you. It will be interesting like Rome. If Nadal has another matchup problem, he could be in a real battle like the Gulbis match.

CyBorg
05-02-2010, 06:35 PM
Ugh. They must bring back best-of-five finals at TMS. This is just boring now.

Filo V.
05-02-2010, 06:55 PM
In Nadal's case, he dominates Rome and Monte Carlo, generally didn't do as well at Hamburg, and Madrid isn't the best surface for his game. But Hamburg was immediately after Rome, which I believe was a major factor, plus he had a hard time using his spin to move guys out of position because of how muddy and slow the surface was and how the balls were so heavy and the air damp.

All of this isn't really connected to what he does at RG. He still has dominated the French and will do so this year barring injury. The fact there is a week off between events for him this year will help his cause.

Persimmon
05-02-2010, 07:17 PM
Hamburg and Madrid have low bounce which Nadal dislikes..

ossie
05-02-2010, 08:36 PM
Hamburg and Madrid have low bounce which Nadal dislikes..is it really worse than rome though?

Action Jackson
05-02-2010, 10:18 PM
is it really worse than rome though?

Well his shots aren't going to get as high are they? So think about it.

CyBorg
05-02-2010, 10:18 PM
Really wet clay today in Rome. Must have helped Nadal, no?

Action Jackson
05-02-2010, 10:22 PM
They could put quicksand to slow Nadal down and he'd still win.

CyBorg
05-02-2010, 10:23 PM
They could put quicksand to slow Nadal down and he'd still win.

He'd probably love quicksand.

Topspin Forehand
05-02-2010, 10:39 PM
Hamburg and Madrid have low bounce which Nadal dislikes..
Madrid is not low bouncing. If anything it is too high bouncing due to the altitude and dry weather. Nadal had all sorts of problems always having to return serve from over his head as the ball didn't drop down to his comfort level unlike the other clay tournaments. Breaking serve was really hard for Nadal in Madrid and I expect the same this year.

Action Jackson
05-02-2010, 10:47 PM
Madrid is not low bouncing. If anything it is too high bouncing due to the altitude and dry weather. Nadal had all sorts of problems always having to return serve from over his head as the ball didn't drop down to his comfort level unlike the other clay tournaments. Breaking serve was really hard for Nadal in Madrid and I expect the same this year.

Overrating Madrid altitude again? They have only played 1 tournament in Madrid and Nadal has not overplayed on clay this season, so this season will be a greater indicator.

Stop making out 568m above sea level is altitude. Dry weather hasn't bothered him in Rome has it. Try how much he played before he played Madrid last season and the movement for him was heavy and laboured and apply it.

Topspin Forehand
05-02-2010, 10:52 PM
Edit

Topspin Forehand
05-02-2010, 10:53 PM
Overrating Madrid altitude again? They have only played 1 tournament in Madrid and Nadal has not overplayed on clay this season, so this season will be a greater indicator.

Stop making out 568m above sea level is altitude. Dry weather hasn't bothered him in Rome has it. Try how much he played before he played Madrid last season and the movement for him was heavy and laboured and apply it.
Cause Rome isn't that extreme for Nadal. The courts aren't that high bouncing. Yes maybe higher than Monte-Carlo but nothing extreme. And we'll see how Madrid plays this year. The kick serve was a big weapon last year if you watched. Querrey also gave Nadal problems in Madrid Davis Cup. The Spanish made a big deal about the DC being played in Madrid due to the altitude. And Querrey took advantage of it by having a big serving day.

Action Jackson
05-02-2010, 11:01 PM
Cause Rome isn't that extreme for Nadal. The courts aren't that high bouncing. Yes maybe higher than Monte-Carlo but nothing extreme. And we'll see how Madrid plays this year. The kick serve was a big weapon last year if you watched. Querrey also gave Nadal problems in Madrid Davis Cup. The Spanish made a big deal about the DC being played in Madrid due to the altitude. And Querrey took advantage of it by having a big serving day.

Actually it wasn't just cause of the altitude in the DC. It was internal politics by the then federation leader Muñoz, that was a bigger factor.

It's not the bounce that is the problem, if it was then Nadal would never win Rome. It's the speed of the court.

At Madrid, do they use a specific high altitude ball? They don't need longer in between points. The lungs aren't burning like they are at Gstaad and other high altitude venues. It requires minimal adjustment as to where the targets are bought in.

1000m above sea level makes a significant difference and Madrid is not even close.

Action Jackson
04-09-2011, 04:10 PM
Funny when I started this thread, all the stuff before was of more relevance. Once Nadal won his first RG then it was just a question of how long the dominance is.

Johnny Groove
04-09-2011, 04:51 PM
As always, scheduling will be a concern for the Rafa.

This year he has Monte-Carlo and Barcelona back to back, then a week off, then Madrid and Rome back to back, then a week off, then RG.

Personally, I'd like to see him lose somewhere in there, Madrid hopefully, and win the other 3 ahead of RG.

Action Jackson
04-09-2011, 04:52 PM
Would be good if he didn't play the Tiriac Open.

Johnny Groove
04-09-2011, 05:06 PM
Yes it would, but politically, you know Nadal has no choice in the matter.

Barcelona should be 1000 and Madrid 500, but that'$ not how thi$ $port work$.

Action Jackson
04-09-2011, 05:07 PM
Fake an injury, though he can go not full out and win 3 of the events.

Action Jackson
04-30-2011, 02:00 AM
Won't make much difference that Madrid got moved.

Getta
04-30-2011, 02:09 AM
easier to fit Barna into someone's busy schedule

Action Jackson
05-15-2011, 07:41 PM
See what happens now with Djokovic winning 2 TMS events on clay.

Action Jackson
04-22-2012, 01:37 PM
Surprise Nadal won it again.

Action Jackson
04-22-2013, 12:34 AM
Finally since I started this thread I can update a different winner for Monte Carlo. The best part even before Nadal's ownership of Monte Carlo it was still the best indicator of Roland Garros success.

uxyzapenje
04-22-2013, 12:49 AM
Finally since I started this thread I can update a different winner for Monte Carlo. The best part even before Nadal's ownership of Monte Carlo it was still the best indicator of Roland Garros success.

You could as well update winners of last year's Madrid and Rome and uncolor Ferrer (if Lenders sees that you colored him in blue as RG winners, we know what will happen to this thread).

guga2120
04-22-2013, 01:10 AM
Another reason this match was so important today. Even more so than Rome. So goes Monaco, goes Roland Garros.

Roy Emerson
04-22-2013, 01:13 AM
Djokovic will try to become the first player ever to win Australian Open, Monte Carlo and Roland Garros in the same year. Wilander in 1983 and Nadal in 2009 also won Australian Open and Monte Carlo but failed to win Roland Garros that year.