ATP Tour and green clay [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

ATP Tour and green clay

Wannabeknowitall
04-15-2007, 01:15 AM
I never really paid attention to the US Clay court championships mostly because it's a joke (the title itself is like an oxymoron) but I did notice it's been on red clay.
So I have a few questions.
So when did the change to green clay happen?
Why are they using the balls that the women use for the US Open?

Is the ATP going to put more clay tournaments on green clay?

Are the rumours about the ATP and WTA trying to make a joint US clay tournament true?

scoobs
04-15-2007, 01:20 AM
a) it happened because this is the last year in Houston and they decided to save money by not having a red clay laid and maintained - they pay them the people who lay it at RG to come over and do it so this was a major expense saved (although I believe there was a lawsuit over this alleging breach of contract)

b) balls - I don't know. Why do the women and men use different balls anyway?

c) just rumours at this point - I think there's a chance the Houston event could move to Charleston and merge with the Family Circle Cup into a joint event - but there are other possibilities too.

Andre♥
04-15-2007, 01:25 AM
c) just rumours at this point - I think there's a chance the Houston event could move to Charleston and merge with the Family Circle Cup into a joint event - but there are other possibilities too.

Charleston looks like hardcourt. Jankovic and Venus were playing like they were on carpet today! :eek:

njnetswill
04-15-2007, 01:28 AM
True. Jankovic and Venus were demonstrating high quality rallying - a rarity to see on both sides of the nets in the women's game. The surface seemed way too fast for a clay court :unsure:. Maybe the girls were just smacking the ball :shrug:.

I think a joint event is good for tennis and the fans. Charleston always gets very good crowd turnout, especially for an American event.

GlennMirnyi
04-15-2007, 01:30 AM
Charleston looks like hardcourt. Jankovic and Venus were playing like they were on carpet today! :eek:

True. It was really fast.

Wannabeknowitall
04-15-2007, 01:34 AM
Charleston looks like hardcourt. Jankovic and Venus were playing like they were on carpet today! :eek:

Well green clay can play pretty fast compared to red clay, can get up close to carpet speeds if the right things happen.
It's been dry there and they don't have a system under the clay that wets the surface.

That speed difference is enough to help some players out.
James Blake has a pretty good record on green clay through challengers and this tournament but his record on red clay is well...:tape:

croat123
04-15-2007, 01:37 AM
they use green clay to save money
and they use women's balls because they are lighter and, therefore go fast (the tournament revolves around roddick)

gusman890
04-15-2007, 02:36 AM
Green clay is amazing.

I love playing on it :)

*Viva Chile*
04-15-2007, 04:38 AM
Call me an ignorant but I never understand why is so expensive to build a red clay court in USA. It doesn't make red bricks in the states??? :confused: So the bricks are green or what??

Deboogle!.
04-15-2007, 04:43 AM
The green clay is much easier to maintain. So they don't have to hire a whole crew to take care of it - that's what costs so much.

MrExcel
04-15-2007, 08:50 AM
Call me an ignorant but I never understand why is so expensive to build a red clay court in USA. It doesn't make red bricks in the states??? :confused: So the bricks are green or what??

Grey clay is actually made from crushed rocks as oppossed to crushed bricks, which is why it's green :)

But I still don't know why they can't use red clay in the US.

Action Jackson
04-15-2007, 08:57 AM
There used to be a whole lot of events on green clay before they changed to hardcourt, like Indy and Washington were played on green clay.

The movement isn't the same as red clay and as has been mentioned it's made of different materials and it plays faster, though using a ball that weighs next to nothing helps with the play of course.

It's a shit surface but much better than astroturf or hardcourts.

dijus
04-15-2007, 08:58 AM
:lol:
what about red grass guys ?

CmonAussie
04-15-2007, 02:28 PM
#
Hewitt won Delray Beach on green clay [1999]!

NicoFan
04-15-2007, 03:42 PM
Green clay is just pure shit ...

You would think that the US was a poor nation with all the complaints about the cost to maintain red clay.

Of course since Mr. Disney is doing his best to make clay as irrelevant as grass, they should probably just bulldoze all the clay courts here in the US - red or green - and just starting pouring the cement. :rolleyes:

Of course, that's when I find another sport to follow...

Deboogle!.
04-15-2007, 07:04 PM
Green clay is just pure shit ...

You would think that the US was a poor nation with all the complaints about the cost to maintain red clay. Come on now, i don't think that's fair at all. The wealth of a nation has nothing to do with whether one particular tournament is in a financial position to be able to pay for the team required to maintain red clay courts. It's common knowledge that many of the IS-level tourneys are financially strapped, even when attendance is good. Do you honestly think it's feasible for most tournaments to fly in a team from Europe or hire a special team here and pay to train them? That's no drop in the bucket for a small tournament.

As for it being "pure shit," I also think that's unfair. Green clay has been around for quite a long time, I mean slams were played on it!! I think it's a decent enough surface and has enough history in the game such that one small men's tourney (that no one here even gives a modicum of respect to anyway) can be played on it.

I, for one, have actually enjoyed the matches from Houston on it. I feel like it allows a nice variety of tennis, because it's fast enough but has the aspects of claycourt tennis like long rallies, dropshots, sliding, creativity, etc. It's something a little different, and a little variety never hurt anyone.

I really think if people could look at it objectively, there is no problem with having this one little event on green clay (plus if people recall, back before it moved to houston, and when Atlanta existed, there were 2 events on green clay anyway - how short memories seem to be.).

Action Jackson
04-15-2007, 07:09 PM
Houston is almost as prestigious as RG, we all know this. I have made my comments about green clay already.

gusman890
04-15-2007, 07:13 PM
USO was played on Green clay for 3 years, thats not too too bad.

LaTenista
04-15-2007, 07:56 PM
Last weekend there were rumors about Winston-Salem being interested in hosting the US Men's Claycourt Championships from 2008.

Pfloyd
04-15-2007, 08:17 PM
Green clay is actually quite fun, and I think it is a bit more interesting to have two diffrent clay surfaces as compared to one. One can make more comparisons and anlysis about players strengths and weakneses with more court varieties.

I play on Green Clay when I'm home and I'm quite happy with it. As some of you have already stated, it is quicker than red clay, but it is not a HC. One can play with relative speed and comfort.

I'm for it.

NicoFan
04-15-2007, 08:51 PM
Come on now, i don't think that's fair at all. The wealth of a nation has nothing to do with whether one particular tournament is in a financial position to be able to pay for the team required to maintain red clay courts. It's common knowledge that many of the IS-level tourneys are financially strapped, even when attendance is good. Do you honestly think it's feasible for most tournaments to fly in a team from Europe or hire a special team here and pay to train them? That's no drop in the bucket for a small tournament.

Agree that smaller tournaments can't afford it - but maybe the USTA could step up and help a bit? Deb, one year I would love for you to come to the US Open and see how the USTA treats the non-corporate fans and how they spend their money. You'd probably be a little more annoyed with the money talk - maybe not :lol: but maybe.

As for it being "pure shit," I also think that's unfair. Green clay has been around for quite a long time, I mean slams were played on it!! I think it's a decent enough surface and has enough history in the game such that one small men's tourney (that no one here even gives a modicum of respect to anyway) can be played on it.

I, for one, have actually enjoyed the matches from Houston on it. I feel like it allows a nice variety of tennis, because it's fast enough but has the aspects of claycourt tennis like long rallies, dropshots, sliding, creativity, etc. It's something a little different, and a little variety never hurt anyone.

I really think if people could look at it objectively, there is no problem with having this one little event on green clay (plus if people recall, back before it moved to houston, and when Atlanta existed, there were 2 events on green clay anyway - how short memories seem to be.).

Houston has been fun to watch. And there is history of green clay here in the U.S. But if the U.S. wants to have all around competitive players and have successful clay tournaments in the U.S., they'll have to learn how to play on the red clay. That's what the rest of the world plays on. :shrug: And the rest of the world isn't going to learn to play on green clay just for one tournament. I would love to see the U.S. host some other tournaments on clay on the lower levels so that our younger players will learn how to play clay - like they used to do pre-this current crop of Americans.