Originally Posted by leng jai
Yeah great, he lost to Rafito who doesn't play tennis any differently on grass either. Irrefutable proof he would be a grass master.
In 2008 he was spanked by Safin. In 2009 he lost twice to a 30 year old Haas who was playing old school grass tennis on slow consistently bouncing "modern" grass. 2010 he played Hewitt and Lu
before being comprehensively beaten by Berdych.
What part of Nole's game would be improved on old school grass? He doesn't have a great slice, his volleys are mediocre and his serve is not big enough. Does he prefer playing his groundies off low bouncing shots? No.
Federer clearly prefers the old grass because the low bounce is far better for his topspin backhand and the slice becomes a much more effective shot. Thats not even taking into account how much better the volleys would be. These days its a joke to try volleying unless its a put away shot. Volleys sit up after they bounce now rather than skid which is what they used to do. How do you think its possible for Nadal to hit those ridiculous passing shots? The bounce of the volley gives him the extra time to reach the ball and get under it to make the shots possible. Do you really think he could chase down a low skidding volley breaking away from him and produce those forehands on the run? No.
nadal did not peak on clay, grass and hardcourts at the same time.....same with djokovic.....both unlike fed.....
do you think nadal and djokovic would play on slick grass the same way they do on today's grass? i have heard all the slowing down of courts arguments enough already.....the first one who benefited from slow grass is fed.....it's ridiculous how philippoussis's serves kept coming back that day in 2003 when the ball should have been barely visible on his first serve.....reason? they changed it to 100% in 2002 and henman went mad straightaway at the organizers.....
they all benefited from slowness.....