[Shirogane]

Originally Posted by Mjau!

Istanbul was well fast!

Indoor Rebound Ace like, laid on wood; so while not that fast, you could still hit through the court indeed.

[Shinoj]

Just watched Ferrer v Murray. The courts are so damn slow. Are we playing Indoors or are we in Estoril,Portugal.

I d be rather watching f****n Golf.

[Everko]

Originally Posted by Shinoj

Just watched Ferrer v Murray. The courts are so damn slow. Are we playing Indoors or are we in Estoril,Portugal.

I d be rather watching f****n Golf.

attitude of real tennis fans? Fans like you make the game embarrassing

[Shinoj]

Originally Posted by Everko

attitude of real tennis fans? Fans like you make the game embarrassing

I am a real fan who wants to see all aspects of a Tennis match and which DOES NOT happen in Slow Courts.

[masterclass]

Originally Posted by Mechlan

Exactly. They don't even necessarily have to speed up the courts. All they have to do is drop the ball size a bit and we'll get conditions that favor offense instead of defense. Do that judiciously and we can go back to actually having some variety again.

I also enjoy the variety of tennis that can be played by the world's top players when the court surface speeds vary. I appreciate the talent it takes for the world's best to be able to adapt and showcase their talents on all courts, or if unable to adapt, to at least specialize on certain types of courts. It used to be a great accomplishment to win the French Open and Wimbledon back-to-back or complete a career grand slam because of the surface differences. However, the trend in the last few years has been to make many of the traditional various court surfaces more alike in playing speed, either via surface change or ball changes.

Many believe the primary cause of this was due to greatly improved racquet and string technology, allowing players to hit with far greater power and accuracy. In around 2001, this led to people like David Lloyd (former British Davis Cup captain) saying that tennis had become almost "unwatchable" at Wimbledon (see here), due to players like Pete Sampras, Goran Ivanišević, and others playing matches that consisted of nothing but hitting extremely fast serves and perhaps a single volley. Now Lloyd actually advocated that the Wimbledon grass be ripped up and replaced with synthetic carpet. Well, suggestions like replacing the grass at Wimbledon probably didn't sit well with the those who value tradition so highly in that event (the suggestion probably amounted to heresy), but at the same time, they felt that they needed to respond in some manner. So it is said that the Wimbledon head groundskeeper, Mr. Eddie Seaward, spoke to many of the professional coaches and asked what they wanted (see here ). Evidently the consensus at the time was that the grass needed to be "slowed down" to make the game less "boring". Mr. Seaward then began to change the surface and indeed over the last few years it has changed; the ball bounces higher and in effect has increased time and space needed to react.

Now with all that said, it seems that the pendulum may have swung a bit too far in the other direction. The game has become homogenized to an extent where almost all players are capable of being "all court players" because all courts play similarly (though one still slides more on a clay court). This appears to be leading to the gradual extinction of the beautiful serve and volley style of play in singles tennis. I'm not lamenting about the late 90's one serve, volley and point over. I'm writing about the serve and volley of the 70's and 80's where the great volleyer and the great baseliner had approximately equal chances to win depending on whether it was their day to excel. One could still see shorter points and longer points, depending on the relative skill of the players involved. Another bonus for all players in a more balanced game would be a significant reduction in injuries and fatigue since the points would on average tend to be over more quickly than they are now.

What would it take to bring back that balance? I think the high tech racquets are here to stay. Perhaps it could be as simple as changing the balls somewhat. Start with playing a faster ball at Wimbledon and a slower ball at the French and see what happens. If that doesn't work, tinker with the surfaces just a bit. The changes need to be small, to avoid the pendulum swinging too far in the other direction.

These things can be done, but either somebody well-placed, a significant number of players, or a significant number of fans (via reduction in the viewing audience) will have to speak up in order for the status quo to change.

Regards,
masterclass

[Matt-TennisFan24]

^^^^^ Great post masterclass.

I agree with your point. Changes need to be made, but how long will it take for them to realize this?? The ATP seems to be in a good position with their players and tour, Federer, Nadal and Djokovic (this year) have made the tour all-marketable these last years for them. It's getting so much interest by common people...

So I guess nothing will happen, only until the players actually start to complain. Heck, they managed to change the USO schedule just by uniting together, why not make another union to get the surfaces sped up (or slowed down in RG's case). Thing is, I'm sure players like Djokovic, Murray or Nadal are fine with it, so I doubt they would complain. But why not Federer, Del Potro, Tsonga and Fish fighting to make the change? They should do it, since their game would be so much better with faster surfaces.

As in many things in life, we need to find a balance. Don't speed up ALL courts, but let's speed up some of them. Let's not favour all offensive players, but let's not favour all defensive players either. I know it's difficult to get this balance, but I just hope that in 20 years we will have made a progress about this.

[Topspindoctor]

Courts should be sped up. Obviously Olderer isn't getting enough free points on serve

[Slice Winner]

Originally Posted by masterclass

I also enjoy the variety of tennis that can be played by the world's top players when the court surface speeds vary. I appreciate the talent it takes for the world's best to be able to adapt and showcase their talents on all courts, or if unable to adapt, to at least specialize on certain types of courts. It used to be a great accomplishment to win the French Open and Wimbledon back-to-back or complete a career grand slam because of the surface differences. However, the trend in the last few years has been to make many of the traditional various court surfaces more alike in playing speed, either via surface change or ball changes.

Many believe the primary cause of this was due to greatly improved racquet and string technology, allowing players to hit with far greater power and accuracy. In around 2001, this led to people like David Lloyd (former British Davis Cup captain) saying that tennis had become almost "unwatchable" at Wimbledon (see here), due to players like Pete Sampras, Goran Ivanišević, and others playing matches that consisted of nothing but hitting extremely fast serves and perhaps a single volley. Now Lloyd actually advocated that the Wimbledon grass be ripped up and replaced with synthetic carpet. Well, suggestions like replacing the grass at Wimbledon probably didn't sit well with the those who value tradition so highly in that event (the suggestion probably amounted to heresy), but at the same time, they felt that they needed to respond in some manner. So it is said that the Wimbledon head groundskeeper, Mr. Eddie Seaward, spoke to many of the professional coaches and asked what they wanted (see here ). Evidently the consensus at the time was that the grass needed to be "slowed down" to make the game less "boring". Mr. Seaward then began to change the surface and indeed over the last few years it has changed; the ball bounces higher and in effect has increased time and space needed to react.

Now with all that said, it seems that the pendulum may have swung a bit too far in the other direction. The game has become homogenized to an extent where almost all players are capable of being "all court players" because all courts play similarly (though one still slides more on a clay court). This appears to be leading to the gradual extinction of the beautiful serve and volley style of play in singles tennis. I'm not lamenting about the late 90's one serve, volley and point over. I'm writing about the serve and volley of the 70's and 80's where the great volleyer and the great baseliner had approximately equal chances to win depending on whether it was their day to excel. One could still see shorter points and longer points, depending on the relative skill of the players involved. Another bonus for all players in a more balanced game would be a significant reduction in injuries and fatigue since the points would on average tend to be over more quickly than they are now.

What would it take to bring back that balance? I think the high tech racquets are here to stay. Perhaps it could be as simple as changing the balls somewhat. Start with playing a faster ball at Wimbledon and a slower ball at the French and see what happens. If that doesn't work, tinker with the surfaces just a bit. The changes need to be small, to avoid the pendulum swinging too far in the other direction.

These things can be done, but either somebody well-placed, a significant number of players, or a significant number of fans (via reduction in the viewing audience) will have to speak up in order for the status quo to change.

Regards,
masterclass

+100
Well said.

[Gamesampras]

They should have left things alone. Wimbledon was meant to be a serve and volley surface and the us open was suppose to be fast. Instead of slowing down the courts there they should put a roof on that fucking place! French open and austrlia should stay the same

[Topspindoctor]

Originally Posted by Gamesampras

They should have left things alone. Wimbledon was meant to be a serve and volley surface and the us open was suppose to be fast. Instead of slowing down the courts there they should put a roof on that fucking place! French open and austrlia should stay the same

Good to see Samprastards nice and biased. So speed up Wimbledon and US Open and leave RG as a hard court with red dust on it??? I think not.

If you speed up W+USO, drasticallyslow down RG. It should play like Monte Carlo, not like a fucking hard court.

[tektonac]

sure why not. also, enforce wooden rackets and old string technology, so they finally stfu.

[Gamesampras]

Originally Posted by Topspindoctor

Good to see Samprastards nice and biased. So speed up Wimbledon and US Open and leave RG as a hard court with red dust on it??? I think not.

If you speed up W+USO, drasticallyslow down RG. It should play like Monte Carlo, not like a fucking hard court.

I didn't realize they made RG faster. If they did, than slow it back down. We need some variety, not mindless baseline tennis one dimentional crap

[Roadmap]

Spindoctor knows that Nadull would lose out overall if the slam surfaces went back to normal. His complaints about Roland Garros getting quicker are simply folly. Should he hand back his two Wimbledon titles for the sake of a slower RG that he had already won four times BEFORE the clay was ground finer and lighter balls introduced?

[Action Jackson]

RG has been sped up and this is far from new. They use a lighter ball and have less clay on the top surface. There are only so many things that can be done with a claycourt since the elements have more influence on how it plays.

[fran70]

Originally Posted by masterclass

I also enjoy the variety of tennis that can be played by the world's top players when the court surface speeds vary. I appreciate the talent it takes for the world's best to be able to adapt and showcase their talents on all courts, or if unable to adapt, to at least specialize on certain types of courts. It used to be a great accomplishment to win the French Open and Wimbledon back-to-back or complete a career grand slam because of the surface differences. However, the trend in the last few years has been to make many of the traditional various court surfaces more alike in playing speed, either via surface change or ball changes.

Many believe the primary cause of this was due to greatly improved racquet and string technology, allowing players to hit with far greater power and accuracy. In around 2001, this led to people like David Lloyd (former British Davis Cup captain) saying that tennis had become almost "unwatchable" at Wimbledon (see here), due to players like Pete Sampras, Goran Ivanišević, and others playing matches that consisted of nothing but hitting extremely fast serves and perhaps a single volley. Now Lloyd actually advocated that the Wimbledon grass be ripped up and replaced with synthetic carpet. Well, suggestions like replacing the grass at Wimbledon probably didn't sit well with the those who value tradition so highly in that event (the suggestion probably amounted to heresy), but at the same time, they felt that they needed to respond in some manner. So it is said that the Wimbledon head groundskeeper, Mr. Eddie Seaward, spoke to many of the professional coaches and asked what they wanted (see here ). Evidently the consensus at the time was that the grass needed to be "slowed down" to make the game less "boring". Mr. Seaward then began to change the surface and indeed over the last few years it has changed; the ball bounces higher and in effect has increased time and space needed to react.

Now with all that said, it seems that the pendulum may have swung a bit too far in the other direction. The game has become homogenized to an extent where almost all players are capable of being "all court players" because all courts play similarly (though one still slides more on a clay court). This appears to be leading to the gradual extinction of the beautiful serve and volley style of play in singles tennis. I'm not lamenting about the late 90's one serve, volley and point over. I'm writing about the serve and volley of the 70's and 80's where the great volleyer and the great baseliner had approximately equal chances to win depending on whether it was their day to excel. One could still see shorter points and longer points, depending on the relative skill of the players involved. Another bonus for all players in a more balanced game would be a significant reduction in injuries and fatigue since the points would on average tend to be over more quickly than they are now.

What would it take to bring back that balance? I think the high tech racquets are here to stay. Perhaps it could be as simple as changing the balls somewhat. Start with playing a faster ball at Wimbledon and a slower ball at the French and see what happens. If that doesn't work, tinker with the surfaces just a bit. The changes need to be small, to avoid the pendulum swinging too far in the other direction.

These things can be done, but either somebody well-placed, a significant number of players, or a significant number of fans (via reduction in the viewing audience) will have to speak up in order for the status quo to change.

Regards,
masterclass

Great post Masterclass . As you well said, move the pendulum just a bit. Speed up a bit more the fast courts and slow down a bit the clay courts. And return back the indoor carpets. There aren`t MANY substancial changes to be made on the tour but I think that desicions are being taken in the wrong hands.