[GugaF1]

People put way too much emphasis on court speed. What is making these matches such a grind feast on every surface has to more to do with current players outstanding conditioning and stamina. When you have supreme confidence on your legs and lungs, you will automatically favor a less risky game, with higher percentages of safe margin in your shots. I mean, the US open courts are not slow, but you still had a Djokovic/Murray grueling physical final. More grueling than several old RG finals between clay courters. These current medium/fast courts would be the same types that Sampras, Edberg would comfortably play their attacking games on their era.

I would say along with having more balanced surfaces is taking the anti-doping control more seriously, that is an area which a lot of people don't put attention to and in my mind could really help to change the dynamics. The anti-doping testing is inept, currently. So along with a petition to speed up the courts, should be first of all to have stricter anti-doping tests, similar to what cycling is looking to do now. Then would be a good way to see results.

What is the ultimate winner in Tennis? The brick wall. Guys with supreme confidence in their physic will look to mimic their games on that rather than fleshy shot making, the brick wall is the ultimate formula for winning it and Peds can help a player get close to mimicking, making it an endurance based game. You could put some of these guys on an Ice cap and they will still look to grind it out. Make them go more to water and vitamins and you will see more risk taking and shot making back

[juan27]

federer speaking abour courts speed:

LONDON -- With the top defensive players increasingly getting the better of him often in recent years, Roger Federer would like to speed up the game of tennis.

Or at least the courts the matches are played on.

Federer lost to Novak Djokovic in the final of the season-ending ATP finals on Monday, and then praised the top-ranked Serb's ability to retrieve so many shots and keep the ball in play. That's a trait Djokovic shares with Federer's other two biggest rivals -- Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray -- and the Swiss star said attacking play doesn't always reap the benefits it deserves even on hard courts because they're often slower than they used to be.

"It's an easy fix. Just make quicker courts, then it's hard to defend," Federer said. "Attacking style is more important. It's only on this type of slow courts that you can defend the way we are all doing right now."

Monday's final at the O2 Arena had a familiar feel to it. Federer did most of the attacking, trying to dictate play with his forehand and aggressive shot making. But Djokovic, as he often does, kept finding ways to get the ball back over the net and was sharper on the key points.

Federer won the first nine points of the match and was up an early break in both sets, but Djokovic recovered to win 7-6 (6), 7-5.

Federer was the two-time defending champion in London and emphasized that he was happy with this court, calling it one of the faster indoor surfaces on the circuit. He said slower courts are also good for long rallies -- which are a big crowd pleaser -- but that having more variety in the surfaces would force players to learn to be more aggressive.

"What you don't want is that you hit 15 great shots and at the end, it ends up in an error," he said. "So I think sometimes quicker courts do help the cause. I think it would help from time to time to move to something a bit faster. That would help to learn, as well, for many different players, different playing styles, to realize that coming to the net is a good thing, it's not a bad thing."

Federer has won a record-equaling seven Wimbledon titles on grass, the quickest surface, but has only one French Open title on the slower clay, where Nadal has repeatedly thwarted him.

Djokovic and Murray also rely heavily on their great defensive abilities, which have helped set them apart from the rest of the pack.

Having more tournaments played on faster surfaces could make it easier for other players to challenge the sport's "Big Four," Federer said, adding that he wasn't sure tournament directors would necessarily buy into that.

"I think some variety would be nice, some really slow stuff and then some really fast stuff, instead of trying to make everything sort of the same," he said. "You sort of protect the top guys really by doing that because you have the best possible chance to have them in the semis at this point, I think. But should that be the goal? I'm not sure."

Djokovic said his strategy against Federer is usually to try and extend the rallies and hope for an opportunity.

"He's somebody that is very aggressive, that likes to finish points very quickly," Djokovic said. "But I managed to get a lot of shots back into the court, being passive, a couple meters behind the baseline. ... That was one of the goals tonight, to always try to get him into the longer rallies where I think I had the better chance."

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

and the confirmation of nole using soome nadal`s tactic for beat federer , being passive and wait for fed`s mistake , the difference is that many times when federer serves well and plays better nole`s shots are not equals than nadal , he hasn`t that terrible lefty spin forehand of nadal that tortures fed`s backhand.

obviusly this kind of tactics are more easy to do in slow courts.

[Chirag]

Hopefully the courts are quickened but the ATP will refuse as usual

[juan27]

well , cash said that australian open 2013 will has more faster balls that before

[Benny_Maths]

Regarding juan27's article, I personally I don't find 20+ shot rallies to be entertaining at all, especially if the shots are high loopy ones for the most part. Winners are what make tennis fun to watch. Although not the kind where the ball just sits up and a player has an eternity to take a swing at the ball. It takes far more skill for a player to take the ball on the rise and hit a winner with minimal set up time than to just run, run and run some more. Endurance and speed are part of the game, but it's the shot-making that defines it.

[juan27]

Originally Posted by Benny_Maths

Regarding juan27's article, I personally I don't find 20+ shot rallies to be entertaining at all, especially if the shots are high loopy ones for the most part. Winners are what make tennis fun to watch. Although not the kind where the ball just sits up and a player has an eternity to take a swing at the ball. It takes far more skill for a player to take the ball on the rise and hit a winner with minimal set up time. Endurance and speed is part of the game, but it's the shot-making that defines it.

I agree with roger that with more faster courts other player will have much many chances to defeat the top-4 than now and it`s true , but the ATP wants protect the top-4 for money and not change the courts speed , the tennis needs more variety slow courts and fast courts.

if ths continues , the tennis will be more and more deffensive in the future and with very long rallys losing the technique , quality and agressive

[heya]

Roddick and Hewitt still failed to win on faster courts.
Fed depends on fitness and agility because he can't depend on
any volleys and backhand.
On second thought, he can't serve for sets and tiebreak wins.
If there were faster courts, Murray & Djoker would demolish Federer even more. No time for him to reach their backhand shots.

[Houstonko]

Originally Posted by heya

Roddick and Hewitt still failed to win on faster courts.
Fed depends on fitness and agility because he can't depend on
any volleys and backhand.
On second thought, he can't serve for sets and tiebreak wins.
If there were faster courts, Murray & Djoker would demolish Federer even more. No time for him to reach their backhand shots.

Not that true, Fed beaten them both at indoor fast 90s wimby. 1 break and hold the rest. Djok and Murray can't shotmake, they'll hit a lot of unforced errors this way and they know it.

[Alex999]

enjoy and don't go too crazy
http://www.tsn.ca/tennis/story/?id=409373

[Abel]

Well it'd be good to see one super-fast surface as one of the 1000 events. Or the grass at Wimbledon to be a bit quicker.

[Wing Man Frank]

Fed on Djokovic yesterday.

"What he does well - even in defence he stays somewhat offensive. That, I think, is what separates him from the rest a little bit."

A faster court would only have benefited Novak even more.

[Nole Rules]

Totally agree with him.

[sportstennis]

Originally Posted by Arkulari

And Oracle + Heya = a match made in ACC heaven

Roger is fun.

[Topspindoctor]

Noserer wanting a faster court is not a huge surprise. He just wants to stand there and serve. Once a rally is underway he is vulnerable. The old geezer apparently forgot that we are not in the 90s/early 2000s where useless serve bots like Ivanisevic and Krajicek could fluke big titles. Tennis takes more skill now, it's no surprise Noserer wants serve era to come back.

[Mark Lenders]

It's rare that I completely agree with Federer on anything, but this is one of those cases. Would be cool if he used his influence to make it happen