A few weeks ago I watched some old matches of James Blake including encounters against Kiefer (Vienna 2002), Agassi (Washington 2002), Safin (Hopman Cup 2004) and Moya (Indian Wells 2003) and it is quite obvious that today's game is far slower than it was then. James was able to generate direct winners off the forehand wing, whereas currently he has to fire his forehand at least two or three times to end the point. I just wonder whether his shots are less powerful now but looking at the shot and serve speeds it is probably not the reason. He uses the same frame as back then in 2002 or 2003, therefore it shouldn't be blamed on the technology of rackets. So what's the main reason - the balls or changes in surface? Or maybe James game is simply slower?
I should explain that by top player fan, I mean someone who only cares about whether their favourite player continues to rack up the big titles, and doesn't care about much about the rest of the sport in general.
Of course it would be better for the players as a whole and for fans who like seeing different styles of tennis, if there was more surface variety.
We need slow surfaces on the tour, and we also need fast surfaces. Tennis would suck if the majority of surfaces were ice rinks that gave rise to ace-fests, and it sucks at the moment with too much tennis being played on slower hard courts. Players grinding so much on at these hard court events is harmful to their long term health as well, with their bodies taking a such pounding.
I think that the red clay tournaments need to be slowed down, the Wimbledon grass needs to be sped up, there needs to be a greater difference between the Australian and US Open hard courts with one of them playing fast and the other playing slow, carpet needs to be re-introduced and implemented at all the indoor events and Miami needs to change surface to green clay.
The extra week that will be introduced between RG and Wimbledon from 2015 is a very welcome (and long overdue) step in the right direction.
I should explain that by top player fan, I mean someone who only cares about whether their favourite player continues to rack up the big titles, and doesn't care about much about the rest of the sport in general.
Of course it would be better for the players as a whole and for fans who like seeing different styles of tennis, if there was more surface variety.
We need slow surfaces on the tour, and we also need fast surfaces. Tennis would suck if the majority of surfaces were ice rinks that gave rise to ace-fests, and it sucks at the moment with too much tennis being played on slower hard courts. Players grinding so much on at these hard court events is harmful to their long term health as well, with their bodies taking a such pounding.
I think that the red clay tournaments need to be slowed down, the Wimbledon grass needs to be sped up, there needs to be a greater difference between the Australian and US Open hard courts with one of them playing fast and the other playing slow, carpet needs to be re-introduced and implemented at all the indoor events and Miami needs to change surface to green clay.
The extra week that will be introduced between RG and Wimbledon from 2015 is a very welcome (and long overdue) step in the right direction.
Just out of curiosity, does anyone recall a comment about surfaces from Federer from his top period where what he describes became evident and he was the main beneficiary?
in federer times the courts were fast and the clay slow.....after 2007 ATP started to slow even more the courts like in australia , masters cup , arthur ashe , heavy balls in wimbledon (even more slow).
australia was played in rebound ace since the 90s for example
If they speed up the courts Roger will dominate the sport for 5 more years and Thugdull, Djoker, and Murray will only pick up runner up plates. Gotta give these pushers a chance too I suppose :shrug:
If carpet is not super fast/slow, there is no reason NOT to have it. It's an additional surface and makes indoors a legitimate 4th different playing field.
I hope this slow ass surfaces get changed in fact all surfaces should get back to what they were in the past, its simply like playing a different sport, endurance sport.
from 5-5 in the first set to 1-0 in the second set, yesterday, i counted off the top of my head about 10-15 occasions on which djokovic could have, and should have, came to net to finish off the points
the courts are slow. players do not know how to volley.
same playing style everywhere; younger players who do not rely on endless stamina and retrieving do not get high up the rankings e.g dimitrov
speed up AO, slow down RG, speed up wimbledon, speed up US, speed up WTF
speed up indian wells, slow down madrid, speed up Paris, shanghai can bugger off
miami and canada have always been slow hard courts
cincinnati and monte carlo are probably the only masters tournaments at the moment which are at the correct speed
agassi it`s more dangerous in very fast courts than today`s murray.
anyway , action jackson I said that federer won in rg because the weather conditions made more faster rg that year , and federer in peak mode without nadal would be capable to win roland garros.
I don`t consider that roger was beneficited by homogenization on clay , he played several final facing very slow courts in roland garros beetwen 2005-2007
bla bla , guys like you that not write nothing interesant and never talk about tennis are boring.
agassi and federer played amazing matches especially beetwen the years 2002-2005 , that agassi was a much hard than all this tour with the exceptio of the big-3 and close with murray
Agassi was much more a player than Djokovic and Murray.Now what you can see one dimensional playing style from everyone the difference is that some of them can run faster and do not get tired and others are not so fast and get tired. The old Fed had the most aces at WTF and most hot shots.
agassi was a genius too , a guy without big serve and playing from the baseline was capable of winning all in an era of very fast courts and great servers.
I miss that kind of tennis , but we need fast courts again
No, it's actually people who are confused from a very clear and obvious quote from Federer about the surfaces being so similar these days, which he agrees with and these guys have benefited.
You know that Fed struggled against Nadal on clay because Nadal was still winning slams regularly when he was beating Fed. However, when Fed loses against someone who at the time of the loss is a non-factor (nevermind a consistent genuine slam contender) the story is completely different. It would then not make any sense to draw any conclusions from such losses other than it was one of those losses that just happen from time to time; like Sampras losing to Yzaga/Kucera (or Federer).
I do not think Federer has a problem to play on clay at all he is actually quite good. The problem was Rafa.To win against Rafa on clay you should be someone like Soderling,Rosol tall and very strong.
I am looking the match beetwen ferrer and stepanek for the davis cup and the court it`s very similar than the us open before 2010 or 2011 , with more faster courts the game has much more variety , I mean players agreesives like stepanel and defensives like ferrer can use their weapons and win.
ferrer won his first masters1000 in paris and against a great server and agressive player like janowicz , played the masters cup`s final in shangai , defeated nadal in a fast us open and more
This DC court is fantastic, pretty fast court - something like this would be great in more indoors events. BTW this is only Stepanek-Ferrer guys with ,,no power,, i think in Berdych-Almagro match with big FH´s and 1st serves in 210-215kph we will see how quick this court really is
Top spin clay court players give Fed headaches. Well good ones anyway- Mantilla taught him a lesson, a past it Al Costa did him over in Rome in 04/05 not sure which and Guga kicked him out of Roland Garros- that was a clay great showing him who the boss was.
Even in 2009 Acasuso was a game away from taking a 2 sets to 1 lead on him despite being way past his best.
This is how Fed has benefitted- the sped up clay and lack of natural dirtballers with topspin who can grind him into the dirt.
It's not the pace of the courts so much with Fed on clay, it's more the lack of the players playing that specific style of game as rocketassist said.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Mens Tennis Forums
18.5M posts
87.7K members
Since 2002
A forum community dedicated to male tennis players and enthusiasts. Talk about everything from the ATP, NSMTA, to college Tennis and even everything about equipment. It's all here!