[bjurra]

Originally Posted by RajFederer

The OP was right on it.. We just saw tsonga. Federer match which is of high quality.. Had they speed up the courts.. That match would have been even mor better

No, it would not have been better.

[TennisOnWood]

Originally Posted by bjurra

There was a reason the ATP abandoned the superfast carpet surfaces of the 90s. Spectators hated them.

Not all Carpet courts were superfast

[JarkaFish]

Originally Posted by RajFederer

The OP was right on it.. We just saw tsonga. Federer match which is of high quality.. Had they speed up the courts.. That match would have been even mor better

Definitely.

[cveks]

Originally Posted by RajFederer

The OP was right on it.. We just saw tsonga. Federer match which is of high quality.. Had they speed up the courts.. That match would have been even mor better

With faster court we would have more aces and less exchanges - so no , match would be worse.

[JarkaFish]

Originally Posted by TennisOnWood

Not all Carpet courts were superfast

I miss carpet.

[Trollicki]

Well, it´s not just the speed that is uniform these days, too many tournaments employ a fairly high bounce if you ask me. Mixing up the speed and the bounce from tournament to tournament would go a long way in making the tennis more varied.

[August]

Like mentioned in this thread, last year's 6-hour AO final was very long to watch, in my opinion too long. Compare it to yesterday's Fed-Tsonga QF that lasted about 4 hours. In my opinion, five setters should mostly last less than five hours. Marathon matches aren't very TV friendly, and also the player is dead in the next match, unless he has the egg. And Fed-Tsonga was still as exciting as last year's final, actually the first four sets were tighter as in last year's final. But at least didn't have the "When does this end?" feeling like I had during last year's final.

[Saberq]

Originally Posted by JarkaFish

I miss carpet.

you're 24 dude

[JarkaFish]

Originally Posted by Saberq

you're 24 dude

And?

[atennisfan]

Originally Posted by August

Like mentioned in this thread, last year's 6-hour AO final was very long to watch, in my opinion too long. Compare it to yesterday's Fed-Tsonga QF that lasted about 4 hours. In my opinion, five setters should mostly last less than five hours. Marathon matches aren't very TV friendly, and also the player is dead in the next match, unless he has the egg. And Fed-Tsonga was still as exciting as last year's final, actually the first four sets were tighter as in last year's final. But at least didn't have the "When does this end?" feeling like I had during last year's final.

Not only because of the grinding and the pushing, last year's AO final was 6 hours was due to endless butt-pickings and ball-bouncing.

[JarkaFish]

Originally Posted by atennisfan

Not only because of the grinding and the pushing, last year's AO final was 6 hours was due to endless butt-pickings and ball-bouncing.

True, but the grinding and pushing is what makes them takes those breaks to pick their ass and ball bounce.

[atennisfan]

Originally Posted by JarkaFish

True, but the grinding and pushing is what makes them takes those breaks to pick their ass and ball bounce.

I guess you are right. They needed to catch their breath.

[G.100sic]

Damn those slow courts, today's semi would have been over in less then an hour otherwise!

[xelena]

Originally Posted by serveandvolley80

Posters like Cveks with their uninformed opinions and complete bias and love towards one player display a huge problem with individual sports to begin with, Once Djokovic is gone so is another person watching the sport. The short sighted nature of the ATP to promote 4 players as the be all end all of the sport is what is going to kill it because there is no long term strategy and focus on the youngsters and the route the game is going.

With a variety of surfaces slow and fast players would not have to destroy their bodies to entertain ignorant casuals who will stop watching as soon as a player they have not heard of outside of the top 3 or 4. It does not favor the sport to have one of the big stars being crippled and injured the entire year because hes the energizer bunny with not enough brains to think of his playing career beyond his mid 20's. Some of these guys have to be saved from themselves. Who else is tired of athletes Lance Armstronging their way to victory?

As far as court homogenization, can you image any other sport killing its own variety because they think its better? American football as an example, for fans here, would you watch if all of a sudden the passing game dies and every team relies on their running game only, you would only see 3 or 4 passes a game tops. Just slow defensive football. I guess the same could be applies to soccer though i have not followed that sport for a while so i do not know if teams copying each others style has become a problem or not.

Interesting. How come all of a sudden there is a homogenization ? what is this crappy analysis anyway ?? the times have changed and it's not all surface -surface. Have to mention that, while there was the domination Fed Nadal for few years no body cried this much , everyone was in admiration of these great god like players. It is only now that there's Djokovic Murray as well that some people started to cry .
The fact that there's Djokovic Murray who are also versatile players on all surfaces beats the theory that it is uniform (the surface or the game itself)

So, They will give you super fast surface tournament and then what ? some serve bots will reach the final and it will be deadly boring will last 1h 1/2 and what? We might as well give them wooden racquets so they'll have to slow down ), and will run less... and it'll be again like nastase ,mcenroe ! no injuries , no daily athletic prep. physios nothing..

The surface is not that much of an issue as much as the players are.. How come the top 3 top 4 are versatile players and they excel on every court? logically nadal should have never won Wimb, Indian wells, etc.. neither Nole .. but we saw also big servers like berdych ,soderling reach the final and we saw what happened to them ..

[atennisfan]

Originally Posted by xelena

Interesting. How come all of a sudden there is a homogenization ? what is this crappy analysis anyway ?? the times have changed and it's not all surface -surface. Have to mention that, while there was the domination Fed Nadal for few years no body cried this much , everyone was in admiration of these great god like players. It is only now that there's Djokovic Murray as well that some people started to cry .
The fact that there's Djokovic Murray who are also versatile players on all surfaces beats the theory that it is uniform (the surface or the game itself)

So, They will give you super fast surface tournament and then what ? some serve bots will reach the final and it will be deadly boring will last 1h 1/2 and what? We might as well give them wooden racquets so they'll have to slow down ), and will run less... and it'll be again like nastase ,mcenroe ! no injuries , no daily athletic prep. physios nothing..

The surface is not that much of an issue as much as the players are.. How come the top 3 top 4 are versatile players and they excel on every court? logically nadal should have never won Wimb, Indian wells, etc.. neither Nole .. but we saw also big servers like berdych ,soderling reach the final and we saw what happened to them ..

There are so many wrongs in this post.