[scoobs]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

You don't have to look far.

Federer and Nadal made a change to the surface a condition of them playing.

Nadal said the surface "gave no value to his game" (read: topspin not that effective) and Federer said he had balance problems on the old surface.

I think it's outrageous that the top 2 players should combine in this way to effectively demand a surface be adjusted at a tournament, but there we are.

As I have said elsewhere, it used to be that the players had to adapt their game as best they could to the surface, but now it seems the surface is expected to be adapted to the players.

 

[Sunset of Age]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

You don't have to look far.

Federer and Nadal made a change to the surface a condition of them playing.

Nadal said the surface "gave no value to his game" (read: topspin not that effective) and Federer said he had balance problems on the old surface.

I think it's outrageous that the top 2 players should combine in this way to effectively demand a surface be adjusted at a tournament, but there we are.

As I have said elsewhere, it used to be that the players had to adapt their game as best they could to the surface, but now it seems the surface is expected to be adapted to the players.

Indeed.

This is a disgrace to the sport. Even if it's my two fav players involved in this - I think it's an atrocity.

I'm rooting for Murray to win even more than I already did now. :ras:

 

[Jimnik]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

Soon the ATP will invent a new general surface that pleases everyone and demand all tournaments to intall it.

 

[Sunset of Age]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

Soon the ATP will invent a new general surface that pleases everyone and demand all tournaments to intall it.

:bigcry: don't give them ideas...

 

[Deboogle!.]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

You don't have to look far.

Federer and Nadal made a change to the surface a condition of them playing.

Nadal said the surface "gave no value to his game" (read: topspin not that effective) and Federer said he had balance problems on the old surface.

I think it's outrageous that the top 2 players should combine in this way to effectively demand a surface be adjusted at a tournament, but there we are.

As I have said elsewhere, it used to be that the players had to adapt their game as best they could to the surface, but now it seems the surface is expected to be adapted to the players.

I actually just got sick to my stomach reading this.

 

[ReturnWinner]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

You don't have to look far.

Federer and Nadal made a change to the surface a condition of them playing.

Nadal said the surface "gave no value to his game" (read: topspin not that effective) and Federer said he had balance problems on the old surface.

I think it's outrageous that the top 2 players should combine in this way to effectively demand a surface be adjusted at a tournament, but there we are.

As I have said elsewhere, it used to be that the players had to adapt their game as best they could to the surface, but now it seems the surface is expected to be adapted to the players.

i would say adapted to Federer and Nadal, the two who whinned, do u think atp would care about Montañes or Starace opinion?

 

[R.Federer]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

You don't have to look far.

Federer and Nadal made a change to the surface a condition of them playing.

Nadal said the surface "gave no value to his game" (read: topspin not that effective) and Federer said he had balance problems on the old surface.

I think it's outrageous that the top 2 players should combine in this way to effectively demand a surface be adjusted at a tournament, but there we are.

As I have said elsewhere, it used to be that the players had to adapt their game as best they could to the surface, but now it seems the surface is expected to be adapted to the players.

That's odd. Federer asking for a court to be slowed down? :lol:

Why are these organizers seceding control of their tournaments like that? This must be one of the few places where it's done. Hewitt has routinely complained that the Aussies pay no attention to his requests. Henman, well we know what they did with the grass and what that did for his results.

Until now I thought the USO was the only place where they have consciously made the courts the best they can for their own players, but now Paris joins in, and not for their home players. Too weird!

 

[danton]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

I actually just got sick to my stomach reading this.

Totally agree the system should overall be fair for everyone whether you're no1 or 100. There should be a selection of surfaces throughout the year but i'm struggling to think of a fast surface most HCs are now Med-fast. I think Nottingham grass was fast but that's all I could think of.

 

[R.Federer]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

You don't have to look far.

Federer and Nadal made a change to the surface a condition of them playing.

Nadal said the surface "gave no value to his game" (read: topspin not that effective) and Federer said he had balance problems on the old surface.

I think it's outrageous that the top 2 players should combine in this way to effectively demand a surface be adjusted at a tournament, but there we are.

As I have said elsewhere, it used to be that the players had to adapt their game as best they could to the surface, but now it seems the surface is expected to be adapted to the players.

Source?

 

[Merton]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

Carpet is obviously dying, but the cause of its death is sad, it is just not fitting for today's top players games. Never mind that styles go in waves, once it is dead it will be hard to resurrect. It is one thing to curtail it due to health hazards but I doubt there is a case that it is more dangerous than hardcourts. Another thing would be to die due to hardcourts having lower cost. I haven't seen the case for that either.

This is a case where the tournament organizer succumbed to bullying and the ATP stood by watching.

 

[scoobs]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

Source:
http://www.grandchelem.net/mon_weblog/2007/10/jean-franois-ca.html

The relevant passage, in French, is

Vous êtes donc allé vers les joueurs en dépêchant Jean-François Bachelot pour connaître leur desiderata, est-ce que leur soucis principal c’était la surface ?
C’était en grande partie la surface. C’est sûr que pour deux d’entre eux, c’était une condition sine qua non de leur venue.

C’est qui les deux ?
Federer et Nadal. Le numéro 1 et numéro 2. Et pour des raisons tout à faire recevables. Nadal trouvait que la surface ne prenait pas ses effets donc son jeu n’avait plus aucune valeur. C’était vrai, la surface prenait moins les effets. Federer c’était un problème psychologique, il bloquait : « Je trouve moins bien mes appuis… »

 

[R.Federer]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

Thanks. So I take it Jean Francois is the tournament director with Pioline or something?

This was not funny ....

Oui d’ailleurs on lui a dit « Comme tu ne vas pas gagner Roland-Garros et que tu ne le gagneras jamais, il faut que t’aies un titre à Paris, viens jouer à Bercy… ». Non je plaisante.

Source:
http://www.grandchelem.net/mon_weblog/2007/10/jean-franois-ca.html

The relevant passage, in French, is

Vous êtes donc allé vers les joueurs en dépêchant Jean-François Bachelot pour connaître leur desiderata, est-ce que leur soucis principal c’était la surface ?
C’était en grande partie la surface. C’est sûr que pour deux d’entre eux, c’était une condition sine qua non de leur venue.

C’est qui les deux ?
Federer et Nadal. Le numéro 1 et numéro 2. Et pour des raisons tout à faire recevables. Nadal trouvait que la surface ne prenait pas ses effets donc son jeu n’avait plus aucune valeur. C’était vrai, la surface prenait moins les effets. Federer c’était un problème psychologique, il bloquait : « Je trouve moins bien mes appuis… »

 

[cmurray]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

You don't have to look far.

Federer and Nadal made a change to the surface a condition of them playing.

Nadal said the surface "gave no value to his game" (read: topspin not that effective) and Federer said he had balance problems on the old surface.

I think it's outrageous that the top 2 players should combine in this way to effectively demand a surface be adjusted at a tournament, but there we are.

As I have said elsewhere, it used to be that the players had to adapt their game as best they could to the surface, but now it seems the surface is expected to be adapted to the players.

I'll be frank - I'm more irritated at the tournament directors than I am at Nadal and Federer. Players are CONSTANTLY complaining about surfaces. The problem is that Bercy conceded. Furthermore, it says something sad that the success of a tournament lays almost exclusively on the shoulders of Federer and Nadal. Players don't play at tournaments ALL THE TIME because of surface (Roddick and clay anyone?).

 

[R.Federer]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

I'll be frank - I'm more irritated at the tournament directors than I am at Nadal and Federer. Players are CONSTANTLY complaining about surfaces. The problem is that Bercy conceded. Furthermore, it says something sad that the success of a tournament lays almost exclusively on the shoulders of Federer and Nadal. Players don't play at tournaments ALL THE TIME because of surface (Roddick and clay anyone?).

Paris is in a bit of a different spot, because they have a history of losing top players because of their position on the calendar. So that might explain why, maybe. Having said that, I think they might have guessed that No.1,2 would have shown up given the new bonus pool regardless of surface.

If it was an American tournament maybe they too would have succumbed to an American player's request for surface fiddling around. I don't think Roddick alone is enough to change slow clay into fast clay in Europe even if he asked for it. I don't think it would matter at all to be honest.

 

[Sunset of Age]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

I'll be frank - I'm more irritated at the tournament directors than I am at Nadal and Federer. Players are CONSTANTLY complaining about surfaces. The problem is that Bercy conceded. Furthermore, it says something sad that the success of a tournament lays almost exclusively on the shoulders of Federer and Nadal. Players don't play at tournaments ALL THE TIME because of surface (Roddick and clay anyone?).

Good point.
It's sad that Raf and Rogi feel the need to exert their power in this manner, but it is even more sad that tournament directors actually listen to them.

It shows how SICK the ATP (in its being of a board for TOURNAMENT DIRECTORS rather than for players) has become, thinking it's dependent on only two players for its succes.

Come on Muzza, take that title now. :angel:

 

[Fee]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

Totally agree the system should overall be fair for everyone whether you're no1 or 100. There should be a selection of surfaces throughout the year but i'm struggling to think of a fast surface most HCs are now Med-fast. I think Nottingham grass was fast but that's all I could think of.

San Jose was pretty damn quick this year. They wanted to speed it up from last year and they went a bit too far. I'm sure it will be slowed down a bit again next year.

 

[scoobs]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

San Jose was pretty damn quick this year. They wanted to speed it up from last year and they went a bit too far. I'm sure it will be slowed down a bit again next year.

Yes they wanted to help the home boys - they wanted Roddick to win. All they got for their troubles was Karlovic in the final, and Murray beating both Roddick and Karlovic to win the thing again :lol:

 

[Sjengster]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

Wow, that is disgusting. Saying that you won't play a big event because the surface isn't good for your game, would Federer and Nadal make the same complaint about RG and the US Open respectively? I really liked that low-bouncing court of old, it made aggression a real priority since the ball just wouldn't stay at a comfortable height for very long.

It's laughable that the sport is supposed to be making big reforms and is simultaneously indulging in craven practices such as this, it's the ultimate example of short-term thinking based entirely on milking your two big cash cows.

 

[stebs]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

Wow, that is disgusting. Saying that you won't play a big event because the surface isn't good for your game, would Federer and Nadal make the same complaint about RG and the US Open respectively? I really liked that low-bouncing court of old, it made aggression a real priority since the ball just wouldn't stay at a comfortable height for very long.

It's laughable that the sport is supposed to be making big reforms and is simultaneously indulging in craven practices such as this, it's the ultimate example of short-term thinking based entirely on milking your two big cash cows.

Perhaps in the future Federer will be asked again about his defeats to Nadal on clay, he will answer that obviously it's tough because the surface suits Nadal and we will arrive in paris to see grass so Feds can complete his career slam.

However, although we are slating the players it is the tournaments decision to accomodate for them. I don't think this surface being implemented last year would've seen the top 2 playing, more likely it is just an over-reaction. Most players have complaints about half the tournaments out there, it was just that Paris NEEDED Federer and/or Nadal this year so they went over board to help out.

 

[Deboogle!.]

Re: Fish fries Dima 7-6 6-4

I'll be frank - I'm more irritated at the tournament directors than I am at Nadal and Federer. Players are CONSTANTLY complaining about surfaces. The problem is that Bercy conceded. Furthermore, it says something sad that the success of a tournament lays almost exclusively on the shoulders of Federer and Nadal. Players don't play at tournaments ALL THE TIME because of surface (Roddick and clay anyone?).

It's poor that Bercy conceded, but I think it's poor if the two top players say "I will not play this important event unless you change the surface." there's complaining and there's ultimatums - Tim complained about the slowing down of Wimbledon but didn't make ultimatums, even Lleyton complained vociferously about the AO surface but never made any ultimatums - these guys actually made an ultimatum. Andy doesn't like clay, but he never ever complains about a particular tournament's surface. that's very very selfish of those two and I think they share the blame with whomever actually listened.

Yes they wanted to help the home boys - they wanted Roddick to win. All they got for their troubles was Karlovic in the final, and Murray beating both Roddick and Karlovic to win the thing again :lol:

Except that Andy didn't ask for it to be sped up - he had won it twice just the way it was :lol: Plus, he said he didn't like it, that it was about the fastest court he had ever played on and it was tough to even hit the ball. So if that was their goal (which no one ever actually said it was except for people here:lol: ) it was a dumb one to make it that fast - that benefits no one really :lol: