Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
349 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
It's not unusual to see a person who likes clay and hate grass or otherwise since those are the opposite surfaces and favor different brand of tennis. But I often see tennis fans who like clay and hate slow hard courts which are adjacent surfaces. It made me realize it's not surface speed that affects their preferences. Are there this type of people on MTF? Could you explain your choice?
 

·
|
Joined
·
14,279 Posts
Slow hardcourt hurts Rafa a lot more than fast hardcourt, because there is nothing more harmful to the knees than playing a long rally on hardcourt.
So I hate slow hardcourt :armed:
I love clay, because clay is easy on the knees no matter how long the rallies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,270 Posts
Clay is easier on the body and the movement is completely different as a result. Clay has a higher bounce and you need to hit the ball heavier and with more topspin. Makes up for more attractive tennis than slow HC which is just too brutal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,663 Posts
Movement in general and especially in defence is natural for clay. The surface encourages you to slide, you have to be good at sliding to have a success on clay (and it looks cool). Matches are therefore different than grass or hard court matches, they are more of a tactical battle (unless you're able to hit shots which clock 10000 MPH and you're not facing Nadal/Djokovic). You're not aiming to finish the rally with an outright winner, but rather to move your opponent around to get an easy ball. That's why slices and drop shots are more common and also more effective on clay.

Hard courts on the other hand aren't suited for sliding. It's tough for the body and it doesn't look natural. You can't move as well as you can on clay (unless you're Djokovic), so the rallies are more one-dimensional baseline rallies with less variety.

The elephant in the corner is obviously the Miami tournament. Indian Wells is fine as one slow tournament and its bounce makes it unique, but Miami serves no purpose. It has no meaning. Now it even can't pretend it has a soul. That's why it has to be destroyed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
958 Posts
I don't mind watching tennis played on slow HC. It's similar to clay and on clay you can really see one's skillset and abilities. On grass and fast HC it's not really about complete players so much, rather big serve, FH and volleys, so it's less diverse. Overall I like watching tennis on all surfaces, but grass and fast HC can get boring.

When it comes to playing - then it's clay only, these knees ain't gettin younger.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
615 Posts
Can't say I'm part of the phenomenon. Don't like slow courts, full stop, because it discourages shotmaking and becomes more of a slugfest.

What I do believe very firmly is that hard courts should not be outright slow. That is clay's job, for better or worse. That why, like some other posters, I dislike Miami. IW is bad enough but at least the ball flies faster through the air there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
472 Posts
Slow harcourts are just boring. Too much of a grindfest with players looking more to get mistakes out of their opponent than go for winners.

Clay has so many more elements to it: sliding and movement, the enhanced effect of topspin and dropshots, more angles, etc.

There's really just less you can do on a hardcourt when it is too slow to hit winners, so the play is not as enjoyable to watch. Same for playing. I remember playing on some courts that were so slow that you don't even try to hit winners because there is no point, so you play 25 shot rallies that end in a UE
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,069 Posts
the whole business of "hating a surface" is just tennis forum idiocy.
I have never seen this anywhere else in tennis forums, although it's legitimate if you play and don't like a surface to play on.
But the whole point of three surfaces is they all showcase different aspects of the game, and create this highest stand are "all court player" someone who can excel on all three.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,069 Posts
Slow hardcourt hurts Rafa a lot more than fast hardcourt, because there is nothing more harmful to the knees than playing a long rally on hardcourt.
So I hate slow hardcourt :armed:
I love clay, because clay is easy on the knees no matter how long the rallies.
I hate to tell you this but Rafa has had his best results on the the slower HCs--Canada IW, USO--and hasn't done as well on the faster ones.

So you would preserve his knees by going out earlier in tourns rather than winning slams and 1000?

Clay is more forgiving but much longer points and is considered just as punishing.
Rafa prob prefers clay because he's better than anyone on it, not because it spares his body.
Grass is also very hard on the knees, with all the bending down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,403 Posts
the whole business of "hating a surface" is just tennis forum idiocy.
I have never seen this anywhere else in tennis forums, although it's legitimate if you play and don't like a surface to play on.
But the whole point of three surfaces is they all showcase different aspects of the game, and create this highest stand are "all court player" someone who can excel on all three.
I thought that what someone who covers the whole court and uses the whole array of shots in the book instead of just pure baseline play or pure serve-and-volley and so on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,626 Posts
I don't necessarily hate slow HC's, as much as I want more surface variety. We have plenty of high end clay tournaments already. Having hard courts that play very similarly feels like a waste. I want to see different play styles thrive, different players, different matchups, different strategies and tactics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,073 Posts
Error: Phenomenon does not exist
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,069 Posts
I thought that what someone who covers the whole court and uses the whole array of shots in the book instead of just pure baseline play or pure serve-and-volley and so on.
well yes, but really if you hold slam titles on all three surfaces that is a simple gauge of an atg great all court player.
for extremely good AC player--Masters or 500 titles on all 3.

But it does show in the game too, being able to make the adjustments to the three surfaces. Nadal for eg has to able to flatten out his FH on HC and grass; the footwork on the three surfaces is also so different--being able to move well on all three; etc. etc.

I find the change of surfaces so interesting, because the kind of tennis that's played changes with it, and each player becomes a slightly different player on different surfaces.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,170 Posts
True hard court doesn't resemble clay. One of the things that make tennis a beautiful sport is the different courts used with different features and thus resulting into different game styles. It's up to the players to deal with it.

Court homogenisation has gone far enough.

By the way, slow hc can't compete with a decent clay court. It's not the same considering speed, bounce and movement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,194 Posts
Slow hc tennis is great. Also you can colour them in different ways.

I suppose people know what they're talking about when they say this surface breeds injuries, however, we've only had a select few of players complaining about them.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top