Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
The Master
Joined
·
1,102 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
We've been having an argument in another thread, and I wanted to call in folks on here who would know which year the grass changed from 70/30 Rye/Red fescue to 100% Rye.

I believe the new grass was put in place following the 2001 edition of the tournament, meaning that the 2002 edition was the first played on the new 100% rye grass.

The issue is that the Wimbledon website says differently to all the other sources I have found, and says that the change occurred in time for 2001, not 2002.
I am convinced that they are in error, and the website has a typo.

So who here knows for sure or knows otherwise?

Some evidence would be good too if possible.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,396 Posts
2002. That is well known fact.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,640 Posts
It's a common revisionist lie that Fedtards try to spin in order to claim that Federer would have won just as many Wimbledons on fast grass, after all ''He beat Sampras on fast grass!''.

False, Federer beat Sampras and slow grass and won all of his Wimbledon titles on slow grass. Surface homogenization enormously benefited Federer.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
62,010 Posts
It's a common revisionist lie that Fedtards try to spin in order to claim that Federer would have won just as many Wimbledons on fast grass, after all ''He beat Sampras on fast grass!''.

False, Federer beat Sampras and slow grass and won all of his Wimbledon titles on slow grass. Surface homogenization enormously benefited Federer.
They hit a few more aces at Wimbledon 2001 than Wimbledon 2000, so it probably wasn't all that much slower. Was only in 2002 it started dipping, before recovering some years later.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,640 Posts
They hit a few more aces at Wimbledon 2001 than Wimbledon 2000, so it probably wasn't all that much slower. Was only in 2002 it started dipping, before recovering some years later.

That data is useless, one could interpret this as the grass being lightning fast in 2010 and 2014.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,273 Posts
2002 I think, it was the first final that featured 2 baseliners (Hewitt-Nalbandian) and Henman complained about how slow the grass was in 2002 Wimbledon (something in the lines of "this is the slowest court I played on all year").

Still, who can know for sure what changes and when they implemented? One thing is certain, while the grass still rewards serving, netplay and offensive playing styles it is much more friendly to baseliners than in previous eras. Kinda puts into perspective how impressive Agassi's runs on the surface were.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
62,010 Posts
That data is useless, one could interpret this as the grass being lightning fast in 2010 and 2014.
Things have changed a lot between 2001 and 2010, strings, racket size, playing style etc. Didn't change all that much between 2000 and 2001.

If you have an objective measure showing the grass played slower in 2001 than 2000 then by all means share it with us. I'm sure Ivanisevic will be happy he didn't know at the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,640 Posts
Things have changed a lot between 2001 and 2010, strings, racket size, playing style etc. Didn't change all that much between 2000 and 2001.

If you have an objective measure showing the grass played slower in 2001 than 2000 then by all means share it with us. I'm sure Ivanisevic will be happy he didn't know at the time.
As you can see the numbers can very greatly from year to year at every slam, or not, you can base absolutely nothing off these numbers in order to determine what the grass speed was compared to the year before.

The objective evidence is in the news article posted above, which is entirely about how they slowed down the grass for the 2001 edition of Wimbledon. I'm not sure how much more evidence you require.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
62,010 Posts
As you can see the numbers can very greatly from year to year at every slam, or not, you can base absolutely nothing off these numbers in order to determine what the grass speed was compared to the year before.

The objective evidence is in the news article posted above, which is entirely about how they slowed down the grass for the 2001 edition of Wimbledon. I'm not sure how much more evidence you require.
In case you haven't read the article, I will point out they said they hoped it would play slower. Hope is not evidence, so as yet you have provided none.

If you have an article showing how well actual results lived up to their hopes and expectations, do share it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,877 Posts
The grass

The grass plant itself has to survive in this dry soil. Expert research has again shown that a cut height of 8mm (since 1995) is the optimum for present day play and survival.

Courts are sown with 100 per cent Perennial Ryegrass (since 2001) to improve durability and strengthen the sward to withstand better the increasing wear of the modern game.

Independent expert research from The Sports Turf Research Institute in Yorkshire, UK, proved that changing the grass seed mix to 100 per cent perennial ryegrass (previously 70 per cent rye/30 per cent creeping red fescue) would be the best way forward to combat wear and enhance court presentation and performance without affecting the perceived speed of the court.

Perceived speed of a court is affected by a number of factors such as the general compacting of the soil over time, as well as the weather before and during the event.

The ball will seem heavier and slower on a cold damp day and conversely lighter and faster on a warm dry day.

The amount a ball bounces is largely determined by the soil, not the grass. The soil must be hard and dry to allow 13 days of play without damage to the court sub-surface.

To achieve the required surface of even consistency and hardness, the courts are rolled and covered to keep them dry and firm. Regular measurements are taken to monitor this.

There have been no changes to the specification of the ball since 1995, when there was a very minimal alteration in compression.
http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/atoz/grass_courts.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,640 Posts
In case you haven't read the article, I will point out they said they hoped it would play slower. Hope is not evidence, so as yet you have provided none.

If you have an article showing how well actual results lived up to their hopes and expectations, do share it.
Well, of course. Wimbledon, an institute with 124 years of experience with grass courts at the time, just throws on some new grass and hopes for the best. Way to fixate on one meaningless word.

Whatever keeps you going, eh :)?
"After stringent testing, we have settled with this new seed because it is so hard-wearing, and will maintain an even bounce for the entire championship."

Since the first championship in 1877, creeping red fescue, a species noted for its deep green colour, has dominated Wimbledon's courts. Rye, known to horticulturists as a hardy, rough variety, has been combined with red fescue over the last decade to add strength and durability. This year, for the first time, the courts will be he 100 per cent aberelf rye.

The grass was chosen after tests at the National Sports Turf Institute in Bingley, West Yorkshire. Over 13 days, patches of grass were subjected to "wear testing" to replicate the movement of tennis players.

Adrienne Wild, the editor of Your Garden magazine who has studied sports turfs, said she believed that the new grass would slow the game at Wimbledon. She said: "The traditional grass varieties at Wimbledon, especially the red fescue combinations, have a really fine finish but can wear, allowing the ball to zip off worn and patchy surfaces.

"These new rye grasses are shorter, hard-wearing and spongy and I imagine they will slow the ball down and allow the ball to sit up instead of skid."
The arrogance :haha:

It obviously worked, because they have been using the exact same 100% rye grass ever since.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
62,010 Posts
Well, of course. Wimbledon, an institute with 124 years of experience with grass courts at the time, just throws on some new grass and hopes for the best. Way to fixate on one meaningless word.

Whatever keeps you going, eh :)? The arrogance :haha:

It obviously worked, because they have been using the exact same 100% rye grass ever since.

Keeping the grass ever since proved nothing. They can have done several changes in the ground beneath the grass, which is also important. Or they can have given up when they didn't achieve the desired objective. Plus, of course, eliminating bad bounces was more important than altering speed.

For arrogance I will never match you, that is neither a hope nor an ambition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,038 Posts
It's just a myth. Advanced poly strings which allows players to hit with more topspin and use of heavier balls made game slower in general. It holds for grass too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,640 Posts
Keeping the grass ever since proved nothing. They can have done several changes in the ground beneath the grass, which is also important. Or they can have given up when they didn't achieve the desired objective. Plus, of course, eliminating bad bounces was more important than altering speed.

For arrogance I will never match you, that is neither a hope nor an ambition.
Of course! You know this, despite the article mentioning both the speed of the courts and the bounce as the reasons in equal measures!

''THE All England Tennis Club, stung by criticisms from big-name players that Wimbledon's courts have become too fast and uneven, has introduced a new grass.''

''In a break with tradition, a new variety of rye grass has been developed so that the lawns do not wear out after the first few days of the tournament, making the bounce quick and unpredictable.''

''It is hoped that the new grass, sown last autumn, will slow the pace of the ball, enabling more and longer rallies to take place.''

''"I think it's excellent. I often felt in my day that the grass did not suit my game when there was such a low and unpredictable bounce. If it really does play like cement and feel like grass, it is the perfect compromise. There will be more rallies, but it will not lose the magic of Wimbledon."''

''"After stringent testing, we have settled with this new seed because it is so hard-wearing, and will maintain an even bounce for the entire championship."''

''Adrienne Wild, the editor of Your Garden magazine who has studied sports turfs, said she believed that the new grass would slow the game at Wimbledon.''

You're making a fool out of yourself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,633 Posts
They change the grass whenever someone other than Federer wins.

2003-2007: grass remained the same
2008: they kept changing the grass during the last set of the final because they weren't sure who would win.
2009: stayed the same
2010-2011: they used Play-Doh and fashioned it to look like grass
2012: changed it back (totes obvi!)
2013-present: changed it
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
62,010 Posts
You're making a fool out of yourself.
You don't even know how that happens, or you elect not to show us that you do. You're the one making sweeping statements, I ask you for proof and you deliver none. Still none. And you're never going to give us any either, because as far as you know it doesn't exist, that's why your're trying to divert attention instead. It's not working.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,184 Posts
The surface was changed for 2001, trouble was it rained heaps in 2001 (IIRC) so the true nature of the new surface was not revealed until 2002.
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Top