PDA

View Full Version : WAIT so ppl are telling me that the MADRID CLAY COURT was FASTER THAN HARD-COURT??


wow246
05-20-2009, 01:15 AM
well nadal said the court was fast so it favoured federer????

really?????

o come on!!!!!!!

NO way a clay court is as fast as the hard courts they just finished playing on and which nadal DOMINATED!!!!!!!

aphex
05-20-2009, 01:24 AM
did you hear? nadal was tired too...

theduh
05-20-2009, 02:26 AM
said who? a clay court could never be faster than a hard court!

sh@de
05-20-2009, 06:11 AM
said who? a clay court could never be faster than a hard court!

Ask Nadal_Freak, gj011, veroniquem, the Natural (maybe?)... and I dno who else. Just ask all those who hate Federer (why they could hate the player so much is beyond me...).

drakulie
05-20-2009, 06:21 AM
^^^to be honest, they actually hate Nadal>>> not Federer. Reading their posts, and "reading between the lines", one could clearly see they purposely paint a picture of him as the biggest living wuss in the history of tennis. It's really scary how much they hate him.

mandy01
05-20-2009, 06:25 AM
Oh, and he doesn't like altitude I was lead to believe also.. Altitude is a bad person,no?! Rafi played on Everest,no?! :lol:

Seriously though I doubt its the case.Ignore such claims.

JediMindTrick
05-20-2009, 07:36 AM
Madrid clay is the red grass. It's ridiculous how all the courts are getting faster and faster these days.

Cyan
05-20-2009, 09:14 AM
^^ The ATP want a British #1 :)

R_Federer
05-20-2009, 09:37 AM
Madrid clay is the red grass. It's ridiculous how all the courts are getting faster and faster these days.

All the courts are getting faster and faster these days? Are you drunk? Have you not seen the Australian Open or Wimbledon recently?

Nadal_Freak
05-20-2009, 10:00 AM
The clay itself is not faster than hardcourts. It's the altitude that makes the ball go through air so much quicker.

aphex
05-20-2009, 10:37 AM
The clay itself is not faster than hardcourts. It's the altitude that makes the ball go through air so much quicker.

Nadal_freak, as the great inventor of the unified theory of spin-gravitation (or spinnistic gravity, as it is known in quantum dynamics textbooks)

please explain (scientifically) your above statement for us laymen.

thanks

Nadal_Freak
05-20-2009, 10:42 AM
Nadal_freak, as the great inventor of the unified theory of spin-gravitation (or spinnistic gravity, as it is known in quantum dynamics textbooks)

please explain (scientifically) your above statement for us laymen.

thanks
The air is thinner. Thus, less resistence on the ball so it doesn't slow up as much. You also get a higher bounce. Everything goes faster and higher. It was really tricky conditions and Nadal couldn't adjust well enough to dominate the tournament and had to battle incredibly hard to get to the finals. It was sunny and dry as well. That only made things go even quicker. It's the fastest clay conditions you will ever see in a big tournament.

LanceStern
05-20-2009, 10:44 AM
It is faster than most clay courts, but it is definitely not faster than hard courts.

Even Australian Open courts are faster, just watch the Fed/Nadal 2009 final it looks like they are playing indoors after all that clay!

coloskier
05-20-2009, 12:54 PM
The clay itself is not faster than hardcourts. It's the altitude that makes the ball go through air so much quicker.

Wrong again!!!! The altitude does not make the ball go quicker. NEVER HAS!!! NEVER WILL!!! What it does do is cause the ball to travel farther, which has nothing to do with velocity. The air is thinner, the gravity is less, which causes the ball to go farther at the same speed!!! It also negates some of the topspin, because of the thin air leaves less molecules for the spinning ball to grab. If you had actually played at altitude, like I do every day, you would know this. Nadal had the same TIME to react to a shot at altitude as he had at sea level. Having the ball travel farther and deeper would actually help Nadal, I would think, since so many of his balls don't bounce much deeper than the service line. This should make his shots even more penetrating.

If you prefer, why don't you go back to the "tiredness" excuse. It works so much better, considering that until two years ago ALL the Masters Finals were best 3 of 5, and it didn't seem to bother Nadal back then.

T1000
05-20-2009, 12:59 PM
The clay itself is not faster than hardcourts. It's the altitude that makes the ball go through air so much quicker.

Ever take a course in physics?

Gugafan_Redux
05-20-2009, 01:34 PM
I think because of the lower air pressure, Nadal's whitey tighties were not wedged in his crack as usual. This threw off his balance and timing.

LanceStern
05-20-2009, 01:43 PM
Wrong again!!!! The altitude does not make the ball go quicker. NEVER HAS!!! NEVER WILL!!! What it does do is cause the ball to travel farther, which has nothing to do with velocity. The air is thinner, the gravity is less, which causes the ball to go farther at the same speed!!! It also negates some of the topspin, because of the thin air leaves less molecules for the spinning ball to grab. If you had actually played at altitude, like I do every day, you would know this. Nadal had the same TIME to react to a shot at altitude as he had at sea level. Having the ball travel farther and deeper would actually help Nadal, I would think, since so many of his balls don't bounce much deeper than the service line. This should make his shots even more penetrating.

If you prefer, why don't you go back to the "tiredness" excuse. It works so much better, considering that until two years ago ALL the Masters Finals were best 3 of 5, and it didn't seem to bother Nadal back then.

Nadal_freak gave a confident, unbiased response and even backed it up with understandable physics. (I'm no physics major, but nothing he said sounds wrong).

You on the other hand gave a pretty arrogant response there. You backed it up with (I hope) correct physics as evidence, but it just comes off all bad.

veroniquem
05-20-2009, 01:48 PM
The speed is not that important. The win was due to a combination of factors, one of which being a very good game from Fed. What some Fed's fans cannot accept (in their infinite Fedlike megalomania) is that Fed's excellent play was not the ONLY factor in his win.

Antonio Puente
05-20-2009, 01:58 PM
The clay itself dries out and becomes finer. This was obvious from the amount of dust being kicked up and the noticeable thin patches across the court. They were basically playing on limestone. The players themselves said it was like playing on a hardcourt.

Serendipitous
05-20-2009, 02:01 PM
The speed is not that important. The win was due to a combination of factors, one of which being a very good game from Fed. What some Fed's fans cannot accept (in their infinite Fedlike megalomania) is that Fed's excellent play was not the ONLY factor in his win.

Great post! The discussion should end right here.


Or will it....?

vtmike
05-20-2009, 02:02 PM
The clay itself dries out and becomes finer. This was obvious from the amount of dust being kicked up and the noticeable thin patches across the court. They were basically playing on limestone. The players themselves said it was like playing on a hardcourt.

Why are we discussing this? Hasn't Nadal already proved that he is all court player & can kick Fed's as* on all surfaces? So how does it matter if the Madrid clay court behaves as hard or clay?

OliverSimon
05-20-2009, 02:03 PM
I think because of the lower air pressure, Nadal's whitey tighties were not wedged in his crack as usual. This threw off his balance and timing.

http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z312/AmyAlways/Owned.gif

Madhoshi22
05-20-2009, 02:03 PM
Nadal_freak gave a confident, unbiased response and even backed it up with understandable physics. (I'm no physics major, but nothing he said sounds wrong).

You on the other hand gave a pretty arrogant response there. You backed it up with (I hope) correct physics as evidence, but it just comes off all bad.

He's correct, from a physics standpoint, I'll back that up, though he could have phrased it better.

But yes altitude does affect your play, as stated, your ball will fly farther with the same velocity due to less friction with the surrounding air. Many players often string their sticks tighter when they know they're going to be at high altitude in an effort to control the ball, and still take massive cuts, yet still land the ball in the court.

Antonio Puente
05-20-2009, 02:20 PM
Why are we discussing this? Hasn't Nadal already proved that he is all court player & can kick Fed's as* on all surfaces? So how does it matter if the Madrid clay court behaves as hard or clay?

Direct your questions to the OP who started the thread. I'm just stating the facts.

vtmike
05-20-2009, 02:23 PM
^^^ Alright... Same question to OP...

Rhino
05-20-2009, 02:26 PM
Madrid clay is the red grass. It's ridiculous how all the courts are getting faster and faster these days.

Except Wimbledon which got considerably slower.

MAX PLY
05-20-2009, 02:31 PM
I understand it was not clay at all. Rather, millions of tiny red ball bearings were placed on a glass surface. Credit to both players for being able to even stand--amazing!

Serendipitous
05-20-2009, 03:14 PM
Well the only reason Rafa has beaten fed of late is because Roger had a sore back.. So maybe he really isn't the true #1 after all...

If excuses work for you wally's, then it should be ok for us.. No??


Yes, you are right.


All Roger did after Wimbledon and the Australian Open was complain about his back. :roll:

Gorecki
05-20-2009, 03:17 PM
The clay itself is not faster than hardcourts. It's the altitude that makes the ball go through air so much quicker.

again finding new paths in science?

Nadal_freak, as the great inventor of the unified theory of spin-gravitation (or spinnistic gravity, as it is known in quantum dynamics textbooks)

please explain (scientifically) your above statement for us laymen.

thanks

respect the man that created the "speed related variable mass of a traveling object"..

The air is thinner. Thus, less resistence on the ball so it doesn't slow up as much. You also get a higher bounce. Everything goes faster and higher. It was really tricky conditions and Nadal couldn't adjust well enough to dominate the tournament and had to battle incredibly hard to get to the finals. It was sunny and dry as well. That only made things go even quicker. It's the fastest clay conditions you will ever see in a big tournament.

you really really suck at physics! man... really...

Wrong again!!!! The altitude does not make the ball go quicker. NEVER HAS!!! NEVER WILL!!! What it does do is cause the ball to travel farther, which has nothing to do with velocity. The air is thinner, the gravity is less, which causes the ball to go farther at the same speed!!! It also negates some of the topspin, because of the thin air leaves less molecules for the spinning ball to grab. If you had actually played at altitude, like I do every day, you would know this. Nadal had the same TIME to react to a shot at altitude as he had at sea level. Having the ball travel farther and deeper would actually help Nadal, I would think, since so many of his balls don't bounce much deeper than the service line. This should make his shots even more penetrating.

If you prefer, why don't you go back to the "tiredness" excuse. It works so much better, considering that until two years ago ALL the Masters Finals were best 3 of 5, and it didn't seem to bother Nadal back then.

elass....

Ever take a course in physics?

many... so many you cannot imagine!

Nadal_freak gave a confident, unbiased response and even backed it up with understandable physics. (I'm no physics major, but nothing he said sounds wrong).

You on the other hand gave a pretty arrogant response there. You backed it up with (I hope) correct physics as evidence, but it just comes off all bad.

everything he said IS wrong... whatever it may sound to you is your own judgment and nothing to do with scientific evidence... as for Coloskier's explanation how does it come all wrong?

veroniquem
05-20-2009, 03:17 PM
Well the only reason Rafa has beaten fed of late is because Roger had a sore back.. So maybe he really isn't the true #1 after all...

If excuses work for you wally's, then it should be ok for us.. No??
Except Rafa hasn't beaten Fed "of late", he has beaten him 13 times in the course of the last 5 years, he's been beating him since the first time they've played in 2004. There is no excuse that will cover that long a time :lol:

veroniquem
05-20-2009, 04:08 PM
I am sure I could come up with excuses that will cover him for each loss..

Like I said. If this is the way you guys wanna play it, then so be it...
Be my guest. If that amuses you.

gj011
05-20-2009, 04:31 PM
Veroniquem, do not pay too much attention to this "No??" creature.

This is ChrisInJapan, well known, many times banned, disturbed troll.

jrachiever
05-20-2009, 04:35 PM
everything he said IS wrong... whatever it may sound to you is your own judgment and nothing to do with scientific evidence... as for Coloskier's explanation how does it come all wrong?

Coloskier is wrong about altitude not effecting horizontal velocity. His explanation is correct assuming basic projectile motion parameters but completely neglects drag.

Thinner air will have a smaller coefficient of drag than thicker air. As a result, the drag force exerted on a tennis ball in thin air will be less than the drag force on a tennis ball travelling through thicker air. Less drag force will cause a tennis ball in thin air to decelerate less than a ball in thick air, and it will thus travel faster than a ball through thicker air. It's really just basic common sense, and happens exactly the way Nadal Freak described it. Coloskier is correct about the other effects he described.

veroniquem
05-20-2009, 04:38 PM
Veroniquem, do not pay too much attention to this "No??" creature.

This is ChrisInJapan, well known, many times banned, disturbed troll.
Thanks. Some of the green army trolls have now passed in the blue, so we have to be careful, lol.

R_Federer
05-20-2009, 04:56 PM
The speed is not that important. The win was due to a combination of factors, one of which being a very good game from Fed. What some Fed's fans cannot accept (in their infinite Fedlike megalomania) is that Fed's excellent play was not the ONLY factor in his win.

What you and your gay love cant accept is that Federer hardly gave his 100%. He was playing at 60% level...and played the perfect 60% level match :). Now imagine if he plays a perfect 100% level match in the French final :).

VivalaVida
05-20-2009, 04:59 PM
What you and your gay love cant accept is that Federer hardly gave his 100%. He was playing at 60% level...and played the perfect 60% level match :). Now imagine if he plays a perfect 100% level match in the French final :).
veroniquem is a female. how is that gay love?

R_Federer
05-20-2009, 05:06 PM
veroniquem is a female. how is that gay love?

I know. I was just looking for any insult.