PDA

View Full Version : Which surface is faster now, US open of Wimbleedon?


dmt
03-28-2010, 10:08 PM
??? Which surface is faster, the hardcourts at US open or the grass at wimbledon? any stats or any idea?

Carsomyr
03-28-2010, 10:10 PM
Yes, the United States of Wimbledon are the fastest courts ever.

Lsmkenpo
03-28-2010, 10:37 PM
The US Opeen is now considered the fasteest
court surface, in terms of playing speeed.

Wimbleedon is not as consistently fast over the entire tournameent, as the grass wears down from play, the court speeed slows down, that combined with the bigger slower higher bouncing balls used there now, has resulted in slower playing speeed than the US Opeen.

Jchurch
03-28-2010, 11:12 PM
The US Open is the fastest slam.

Rhino
03-28-2010, 11:22 PM
Oh come on, we get it, Wimbledon has sped up.

US Open obviously.

Feña14
03-29-2010, 12:07 AM
I feel that because there is alot of talk about Wimbledon slowing down, it clouds peoples judgement.

To me it still appears to be a very quick surface, I was at Tsonga v Karlovic last year at Wimbledon and the surface looked every bit as fast as it was in the mid 90's when Sampras and Ivanisevic were playing a similar game.

It's almost like the "in" thing to say Wimbledon has slowed considerably, I don't buy it personally.

Li Ching Yuen
03-29-2010, 12:11 AM
As the grass wears down it seems the surface slows down as well.
But still, the slice is very effective. Whenever a player hits an offensive one that stays pretty low, you can actually see how the ball simply slides away, which is part of the beauty of grass courts I guess.

Darth_Timmaayyy!!
03-29-2010, 02:19 AM
Wimbledon is the Green Clay slam...

dmt
03-29-2010, 02:28 AM
Wimbledon is the Green Clay slam...thats a gross exxageration

Tennis_Crazed
03-29-2010, 02:36 AM
Everyone's knows that Wimbledon is a lot slower than before...but not sure its THAT SLOW?

Interesting stats: Aces, winners, # of shots per point etc...

abraxas21
03-29-2010, 02:02 PM
us open.

wimby is probably even behind the australian open in terms of ball speed.

Ocean Drive
03-29-2010, 02:14 PM
I feel that because there is alot of talk about Wimbledon slowing down, it clouds peoples judgement.

To me it still appears to be a very quick surface, I was at Tsonga v Karlovic last year at Wimbledon and the surface looked every bit as fast as it was in the mid 90's when Sampras and Ivanisevic were playing a similar game.

It's almost like the "in" thing to say Wimbledon has slowed considerably, I don't buy it personally.

lmao

That's because you were at a Karlovic - Tsonga match with no rallies.

The-Champ
03-29-2010, 02:48 PM
lmao

That's because you were at a Karlovic - Tsonga match with no rallies.


like becker - sampras?



They slowed it down so that Rafa could make 3 finals in a row, but they sped it up the years Roddick made the finals..

dmt
03-29-2010, 04:00 PM
us open.

wimby is probably even behind the australian open in terms of ball speed.

again based on what? Any sourrces, any stats?

ReturnWinner
03-29-2010, 04:02 PM
UsOpen is faster even although it has been slowed too in the last years.
but Wimbledon is not just slower but the bounce is higher too.

prosealster
03-29-2010, 04:51 PM
Uso...................................

NamRanger
03-29-2010, 04:53 PM
I feel that because there is alot of talk about Wimbledon slowing down, it clouds peoples judgement.

To me it still appears to be a very quick surface, I was at Tsonga v Karlovic last year at Wimbledon and the surface looked every bit as fast as it was in the mid 90's when Sampras and Ivanisevic were playing a similar game.

It's almost like the "in" thing to say Wimbledon has slowed considerably, I don't buy it personally.




No, it's clearly slower. BBC did an analysis of it which Nadal fans today still reject. We've had professional athletes who played on both the old and new grass tell everyone that the grass is slower. I mean, even AELTC themselves admitted to it and then shot themselves in the foot by denying it over the course of many interviews (it's quite hilarious looking back at 2002 to present, and seeing how many times AELTC contradicts itself).


Am I saying that it is slow as clay? No. But it's no lightning court of the past anymore.

aldeayeah
03-29-2010, 04:57 PM
It's clearly slower than Queens at any rate.

Tennis_Maestro
03-29-2010, 04:59 PM
Logic.

Del Potro = Grass court rookie (Schooled by Hewitt in Round 1 of Wimbledon 2009)

Del Potro becomes 2009 US Open Champion

US Open faster than Wimbledon?

How can US Open Champion 2009 lose to Hewitt of Wimbledon 2009, when Wimbledon is slower than the US Open and Del Potro is predominantly a ball bashing baseliner?

Stop being silly. Its slowed down, but not to the extent by which the surface has become slower than a fast hard-court.

dmt
03-29-2010, 05:00 PM
http://www.sportingo.com/tennis/a4653_us-opens-hard-courts

interesting article , not sure if its true.

NamRanger
03-29-2010, 05:01 PM
Logic.

Del Potro = Grass court rookie (Schooled by Hewitt in Round 1 of Wimbledon 2009)

Del Potro = US Open Champion 2009

US Open faster than Wimbledon?

Stop being silly. Its slowed down, but not the extent by which the surface has become slower than a fast hard-court.



Just because the surface is slower doesn't automatically make everyone good on it. You still have to have excellent footwork and be a phenomenal athlete to play on that surface. It's clear that it is much slower though, as the guys that have been competing for this title for multiple years in a row have been guys who are by far the best athletes on the tour (Federer and Nadal).

Tennis_Maestro
03-29-2010, 05:06 PM
Just because the surface is slower doesn't automatically make everyone good on it. You still have to have excellent footwork and be a phenomenal athlete to play on that surface. It's clear that it is much slower though, as the guys that have been competing for this title for multiple years in a row have been guys who are by far the best athletes on the tour (Federer and Nadal).

You haven't answered the question though.

This isn't even about being good on it. This is about Del Potro a player that won the US Open, losing to a player making his comeback in straight sets on a surface supposedly slower than those used @ the US Open. (First round, lets also remember)

Del Potro isn't good on grass because? Its ....? Too fast, right? You could say he's not used to the way the slice reacts on the surface, but then again, did Hewitt even use much slice in that match? No he didn't. Sorry, I'm not buying into it. This is nothing more than a myth created by fans whom can't quite believe Nadal won Wimbledon. lol (And I'm not even a liker of Nadal)

T1000
03-29-2010, 05:10 PM
You haven't answered the question though.

This isn't even about being good on it. This is about Del Potro a player that won the US Open, losing to a player making his comeback in straight sets on a surface supposedly slower than those used @ the US Open. (First round, lets also remember)

Del Potro isn't good on grass because? Its ....? Too fast, right? You could say he's not used to the way the slice reacts on the surface, but then again, did Hewitt even use much slice in that match? No he didn't. Sorry, I'm not buying into it. This is nothing more than a myth created by fans whom can't quite believe Nadal won Wimbledon. lol (And I'm not even a liker of Nadal)

It could have something to do with Del Potro sucking on grass and Hewitt is a top 5 grass court player today.

Tennis_Maestro
03-29-2010, 05:14 PM
It could have something to do with Del Potro sucking on grass and Hewitt is a top 5 grass court player today.

OH lord!

Why does he suck on grass though? and he didn't even get a single set from Hewitt, infact, he wasn't even close, infact, it didn't even go to a single tie break if i remember correctly....

Sorry but if Grass was slower, Del Potro would've pushed Hewitt further.

There has to be an explanation. It wasn't even as if Hewitt was playing scintillating tennis, he lost in 4 sets to Roddick come the Quarters.

T1000
03-29-2010, 05:18 PM
OH lord!

Why does he suck on grass though? and he didn't even get a single set of Hewitt, infact, he wasn't even close, infact, it didn't even go to a single tie break.

Sorry but if Grass was slower, Del Potro would've pushed Hewitt further and to add to that, as I said before, Hewitt hardly ever uses slice, so it has nothing to do with slice.

There has to be an explanation. It wasn't even as if Hewitt was playing scintillating tennis, he lost in 4 sets to Roddick come the Quarters.

Del Potro has little to no experience on grass. It's a lot harder to play on a new surface against one of the best for the first time. It would have been the same result had he played Federer, Nadal, Murray, Roddick, or Haas. HE doesn't know how to move or how to play on grass, that's why he got embarrassed. Hewitt also lost in 5, not 4, and he was injured while Roddick had the tournament of his life but that's a different story.

Li Ching Yuen
03-29-2010, 05:18 PM
OH lord!

Why does he suck on grass though? and he didn't even get a single set from Hewitt, infact, he wasn't even close, infact, it didn't even go to a single tie break if i remember correctly....

Sorry but if Grass was slower, Del Potro would've pushed Hewitt further.

There has to be an explanation. It wasn't even as if Hewitt was playing scintillating tennis, he lost in 4 sets to Roddick come the Quarters.

Because of his movement.

Del Potro is a crap mover, especially on grass. Actually, to me it looked like a serious handicap when I first saw him on grass, really looked uncomfortable. Plus he can't make that slight side-sliding he likes to do on clay for example that allows him to redirect the play from side to side.

Tennis_Maestro
03-29-2010, 05:25 PM
Del Potro has little to no experience on grass. It's a lot harder to play on a new surface against one of the best for the first time. It would have been the same result had he played Federer, Nadal, Murray, Roddick, or Haas. HE doesn't know how to move or how to play on grass, that's why he got embarrassed. Hewitt also lost in 5, not 4, and he was injured while Roddick had the tournament of his life but that's a different story.

If its his movement, why is he so able to move and slide on clay? Made the semi's of the French, right?

If you can slide on clay, you can slide on grass, as shown by Nadal, although Nadal is a lot more athletic....

So he can't move as well on grass, he still shouldn't be getting thumped by Hewitt. I think part of the reason his movement needs to be better is because the grass is that little bit more faster....

petetheileet
03-29-2010, 05:56 PM
Conditions affect wimbledon more than the US

that final last year was very very quick

the two years before however were not too quick

djokovicgonzalez2010
03-29-2010, 05:57 PM
Who honestly thinks it is Wimby???

NamRanger
03-29-2010, 05:59 PM
If its his movement, why is he so able to move and slide on clay? Made the semi's of the French, right?

If you can slide on clay, you can slide on grass, as shown by Nadal, although Nadal is a lot more athletic....

So he can't move as well on grass, he still shouldn't be getting thumped by Hewitt. I think part of the reason his movement needs to be better is because the grass is that little bit more faster....



You're really grasping at straws here. Clay and grass are two totally different surfaces and require two totally different styles of movement. Del Potro got thumped by Hewitt because Hewitt today is a veteran, more experienced on grass, former Wimbledon champion, and is a far superior mover, which is still a very important aspect to have.



Gustavo Kuerten for example sucked on grass (he was actually decent for a clay courter those days though), yet he won the TMC on a lightning indoor carpet court against Agassi and Sampras. It's not just about speed, it's also about the movement on the surface, which Del Potro clearly is not comfortable with.

Feña14
03-29-2010, 09:51 PM
No, it's clearly slower. BBC did an analysis of it which Nadal fans today still reject. We've had professional athletes who played on both the old and new grass tell everyone that the grass is slower. I mean, even AELTC themselves admitted to it and then shot themselves in the foot by denying it over the course of many interviews (it's quite hilarious looking back at 2002 to present, and seeing how many times AELTC contradicts itself).


Am I saying that it is slow as clay? No. But it's no lightning court of the past anymore.

Totally agree.

As I said, the way people talk about the grass at Wimbledon these days you'd be forgiven for thinking it was green clay.

There is no doubt it is slower than in the mid 90's, but not by the margins talked about.

abmk
03-29-2010, 10:09 PM
OH lord!

Why does he suck on grass though? and he didn't even get a single set from Hewitt, infact, he wasn't even close, infact, it didn't even go to a single tie break if i remember correctly....

Sorry but if Grass was slower, Del Potro would've pushed Hewitt further.

There has to be an explanation. It wasn't even as if Hewitt was playing scintillating tennis, he lost in 4 sets to Roddick come the Quarters.

becuase he isn't comfortable moving on grass , as simple as that ..., has very less experience on grass

also hewitt lost in 5 to an on-fire roddick, was playing some very good tennis, in fact he was up a break in the 5th

namelessone
03-29-2010, 10:17 PM
It's clearly slower than Queens at any rate.

Yeah and Nadal won that too. Go figure.

NamRanger has it right. The new grass was supposed to be sturdier(but as we have seen in the second week that it was a massive fail) and from what I hear they compacted the soil quite a bit thus resulting in a bigger bounce(hence the slowed down impression cause when they played on grass in the past most balls stayed low).

While it is slower it is not much slower. People tend to exagerrate. I saw federer his some volleys in his matches with nadal that were staying really low. The slice still is the best weapon on grass,it still stays low. Nadal was hitting balls from near his ankles in some of these matches and that is only cause he has that western grip,mobile wrist and great arm strength.

My point is that even today,with the slowed down grass,big shots,slices and big serves are still the way to go on this surface,if you can move on it that is. I remember many of Rafa's matches there over the years on grass and quite a few were very close calls,with guys like soderling(5 sets),gulbis,kendrick(5 sets),youzhny(5 sets) giving nadal trouble.

Nadal has a big advantage on grass because he can play balls like these:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROQKOSqHYPs

sh@de
03-30-2010, 12:16 AM
If its his movement, why is he so able to move and slide on clay? Made the semi's of the French, right?

If you can slide on clay, you can slide on grass, as shown by Nadal, although Nadal is a lot more athletic....

So he can't move as well on grass, he still shouldn't be getting thumped by Hewitt. I think part of the reason his movement needs to be better is because the grass is that little bit more faster....

Are you serious? :shock:

You do realize clay and grass are radically different surfaces right...:oops: I mean, Sampras owned grass and sucked on clay... Kuerten owned on clay and sucked on grass...

Dark Tempest
03-30-2010, 01:32 AM
Wimbledon is as fast as the 90's. Players like Nadal can dominate big servers cuz they have superior returns.

Tennis_Maestro
03-30-2010, 04:08 AM
His movement is evidently worse on grass and I think thats majorly down to the possibility grass is a little bit faster.

Although spin inevitably still plays a factor.

NamRanger
03-30-2010, 02:32 PM
His movement is evidently worse on grass and I think thats majorly down to the possibility grass is a little bit faster.

Although spin inevitably still plays a factor.



It has nothing to do with speed. Kuerten for instance did fine on fast HCs, much better than he did on grass. He even won a lightning indoor carpet tournament, yet he was incapable of going past the QF of Wimbledon.



Yeah and Nadal won that too. Go figure.

NamRanger has it right. The new grass was supposed to be sturdier(but as we have seen in the second week that it was a massive fail) and from what I hear they compacted the soil quite a bit thus resulting in a bigger bounce(hence the slowed down impression cause when they played on grass in the past most balls stayed low).

While it is slower it is not much slower. People tend to exagerrate. I saw federer his some volleys in his matches with nadal that were staying really low. The slice still is the best weapon on grass,it still stays low. Nadal was hitting balls from near his ankles in some of these matches and that is only cause he has that western grip,mobile wrist and great arm strength.

My point is that even today,with the slowed down grass,big shots,slices and big serves are still the way to go on this surface,if you can move on it that is. I remember many of Rafa's matches there over the years on grass and quite a few were very close calls,with guys like soderling(5 sets),gulbis,kendrick(5 sets),youzhny(5 sets) giving nadal trouble.

Nadal has a big advantage on grass because he can play balls like these:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROQKOSqHYPs



Nadal has such a big advantage on grass because his footwork is phenomenal. He actually usually struggles the 1st week due to the speed of the court, but as the tournament progresses he actually gets better because of the lack of grass, which kicks the ball up even more.

samprasvsfederer123
03-30-2010, 04:14 PM
I feel that because there is alot of talk about Wimbledon slowing down, it clouds peoples judgement.

To me it still appears to be a very quick surface, I was at Tsonga v Karlovic last year at Wimbledon and the surface looked every bit as fast as it was in the mid 90's when Sampras and Ivanisevic were playing a similar game.

It's almost like the "in" thing to say Wimbledon has slowed considerably, I don't buy it personally.

have you ever seen the demo graphics of how the ball reacts when it lands when they digitally compute and compair the lets say 2002 wimby vs 2010 wimby, they do it like in every match in wimbledon each year

samprasvsfederer123
03-30-2010, 04:19 PM
Wimbledon is the Green Clay slam...

dont make me ask you again who is that person, you have as your avatar!

sh@de
03-30-2010, 06:22 PM
have you ever seen the demo graphics of how the ball reacts when it lands when they digitally compute and compair the lets say 2002 wimby vs 2010 wimby, they do it like in every match in wimbledon each year

No I haven't, can you show me? (I'm a firm believer that Wimby has slowed down, just so you know)

paulorenzo
03-30-2010, 07:37 PM
Logic.

Del Potro = Grass court rookie (Schooled by Hewitt in Round 1 of Wimbledon 2009)

Del Potro becomes 2009 US Open Champion

US Open faster than Wimbledon?

How can US Open Champion 2009 lose to Hewitt of Wimbledon 2009, when Wimbledon is slower than the US Open and Del Potro is predominantly a ball bashing baseliner?

Stop being silly. Its slowed down, but not to the extent by which the surface has become slower than a fast hard-court.


just trying to play the devil's advocate here, but consider this — perhaps delpo did well in the us open because his huge, flat groundies compliment the surface well. when he goes for a huge cut at a ball and flattens his shot out, which is almost half of the time, the ball seemed to skid a bit on the surface of USO hard courts since the courts are fast and a lot less grittier than the hardcourts at, say, indian wells. what i'm trying to get at is that delpo would be the kind of player to do well on faster surfaces because of his huge,flat groundies.

yes delpo is a ball bashing baseliner, but he isn't a baseliner of the defensive, retrieving variety. is very aggressive and tries to find a way to get right on top of the baseline. his game would suit a faster surface.

there are more variables in the example you proposed aside from court speed and results at wimbledon vs US open.

delpo was facing hewitt, a person who hits cleanly, flat, on the rise and able to run down a lot of balls. this is a bad matchup for the big man to begin with since delpo doesn't do well against these kinds of players (davydenko for example).
as namranger pointed out, moving well on clay doesn't translate to moving well on grass. it is fair to say lleyton is far more comfortable on grass on than delpo, seeing as he's played at sw19 a quite few more times, faring good results.

just food for thought.

MotherMarjorie
03-30-2010, 11:30 PM
I feel that because there is alot of talk about Wimbledon slowing down, it clouds peoples judgement.

It's almost like the "in" thing to say Wimbledon has slowed considerably, I don't buy it personally.
Mother Marjorie likes you. Spot on.