PDA

View Full Version : New Grass at Wimby?


tnig469
06-26-2006, 05:35 AM
Ive been hearing all this talk about this new grass....from brad gilbert....sayin the surface is slower than ever b4.....wonder what they have done to the grass to make it s....l.....o....w....e....r....

DariusRaiden
06-26-2006, 05:46 AM
They use 100% Rye grass instead of 70% Rye/30% Fescue like they did before. They also use a firmer type of soil I think.

BabolatFan
06-26-2006, 06:17 AM
After each match, do they repair the grass or leave it as is? I know the courts look fresh and green but towards the round of 16, they normally get worn out.

Volly master
06-26-2006, 06:18 AM
leave it how it is for the 2 weeks

now its only worn in the baseline area, where as 10 years ago, the net part was warn out as well

KBalla08
06-26-2006, 08:11 AM
hmm slower... wonder who got that done... *coughUncleTonycough*

dh003i
06-26-2006, 08:19 AM
it really sucks that they're making the grass at Wimbledon slower. It should be made faster, like how it was in the early 90s. There's already 1 ultra slow material, clay, and an intermediate material, concrete. Why can't grass be of it's own, at the opposite end of the spectrum?

This is a lame attempt to favor one playing style.

Hartzy
06-26-2006, 08:23 AM
The courts are also rolled daily as well. Rolling does a TON to change a surface. I work grounds crew at a golf club and I can attest to that. This year we started rolling our greens (bentgrass) every weekday and now they are so firm.

Rabbit
06-26-2006, 09:21 AM
it really sucks that they're making the grass at Wimbledon slower. It should be made faster, like how it was in the early 90s. There's already 1 ultra slow material, clay, and an intermediate material, concrete. Why can't grass be of it's own, at the opposite end of the spectrum?

This is a lame attempt to favor one playing style.

They made it slower because of all the complaining about:

1) the points weren't long enough. It was becoming a serving contest
2) the claycourters didn't have a chance. They were beginning to boycott the tournament.

They had to do something. John Lloyd was advocating abandoning grass all togehter. He wanted the All England Club to move to a different surface, I think a hard court.

While I miss greatly the variety that used to be part of tennis, I think I'd miss it even more of the grass were completely gone. It wouldn't suprise me if in the next twenty years, grass did disappear as a Grand Slam surface.

guernica1
06-26-2006, 10:13 AM
The balls are also very very heavy now leading to lots of shoulder and arm problems. One really has to hope careers don't get shortened because of these types of changes. We'll see in 6-7 years I suppose.

BiGGieStuFF
06-26-2006, 10:15 AM
Make it faster!! I want to see S&V tennis!!! Grrr

fastdunn
06-26-2006, 10:47 AM
They use 100% Rye grass instead of 70% Rye/30% Fescue like they did before. They also use a firmer type of soil I think.

What I heard is that they put extra cement layer underneath grass.
Some people claim it plays like hard court practically(maybe in the
2nd week). All these changes started to happen at around 2001-2002
when Federer beat Sampras and then next year Hewitt won the title.

araghava
06-26-2006, 10:55 AM
The part that really sucks is that there is no explanation from wimbledon. All this stuff about chaning the soil, grass is pure speculation. It would be nice if the officials at wimbledon came out and actually told the public what they've changed and why.

jackson vile
06-26-2006, 11:25 AM
it really sucks that they're making the grass at Wimbledon slower. It should be made faster, like how it was in the early 90s. There's already 1 ultra slow material, clay, and an intermediate material, concrete. Why can't grass be of it's own, at the opposite end of the spectrum?

This is a lame attempt to favor one playing style.


You and others could not be more wrong.



The reason for the slow does is due to the advance in racket technology, the ball is traveling faster and faster as the years go on. On top of that consider string tech, and the balls are heavier and faster, presure longer lasting.

This makes other forms of tennis (besides basline) nonworth while to the players to do anything besides basline, do dont' have a chance to do much else.


All they are doing is rebalancing things out, so that we can see all forms of tennis.

malakas
06-26-2006, 11:52 AM
hmm slower... wonder who got that done... *coughUncleTonycough*

I knew it!!:mad:

:mrgreen:

dh003i
06-26-2006, 12:29 PM
my complaint is that grass-court players are a very distinct disadvantage on clay; clay-court players aren't at such a disadvantage on grass. Certainly, clay hasn't been sped up to help out grass-court specialists: why the special treatment for clay-courters?

Sure, fine, if it's becoming a little bit too serve oriented, make some moderate changes to promote more of an all-court game. But I think it's gone a little bit over-board.

AAAA
06-26-2006, 12:46 PM
my complaint is that grass-court players are a very distinct disadvantage on clay; clay-court players aren't at such a disadvantage on grass. Certainly, clay hasn't been sped up to help out grass-court specialists: why the special treatment for clay-courters?

Sure, fine, if it's becoming a little bit too serve oriented, make some moderate changes to promote more of an all-court game. But I think it's gone a little bit over-board.

It seems like a case of the tables have turned. Is that good or bad? Depends on your preferences and who(m?) you like to support, I guess.

joy
06-26-2006, 06:54 PM
Why not the players who excel on fast surface and serve and volleyers launch a protest against the slowing down of courts?

LowProfile
06-26-2006, 08:02 PM
Yes. The grass composition was officially changed in 2002 to firm up the bounce. And look who won Wimbledon that year. Hewitt over Nalbandian.

textbook strokes
06-26-2006, 08:09 PM
It seems i'm the only one here, but I really like better the matches played now at Wimbledon.
I think the quest for diversity could rather lead to lack of competitiveness when you have players like the old Goran, or Alexander Popp, or that russian... Bugomolov?, that really don't count as great and skilled competitors in any other surface, having succes just cause they are tall and serve hard ( Even when great players win the title at the end).
Shure I know you cand pick some analog cases in the FO too, but I guess Wimby was more prone to allow that.
Besides, he fact that Roger is still the favorite tells me that things are not extremely changed. The grass is still without a doubt very fast, and you can see this just by watching the rallies.
The dominance of the baseline game over the net game is imho due to the unavoidable evolution of the sport.
Just my 2 cents.

SCARLETRUBIES
06-27-2006, 02:10 AM
vamos Rafa!!!
wimbledon champ in 2007.

Chang
06-27-2006, 02:37 AM
this is going to really decrease the diversity of styles played overall. Sure fast grass is a bit serve dominant but isn't clay a bit groundstroke dominant. OK points and a bit fast with an ace but what about clay? It's mostly back and fourth back and fourth with nobody really attacking. They don't speed up clay so why slow down grass.

superman1
06-27-2006, 03:14 AM
The points used to be quicker, but they were just as interesting to watch, if not more so. Seeing one guy charge the net and the other guy sprint across the court to hit a passing shot that is volleyed away is always fun. Seeing two guys hit back and forth until one hits the net isn't quite as fun.

ubel
06-27-2006, 03:19 AM
this isn't fast? wow, i need to watch some of the older stuff. ball seems to be flying to me, maybe it's post-RG watching syndrome.

superman1
06-27-2006, 03:22 AM
It is very fast. I guess the main difference now is that the ball are heavier and bounce higher.

tnig469
06-27-2006, 04:32 AM
yeah tht is a gd reason but isnt tht a good thing.????

a lot of old fashion ppl dont want it to change...this would give a little more advantage to other slower players....its still a fast fast court...but whoever complains about that is just making excuses in my mind that the COURT IS SLOWER!

tnig469
06-27-2006, 04:35 AM
Henman made excuses when he lost last year...about the court playin to slow...it was the same as b4...but he even said he was makin excuses back then....

BackSpin
06-27-2006, 05:29 AM
the courts seem alot slower this year due to the grass being abit longer.

Caswell
06-27-2006, 06:13 AM
The points used to be quicker, but they were just as interesting to watch, if not more so. Seeing one guy charge the net and the other guy sprint across the court to hit a passing shot that is volleyed away is always fun. Seeing two guys hit back and forth until one hits the net isn't quite as fun.

Exactly.

dh003i
06-27-2006, 06:46 AM
my question is, why make the courts at Wimby slower to help out clay-court players? This is BS favoritism. They don't make the courts at the FO faster to help out grass-court players. C'mon.

Lefty Spin
06-27-2006, 07:14 AM
I think the switch was also done to get a grass that could take the wear and tear of the play better. At last year's Wimbledon it was stated that the grass court shoes that the players wear are ripping up the court. Consequently, a decision was made to go to a sturdier grass which has resulted in a slower court.

Eviscerator
06-27-2006, 08:03 AM
The dominance of the baseline game over the net game is imho due to the unavoidable evolution of the sport.
Just my 2 cents.

I don't agree with your comment, and here's why. The evolution of a sport can be affected by many things. If it is solely that players are bigger, faster, and stronger then yes your comment would be valid. However when racquet manufactures make them with more power and control and tournaments change the surface and balls to alter play, that is not evolution. It is merely their desire to sell more of a product. In the racquet makers case their technological breakthroughs were driven by the recreational market, not professional tennis players needs. The same can be said of tournaments who want greater attendance and/or TV revenue. So when a capitalistic drive is causing fundamental changes to a game, it is not evolution, but rather greed.

textbook strokes
06-27-2006, 09:05 AM
I could be wrong, but I think its common knowledge that RG has fast clay courts. I've been listening that for years from pro-players specialists and commentators. They say the FO fastened its surface and that its a lot more fast than south american tourneys or Hamburg. That is why modern clay court players are completely different to Vilas and Borg's style.

I remember the match between Nalby and Vasallo this year as a battle between modern and old clay court tennis. Nalby was standing at or near the baseline, hitting with power ( not extreme topspin) from both sides, while Vasallo Arguello was very far behind the baseline, and using a lot of topspin.

About the evolution of the sports, it also involves the racquets. I mean, if someone can build a better racquet, that allows the player to hit with more power more often, the pros are going to use it. Traying to put a limit to this, forbidding certain kinds of frames for the pro circuit, like kind of what the F1 does regulating the power of engines, seems very exteme and unjustified for tennis.



pd: Can somebody teach me how to quote more than one post?. Thanks in advance

ED_4.6HSE
06-27-2006, 10:04 AM
I agree with most of the posts here, its a real shame that serve & volley and general net play has died. I love long baseline rallies dont get me wrong but for me we're only getting half the game of tennis now, its becoming one-dimensional. i used to love the aggressive attacks on the net, lunges, screaming passing shots, lobs, dives, and touches. The 2001 Ivanisevic v Rafter was the end of an era, at least it went down with a bang

Returning is such high quality now that they definately dont need the conditions put in there favor as well

I hope the contrast in styles will return but i cant see it happening for a long while yet

fastdunn
06-27-2006, 10:07 AM
my question is, why make the courts at Wimby slower to help out clay-court players? This is BS favoritism. They don't make the courts at the FO faster to help out grass-court players. C'mon.


The thing is, exactly via that favoritism, we have a fabulous champion
called Federer who is the best baseliner on faster courts.

By the way, they did make FO faster. Faster than Borg's era.

ED_4.6HSE
06-27-2006, 10:13 AM
The thing is, exactly via that favoritism, we have a fabulous champion
called Federer who is the best baseliner on faster courts.

I wouldnt call Federer a baseliner, given the impetus he would serve & volley and be bloody great at it as well. I reckon he'd be winning wimbledon regardless of the surfaces

Ronaldo
06-27-2006, 10:22 AM
New grass at Wimby? This was a hybrid. The old courts were a cross, ah, of Bluegrass, Kentucky Bluegrass, Featherbed Bent, and Northern California Sensemilia. The amazing stuff about that was, that you played 5 sets on it in the afternoon, took it home and just got stoned to the bejeezus-belt that night on that stuff. By the second week, mark my words, there was enough left of the centre court to stick in a pipe let alone play the final. Now this 100% Rye is only good for cows.

Rabbit
06-27-2006, 10:23 AM
Watching play now versus the latter Becker and early Sampras years, the courts are playing a lot slower than they did. They've also started using heavier balls. The combination of these two things may lead to some pretty sore arms.

The French, according to the interviews I've heard, is faster than Hamburg but slower than Rome.

Rabbit
06-27-2006, 10:24 AM
New grass at Wimby? This was a hybrid. The old courts were a cross, ah, of Bluegrass, Kentucky Bluegrass, Featherbed Bent, and Northern California Sensemilia. The amazing stuff about that was, that you played 5 sets on it in the afternoon, took it home and just got stoned to the bejeezus-belt that night on that stuff. By the second week, mark my words, there was enough left of the centre court to stick in a pipe let alone play the final. Now this 100% Rye is only good for cows.

Ronaldo.....are you the Cinderella story? :)

Ronaldo
06-27-2006, 10:26 AM
Ronaldo.....are you the Cinderella story? :)

Yeah, ckitout, my day at the World Cup, eh?

malakas
06-27-2006, 10:30 AM
Ronaldo you are fat!!!:mad:

fastdunn
06-27-2006, 10:32 AM
I wouldnt call Federer a baseliner, given the impetus he would serve & volley and be bloody great at it as well. I reckon he'd be winning wimbledon regardless of the surfaces

Well, I'm not the one who's calling him a baseliner.
I just quoted what has been said on ESPN2.

I don't think there is enough evidence that he would be a
bloody good serve and vollyer.

Ronaldo
06-27-2006, 10:35 AM
FAT!!!!!!! http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/71304816.jpg?v=1&c=MS_GINS&k=2&d=08A8BA3C818346D01B6BC8D5DE3FCC73
Holla at yo boy!

ED_4.6HSE
06-27-2006, 11:10 AM
Well, I'm not the one who's calling him a baseliner.
I just quoted what has been said on ESPN2.

I don't think there is enough evidence that he would be a
bloody good serve and vollyer.

I see him as an all rounder but I suppose even Henman could be called a baseliner now! Did he even serve & volley once against soderling today?

simi
06-27-2006, 03:24 PM
I think the switch was also done to get a grass that could take the wear and tear of the play better. At last year's Wimbledon it was stated that the grass court shoes that the players wear are ripping up the court. Consequently, a decision was made to go to a sturdier grass which has resulted in a slower court.

They talked about this today (the talking heads in the broadcast booth). They said that the change in shoes was what was ripping up the grass and the AELTC went with a different grass to wear better. The unintended side effect was a slowing of the surface for tennis play.

They went on to explain that the composition of the grass this year resulted in a grass surface that plays just like as if it were a hardcourt.

I miss S&V too. Was dissapointed in the Henman match today (what they showed of it.) No S&V at all. The talking heads explained that Henman himself said that S&V can no longer win at Wimbledon. One can now only win with a strong baseline game.

AAAA
06-27-2006, 03:48 PM
Well, I'm not the one who's calling him a baseliner.
I just quoted what has been said on ESPN2.



But you have done in the past on numerous occasions.

framebreaker
06-27-2006, 04:26 PM
I don't agree with your comment, and here's why. The evolution of a sport can be affected by many things. If it is solely that players are bigger, faster, and stronger then yes your comment would be valid. However when racquet manufactures make them with more power and control and tournaments change the surface and balls to alter play, that is not evolution. It is merely their desire to sell more of a product. In the racquet makers case their technological breakthroughs were driven by the recreational market, not professional tennis players needs. The same can be said of tournaments who want greater attendance and/or TV revenue. So when a capitalistic drive is causing fundamental changes to a game, it is not evolution, but rather greed.
oh c'mon guys. the reason why SV players aren't that successful anymore is because the passing shots have become better -more powerful, accurate- and not everybody is using babolats... nowadays tennis players are physically much stronger than they were in the past. how can someone blindly run to the net and not expect to be punished for that by a 2006 professional tour player? ouch!

FedererUberAlles
06-27-2006, 04:30 PM
FAT!!!!!!! http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/71304816.jpg?v=1&c=MS_GINS&k=2&d=08A8BA3C818346D01B6BC8D5DE3FCC73
Holla at yo boy!

Hey Brazil, where did all of your good players go? Oh, that's right, they were all eaten by Ronaldo. Last time that guy scored, was when he ate a Grand Slam at Denny's. Hey, Ronaldo, why don't you get one of your country's painful body waxes downfield, because the only person you should be playing with is yourself!

fastdunn
06-27-2006, 04:50 PM
But you have done in the past on numerous occasions.

Yep. But this time, I used the exact quote "Federer is the best
baseliner on grass court" said on ESPN.

Ronaldo
06-27-2006, 06:48 PM
Hey Brazil, where did all of your good players go? Oh, that's right, they were all eaten by Ronaldo. Last time that guy scored, was when he at a Grand Slam at Denny's. Hey, Ronaldo, why don't you get one of your country's painful body waxes downfield, because the only person you should be playing with is yourself!
Have a Belgium waffle and a smile Fed cuz its Moons Over My Hammy all nite long

Eviscerator
06-28-2006, 06:54 AM
I could be wrong, but I think its common knowledge that RG has fast clay courts.

About the evolution of the sports, it also involves the racquets. I mean, if someone can build a better racquet, that allows the player to hit with more power more often, the pros are going to use it. Traying to put a limit to this, forbidding certain kinds of frames for the pro circuit, like kind of what the F1 does regulating the power of engines, seems very exteme and unjustified for tennis.






According to Federer in his interview after his FO loss to Nadal, he said the courts were playing very slow, especially compared with Rome.

As to the racquet issue, what would happen to the game if they developed a racquet that could hit 3 times harder with the same control. Would the governing body's not step in at some point and say that the new racquets were restricted? If not, tennis would certainly die as a popular sport because the game would be too fast to follow. Other sports have restrictions on equipment, so why not tennis? Sure they have some restrictions, like not allowing certain lengths, and restrictions on what you can string it with, but in the end, they have allowed current technology to significantly affect the game. I however contend that it is not evolution of the game in the true sense.

Lastly, as to your request about quoting multiple people, just hit the quote button, then use your cut and paste feature and import the quote to the other post you are quoting.

AAAA
06-28-2006, 07:01 AM
Yep. But this time, I used the exact quote "Federer is the best
baseliner on grass court" said on ESPN.

Whether you say it in your own words or find someone else to say it makes no difference when the intent is the same.

Eviscerator
06-28-2006, 07:04 AM
oh c'mon guys. the reason why SV players aren't that successful anymore is because the passing shots have become better -more powerful, accurate- and not everybody is using babolats... nowadays tennis players are physically much stronger than they were in the past. how can someone blindly run to the net and not expect to be punished for that by a 2006 professional tour player? ouch!

:roll:

LOL, so you give no credence to racquets allowing people to bang away from the baseline with more power and accuracy:confused:

Heck, tiny guys are able to generate a ton of power with today's racquets, so your point of "physically much stronger" does not hold water.
Grinders of the past like Vilas had to be strong to swing a heavy wood racquet for 5 sets, and if you don't think he was strong, then you have never seen his arm. His left forearm makes Nadal's look like a girls forearm.

BERDI4
06-28-2006, 11:13 AM
Fast grass was ok in the wooden racquet era where there wasn't such power as now. But now with the new powerful racquets I think it's a great idea to make it slower. You need to have a complete game to win. Not just being tall and have a great serve.