For all those who say grass courts played the same . . .

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Arafel, May 15, 2009.

  1. Arafel

    Arafel Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    Messages:
    1,160
    watch the first point of this video of Wilander vs. Lendl at the Australian in 83 and then try to imagine a similar point at Wimbledon

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2WIBU6i-Ac&feature=related

    The Aussie grass got sun baked and hard, and it also sloped uphill towards the net. It's extremely different than the Wimbledon grass.

    Every time I read people here talking about how Agassi won on four different surfaces and it was much more impressive than Laver and the old guard winning because three Slams were on grass, I think of this.
     
    #1
  2. tudwell

    tudwell Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,408
    I think the length of that rally had more to do with the guys who were playing than the speed of the grass. In reality, the Aussie grass was usually faster than Wimbledon. The grass at the Australian was, as you say, sun baked and hard, allowing the ball to skid through the court even more. The grass at Wimbledon was most often wet and the air humid, which slows the balls down. I agree with you, though, that grass could be extremely different at different venues.
     
    #2
  3. deltox

    deltox Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    2,639
    Location:
    NC, USA
    wouldnt dry grass make the ball bounce better than wet grass? slippery grass causes the ball to skid instead of hopping up, right?
     
    #3
  4. Arafel

    Arafel Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    Messages:
    1,160
    Yes, the Australian had a much truer bounce. The ball at Wimbledon tends to skid and stay low. Because of how firm the grass got in Australia, it produced a truer, higher bounce.
     
    #4
  5. Fate Archer

    Fate Archer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,669
    So, theoretically, it actually played similarly to Wimbledon nowdays.
    Just from looking, the bounce in this video seemed much like Wimbledon (today) to me as well.

    But Agassi won Wimbledon in 1992, way before they changed the composition of the grass, turning the bounce better.

    With the grass of those days in Wimb (before 2001), the ball skidded and stayed lower, turning the game faster paced (right?). If it played faster, then the adaptation to the different surfaces was much more difficult in Agassi's time, I guess. :)
     
    #5
  6. vtmike

    vtmike Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,658
    Location:
    Texas
    #6
  7. Moose Malloy

    Moose Malloy Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    7,913
    Yet Lendl was serving & volleying on 1st AND 2nd serves vs Mac that same year at Wimbledon(and judging from the NY Times writeup of that match, he was doing that at all his matches at Wimbledon that year prior to meeting Mac) Different grass indeed...

    This was a very important factor in the conditions at the AO. Lendl, Mac, Becker, Martina & many others talked of how tricky it was to adjust to the slope. Martina & Becker dominated Wimbledon, but not the AO. You don't need to go back to Laver's time to find pros talking about how different the conditions were at these 2 venues. Hell, don't today's pros talk about the difference between Queens & W? Every grasscourt in the world doesn't have the same grass, groundskeeper, etc. Surprised so many serious tennis fans don't seem to get that.

    and its funny how so many here dismiss the differences in grasscourts during Laver's time, but in other threads I see them obsessing over the 'different clay' in Madrid this week.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2009
    #7

Share This Page