Sampras on post-2002 Grass of Wimbledon

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Prisoner of Birth, Jan 10, 2013.

?

How many Wimbledons would Sampras have won on "Slow Grass"?

  1. 0

    8.3%
  2. 1

    2.1%
  3. 2

    8.3%
  4. 3

    25.0%
  5. 4

    14.6%
  6. 5

    18.8%
  7. 6

    4.2%
  8. 7

    10.4%
  9. 8

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  10. 9

    8.3%
  1. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    17,554
    While Sampras never faced anyone who would get to his backhand as much as Nadal would. He would have to improve that shot at least 3 times to stand still against Nadal in the rallies cause once Nadal gets to his bh it's point over for Pete.

    I also assume they would play in the later rounds where the grass is already worn out and the ball jumps higher. Just looking at Nadal you can see what a difference it makes - he often struggles against complete nobodies in the first 3-4 rounds, only to steamroll the likes of Murray in the second week.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
    #51
  2. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,980
    Location:
    U.S
    slice_serve_ace,

    those were the only matches on grass ......I know sampras didn't give it his all at queens ... just that he was already in the finals vs hewitt in 2000 and while he didn't play at his best, he did play decent and hewitt beat him in straights - in particular was returning and passing him very well ...

    even other matches reflect that sampras wouldn't have it easy vs hewitt ( just that I didn't mention it in there )

    Like I said in that post :

    "I see sampras vs hewitt being a somewhat similar case to federer vs nadal on grass .. even though the former in those cases are better grass court players by far, in their matchup, it just gets closer ...."
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
    #52
  3. slice serve ace

    slice serve ace Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    186


    i have no problem with that

    i only quoted the part of your post which implied the line of thinking "sampras had it tough vs hewitt at queens in years when he won wimbledon, therefore he would have it tough at wimbledon as well"

    i was simply shoving that line of thinking wrong

    sampras wouldn't have it easy vs hewitt on slow grass, that i agree (02, 04 and 05 hewitt especially)
     
    #53
  4. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567


    Hewitt bothered an older gassed Sampras. I thought were talking Prime Sampras here? I highly doubt Hewitt would ever beat Pete on the big stage here especially at wimbledon if we are talking PRIME Sampras. 2000 Sampras for instance.. Blew Hewitt right off the court at the USO without even breaking a sweat.

    Thats like saying, Big servers and hard hitters "hurt Federer". No.. They bother OLDER Federer because his reaction time has declined. .. Not prime Federer. Federer ate big serving hitters like Roddick for lunch in his prime. Sampras ate baseliners for lunch in his prime.

    Federer has always been bothered more by solid baseliners (Nalbandian, Nadal, DJoker, Murray etc) then he has big server/hitters. Wheras Pete was bothered more by attacking big servers and or great net players (Goran, Krajciek, Edberg Rafter etc.) and less by baseliners (Courier, Agassi etc). If we are talking prime of course
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
    #54
  5. tudwell

    tudwell Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,408
    Hewitt beat Sampras on grass in 2000.
     
    #55
  6. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567


    Evidently, you didn't catch Kraijcek at wimbledon in 96.. That like was watching Muster of 1995 at the French.. Insane quality of play.

    And Nadal has "hardly" been unbeatable on grass. He didn't look all that great at wimbledon in 2006 (definitely that year) and 2007 either. Richard's level in 96 was WAYYY higher then Nadal's were those years

    And Sampras would DESTROY Nadal at wimbledon.. Fast or slow.. Gimme a break. Nadal has NOTHING to hurt Pete with on that surface. Nothing at all
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
    #56
  7. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567
    At a non wimbledon event? Did Sampras even ever take those seriously? Sampras peaked for Wimbledon.. He just went through the motions at non slam grass events.
     
    #57
  8. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,980
    Location:
    U.S
    lol, wut ? the USO 2000 semi b/w sampras and hewitt was a competitive one for all 3 sets and hewitt wasn't even top 5 then ..sampras only won 10 points more than hewitt over 3 sets ..

    hewitt won 24 more points than sampras in their 2001 USO encounter ... now *that* was blowing someone off without breaking into a sweat ....

    hewitt bagelled sampras @ the YEC in lisbon in 2000 ....

    sampras at his prime ate baseliners for lunch ? yeah, mostly courier, kafelnikov who weren't exactly great movers; of course he lost more often than won vs agassi on the slower courts .... chang was one exception, but simply put, hewitt is chang V 2 in many ways , more firepower, better returning, better passing, only worse handling of topspin & play on clay, but that isn't in picture here ...

    coming to reality, sampras did have trouble with the topspin of bruguera and corrretja ( corretja nearly beat him @ the USO in 96 and beat in the YEC semis in 98 - hardly small matches )

    also just about managed to lead ferreira 7-6 and he was nothing more than a very good mover and a good FH ....( in contrast agassi was 11-0 vs ferreira )

    sampras was bothered by both big hitters ( esp on faster surfaces ) and baseliners who could get it up high on his BH or get back lot of his serves along with being fast enough & pass well.....hewitt fits the second criteria of baseliners as well as anyone ...
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
    #58
  9. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567


    What baseliner has "owned" a prime Sampras overall exactly? I will wait for your response since you will be looking for answers for quite a long time. ROFLMAO

    Sampras DESTROYED Courier (16-4 in the h2h), Chang in the h2h, Agassi in the h2h. Bruguera was 3-2 vs. Pete but most of those came on clay, and even Pete beat Bruguera at the French.. Bruguera's best surface. Pete certainly wasn't "owned" by any strict baseliner overall in his prime

    Sampras' main problems came vs. Kraijceck.. An attacker. More guys started giving him issues from the baseline OUT OF PETE'S PRIME. Just like big servers and attackers are giving Fed problems now.

    2000? That was a year or two out of Pete's prime.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
    #59
  10. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,786
    If Krajicek can beat Prime Sampras (decimate in 3 straight sets, more like), so can Nadal, Roddick, Hewitt, Djokovic and Murray.
     
    #60
  11. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567
    :shock::shock::shock::shock:

    Roddick, Hewitt, Nadal, Djokovic?...... at wimbledon??? Please stop..
     
    #61
  12. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,980
    Location:
    U.S


    lol, I already edited my previous post with those names - bruguera, corretja, ferreira ... only let's get more into detail :

    bruguera's h2h vs pete is interesting :

    bruguera of course beat him twice on clay, 93-94 .... then lost to him @ RG 96 when he was coming back from serious injury and had a losing record on clay that year before coming into RG ...

    they had 2 matches off clay :

    one was the YEC in 1993 when bruguera breadsticked him on carpet, yes, carpet ..... pete only narrowly escaped in the third ..

    then in miami 97, bruguera beat him in 3 sets ....

    yeah, only thing is hewitt wasn't just beating him , he was bagelling and breasticking him, he was ripping his serve apart and made him struggle @ the net like no one else , even in that time-frame .... ( that includes agassi btw )
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
    #62
  13. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    17,554
    Krajicek:shock:?At Wimbledon:shock:?

    In straight sets:shock:?
     
    #63
  14. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567

    Better to lose to a peaking Kraijcek then Freakin Rosol in your prime. But of course, Nadal would beat prime Pete at wimbledon
     
    #64
  15. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567

    You know losing 1-2 matches to a guy isn't exactly getting "owned"

    Again I ask.. Name me ONE baseliner that "owned" Sampras in his prime. You haven't been able to give me one..

    Still waiting..

    I guess Fed has been completely demolished by Simon and Canas then
     
    #65
  16. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,786
    Hey, I'm just going by your logic of comparing titles to say who's better than who.

    Krajicek at Wimbledon - 1 Win, 1 Semifinal, 1 Quarterfinal

    Nadal - 2 Wins, 3 Finals
    Djokovic - 1 Win, 3 Semifinals, 1 Quarterfinal
    Hewitt - 1 Win, 1 Semifinal, 3 Quarterfinals
    Roddick - 3 Finals, 1 Semifinal, 1 Quarterfinal
    Murray - 1 Final, 3 Semifinals, 1 Quarterfinal, 1 Olympic Gold

    Statistically, Nadal, Hewitt, Djokovic are much better than Krajicek on grass. Roddick and Murray are at least on the same level, if not better. So these are all guys more than capable of taking out Sampras in his best year.
     
    #66
  17. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    17,554
    Nadal has built his legacy on his "forehand to backhand" strategy repeated in every point against Federer. One would think that Nadal has nothing on Federer yet that one single element allowed him to be a nightmare for Federer from day 1. You think Nadal wouldn't get to Sampras' backhand considering Federer's backhand>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Sampras' backhand?

    Yeah, keep dreaming. If you think that Sampras would just serve his way through Nadal (and hit an occasional volley) then you seriously need to take those underpants off your head. If this was true Isner, Raonic and Karlovic would own Wimbledon yet it's everyone who owns them.
     
    #67
  18. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,980
    Location:
    U.S
    krajicek's level of play was definitely higher than nadal 2006 , no question .... 2007 in the finals, nadal was darn good however ....

    question however is was sampras' level @ wimbledon in any year better than krajicek's in 96 ? how lucky was he to play him only once @ wimbledon ? :twisted:

    and nadal has the movement , FH to the BH wing , serve slice out wide and brilliant passing shots to hurt sampras on the grass of today ... nothing to hurt sampras with ? ROFLOL ! :lol:
     
    #68
  19. President

    President Legend

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    7,062
    Location:
    Philadelphia
    You think 3 time Wimbledon finalist Roddick and champions Hewitt, Nadal, and Djokovic beating Sampras at Wimbledon is laughable...fair enough. But then don't be a total hypocrite and say that ONE TIME RG Semifinalist Petros Sampras would have a chance at beating Nadal at the French. Nadal is way better and more dominant at RG than Sampras was at Wimbledon.
     
    #69
  20. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567


    And you think sampras would be like Roger and just sit there at the baseline all day and let him exploit it? ROFLMAO.


    Sampras would be chipping and charging, serving bombs, acing Nadal off the court with his 1st and 2nd serves and attacking the net with relentlessness.

    Pete would hold serve EASY vs. Rafa (much easier then Roger), and his attack would be too much for Nadal to handle.

    Think Rosol but 100 times WORSE
     
    #70
  21. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    17,554
    And get passed every time. You're putting way too much emphasis on "it's still grass but a bit slower". It's like a completely different surface now. While top baseliners of the 90's like Kuerten, Muster, Corretja, Moya literally skipped Wimbledon to avoid humiliation in the first round, nowadays people like Nadal and Djokovic are Wimbledon champions. It's night and day. The surface is not only way slower, the ball bounces up that much higher so it would be 2x harder for Sampras to employ his tactics. I'm not saying Sampras would lose every time against Nadal on grass but he wouldn't dominate them, NOT EVEN CLOSE. I'm not even considering the fact that Nadal and Djokovic are 10x tougher mentally than anyone Sampras has ever faced in his life.

    Once again, if it was possible to serve your way through your opponent on grass, Isner, Raonic and Karlovic would be notorious semi-finalists.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
    #71
  22. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567

    Roddick is a brokeback version of Goran on grass. If Goran couldn't beat Pete at wimbledon, Roddick would do what exactly? He has no net game, his movement is slow.

    See how Pete exploited that at the USO at 31 years of age. Thats what Sampras would do to Roddick at wimbledon
     
    #72
  23. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,980
    Location:
    U.S
    so you want me to show your crush sampras was owned 4-8 or 4-9 by a player off clay ( since he didn't meet anyone regularly on clay and was getting crushed by journeymen ? ) ........ you think he's that bad ?

    get freaking real ...... you haven't even watched any of those matches vs corretja, bruguera, ferrerira vs to see "how" they troubled sampras ....

    yeah, no , their h2h is tied ... and demolition was what fed did to canas when he got revenge in madrid 2007 by demolishing him .........
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
    #73
  24. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,980
    Location:
    U.S
    lol, what a joke ....firstly roddick was injured at that time ...google it, its documented ...... secondly roddick in 2002 wasn't the player he'd become later ....

    on grass, roddick is goran with a lesser game, but far more stronger mentally ...goran *did* beat pete at wimbledon in 92 and took him twice to 5 sets ... only choked both times ...
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
    #74
  25. President

    President Legend

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    7,062
    Location:
    Philadelphia
    Goran was a freaking headcase, he may have had more game than Roddick but Roddick has the heart of a champion. Roddick serves even better than Petros...of course Sampras would win the majority of the time but Roddick wouldn't get blown out.

    And I'm still waiting for you to retract your claim that Petros would have any chance against Nadal at RG.
     
    #75
  26. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567

    Goran won wimbledon in 2001 with STRONG mental toughness and nerves. Besides, sometimes mental toughness can't make up for supreme talent and weapons..

    And Roddick has NOTHING on grass in terms of the weapons Goran had. Sampras was also mentally tough as well. Dont sell out Pete's mental game here. Goran would have won ALOT of wimbledons if not for Sampras

    Roddick would struggle to even take a set off Pete at wimbledon.. He has much more limited mobility, and his net game is AWFUL as his his transition to the net game. Poor footwork as well. A losing proposition vs. a prime Sampras at wimbledon
     
    #76
  27. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    17,554
    Hilarious. Roddick was barely 20 at the time and wasn't half as good as he became a 1 year from then while Sampras had his last hot run in his career.

    And even there Roddick owned Sampras in the 2 previous meetings (I'm sure you'll say that 29-year old Sampras was too old to swing a racquet though haha)
     
    #77
  28. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    17,554
    The moment someone types "Goran" and "mental toughness" in one sentence, loses all credibility.
     
    #78
  29. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567


    Sampras didn't have the heart of a champion?. I don't care whats in Roddick's heart in this matter.. He doesn't have enough talent on grass to beat Pete at wimbledon in his prime.. not even close.
     
    #79
  30. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567
    Go back and watch 2001 wimbledon.
     
    #80
  31. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,980
    Location:
    U.S
    no, he wasn't that strong mentally even in 2001 ...messed up on a few key points ... just more determined then .....

    nothing in terms of weapons ? LOL, what a joke .... roddick serve in itself is a huge weapon ........ he had a darn good FH, clearly better than goran's as well ......

    without sampras, goran wins : wimbledon 94,95 and 98 ...
    without federer, roddick wins : wimbledon 03,04 and 09

    so yeah, don't see that much of difference ....
     
    #81
  32. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567

    Yep Roddick has a big serve.. But nothing big enough to back it up. He would have to come into the net vs. Pete... And we know how Roddick's net game is.. Along with footwork and movement and mobility.. HORRIBLE

    In fact, thats what killed Roddick vs. Roger.. Nothing to back his serve up to win
     
    #82
  33. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    17,554
    Which round did he face Sampras again?

    It's easy to dismiss Roddick (in comparison to Ivanisevic) when every single time he played well at Wimbledon, he got Federer in the end. Ivanisevic lucked out on that 2001 but LOL at claiming he was mentally tough.
     
    #83
  34. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567
    He beat Rafter and Roddick and I believe Safin. .. Why does it matter if he faced Sampras
     
    #84
  35. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    17,554
    So now Roddick is tough on grass? Btw Roddick was 18 at the time haha.

    It matters cause he didn't have to play his nemesis. Each time Roddick played well at Wimbledon sooner or later he ran into Federer unlike Ivanisevic who needed baby Federer to take out Sampras to have any chance at winning the title.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
    #85
  36. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,980
    Location:
    U.S

    so how the freaking' hell did he have close matches vs federer on grass in 2004 and 2009 ? federer who returns his serve that well and is his worst possible matchup ?

    fact is you are clueless ..... roddick's movement on grass is nowhere as bad as you make it out to be ...... and you are exaggerating goran's game as well .. his volleys could be sloppy many times, FH could go off course and he could be prone to DFing ....while a good mover, nowhere close to an elite mover on grass ...

    hell, players much worse than roddick have taken sets off sampras at wimbledon ... what roddick would need to do is hold serve and take his chances when it got close ....

    in 2004, roddick was in fact returning and moving well , his FH was brilliant..... in 2009, he was moving well, even his BH for once was pretty good .......
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
    #86
  37. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,980
    Location:
    U.S
    safin didn't do much of note on grass outside of his good run in 2008 ( where it was fed who beat him )

    roddick was 18-19 years old then and nowhere close to his peak ...
     
    #87
  38. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    17,554
    90's clay is hilarious.

    First he says: Roddick sucks on grass, Sampras would own him. But then he adds "look who Ivanisevic had to beat at 2001 Wimbledon - Roddick..."

    18-year old Roddick...

    HAHA
     
    #88
  39. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    17,554
    Beating Rafter was the only good win in that tournament, also beating Henman in the semis was pretty decent.

    Safin, Roddick or anyone else. No. Safin sucked on grass bar the occasional good run (2001 and 2008 Wimbledon, 2005 Halle - so 3 good tournaments in his career), Roddick was 18 at the time.
     
    #89
  40. President

    President Legend

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    7,062
    Location:
    Philadelphia
    Hewitt especially could have been a HUGE threat to Petros on grass. He leads their grass H2H 2-1 and Petros' one win was a hard fought 3 setter when Hewitt was 18. It's amazing that you think Rusty would have no chance vs Petros on grass.
     
    #90
  41. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567
    Wait so.. Beating Safin, Roddick, Rafter and Henman in one slam isn't impressive or something?

    Hell thats a tougher draw then 60-70 percent of the slams Fed has played his ENTIRE career.
     
    #91
  42. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    17,554
    Federer beat Roddick and Safin (bar 05 AO) in slams regularly. But of course when FEDERER beat Roddick in slams you were like "ah it's only Roddick", haha. Yeah...touhg for him? Nobody was tough for Federer in 2004-2007 except Nadal on clay but I guess for Ivanisevic grass giants like Safin and 18-year old Roddick were incredibly tough to beat.

    Henman was no match for Federer once he reached his prime. Rafter was the only uncertain point here but I remember they played in Halle in 2001 right before that Wimbledon and Rafter BARELY won that match 4-6 7-6 7-6.
     
    #92
  43. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,115
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    It was September 2001 when the courts were relayed as 100% Rye. 2002 was the strangest Wimbledon of all. There was nothing odd about the playing conditions at 2001 Wimbledon, even if there was a huge surprise champion in Goran Ivanisevic.

    http://www.livemint.com/Leisure/rwKA0N0h2E5EtCtX5JzcuI/Net-loss-End-of-the-Volleyer.html

    And as the article also mentions, the heavier and softer balls introduced in 1995, also made it harder for serve and volleyers. That was obviously done in response to the 1994 Wimbledon final, where the sets were dominated by big serves, very short to no rallies, and a tank job in the third set.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
    #93
  44. Goosehead

    Goosehead Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2012
    Messages:
    3,597
    Location:
    A bloke in Brighton, England.
    its no good dragging some stuff off the internet saying it was after wimby 2001, when we ve had stuff saying it was after 2000 wimby they changed the grass...what are you expecting ???..i cant help it if there are different versions of events..:confused::confused:

    anyway weather it was 2000 or 2001 it was ages ago that the courts were changed..and now we get loads more rallies so good news i say.:)
     
    #94
  45. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,567
    There was a post on here quite a few months that showed on the official Wimbledon website, that the wimbledon surface was indeed CHANGED in 2001
     
    #95
  46. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,115
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    It was changed in 2001, but after the 2001 Wimbledon tournament. 2002 Wimbledon was the one with the upsets, Henman complaining about the slow courts, baseliners like Nalbandian, Malisse, Sa and Lapentti getting deep into the tournament while serve and volleyers struggled. There was nothing odd about the 2001 Wimbledon playing conditions that was different from the immediate preceeding years.
     
    #96
  47. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    17,554
    It was changed in SEPTEMBER so AFTER WIMBLEDON.
     
    #97
  48. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,668
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Why does this Time article specifically refer to the grass being changed in 2001 before the Championships? It goes into some detail here. As to the rainy conditions, maybe there was a lot of rain before the tourney began, which made for a "dry" tournament played on saturated courts. See the underlined portion below. So this source contradicts the other source, correct? Also, this is a Time article and it does look complete and well-researched.

     
    #98
  49. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,115
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    There wasn't that much rain at 2001 Wimbledon until the Ivanisevic vs. Henman semi final saga. The only 2 rain delays before that that I can remember were early in the second set of the Hewitt vs. Dent match in the second round (where Dent was leading 6-1, 1-1), and the rain delay that postponed the Henman vs. Martin match overnight with Henman 1-2 behind in sets.

    "Exceptionally rainy", 2001 Wimbledon was not. Perhaps they are confusing 2001 with 1991. 1991 Wimbledon was the wettest Wimbledon I remember seeing, especially in the first week.
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2013
    #99
  50. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,668
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    That may be true Mustard as to the amount of rain during the tourney, but the article is clear about the fact that the 2001 Championships already had the "new grass". Maybe "exceptionally rainy" is an overstatement though.

     

Share This Page