The puzzle of Isner's record on grass

[Mainad]

John Isner's record on grass is a bit of a puzzle. Newport is the only grasscourt event where he has done well winning 3 titles there.

Elsewhere, his grass record is pretty dismal. He has never made it past the 3rd round at Wimbledon and made just 1 quarter-final appearance at Queen's (no appearances in Halle).

Many of his fellow servebots have done a bit better than this. Raonic made back to back finals at Queen's and Wimbledon, Karlovic has a quarter-final showing at Wimbledon and a final at Queen's, Anderson has several 4th round appearances at Wimbledon and a final at Queen's. His fellow American big-server, Querrey made the semis of Wimbledon and is a former champion at Queen's!

With grass supposedly being especially favourable to players with a big serve, why is Isner of all people lagging behind many of his fellow servebots at the bigger grasscourt events. Why can he only turn it on for Newport?

Thoughts?

 

[Deleted member 512391]

There is nothing mysterious here, imo. Just because his serve is big doesn't mean that he's automatically a good grass court player. He's not a great athlete, his movement is poor and he's never had a great return, which is crucial for having success on grass.

 

[The Green Mile]

Not even going into his grass-court game, looking at his draws, the only poor losses were against Sela last year and maybe Almagro. Everything else can be explained reasonably well enough...

 

[True Fanerer]

My theory is his height hinders him on grass once a rally has started. He does well on serve and first shot, but after that he's at a disadvantage getting low for shots.

 

[Steve0904]

Like Martin J said. Nothing mysterious here. Anderson and Querrey aren't even servebots, and Karlovic actually has a decent volley so he comes in behind his serve a lot at Wimbledon. He's also able to hit the slice BH since he has a one hander whereas Isner is out of his element where the slice is concerned.

Raonic isn't really a servebot either, but at any rate he has a better return on grass than Isner. He moves a bit better too IMO. He probably has a better FH as well. I suppose that last one is debatable, but the point is, Isner really lumbers around a grass court. He's probably the worst natural mover/athlete on grass out of all the guys mentioned. And it bears mentioning again his return game is horrendous on grass. Many people severely underrate that aspect on grass. I think it was Sampras who once said that the return was more important than the serve on grass, or something to that effect.

Another thing I'd say is that the slice hurts Isner on grass. Getting down to those at 6'10+ (and not using S&V like Karlovic sometimes) is near impossible.

 

[zagor]

It's not really puzzling, servebots never did well at Wimbledon.

 

[Rago]

He's not a great athlete, his movement is poor and he's never had a great return, which is crucial for having success on grass.

It's not really puzzling, servebots never did well at Wimbledon.

Passing shots, atheticism and movement are precisely what separate guys like Sampras and Federer from these run of the mill generic servebots on grass.

 

[ibbi]

I'd say the low bounce is for sure a factor. The guy's 6'10! He can't get down to where he needs to. Karlovic can't either, but at least behind his serve he's aggressive and gets his ass to net.

 

[The Green Mile]

It's not really puzzling, servebots never did well at Wimbledon.

Sampras says hi.

 

[zagor]

Passing shots, atheticism and movement are precisely what separate guys like Sampras and Federer from these run of the mill generic servebots on grass.

Definitely, Sampras especially is underrated in that regard, mainly his ability to block back big serves with his BH and also hit passing shots off that wing. It was crucial to winning Wimbledon in the 90s and what held back a guy like Rafter, Krajicek was able to do it for one year when he was zoning but his BH return was often his weakness as well.

 

[Zhilady]

Aside from simple explanations like Isner just not being comfortable on the surface and not having a grasscourt game, there is also the matter of his second serve, which is arguably Isner’s biggest weapon and the best second serve the game has ever seen.

The reason Isner’s second serve is so lethal is because of the kick he can generate with it. And grass neutralizes that to a large extent, making what is perhaps Isner’s biggest weapon less effective.

 

[zagor]

Sampras says hi.

I don't even consider Ivanisevic a servebot (his athleticism and movement on grass was far above the likes of Isner and Karlovic) let alone someone like Sampras who had every shot in the book. He was Fed of the 90s whose main problem was that he wasn't comfortable moving on clay and didn't have endurance for it. On every other surface (including slow HC) he was more than holding his own even against the best baseliners of his era.

 

[Mainad]

Not even going into his grass-court game, looking at his draws, the only poor losses were against Sela last year and maybe Almagro. Everything else can be explained reasonably well enough...

At Wimbledon, he has also lost against the likes of Gulbis (who never made it passed the 3rd round either), De Bakker and Falla (he retired against Mannarino). He had some close encounters with Lopez, Cilic and Tsonga in recent years (several 5 setters) but could never prevail. I suppose it can be argued that Raonic and Anderson have better ground games although Isner has improved lately and has just won a Masters title (albeit on hardcourt) but Karlovic?

His Newport results would certainly indicate that he has the potential for grass on the bigger stages. Is he just unlucky at the other grass events?

 

[The Green Mile]

At Wimbledon, he has also lost against the likes of Gulbis (who never made it passed the 3rd round either), De Bakker and Falla (he retired against Mannarino). He had some close encounters with Lopez, Cilic and Tsonga in recent years (several 5 setters) but could never prevail. I suppose it can be argued that Raonic and Anderson have better ground games although Isner has improved lately and has just won a Masters title (albeit on hardcourt) but Karlovic?

His Newport results would certainly indicate that he has the potential for grass on the bigger stages. Is he just unlucky at the other grass events?

Gulbis 08 is not a bad loss, De Bakker is right after his marathon win over Mahut (0 aces) and Falla is also a tricky grass-court opponent has pushed Fed multiple times on the surface. Best of 5 is also a weakness.

 

[Deleted member 512391]

Not to mention that Gulbis pushed Nadal at his peak the very same year at Wimbledon, his toughest match prior to the final.

 

[zagor]

At Wimbledon, he has also lost against the likes of Gulbis (who never made it passed the 3rd round either), De Bakker and Falla (he retired against Mannarino). He had some close encounters with Lopez, Cilic and Tsonga in recent years (several 5 setters) but could never prevail. I suppose it can be argued that Raonic and Anderson have better ground games although Isner has improved lately and has just won a Masters title (albeit on hardcourt) but Karlovic?

His Newport results would certainly indicate that he has the potential for grass on the bigger stages. Is he just unlucky at the other grass events?

BO3 format just lends itself more to getting served off court, it's one of the reasons why Isner is much better even in masters events compared to slams.

Raonic and Anderson have much better groundgames than Isner, it's barely even a comparison. Anderson especially while being a bonafide mental midget (one of the biggest on tour) has much better groundies than Isner.

 

[tacou]

Grass negates his kick serve and he has a lot of trouble hittin ground strokes at his ankles. that said, the disparity between his three Newport titles & pretty much no good results at SW19 is kind of confusing.

 

[zagor]

Aside from simple explanations like Isner just not being comfortable on the surface and not having a grasscourt game, there is also the matter of his second serve, which is arguably Isner’s biggest weapon and the best second serve the game has ever seen.

The reason Isner’s second serve is so lethal is because of the kick he can generate with it. And grass neutralizes that to a large extent, making what is perhaps Isner’s biggest weapon less effective.

Rafter had a similar problem though I'd argue modern grass kicks far more than it did in the 90s/early 2000s.

Isner's problem at WImbledon is that in BO5 format the opponent eventually gets more comfortable returning your serve and it's hard to win several tiebreaks in a row consistently no matter how good of a server you are. You need atleast a solid return game for Wimbledon, it's the way it has always been.

 

[MugOpponent]

The faster court doesn't really help Isner much because his serve is already so effective. He actually loses an edge because faster surfaces elevate his opponents serve and hurt his return game. It's a net loss. That's why he's a pretty solid clay player. His serve is still robust but his ability to return serves is much better.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Like Martin J said. Nothing mysterious here. Anderson and Querrey aren't even servebots, and Karlovic actually has a decent volley so he comes in behind his serve a lot at Wimbledon. He's also able to hit the slice BH since he has a one hander whereas Isner is out of his element where the slice is concerned.

Raonic isn't really a servebot either, but at any rate he has a better return on grass than Isner. He moves a bit better too IMO. He probably has a better FH as well. I suppose that last one is debatable, but the point is, Isner really lumbers around a grass court. He's probably the worst natural mover/athlete on grass out of all the guys mentioned. And it bears mentioning again his return game is horrendous on grass. Many people severely underrate that aspect on grass. I think it was Sampras who once said that the return was more important than the serve on grass, or something to that effect.

Another thing I'd say is that the slice hurts Isner on grass. Getting down to those at 6'10+ (and not using S&V like Karlovic sometimes) is near impossible.

Peakovic is great proof of this. God I hated Djokovic matches knowing no matter how well Federer was serving, even on grass, that he was going to get into games inevitably/break him eventually.

 

[Steve0904]

Peakovic is great proof of this. God I hated Djokovic matches knowing no matter how well Federer was serving, even on grass, that he was going to get into games inevitably/break him eventually.

Yeah, at his peak, Djokovic arguably had the best combination skill wise on serve and return. Very hard to break under Becker, and probably a top 1-3 all time return game.

 

[TheFifthSet]

The low bounce, his return being crappy, and almost every match against a Top 50 player being a pick ‘em goes a long way in explaining it.

 

[Deleted member 512391]

Passing shots, atheticism and movement are precisely what separate guys like Sampras and Federer from these run of the mill generic servebots on grass.

Exactly. When you have a great athletes with huge serves, you get a dominant Wimbledon champions like Federer or Sampras. I would also include Borg here, who might not be as offensive-minded/explosive as the other two, but whose athleticism is arguably second to none and whose serve was a real weapon.

 

[tennis_pro]

His serve isn't good enough.

 

[Red Rick]

He doesn't serve and volley, and his serve is so big it doesn't help him that much on grass as it makes the +1 harder vs a good return. Kick serve is worse, he doesn't slice,

yada

yada

yada

yada

 

[Red Rick]

Peakovic is great proof of this. God I hated Djokovic matches knowing no matter how well Federer was serving, even on grass, that he was going to get into games inevitably/break him eventually.

Federer only has to blame himself for '14 and '15

Shouldn't have clobbered Roddick into retirment so Roddick could take out Djok for him at Wimbly '14 and '15.

Duh

 

[tennisaddict]

Isner is a BO3 player . He does not have the mental tenacity of even Jack Sock or a Querrey at the majors

 

[Atennisone]

There is nothing mysterious here, imo. Just because his serve is big doesn't mean that he's automatically a good grass court player.

He should be

 

[Tennisanity]

Why Isner is not good on grass is why Fed > Sampras on grass.

 

[BeatlesFan]

He should be

Roddick and Goran had the two biggest serves over a 15 year period of the pro game. Each only managed to win Wimbledon once each. If grass only required a big serve, then guys like Ivo, Rusedski and Raonic would all have won Wimbledon multiple times. Neither Djokovic or Nadal have especially big serves, but share 5 Wimbledon titles.

 

[Red Rick]

Roddick and Goran had the two biggest serves over a 15 year period of the pro game. Each only managed to win Wimbledon once each.

If only

Here I go again

 

[Deleted member 512391]

Roddick and Goran had the two biggest serves over a 15 year period of the pro game. Each only managed to win Wimbledon once each. If grass only required a big serve, then guys like Ivo, Rusedski and Raonic would all have won Wimbledon multiple times. Neither Djokovic or Nadal have especially big serves, but share 5 Wimbledon titles.

To be fair to both of them, they had to play against Wimbledon GOATs most of the time. And while Goran's problem was mental (he had the tools), Andy faced someone who's simply far superior and couldn't to much.

 

[Red Rick]

But really, people think about it wrong.

Firstly, this is about court speed

That means it's about time

- Serve gets more important and being good with little time gets more important
- serve, return and taking ball early gets more important
- footwork gets less important unless you specifically use it to play more aggressively

And bounce height is also important, and for some players it's more important than court speed. Roddick is a fast court player, while Raonic is low bouncing court player.

 

[Atennisone]

Roddick and Goran had the two biggest serves over a 15 year period of the pro game. Each only managed to win Wimbledon once each. If grass only required a big serve, then guys like Ivo, Rusedski and Raonic would all have won Wimbledon multiple times. Neither Djokovic or Nadal have especially big serves, but share 5 Wimbledon titles.

Well Goran was much better on Grass than other surfaces, and Roddick too. Djoko and Nadal have Grass as one of their worst surfaces, and it is only because they are incredibly good that they have WB. Grass dosen't only require big serves, but it helps servebots

 

[Mainad]

Roddick and Goran had the two biggest serves over a 15 year period of the pro game. Each only managed to win Wimbledon once each. If grass only required a big serve, then guys like Ivo, Rusedski and Raonic would all have won Wimbledon multiple times. Neither Djokovic or Nadal have especially big serves, but share 5 Wimbledon titles.

No doubt Roddick would bless your heart if he were to read this part of your post but, alas, it still wouldn't make it true.

 

[Sudacafan]

John Isner's record on grass is a bit of a puzzle. Newport is the only grasscourt event where he has done well winning 3 titles there.

Elsewhere, his grass record is pretty dismal. He has never made it past the 3rd round at Wimbledon and made just 1 quarter-final appearance at Queen's (no appearances in Halle).

Many of his fellow servebots have done a bit better than this. Raonic made back to back finals at Queen's and Wimbledon, Karlovic has a quarter-final showing at Wimbledon and a final at Queen's, Anderson has several 4th round appearances at Wimbledon and a final at Queen's. His fellow American big-server, Querrey made the semis of Wimbledon and is a former champion at Queen's!

With grass supposedly being especially favourable to players with a big serve, why is Isner of all people lagging behind many of his fellow servebots at the bigger grasscourt events. Why can he only turn it on for Newport?

Thoughts?

Isner wasted all his grasscourt useful life in that 2010 first round match against Mahut.

 

[mightyrick]

Isner only seems to do well in major tournaments in his home country. I think a lot of this is about being a product of American college tennis. A lot of this is simply Isner's mentality.

 

[Bukowski]

Grass doesnt suit him. He's a baseliner with below average volleys, transition game, and slice. He also has really big swings with a western grip on the FH side.

 

[EloQuent]

Isner is a BO3 player . He does not have the mental tenacity of even Jack Sock or a Querrey at the majors

what has Jack SUCK done at majors

 

[Crisp]

i believe inner plays his best tennis on clay as he has more time to hide his backhand and set up his forehand and his serve is still big. problem for him on clay is that him on his best surface is still not as good as others on clay.

 

[EloQuent]

Isner has a career W% of 63.9% on grass.
62.8% on HC, 54% on clay.

So grass is marginally his best surface. And clay by a big margin his worst. The reason he's never done well at Wimbledon is the same reason he's never done well at the other slams. He's just not that good.

 

[jaggy]

Southern boy wants to show the Yankees how good he is explains Newport. Probably hummed Dixie on changeovers.