I've always heard that there are slow surfaces (clay courts) and fast surfaces (hard courts, grass and carpet). This is how we categorize surfaces in my country (and probably in Spain as well). When only 4 of the biggest 14 tournaments played each year are played on the first category of surfaces, I would say that the tour gives a clear advantage to the players who prefer fast surfaces.
I know that there are different speeds, and that the current surfaces are not lightning fast, far from it. No need to come with scales and all those things to categorize the surfaces. I've seen them enough on this forum. But if there are different types of hard courts and the ones used now are not very fast, you can say the same about clay. I live in Belgium and I used to play tournaments on clay and hard courts (or sometimes carpet). Believe me, there is nothing more different from a clay court than another clay court. Maybe it's difficult to believe for some of you, but the courts of the French Open are considered very fast, very good for the attackers (they have been sped up for the first time in the nineties to give more chances to fast court players), Rome courts have always been considered the fastest clay courts on tour. But it was before Madrid got played on clay... The average clay courts are much more difficult to play for the attackers than the ones used for the Masters 1000 and the French Open.
Some of you like to only see one part of the story. Yes, the fast courts (HC, grass) may not be that fast these days. But the slow surfaces (clay) are not very slow either. Remain 10 tournaments played on fast surfaces and 4 on slow surfaces amongst the 14 biggest tournaments played each year.
Last edited by reversef : 10-07-2012 at 05:26 AM.