View Single Post
Old 11-29-2012, 02:12 PM   #12
Clarky21
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 12,754
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Jr View Post
The problem is, most countries around the world have a majority of hard courts... it's what has developed over the years and it'd be hard to just dump a one clay court in a city as a stand-alone entity. Tennis centres almost all rely on out of tournament business and, without it, they're dead ducks financially.

Perhaps we should have one major on artificial grass if Toni's logic is to be applied with an even brush.

It's also worth considering that many of the hard courts have been slowed down so much they basically play as slow as clay did anyway - they're just harder to run on. Is it the speed or the hardness Toni is concerned about?

Maybe the situation could be rectified by, as Toni says, replacing a couple of hard court tournaments with clay ones.

In order for this to be fair they would have to be post US Open - Shanghai and Bercy for example. The current hard court schedule is split in two so why should clay get a straight run of tournaments all within 45 mins flying time from each other just for the benefit of clay court specialists? No, make the players adapt more during the season.In addition, when these couple of tournaments are changed to clay, the remaining hard court tournaments would all need to be sped up - some to early 90s conditions. Not doing that would be inherently unjust to those who aren't clay-court specialists - and the fans who are tiring of the lack of variety shown in the game today compared to the past.

But why should certain players who excel on clay be forced to adapt when hc specialsts don't have to adapt one bit? Just how much adaptation are hardcourters doing? None. It's not even close to being fair,but I don't expect the majority of the folks here to admit that considering Nadal is public enemy number one around here.
Clarky21 is offline   Reply With Quote