Crazy court for the US-Swiss Davis cup tie

[svijk]

High unpredictable bounce worked right into the hands of Isner against Fed...seemed like a badly laid fast clay court. Gimlestob even went as far as saying that the person who laid the court should never get work again.....the home court advantage blew up on their face !! Bad strategy by the Swiss.

[brc444]

It seems that these one-time inside clay courts for Davis Cup are always in poor condition. Is the problem due to being inside versus outside -- difficult to build and maintain inside? Whats the solution?

[BrooklynNY]

Hmm... good try.

They were beaten by guys who seemingly wanted to win more.

Court is just as bad for everyone. Especially Mardy Fish with his mass deceleration forehand, and Isner's strokes which are extremely rigid.

The better players should win on a bad court, as they have more weapons and game. Isner played lights out, going for his serve and going for the forehand.

This is called 'taking the racquet out of your opponents hands'

[Cup8489]

Originally Posted by brc444

It seems that these one-time inside clay courts for Davis Cup are always in poor condition. Is the problem due to being inside versus outside -- difficult to build and maintain inside? Whats the solution?

I think it was the speed which they put it together... not enough time to iron out the kinks.

I remember a few years back, I wanna say 2008, the US played Spain on outdoor clay in Madrid, and the brick was actually stripping off the court while Querry-Nadal was on.. and it wasn't playing much like red clay, either.

They're just rushed... it's too bad.

[woodrow1029]

I worked a Davis Cup tie in Brazil a few years ago, and the court was a temporary clay court put up in the parking lot of a shopping center. They finished installing the court on Wednesday of the week of the tie. It rained Wednesday night and a good part of the day on Thursday. The court was not playable until Sunday, and when we started playing, the court was TERRIBLE! One of the people installing the court said that a good clay court should be in place for 6-8 weeks minimum without being played on to be in a reasonable condition to play a Davis Cup level match. And they weren't allowed to start building it until about 10 days before the tie was to start.

[Andres]

You can't just add a layer of pulverized bricks on a concrete floor and call that a claycourt. A claycourt is made out of several different layers of different materials, including compacted clay, small rocks, bigger rocks. And its quite deep. It's the compacted clay surface what absorbs the impact, not the thin layers of clay on top.

Germany laid down red clay on top of a basketball parquet floor. Needless to say it didn't play like a claycourt at all. It was the lowest bounce ever seen on a clay court.

That's what happens after a heavy heavy rain. The claycourt becomes muddy. When the mud dries up, it plays pretty much like a hardcourt.

[TTMR]

Originally Posted by BrooklynNY

Hmm... good try.

They were beaten by guys who seemingly wanted to win more.

Court is just as bad for everyone. Especially Mardy Fish with his mass deceleration forehand, and Isner's strokes which are extremely rigid.

The better players should win on a bad court, as they have more weapons and game. Isner played lights out, going for his serve and going for the forehand.

This is called 'taking the racquet out of your opponents hands'

Nah, the court surface is always working against Federer (even when he chooses it). When Federer is competing, he is battling two opponents: the other player, and the court surface. The fact he is able to win despite today's surfaces only amplifies his greatness.

[rufus_smith]

IMHO, playing indoors on any surface gave big servers like Fish and Isner the advantage. No sun or wind to ruin their serves. Meanwhile Wawrinka's weak second serve sat up like a sitting duck . Only chance Swiss had was to make an Australian Open-like slow hardcourt. At least the bounces would be true on the baseline rallies which would help the Swiss players a bit.

[Cfidave]

Isner played lights out tennis. Went for everything, and most went in. The court probably helped him, by giving him more time on the goundies. I very much doubt he is capable of playing that kind of high risk tennis on any kind of consistent basis. If he could, he would not be ranked 17. Somewhat unlucky for Fed.

[FlashFlare11]

Originally Posted by TTMR

Nah, the court surface is always working against Federer (even when he chooses it). When Federer is competing, he is battling two opponents: the other player, and the court surface. The fact he is able to win despite today's surfaces only amplifies his greatness.

I think you've gone beyond trolling and actually believe the ridiculous stuff you say. I mean, that must be the only reason you say the stuff you do.

Either that, or you're the biggest trolling Federer fan on this board.

[elpolaco84]

there was no option they had to play indoors

[Bartelby]

It was also played at altitude.

[devila]

Originally Posted by rufus_smith

IMHO, playing indoors on any surface gave big servers like Fish and Isner the advantage. No sun or wind to ruin their serves. Meanwhile Wawrinka's weak second serve sat up like a sitting duck . Only chance Swiss had was to make an Australian Open-like slow hardcourt. At least the bounces would be true on the baseline rallies which would help the Swiss players a bit.

only federer gets to win october events.

with the condition that djoker stops fighting and isner ignores the scores and tanks his matches with federer.

[elpolaco84]

I think it is much more easier/safer to make a really slow hard court if time is a factor rather than a tricky Clay court