Enough is enough. Speed the courts up.

[The Bawss]

Of late, 2 matches stand out as having sinfully unfair outcomes:

Djokovic vs. Wawrinka:

Wawrinka played amazing offensive tennis, the man was in the zone. Helas, try as he might, there no getting past Djokovic's defence. We all know just how hard Stan can smack a ball yet Djokovic was easily getting to many of Stan's shots on the bed of molasses that is Rod Laver area. As Novak hit the winning point, the air was palpably thick with injustice.

Murray vs. Simon:

Simon basically got blown off the court. How is this possible you may ask? Good question. It turns out that Simon all but ran himself to death in his previous match against Gael "The clown" Monfils on a court which seemed to be fashioned out of treacle. Murray however breezed through his cake draw match in about 30 minutes courtesy of no-name/weak/choke-artist opposition. The unfairness was certainly not lost on me as I booed my TV while the early-morning light kissed my frowning face.



For god's sake. Speed up the courts. Bring back rebound ace.

[Duncan Bell]

Inconsistency in your post. If the courts were as slow as you make out, Simon wouldn't have to run around at all in his match against Murray. He'd gently stroll up to the ball before stroking it back over the net.

[always_crosscourt]

No. Pipe down, mug.

[killerboi2]

It was sinfully unfair that Murray beat Simon? lol dear oh dear....

[Gonzo_style]

Enough is enough. Delete this thread

[Russeljones]

Originally Posted by The Bawss

Of late, 2 matches stand out as having sinfully unfair outcomes:

Djokovic vs. Wawrinka:

Wawrinka played amazing offensive tennis, the man was in the zone. Helas, try as he might, there no getting past Djokovic's defence. We all know just how hard Stan can smack a ball yet Djokovic was easily getting to many of Stan's shots on the bed of molasses that is Rod Laver area. As Novak hit the winning point, the air was palpably thick with injustice.

Murray vs. Simon:

Simon basically got blown off the court. How is this possible you may ask? Good question. It turns out that Simon all but ran himself to death in his previous match against Gael "The clown" Monfils on a court which seemed to be fashioned out of treacle. Murray however breezed through his cake draw match in about 30 minutes courtesy of no-name/weak/choke-artist opposition. The unfairness was certainly not lost on me as I booed my TV while the early-morning light kissed my frowning face.



For god's sake. Speed up the courts. Bring back rebound ace.

I agree about Djokovic benefited big time from the slow court speeds but Simon couldn't outplay Monfils and his physical state is the price he paid for that.

[Dark Magician]

Murray would have won against Simon anyway.

[corners]

The problem is that if you speed up the courts Raonic might beat Fed despite being an inferior player and hitting three times as many unforced errors. Give him an extra free point per service game with an ace or unreturnable by speeding up the courts and he's basically unbreakable.

Remember the original reason they slowed down the courts was that the serve was allowing one-dimensional players to defeat those with much better all-around games. Now the defensive baseline style has taken over, and it is tiresome, but there are so many huge serves on tour right now that they might take over the game again if the courts are sped up.

Or maybe not. US Open plays nice. Cincy was great. Even the medium speed but low-bouncing courts at the WTF produced good tennis. This slow hardcourt stuff sucks, though - I completely agree with you about that. Fake clay that's hard on the body. What's the point?

[vandre]

Originally Posted by corners

Remember the original reason they slowed down the courts was that the serve was allowing one-dimensional players to defeat those with much better all-around games. Now the defensive baseline style has taken over, and it is tiresome, but there are so many huge serves on tour right now that they might take over the game again if the courts are sped up.

exactly. it seems like the complaint is "player's have adapted their style of play to the surface" which is what tennis players have done since the beginning of time (errr...tennis). even when most events were played on grass or clay, players would adapt to the surface. how many years did lendl blow off a huge chunk of the clay court season (including the french open) to work on his grass court game?

let's say the "powers that be" read this thread and think you're on to something so they agree to speed up surfaces. the question is what if anything will be done to brunt the power of the modern game? with these players and this technology (i.e. string), how long will it be before most people are fed up with points that are won in one shot and the "long rallies" are anything more than 3 shots total? how long will it be before players could play 2 complete games in the time a changeover takes? how much of this tennis would it take for you to become bored with it. how fun will it be to watch a match where the winner has 68 winners and 59 ues?

[always_crosscourt]

Bawss, you tool, wanna explain why Murray does well on 'fast' surfaces such as Cinci?

Simon wouldn't have won if they were playing on ice.

[forzamilan90]

Speed ***** up and people like the Nadal and Djoko won't be as successful

[Russeljones]

Originally Posted by corners

The problem is that if you speed up the courts Raonic might beat Fed despite being an inferior player and hitting three times as many unforced errors. Give him an extra free point per service game with an ace or unreturnable by speeding up the courts and he's basically unbreakable.

Remember the original reason they slowed down the courts was that the serve was allowing one-dimensional players to defeat those with much better all-around games. Now the defensive baseline style has taken over, and it is tiresome, but there are so many huge serves on tour right now that they might take over the game again if the courts are sped up.

Or maybe not. US Open plays nice. Cincy was great. Even the medium speed but low-bouncing courts at the WTF produced good tennis. This slow hardcourt stuff sucks, though - I completely agree with you about that. Fake clay that's hard on the body. What's the point?

Rubbish argument. Raonic would lose even worse if courts were faster.

[Cosmic_Colin]

Originally Posted by corners

The problem is that if you speed up the courts Raonic might beat Fed despite being an inferior player and hitting three times as many unforced errors. Give him an extra free point per service game with an ace or unreturnable by speeding up the courts and he's basically unbreakable.

Remember the original reason they slowed down the courts was that the serve was allowing one-dimensional players to defeat those with much better all-around games. Now the defensive baseline style has taken over, and it is tiresome, but there are so many huge serves on tour right now that they might take over the game again if the courts are sped up.

Or maybe not. US Open plays nice. Cincy was great. Even the medium speed but low-bouncing courts at the WTF produced good tennis. This slow hardcourt stuff sucks, though - I completely agree with you about that. Fake clay that's hard on the body. What's the point?

I agree. It's about balance and variety.

Make a few of the slow courts medium (including AO), make a few of the medium courts fast. That would be satisfactory.

[ark_28]

We need to speed up to courts right now it's become a
Grind fest serve and volley tennis it's gone it's really sad!

[The Bawss]

Originally Posted by Cosmic_Colin

I agree. It's about balance and variety.

Make a few of the slow courts medium (including AO), make a few of the medium courts fast. That would be satisfactory.

This is what I meant. I didn't mean speed everything up including clay. Let the clay players have their clay titles and the grass players have the grass titles but not both...unless you are truly special like Borg.

[RF20Lennon]

The took out rebound ace because part of the court was melting due to the heat of Australia. You can speed up Plexicushion by not adding too much sand which they did this year and have sped it up a bit

[jxs653]

Originally Posted by The Bawss

Djokovic vs. Wawrinka:

Wawrinka played amazing offensive tennis, the man was in the zone. Helas, try as he might, there no getting past Djokovic's defence.

Maybe Wawrinka was in the zone because the court was slow. If the court was fast, Wawrinka might not have been in the zone and might have not played that well, and would have still lost to Djoko. People say that Djoko benefitted from slow court, but who knows? Wawrinka was benefitted even more from the slow court for his level of play that day.

So question is, who do you think prefers fast court, Djoko or Wawrinka? If the answer is Djoko, then speeding up the court would have helped Djokovic than Wawrinka.

[merwy]

OP it doesn't look like anyone agrees with you here. I'm so used to today's court speed that I've almost forgotten what it feels like to have fast courts. So I don't know how I feel about changing all the slow hard courts back to fast ones. It would change tennis drastically, as Nadal, Murray and Djokovic would have significantly less succes. They'd still be the top 4 but, wouldn't dominate as much. More prone to upsets to the likes of Tsonga and Berdych or big servers.

But I do completely agree with the 2 examples that you posted. I did feel the injustice when Wawrinka lost to Djokovic and I even see what you mean with the Simon example. On a fast court, Simon would probably stand even less of a chance against Murray and Monfils (although it would hurt them too). But that's not what you're talking about right now. It's about the fact that one match can drain a player like that. The higher seeded players draw weaker players and thus waste less energy. Players like Simon, Chardy and Anderson have to battle it out against equal or better players like Monfils, Delpo and Verdasco. What chance of an upset do these tired players have against a fit top 4?

[Mick3391]

Originally Posted by The Bawss

Of late, 2 matches stand out as having sinfully unfair outcomes:

Djokovic vs. Wawrinka:

Wawrinka played amazing offensive tennis, the man was in the zone. Helas, try as he might, there no getting past Djokovic's defence. We all know just how hard Stan can smack a ball yet Djokovic was easily getting to many of Stan's shots on the bed of molasses that is Rod Laver area. As Novak hit the winning point, the air was palpably thick with injustice.

Murray vs. Simon:

Simon basically got blown off the court. How is this possible you may ask? Good question. It turns out that Simon all but ran himself to death in his previous match against Gael "The clown" Monfils on a court which seemed to be fashioned out of treacle. Murray however breezed through his cake draw match in about 30 minutes courtesy of no-name/weak/choke-artist opposition. The unfairness was certainly not lost on me as I booed my TV while the early-morning light kissed my frowning face.



For god's sake. Speed up the courts. Bring back rebound ace.

It's not a bad thread at all. Think, if courts were like they were just in the 90's, things WOULD BE much different.

While I don't agree with how this thread was set up, there is alot of truth in it. Does ANYONE HERE really get excited or even watch a Murray match? Boring, whoever is in better shape wins.

I hate to admit though, seeing the Fed-Milos serve fest last night, it was boring to an extent, incredible perfect game by Fed but a bit boring.

I have the answer: One GS that is total fast court, then medium, then clay, etc. Everyone gets their chances, then debates about who the best go away, "Fed's best fast court", "Nadal best clay", etc.

By the way, no injustice with Wawrinka match, he WON MOST OF THE GAMES, lost by one point that could have gone either way, Djoke didn't beat him as in BEAT HIM, but he did win by the skin of his teeth.

[ultradr]

Originally Posted by The Bawss

For god's sake. Speed up the courts. Bring back rebound ace.

AO claimed current Plexicushion is faster than rebound ace and when they switched, they also claimed AO is 2nd fast slam surfaces after US Open.