... Here in Sweden we only have Extra Duty US Open balls. I tried the Regular Duty ball last week in New York and that regular duty ball is harder and faster then the extra duty ball.
I'd be surprised that the reg duty ball would feel harder, but I suppose it is conceivable. It could be that you were playing with the reg duty balls on a colder day -- this affects the internal pressure and the resiliency of the rubber and would make them feel harder. Perhaps it has a very slight effect on the felt as well.
The Wilson Championship ball feel harder, in general, that the Wilson USO balls. Are you sure that you were not using the cheaper Champ balls?
The regular duty Penn Champs, to me, feel a bit softer than the extra duty version.
I'm sorry for having an opinion and questions. I'm ashamed that I'm the only person on this public forum that questions professional tennis.
No shame is warranted. You are hardly the only person that questions professional tennis. There are many others, myself included. However, trying to use the fact that women use a slightly different (ITF-approved) ball for
some tournaments as a justification for unequal prize money is absurd. While many of us will agree that the men should receive greater payments for best of 5 matches, I doubt that you will find much support for your opinion about the ball difference.
Note that the current extra duty balls are a fairly recent development. They were primarily developed for longevity on the harsher hardcourt surfaces. It appears that they have also been sued to slow down the men's game.
I don't think this should be turned into an equality thing, but I do find it strange that they are using different balls. Whatever ball is best for that type of court should be used, regardless of differences between men's and women's play. I actually get ticked when a local club uses regular duty on indoor cement (though some people say those are good for indoor play) because the ball really slides low. My understanding was that regular duty should be for natural surfaces.
Not so strange really. The balls used for a particular event or surface has supposedly been selected to improve the quality of play (and the duration of rallies) for both the men's and women's games. With advancement in racquet technologies, the men's game during the 90s got to a point where it was very boring -- rallies often did not go past the serve or the return.
A number of countermeasures have tried & incorporated primarily to adjust to the changing men's game. Courts have been made slower and balls have been made brighter. The larger type 3 ball was also developed in the late 90s in an effort to slow down the men's game.
Not sure exactly when the current extra duty ball was developed and incorporated in pro tournaments. However, I do recall that some time back in the 90s, a different red label ball was used for some women's events. Given that a number of changes were made to suit the playing and viewing enjoyment of the men's game, why not allow this one (ball) difference to enhance the viewing/playing of the women's game?
