AO 2018 court SPEED, looks slow

heard that it was same as before year, but looks slow to me, advantage to grinders like nadal and djokovic, not AGAIN! Slow courts are SO boring to watch, nadal is exploting these slow courts to his favor. Federer should be prepared to SLAY the field(mindset), no matter who, only way to win this
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
I have observed a universal tendency among a great percentage of Federer fans.

No matter what we get to observe, on ANY single tournament, in the previous matches we can see many Federer fans posting comments on social networks, Youtube, or tennis forums claiming things like "can the surface be any slower?". The only exception to this general tendency is when the court is so obviously fast that even Federer fans have to accept it with comments like "Shanghai at least this year seems decently fast".

The Slow Surface Conspiracy Theory (SSCT) already existed back in 2008 and 2009 when Federer fans complained about both Wimbledon's and Australian Open's speed to justify the losses against Nadal.

Why do we get to observe the SSCT on almost any tournament? Here is the answer: it is both an excuse and a form of escapism. With that procedure, it doesn't matter if Federer loses the tournament, it won't be his fault but the surface's speed. Everything is suppousedly an advantadge for Nadal and everything is a disadvantadge for Federer.

P.S.: FORTUNATELY NOT ALL FEDERER FANS ALWAYS COMPLAIN ABOUT THE SURFACE'S SPEED.
 
Last edited:

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
I have observed a universal tendency among a great percentage of Federer fans.

No matter what we get to observe, on ANY single tournament, in the previous matches we can see many Federer fans posting comments on social networks, Youtube, or tennis forums claiming things like "can the surface be any slower?". The only exception to this general tendency is when the court is so obviously fast that even Federer fans have to accept it with comments like "Shanghai at least this year seems decently fast".

The Slow Surface Conspiracy Theory (SSCT) already existed back in 2008 and 2009 when Federer fans complained about both Wimbledon's and Australian Open's speed to justify the losses against Nadal.

Why do we get to observe the SSCT on almost any tournament? Here is the answer: it is both an excuse and a form of escapism. With that procedure, it doesn't matter if Federer loses the tournament, it won't be his fault but the surfaces' speed. Everything is suppousedly an advantadge for Nadal and everything is a disadvantadge for Federer.

PD: FORTUNATELY NOT ALL FEDERER FANS ALWAYS COMPLAIN ABOUT THE SURFACE'S SPEED.

It's always like that. Better get an excuse ready if things don't go as planned.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
From what I heard Fed himself said the court is as fast as last year.

Fed and basically everyone else, that's aside from the fact that it's the bounce that matters for Fed the most, not court speed.

I've had dealings with OP in the past on the forum, the guy's a Nadal troll who often posts like an exaggerated parody of Fed fans. Of course people take the bait easily.
 

Meles

Bionic Poster
From what I heard Fed himself said the court is as fast as last year.
Thought I heard they changed to slower balls for 2018.
Confused04.gif
 
D

Deleted member 77403

Guest
Court looks as fast as last year to me. Significantly faster than USO 2017 court.
 
If it's a universal tendency among them, it must infect every single Federer fan! :)

(I do agree with you, actually).

I have observed a universal tendency among a great percentage of Federer fans.

No matter what we get to observe, on ANY single tournament, in the previous matches we can see many Federer fans posting comments on social networks, Youtube, or tennis forums claiming things like "can the surface be any slower?". The only exception to this general tendency is when the court is so obviously fast that even Federer fans have to accept it with comments like "Shanghai at least this year seems decently fast".

The Slow Surface Conspiracy Theory (SSCT) already existed back in 2008 and 2009 when Federer fans complained about both Wimbledon's and Australian Open's speed to justify the losses against Nadal.

Why do we get to observe the SSCT on almost any tournament? Here is the answer: it is both an excuse and a form of escapism. With that procedure, it doesn't matter if Federer loses the tournament, it won't be his fault but the surfaces' speed. Everything is suppousedly an advantadge for Nadal and everything is a disadvantadge for Federer.

P.S.: FORTUNATELY NOT ALL FEDERER FANS ALWAYS COMPLAIN ABOUT THE SURFACE'S SPEED.
 

axlrose

Professional
What are you talking about? As fast as last year? Are you kidding me, because there were 2 types of surfaces they used last year.

The first was super slow, applied from the first round until the middle of the last set in the final. That's why fast-court God Federer struggled against the like of Wawrinka, Nishikori and led by Nadal.

The second one was lightning fast, we all know how great Fed is on a true hard court, and the rest was history.
 
Last edited:

justasport

Professional
Watched my first ever live Federer match and I will tell you the truth about the court. Craig Tiley has said countless times that the court on Rod Laver Arena is as fast or slightly faster then last year. To me it looks like the fastest court in the world along with Shanghai. I have got to watch tons of practices this past week and all the players are talking not only about how quick the courts are this year (especially Rod Laver Arena), but also that the court is skidding and not jumping up very much at all. That's coming straight from the pros, and from watching the matches I agree with them totally. In my opinion this court plays very much if not identical to the court at Shanghai from last year. And it will only get quicker as the tournament goes along. Do you all remember how the US Open court played before they slowed it down? Well that's how this court on RLA is playing.
 

Tommy Haas

Hall of Fame
If the courts really are slower this year then all the better for Nadal and I hope he wins it and has the double career grand slam in the bag.

Federer can play until he's in his 40s like Connors and finish his career with 30 slams. I don't think Nadal can catch him, so they'll each have their own unique accomplishments to be proud of.

Nadal: La Decima, DCGS, OG in singles.
Federer: Most slam singles titles ever.
 

fedtennisphan

Hall of Fame
I have observed a universal tendency among a great percentage of Federer fans.

No matter what we get to observe, on ANY single tournament, in the previous matches we can see many Federer fans posting comments on social networks, Youtube, or tennis forums claiming things like "can the surface be any slower?". The only exception to this general tendency is when the court is so obviously fast that even Federer fans have to accept it with comments like "Shanghai at least this year seems decently fast".

The Slow Surface Conspiracy Theory (SSCT) already existed back in 2008 and 2009 when Federer fans complained about both Wimbledon's and Australian Open's speed to justify the losses against Nadal.

Why do we get to observe the SSCT on almost any tournament? Here is the answer: it is both an excuse and a form of escapism. With that procedure, it doesn't matter if Federer loses the tournament, it won't be his fault but the surfaces' speed. Everything is suppousedly an advantadge for Nadal and everything is a disadvantadge for Federer.

P.S.: FORTUNATELY NOT ALL FEDERER FANS ALWAYS COMPLAIN ABOUT THE SURFACE'S SPEED.

There is a universal tendency for Fedhaters to get salty win they are scared Federer will win or has won.
 

Slightly D1

Professional
Sure the courts aren't as fast as they allegedly were in the 1990's but I don't think the game would be enjoyable with those sorts of speeds paired with the power and racket technology of today. The way Fed fans complain almost every tournament makes it almost seem as if they have their complaint typed up even before any of the pro's share their thoughts on the court's playability.
 
Last edited:

zagor

Bionic Poster
Height of bounce is where court speed comes from...

Not completely. As far as I understand it, there's court speed (how much speed groundstroke/serve loses in contact with it), there's height of the bounce and outside factors (weather, altitude, type of balls used) which all together contribute to whether playing conditions are fast or not. Basically, horizontal and vertical speed.

WTF O2 arena and Hamburg are tournaments often described as low bouncing but slow.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
Sure the courts aren't as fast as the allegedly were in the 1990's but I don't think the game would be enjoyable with those sorts of speeds paired with the power and racket technology of today. The way Fed fans complain almost every tournament makes it almost seem as if they have their complaint typed up even before any of the pro's share their thoughts on the court's playability.

Fed fans aren't complaining about AO speed this year. Other tournaments sure, they definitely are.

As for what is enjoyable, that's down to subjective taste.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
Not completely. As far as I understand it, there's court speed (how much speed groundstroke/serve loses in contact with it), there's height of the bounce and outside factors (weather, altitude, type of balls used) which all together contribute to whether playing conditions are fast or not. Basically, horizontal and vertical speed.

WTF O2 arena and Hamburg are tournaments often described as low bouncing but slow.

Yeh. If the ball moves at the same speed after the bounce more or less but bounces higher then by definition it will reach the racket later because more distance is travelled (assuming player maintains position)... yet it's but one part of the equation, as you've elucidated.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
It's always like that. Better get an excuse ready if things don't go as planned.

What will your excuse or excuses be if things don't go according to plan? Faster courts, elbow, arm, wrist, marital problems, chlamydia, food poisoning, bird flu, etc. etc?

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
 
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
Bounce height is separate from court speed, but a lower bounce will contribute to making the court "play faster". Both the actual speed of the court surface and the bounce height affect how much time the returner has (i.e. the speed the court is playing at in effect.)
 

Slightly D1

Professional
Fed fans aren't complaining about AO speed this year. Other tournaments sure, they definitely are.

As for what is enjoyable, that's down to subjective taste.
I mean this entire thread was started by complaining about the speed of the courts...?

And I agree with you on that, I just think that if the courts were too fast you would see serve bots ending points in less than 3 shots with power tennis instead of shot making and strategy.
 

TearTheRoofOff

G.O.A.T.
It's largely about how much velocity in the Y and X components the ball conserves upon contact with the court, with some drag factor applied by the climate.

EDIT: Though (-)Z is traditionally considered for the direction of gravity.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
I mean this entire thread was started by complaining about the speed of the courts...?

You said Fed fans, plural. Even if the OP was a Fed fan, it's basically one thread (with all of the Fed fans participating disagreeing with him).

And I agree with you on that, I just think that if the courts were too fast you would see serve bots ending points in less than 3 shots with power tennis instead of shot making and strategy.

Maybe but as things stand now you see the exact same type of topspin baseline tennis in every tournament all year long but select few.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
It's largely about how much velocity in the Y and X components the ball conserves upon contact with the court, with some drag factor applied by the climate.

EDIT: Though (-)Z is traditionally considered for the direction of gravity.

Which, as far as I recall, is measured for the court pace index. But are conditions (assume same climate) "faster" with a heavy (compared to norm) X axis component or Y axis component. I'm not sure about this, because though one might intuit that a higher bounce leads to what appear like slower conditions, providing the surface is still suitably fast it would also lead to less suffocating play due to one having more control over one's destiny in the rallies with aggression through having time to set up optimal mechanics and court positioning (preferable bounce height given prevailing tennis styles and mechanics), leading to more winners; but if true, this dynamic likely has a tipping point on the spectrum of fast-slow.
 
Last edited:

ADuck

Legend
Maybe but as things stand now you see the exact same type of topspin baseline tennis in every tournament all year long but select few.
Topspin baseline is good in moderation like anything else. But do you really think the surface speed is the leading contributing factor in deciding the quality of tennis? We've seen amazing matches in all kinds of conditions and speeds, and probably most of them on slower surfaces. I think if there's a drop of quality in recent years it's more so due to the lack of upcoming quality players.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
Topspin baseline is good in moderation like anything else. But do you really think the surface speed is the leading contributing factor in deciding the quality of tennis? We've seen amazing matches in all kinds of conditions and speeds, and probably most of them on slower surfaces. I think if there's a drop of quality in recent years it's more so due to the lack of upcoming quality players.

I don't think the quality of the baseline tennis is in question unless by quality you mean of qualities and type. More likely implied is the death of variety in the game.
 
D

Deleted member 3771

Guest
heard that it was same as before year, but looks slow to me, advantage to grinders like nadal and djokovic, not AGAIN! Slow courts are SO boring to watch, nadal is exploting these slow courts to his favor. Federer should be prepared to SLAY the field(mindset), no matter who, only way to win this


check your tv settings :cool:
 

ADuck

Legend
I don't think the quality of the baseline tennis is in question unless by quality you mean of qualities and type. More likely implied is the death of variety in the game.
What has changed in the past 10 years though? And if there has been less and less variety every year in the last 10 years I wouldn't chalk that up to surface speeds. For all this talk of lack of variety, there are still 3 surfaces which are played on which are all very different. The slams are all different. The only problem I see is the masters.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
What has changed in the past 10 years though? And if there has been less and less variety every year in the last 10 years I wouldn't chalk that up to surface speeds. For all this talk of lack of variety, there are still 3 surfaces which are played on which are all very different. The slams are all different. The only problem I see is the masters.

I don't really know. There's data for recent years but I haven't found much going that far back. The overall speed of the tour is lopsided towards the slow if we treat medium as some fair middle ground according to court pace index (which is up for debate). I don't doubt that surface changes have an effect but that it's probably not as significant as changes that happen at the ground level in coaching (which is an effect of changing courts but only partially) nor as significant as the current gens having had 15 or so years to master and understand poly strings, and that rising gens are now pretty much born into learning with poly.

Generally, I think the standard of tennis, on aggregate, improves over time rather than deteriorate.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
What has changed in the past 10 years though? And if there has been less and less variety every year in the last 10 years I wouldn't chalk that up to surface speeds. For all this talk of lack of variety, there are still 3 surfaces which are played on which are all very different. The slams are all different. The only problem I see is the masters.

that's a response from someone who hasn't seen much tennis in the years prior to 2005 or so.
there's quite less variety, more vanilla type baseliners who just want to pound away --- thanks due to a variety of factors --- speed of the courts, speeds, coaching.

less players with their own unique styles, less SnVers, less net play.
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
Not completely. As far as I understand it, there's court speed (how much speed groundstroke/serve loses in contact with it), there's height of the bounce and outside factors (weather, altitude, type of balls used) which all together contribute to whether playing conditions are fast or not. Basically, horizontal and vertical speed.

WTF O2 arena and Hamburg are tournaments often described as low bouncing but slow.
It's a long read:

https://fogmountaintennis.wordpress.com/

This is long and REALLY complicated. It took me a couple days to take it all in.

Cutting to the chase. Shots with a high amount of topspin are not affected by court surface because they are literally rolling on the court when they hit. Flat shots differ more, and backspin difference is huge. So a great deal of grit in a HC will make this factor close to clay. If there is a huge amount of grit, enough to grip the ball a great deal, clay and HCs will play very similarly IF the bounce is the same.

A very smooth, slippery HC will grip the ball more like grass. So a very slippery, low bouncing HC will have a lot in common with grass. High bouncing, gritty HC, a lot like clay.

But the thing we notice first, and which is the main thing that makes grass stats always different, are the lower height of the bounce combined with unpredictability. The ball bounces weird. To some extent this happens on clay too, as it clumps, and before it is raked again, but the high bounce gives a lot of time.

The bounce itself is the largest factor because it determines how long the ball will be in the air. You can only hit the ball between the time it hits the court and when it drops to the ground. This time is related to the height of the bounce, so the lower the bounce, the more the player perceives it as "fast" because he has less time to react. This is why we think of indoor courts as so fast, and why they are the closest thing to playing like grass, and thus Fed's favorite surface, and Nadal's least favorite.
 

ADuck

Legend
I don't really know. There's data for recent years but I haven't found much going that far back. The overall speed of the tour is lopsided towards the slow if we treat medium as some fair middle ground according to court pace index (which is up for debate). I don't doubt that surface changes have an effect but that it's probably not as significant as changes that happen at the ground level in coaching (which is an effect of changing courts but only partially) nor as significant as the current gens having had 15 or so years to master and understand poly strings, and that rising gens are now pretty much born into learning with poly.

Generally, I think the standard of tennis, on aggregate, improves over time rather than deteriorate.
that's a response from someone who hasn't seen much tennis in the years prior to 2005 or so.
there's quite less variety, more vanilla type baseliners who just want to pound away --- thanks due to a variety of factors --- speed of the courts, speeds, coaching.

less players with their own unique styles, less SnVers, less net play.
Slow compared to what though? There's far more power in today's game so despite the slower surface speeds, the game is still played as fast as 20 years ago. Surface speeds are not indicative in determining how fast the game is played. There's other factors like what tennis racket you're using and what surface type are you playing on. Look at how slow everything was back when Laver was playing even. The game is just moving on naturally with each technological change. So if you're playing with bigger and more powerful rackets, there's naturally not going to be as much room for variety in the surface speeds without making tennis broken.
 
Top