Are rec players' hard courts still Sampras-era fast?

[AtomicForehand]

With all the talk on the other forums about how much hard courts on the pro tour have been slowed down in recent years to lengthen rallies and keep matches from being two- or three-stroke serve/volley fests, it made me wonder whether we poor rec players are having to compete with improved, "faster" technology in our equipment while still playing on a surface that is as fast as it used to be 20+ years ago.

I mean, the vast majority of public facilities and even clubs will not be tinkering with their surfaces and retooling the bounce. Many places are lucky even to get their cracks repaired. I would imagine that the formula for the surfaces of the great majority of hard courts in North America (and probably beyond) is as fast as ever it was.

Thoughts?

 

[PhrygianDominant]

I have always wondered about this. I am hoping that someone with court construction and finishing knowledge chimes in.

 

[spaceman_spiff]

I had the opposite problem as a teenager. Around 1990, my home town (Tulsa, OK) resurfaced pretty much all of the public courts with a much slower surface, basically just putting more sand in the paint.

So on TV, everyone was playing S&V on fast courts. But at home, we were all playing "modern" tennis, slugging it out from the baseline on slow courts.

Maybe that's why I don't really see anything modern in today's "modern" tennis.

 

[North]

I had the opposite problem as a teenager. Around 1990, my home town (Tulsa, OK) resurfaced pretty much all of the public courts with a much slower surface, basically just putting more sand in the paint.

Yes - I wondered if this was a local phenomenon where I live or was more widespread.

I notice a lot of places doing that - adding more sand to the mix - with hard courts over the past 5-10 yrs. You can tell when you play but you can also just touch the courts and feel many of them grainier and, therefore, slower. It just makes for boring long drawn out rallies as even out of shape people can get to balls that would be winners on decently fast courts.

 

[amorris525]

A lot of courts near my house are starting to use this crappy "roll on" red and green surface. This surface is slow and sometimes has air bubbles on the court. Very bad surface. Other courts have gone to the us open colored courts and these are more gritty, in my opinion.

 

[spaceman_spiff]

Yes - I wondered if this was a local phenomenon where I live or was more widespread.

I notice a lot of places doing that - adding more sand to the mix - with hard courts over the past 5-10 yrs. You can tell when you play but you can also just touch the courts and feel many of them grainier and, therefore, slower. It just makes for boring long drawn out rallies as even out of shape people can get to balls that would be winners on decently fast courts.

It also tears your shoes up a lot faster than anything else. I think it's the reason shoe companies started doing the 6-month warranty. (I had a pair of the first Adidas shoes with the 6-month deal back in the spring of 1993.)

Kick serves, heavy topspin groundstrokes, beating your opponent in a war of attrition; that's the type of tennis my opponents and I were playing 20 years ago.

 

[schmke]

My club had reasonably fast "green/red" indoor hard courts until last week when they were resurfaced and we now have the gritty/slow US Open "blue/green" courts. The same thing happened at a local high school last summer when they resurfaced their courts.

That seems to be the trend here at least, every new set of courts or every resurface goes to these slower courts. I'm sure part of it is to be just like the US Open but a bigger part is if is probably that the thought is that slower courts are easier to play on for the average club player, and the junior programs run at clubs here have to groom players in the modern style so need slow gritty courts for that.

It is all very sad IMHO. Yes, my kick serve has more bite, but there is less and less reward for a serve and volley or attacking game and it takes all the variety out of the game of tennis and tries to make us all robotic baseliners.

 

[beernutz]

I actually like the new slower blue/green surface as it plays much closer to har-tru which is what I try to play on as much as possible. The Mobile tennis center, which is the largest public tennis facility in the world, has been renovating most of their oldest courts with the slower blue/green surface. I'm only a newly bumped 4.0 and I can tell the difference between the speed of the newer blue/green and the older faster surface.

 

[tennixpl]

i think it has more to do with when a court is resurfaced. regardless of sand composite in any new surface over time it will get smoothed out and a court will be come faster. so if you switch from an older court to a newer one in general it will be slower. but the coating resurface at our club seemed to slow it down a bit, but not a whole lot. there is also a huge diffrence between line paint that soaks into the court surface versus paint that adds a small layer.
I grew up on 20 year old courts so almost all surfaces seem slow to me.

 

[Baxter]

I actually like the new slower blue/green surface as it plays much closer to har-tru which is what I try to play on as much as possible. The Mobile tennis center, which is the largest public tennis facility in the world, has been renovating most of their oldest courts with the slower blue/green surface. I'm only a newly bumped 4.0 and I can tell the difference between the speed of the newer blue/green and the older faster surface.

That's what they use here too, very gritty and slow.

i think it has more to do with when a court is resurfaced. regardless of sand composite in any new surface over time it will get smoothed out and a court will be come faster. so if you switch from an older court to a newer one in general it will be slower. but the coating resurface at our club seemed to slow it down a bit, but not a whole lot. there is also a huge diffrence between line paint that soaks into the court surface versus paint that adds a small layer.
I grew up on 20 year old courts so almost all surfaces seem slow to me.

Very true, courts get faster with age, but it seems they resurface more often these days.

 

[JRstriker12]

With all the talk on the other forums about how much hard courts on the pro tour have been slowed down in recent years to lengthen rallies and keep matches from being two- or three-stroke serve/volley fests, it made me wonder whether we poor rec players are having to compete with improved, "faster" technology in our equipment while still playing on a surface that is as fast as it used to be 20+ years ago.

I mean, the vast majority of public facilities and even clubs will not be tinkering with their surfaces and retooling the bounce. Many places are lucky even to get their cracks repaired. I would imagine that the formula for the surfaces of the great majority of hard courts in North America (and probably beyond) is as fast as ever it was.

Thoughts?

Depends.

The newer courts near my house are sanded and slower. The courts in a near by community with a Tennis Association vary as they have hard-tru courts and also a set of courts with the same surface as the use open.

The courts at 3 of the local clubs I've played at recently have fast to just paint on concrete fast courts. I actually like fast courts because it rewards a good shot. One of the clubs has a variation - the inside courts are fast but the courts in the bubble are a bit slower.

IMHO your standard outdoor hard court tends to get slower as it picks up a lot of dust and grit.

 

[goran_ace]

At my club they haven't resurfaced in at least 5 years but they still play ok for now. Not sure the last time other clubs in the area resurfaced but they tend to play similar. A lot of the public courts are slick as glass, some have been recently resurfaced.

As an extreme, in high school we used to have the first few days of practice in the gym on a wood floor. Also, there was a school that had rubberized floor in the gym where we once played a scrimmage match because it was raining outside. These surfaces are superfast, well outside the standards for sanctioned play, and I wouldn't exaclty call it fun or rewarding for any type of player. It really doens't even feel like playing tennis.

 

[goran_ace]

In addition to spins being more effective on grittier courts, you also move much better because of traction. Much quicker first step, cuts, and stops.

On slick/smoother court the ball will skid so it behaves diffrently after the bounce, but there is still the same advantage to hitting heavy topspin shots because of how the spin can shape your shot in the air.

 

[Angle Queen]

Our indoor hard courts used to be fast. Super fast. But we recently had them resurfaced and they're somewhat slower (more paint/sand/whatever).

Our outdoor 'hard courts' have that rubbery topcoat. I hate 'em. Play kinda like clay without the benefit of being easier on your body.

Love our Har-Tru courts. Firm but any shot with enough spin will bite.

There are a few clubs here in town with good ole fashioned hard courts. Even at my (advancing) age, I love 'em. Bounce is true and speed (of shot or foot) is rewarded.

 

[vandre]

I would generally say that courts have gotten slower since the 90s, albeit gradually. I remember playing on some slick asphalt courts (kind of like these

) that would play really fast (probably because they hadn't been resurfaced in a while). now, I've played indoors and outdoors and some topnotch facilities (D1 school's home courts) and some public courts and they all play slower than those asphalt courts I grew up on.

and then I've played on courts covered with this garbage

. if you have then you may understand why I have a hard time describing it. it seems like to me under the right conditions it can play faster than real hc. the ball sort of skids yet the surface's ridges cause it to kick up (hence transforming you into topspin monkey). you do not want to play on it at all if you're a heavy sweater or if there's even the slightest hint of precipitation as all it takes is trace amounts of moisture to make this stuff slick and very dangerous.

 

[Brian11785]

Great thread. I have played on quite a variety of hardcourts since starting flex leagues. From:

- Smooth concrete slab that was insanely fast and low bouncing, rewarded a good serve and flat strokes.

- Grainy, newly finished courts that the ball really caught and kicked up.

- This weird, plush, sort of hollow feeling surface that seemed to negate spin and put the ball at exactly the right height (about a foot above or below waist height.)


Being someone who's never played on clay or grass, I enjoy playing on varied hardcourts.

 

[TimeSpiral]

Interesting thread.

Firstly: I don't know that a rec player is going to be able to judge the speed of a hard court versus the speed of another hard court. *shrugs* I think these are pro level margins, and unless they're quite profound, the rec player may not have the ability to notice.

Secondly: I would imagine that public courts, even semi-public courts, are probably slower than pro level Plexicushion/Plexipave surfaces. These surfaces are expensive.

Thirdly: I don't imagine that a public court--perhaps just slightly above painted asphalt--would get faster with age. If anything, the erosion of time would make the surface less perfect, and thusly slower.

Finally: I want to see something hard and cold about the speed differences of these courts. Sure, we here players comment on the speeds, we here pundits talk about it, and we have a bunch of lays (me included) talking about it on forums, but: what are the facts? Does the ball lose 5% velocity do to friction on a fast court, and 15% on a slow court? Or is it more like 5% to 5.75%? Are the "fast courts" from yesteryear 1% faster or 50% faster? I've never seen objective data in a format I could really comprehend.

 

[andreh]

In my home town there are two major indoor venues (this is Sweden so almost all outdoor courts are red clay). These venues both host Futures and Challengers and make a big point about having the same surfaces as on the ATP. Not sure if this is true, though. But they have resurfaced.

One of them switched from indoor carpets to Rebound Ace a few years ago. The other one switched from carpets to some other indoor hard and later to yet another, according to them, slower indoor hard. These are club courts and not public as in free courts in the park. Free courts in Sweden used to be all asphalt (unpainted) and now they're all gone, as is tennis as a major sport in my country, alas.

Good thread, BTW

 

[tennixpl]

firstly: travel more then, even rec players can tell the speed and grip differences. again (IMHO) usually due to age and not exact type of surface, though perhaps some surfaces age different than others as well. I would wager that the Pro level has a spec standard for any type of surface and would hope that that spec is quality controlled. though that would be a material spec not a performance spec.

Secondly: no idea, but given how things tend to slicken with constant rubbing of balls and shoes i would imagine more skid through which would increase horizontal velocity.

thirdly: that would be awesome. though given how the industry just now figured a way to measure spin of ball, i doubt they would put that much effort into measuring court speed, let alone have a historical database to compare too, the only record i have heard of is Wimbledon's grass and them arguing it is not slower than previous years. thoug how exactly they measure it i don't know.

sounds like a business opportunity. Tennis Court QC Incorporated!

Interesting thread.

Firstly: I don't know that a rec player is going to be able to judge the speed of a hard court versus the speed of another hard court. *shrugs* I think these are pro level margins, and unless they're quite profound, the rec player may not have the ability to notice.

Secondly: I would imagine that public courts, even semi-public courts, are probably slower than pro level Plexicushion/Plexipave surfaces. These surfaces are expensive.

Thirdly: I don't imagine that a public court--perhaps just slightly above painted asphalt--would get faster with age. If anything, the erosion of time would make the surface less perfect, and thusly slower.

Finally: I want to see something hard and cold about the speed differences of these courts. Sure, we here players comment on the speeds, we here pundits talk about it, and we have a bunch of lays (me included) talking about it on forums, but: what are the facts? Does the ball lose 5% velocity do to friction on a fast court, and 15% on a slow court? Or is it more like 5% to 5.75%? Are the "fast courts" from yesteryear 1% faster or 50% faster? I've never seen objective data in a format I could really comprehend.

 

[tkoziol]

Interesting thread.

Firstly: I don't know that a rec player is going to be able to judge the speed of a hard court versus the speed of another hard court. *shrugs* I think these are pro level margins, and unless they're quite profound, the rec player may not have the ability to notice.

Agreed, few players can tell a difference between the court speeds.

Secondly: I would imagine that public courts, even semi-public courts, are probably slower than pro level Plexicushion/Plexipave surfaces. These surfaces are expensive.

Not true. Most public courts are going to have a thin layer of Laykold, or just have a concrete/asphalt/cement slab that has lines painted on it. This will play extremely fast. The cushioning and layering of ATP surfaces is what makes the court slow. As well as the sandpaper like surface.

Thirdly: I don't imagine that a public court--perhaps just slightly above painted asphalt--would get faster with age. If anything, the erosion of time would make the surface less perfect, and thusly slower.

Not true. Once the thin layers of laykold peel away, all that is left is the smooth concrete base. Even if this base isn't perfectly smooth and erodes over time, it will still produce less friction than the laykold layer that peeled off.

Finally: I want to see something hard and cold about the speed differences of these courts. Sure, we here players comment on the speeds, we here pundits talk about it, and we have a bunch of lays (me included) talking about it on forums, but: what are the facts? Does the ball lose 5% velocity do to friction on a fast court, and 15% on a slow court? Or is it more like 5% to 5.75%? Are the "fast courts" from yesteryear 1% faster or 50% faster? I've never seen objective data in a format I could really comprehend.

Great point, this site has some useful data: http://www.fawcette.net/2012/02/hard-courts-fast-clay-slow-not-so-much-.html. Other data on this website completely ruin the argument. I'm unsure if hardcourts are really getting slower or not. I've heard anywhere from 5%-20% slower. Regardless of if the courts are slowing down or not, we do know for a FACT that players are hitting all shots about 15% faster than they were 20 years ago. In my opinion IF courts are getting slower, the increase in pace that the pros hit make up for it.

 

[TimeSpiral]

firstly: travel more then, even rec players can tell the speed and grip differences. again (IMHO) usually due to age and not exact type of surface, though perhaps some surfaces age different than others as well. I would wager that the Pro level has a spec standard for any type of surface and would hope that that spec is quality controlled. though that would be a material spec not a performance spec.

Secondly: no idea, but given how things tend to slicken with constant rubbing of balls and shoes i would imagine more skid through which would increase horizontal velocity.

thirdly: that would be awesome. though given how the industry just now figured a way to measure spin of ball, i doubt they would put that much effort into measuring court speed, let alone have a historical database to compare too, the only record i have heard of is Wimbledon's grass and them arguing it is not slower than previous years. thoug how exactly they measure it i don't know.

sounds like a business opportunity. Tennis Court QC Incorporated!

Don't get me wrong. I'm rec level. I'm not trying to knock or diminish that level of play, I'm just saying I don't know that we're really capable of qualifying the speed of various hard courts. I'm very open to being wrong about this, of course.

Yeah, I hear ya, and that's kinda my point about court surfaces. We know they have ratings. We hear that they're slower. People make a big deal about it, but I haven't seen much--if any hard data--to actually support the claim that the game is "much slower." We have player, pundit, and industry testimony, but that's about it.

 

[TimeSpiral]

Agreed, few players can tell a difference between the court speeds.



Not true. Most public courts are going to have a thin layer of Laykold, or just have a concrete/asphalt/cement slab that has lines painted on it. This will play extremely fast. The cushioning and layering of ATP surfaces is what makes the court slow. As well as the sandpaper like surface.



Not true. Once the thin layers of laykold peel away, all that is left is the smooth concrete base. Even if this base isn't perfectly smooth and erodes over time, it will still produce less friction than the laykold layer that peeled off.



Great point, this site has some useful data: http://www.fawcette.net/2012/02/hard-courts-fast-clay-slow-not-so-much-.html. Other data on this website completely ruin the argument. I'm unsure if hardcourts are really getting slower or not. I've heard anywhere from 5%-20% slower. Regardless of if the courts are slowing down or not, we do know for a FACT that players are hitting all shots about 15% faster than they were 20 years ago. In my opinion IF courts are getting slower, the increase in pace that the pros hit make up for it.

Great response! Thanks. Maybe I'll dig into the smooth concrete base claim. I bet this is somewhat regional, too. I play in Florida. These hard courts get BRUTALIZED by the conditions here.

And with there being so many different surfaces, and so many different private installation companies, how can you feel confident saying "most surfaces," have a specific layer of something on it? You may be correct, I'm just curious how you came to this conclusion.

I will check out that link!

 

[andreh]

Finally: I want to see something hard and cold about the speed differences of these courts. Sure, we here players comment on the speeds, we here pundits talk about it, and we have a bunch of lays (me included) talking about it on forums, but: what are the facts? Does the ball lose 5% velocity do to friction on a fast court, and 15% on a slow court? Or is it more like 5% to 5.75%? Are the "fast courts" from yesteryear 1% faster or 50% faster? I've never seen objective data in a format I could really comprehend.

Good point. I believe at least that I can tell the difference. If nothing else, being an S&V player, I get passed a lot more on the hard courts than the old indoor carpets my club used to have. Might also be age and moving slower, though.

 

[TennisCJC]

I don't know about hard courts everywhere, but in Atlanta area they are fast. Most public and even nice private clubs tend to resurface only after several years. After 2 or 3 years or play and weather, most of the grit is gone and you get a slicker faster surface. I can really tell the difference when I play on a recently resurfaced court where the ball bounce slower and spin grabs more. Bounces are higher due to the grab of the grit.

My opinion is most public courts wait way too long before they resurface - estimate 5+ years for public courts.

And, many private courts are just as bad. Lots of private courts are run by home owners associations and they scrimp pennies and the tennis players have to fight to get enough money to resurface.

The richest private clubs do the best job of resurfacing but even here you see hard courts with slick surfaces before they are resurfaced. Tennis sometimes has to compete with golf for private club money.

On average, public courts are much faster than ATP average. When I see court level shots on TV or attend ATP tournaments, I wish I played on courts with as much grit as the pros.

 

[tkoziol]

Great response! Thanks. Maybe I'll dig into the smooth concrete base claim. I bet this is somewhat regional, too. I play in Florida. These hard courts get BRUTALIZED by the conditions here.

And with there being so many different surfaces, and so many different private installation companies, how can you feel confident saying "most surfaces," have a specific layer of something on it? You may be correct, I'm just curious how you came to this conclusion.

I will check out that link!

I use the Laykold term as a generic. Similar to saying I need an aspirin or a coke. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericized_trademarks.

My apologies for the confusion. Most hardcourts have a foundation of asphalt or concrete with the surface layer being a thin (usually maxing out at 10 mm) layer of rubber, paint, sandpaper, etc. Typically public courts have thinner and cheaper layers. An example of a good hardcourt would be a court that has spots from the ball fluff ripping off onto the court. An example of a bad hardcourt would be concrete with yellow lines painted on it (complete with chain link fence and basketball hoops on each side).

Typically what I have found is that concrete slab with yellow lines plays super fast. Alternatively, the most the surface has a "sandpaper feel" to it, the slower it plays. Here in Nebraska, blue USO style courts tend to play very slow.

 

[TimeSpiral]

Snip!

On average, public courts are much faster than ATP average. When I see court level shots on TV or attend ATP tournaments, I wish I played on courts with as much grit as the pros.

I had the opportunity to play tennis the Sony Open's center court. It was incredibly awesome feeling! But, beside that, I did not notice a speed difference in the court--maybe I'm just a hack!--but I did notice that it was much, much easier to slide on than your run-of-the-mill public/private hard court.

 

[Adles]

I can't understand why people are saying that rec players can't tell the difference between a slow and a fast court. It seems pretty obvious to me and the people I play with. (4.0 level)

On a basic level, the ball comes at you faster! When I bring guests to clay courts I always see them swinging early until they figure it out. Hard serves aren't so hard to return. The ball bounces up instead of skidding. Gradations between hard courts aren't as big as the difference between surfaces, but I'm surprised by the assertion that rec level players can't tell the difference.

There is one club around here that hasn't resurfaced its courts in forever, and that surface is well known as being fast by all the rec players who have to play a match there.

 

[TimeSpiral]

I can't understand why people are saying that rec players can't tell the difference between a slow and a fast court. It seems pretty obvious to me and the people I play with. (4.0 level)

On a basic level, the ball comes at you faster! When I bring guests to clay courts I always see them swinging early until they figure it out. Hard serves aren't so hard to return. The ball bounces up instead of skidding. Gradations between hard courts aren't as big as the difference between surfaces, but I'm surprised by the assertion that rec level players can't tell the difference.

There is one club around here that hasn't resurfaced its courts in forever, and that surface is well known as being fast by all the rec players who have to play a match there.

Well I'm generalizing, of course. Some will be able to tell. Sure.

But one of the factors of perceived court speed is probably your opponent. So if you're playing the same people on all sorts of different HC's, then maybe you'll start noticing a slight difference.

 

[JRstriker12]

Well I'm generalizing, of course. Some will be able to tell. Sure.

But one of the factors of perceived court speed is probably your opponent. So if you're playing the same people on all sorts of different HC's, then maybe you'll start noticing a slight difference.

IMHO it's pretty easy to tell the speed difference in courts as a lot of facilities tend to fall to extremes, either really slow or really fast. I'm not saying people have an exact measurement of court speed or are able to produce an exact comparison with courts on pro tournaments.

For example some of the indoor courts you can see the ball skid through and stay low. You can see that it's just basically paint without any grit in it. Pretty obvious it's a fast court.

It's also pretty easy to tell that what would have been a winning shot on that slick indoor court slowed up and gave the opponent a chance to get it back when playing on another court, especially when you play the same people at different locations.

 

[TimeSpiral]

IMHO it's pretty easy to tell the speed difference in courts as a lot of facilities tend to fall to extremes, either really slow or really fast. I'm not saying people have an exact measurement of court speed or are able to produce an exact comparison with courts on pro tournaments.

For example some of the indoor courts you can see the ball skid through and stay low. You can see that it's just basically paint without any grit in it. Pretty obvious it's a fast court.

It's also pretty easy to tell that what would have been a winning shot on that slick indoor court slowed up and gave the opponent a chance to get it back when playing on another court, especially when you play the same people at different locations.

That all makes sense to me.

 

[struggle]

It's quite easy to notice differences in court speeds if you play much tennis at a decent level.

We have some wicked fast indoor hard courts in town. Throw in the fact they are also the poorest lit indoors in town and you've got "bloody fast".

Most of the others have been resurfaced recently and are much more like a gritty outdoor surface, the typical blue stuff.

Funny, down the road there are a couple indoor clay courts.

 

[JRstriker12]

It's quite easy to notice differences in court speeds if you play much tennis at a decent level.

We have some wicked fast indoor hard courts in town. Throw in the fact they are also the poorest lit indoors in town and you've got "bloody fast".

Most of the others have been resurfaced recently and are much more like a gritty outdoor surface, the typical blue stuff.

Funny, down the road there are a couple indoor clay courts.

Despise indoor clay in a bubble. Might as well play on mud in a sauna.

 

[anantak2k]

Yes - I wondered if this was a local phenomenon where I live or was more widespread.

I notice a lot of places doing that - adding more sand to the mix - with hard courts over the past 5-10 yrs. You can tell when you play but you can also just touch the courts and feel many of them grainier and, therefore, slower. It just makes for boring long drawn out rallies as even out of shape people can get to balls that would be winners on decently fast courts.

This is a very interesting thread as I was wondering what players thought about the differences in hard courts.
From my personal experience, I have always noticed that when the courts are grainier (you can see it in the surface because it's more sparkly, and I always wondered if it was sand that sparkled) they seem to play a lot slower and bouncier. Most of the older courts used to be painted either all green or green + red and they were not as sparkly. These courts to me always played a lot faster and the balls bounced lower. To the point where it was a great advantage to players who hit the ball flat or had good slice BHs. A lot of the times the balls would just skid after hitting the court.

However, recently, I have noticed a trend in both Miami and NYC that when they resurface the courts, they are making them a lot grainier and painting them all blue. These courts are super slow and bouncy. Flat shots and slices are completely ineffective as they bounce to the perfect height. Top spin shots on the other hand bounce really high.

To add to the thread, I have played a lot yearly at the US Open courts in Flushing and I remember when they first changed the color of the court from green to blue. I played on the courts there every summer and the first year that they changed from green to blue, the first thing that we all noticed was bouncy the courts got that year. I personally find the courts at the USO to be bouncier than har-tru clay courts! which is ridiculous. I mean don't get me wrong its actually great for my game as I use a lot of heavy topspin on my FH that kicks up but whenever I play against someone who plays a similar style, it gets very annoying and frustrating and at some point I feel like we are just moonballing back and fourth. LOL

 

[anantak2k]

I disagree with most of your points.

Interesting thread.

Firstly: I don't know that a rec player is going to be able to judge the speed of a hard court versus the speed of another hard court. *shrugs* I think these are pro level margins, and unless they're quite profound, the rec player may not have the ability to notice.


Personally, I seen most players roughly 3.5 and up notice the difference on the speed of different hard courts. On the other hand when it comes to something like strings I would agree that noticing difference between different poly's or multi's or whatever are "pro level margins." To me most polys feel very similar and most multis feel very similar.

Secondly: I would imagine that public courts, even semi-public courts, are probably slower than pro level Plexicushion/Plexipave surfaces. These surfaces are expensive.

This in my experience is false. I have played on the USO courts including Arthur Ashe stadium and I have played on courts at the Miami masters and those are the top 2 slowest and bounciest hard courts I have played on. USO courts are a bit faster than Miami but USO courts are also bouncier than Miami to me. All the public Hard courts I have played on are faster than USO or Miami masters courts.

Thirdly: I don't imagine that a public court--perhaps just slightly above painted asphalt--would get faster with age. If anything, the erosion of time would make the surface less perfect, and thusly slower.

I disagree with this too, as the court gets older, it actually becomes faster less bouncy. The ball also starts to skid more often as the court gets more beat down. They resurface the USO courts yearly and its always at its slowest and bounciest right after the resurfacing. After the indoor season the courts actually get a bit faster and less bouncy.

Finally: I want to see something hard and cold about the speed differences of these courts. Sure, we here players comment on the speeds, we here pundits talk about it, and we have a bunch of lays (me included) talking about it on forums, but: what are the facts? Does the ball lose 5% velocity do to friction on a fast court, and 15% on a slow court? Or is it more like 5% to 5.75%? Are the "fast courts" from yesteryear 1% faster or 50% faster? I've never seen objective data in a format I could really comprehend.

This is an interesting point. Would be good to find out. One thing I do know is that when I open up a new can of tennis balls they wear down much faster on the grainier hardcourts.

 

[andreh]

I would also think that older hard courts would be faster as the grain is gradually worn away with time. The surface becomes smoother and the surface will be less prone to take spin.

 

[dman72]

Most of the outdoor courts here are very fast worn down asphalt. I've been playing at a local high school that was resurfaced a few years ago, and that is noticeabley slower...everyone I've played there has commented about it. They put a good amount of sand in the paint.

The indoor courts I play club matches on are very fast and slick, haven't been resurfaced in years. A few guys from my club who've played at the tennis center in Flushing remarked about how much slower the surface is there. I had commented that pros basically never play on a surface as fast as our club, and at first they didn't believe me.

My flat first serve is much more effective on the faster courts and it's much easier to hit through the retrievers. With the slower courts the best tactics are kick serves and topspin moon balls.

 

[dman72]

I would also think that older hard courts would be faster as the grain is gradually worn away with time. The surface becomes smoother and the surface will be less prone to take spin.

The older outdoor courts get worn down very quickly by rain and wind more than anything else.

 

[TimeSpiral]

I disagree with most of your points.

Excellent response! Very thoughtful. I'm certainly no authority--I'm just some guy. It's nice to hear people's experiences, especially when they're different from mine.

I play public and private HC courts often, and I've played that same Miami court you're talking about (Tennis Center at Crandon Park, Center Court), and I didn't notice a speed difference that would have any effect on match play. But that could be a variety of factors: my opponent, my consciousness, the mood, whatever. Maybe I'm just not paying attention to that aspect of the game. *shrugs*

I'm also interested in the dynamic between the wear play adds to a surface compared to the beating it gets from mother nature. Sliding balls and rubber soled shoes would smooth it out, and maybe even constant rain would have a smoothing effect too ... Perhaps I was just completely wrong here!

 

[tennixpl]

Excellent response! Very thoughtful. ... Perhaps I was just completely wrong here!

Not completely wrong, just a broad assumption. It has a lot to do with players skill and attention. tell some people that they aren't following through they will tell you are crazy, and then take a video of them and they will believe you but still "feel" they are following through.

Do you notice the differences between balls? To me Penn has a distinctively different sound than Wilson and Dunlop feels stiffer. Give me three unmarked balls let me hit em and i can feel and hear difference other people look at me like i am crazy!

Change my racquet poundage with multifilament 15 pounds either way I couldn't tell ya squat without looking at the strings and trying to move em.

 

[JRstriker12]

I disagree with most of your points.

RE: About the strings.

Just like court speed it depends. Some people are more or less string or tension sensitive. But in general I can tell the difference between a poly and multi set-up in my sticks. Most of the other players I know can tell the difference. Feedback and sound off the strings are different.

 

[anantak2k]

RE: About the strings.

Just like court speed it depends. Some people are more or less string or tension sensitive. But in general I can tell the difference between a poly and multi set-up in my sticks. Most of the other players I know can tell the difference. Feedback and sound off the strings are different.

Yes I agree with your point. I can clearly distinguish poly setups vs multi setups. I can also notice the difference in the sounds between different strings. However, I can rarely notice the difference between how different poly's (even poly's with different textures) play. The one thing I can definitely distinguish is poly's or multis of different guage or when certain poly's tend to grip the balls more/longer, but even then after a few hours of play they all feel very similar.

 

[anantak2k]

Excellent response! Very thoughtful. I'm certainly no authority--I'm just some guy. It's nice to hear people's experiences, especially when they're different from mine.

I play public and private HC courts often, and I've played that same Miami court you're talking about (Tennis Center at Crandon Park, Center Court), and I didn't notice a speed difference that would have any effect on match play. But that could be a variety of factors: my opponent, my consciousness, the mood, whatever. Maybe I'm just not paying attention to that aspect of the game. *shrugs*

I'm also interested in the dynamic between the wear play adds to a surface compared to the beating it gets from mother nature. Sliding balls and rubber soled shoes would smooth it out, and maybe even constant rain would have a smoothing effect too ... Perhaps I was just completely wrong here!

Yea Crandon park is much slower and bouncier if you compare them to other courts like say the ones at Biltmore in Coral gables or morningside courts in Biscayne blvd or even the north miami beach hard courts (although I have not played on those enough times to really get a feel for those courts). I have played at Biltmore, morningside, Crandon 20+ times so a fairly good amount of matches on each to have a solid comparison and many of the same opponents on the different surfaces.

 

[TimeSpiral]

Yea Crandon park is much slower and bouncier if you compare them to other courts like say the ones at Biltmore in Coral gables or morningside courts in Biscayne blvd or even the north miami beach hard courts (although I have not played on those enough times to really get a feel for those courts). I have played at Biltmore, morningside, Crandon 20+ times so a fairly good amount of matches on each to have a solid comparison and many of the same opponents on the different surfaces.

Cool. Your experience has been noted.

 

[SpinDr.]

Zombie thread! I've been playing at Golden Gate Park in San Francisco for the past year, and it's remarkable how fast and low bouncing those courts are. I've never experienced anything close to it. I'm 6'3 and have to hug the baseline and stay really low, especially against all the crafty middle-aged 4.0 and 4.5 players who hit a flat ball, otherwise I'm taking balls at ankle to knee height. That's a tough shot when you're a tall guy with loopy topspin strokes.

 

[GatorTennis]

I remember in HS playing on faster courts. We played a private school that had pristine courts that played slower than clay courts. It was remarkable. I've never played on a hard court that slow since.

 

[norcal]

My local park courts are redonkulous fast. The asphalt is showing through the court surface. I hit there every Friday before league on Sunday. Makes the ball seem slow on Sunday so it's good practice. The down side is balls only last about 20 minutes of hard hitting until they have lost their felt.

 

[goran_ace]

I'm just glad to see that more and more public courts around me are being resurfaced. For a while the park and rec system seemed like they wanted to give up on tennis and started converting courts for other uses (basketball, roller hockey/skating) instead of repairing but perhaps the reason people weren't playing much tennis at certain parks was because the courts were in such bad shape. The courts that have been recently resurfaced seem to be pretty busy.