Are the courts going to get faster?

[Booger]

We all know how the courts were slowed down to benefit Nadal and help him keep Federer from winning everything in sight. Even Wimbledon bought in and slowed down the grass.

But here we are, a decade+ later, and the situation is different. Baseline bashing and pushing has become the dominant pro style for both ATP and WTA, even clay court specialists are having success on other surfaces, and the younger viewers want nothing to do with 5 hour groundstroke practice GS matches.

Supposedly the australian open courts were the fastest they've been in years. Same with Indian Wells. Are we slowly seeing a shift back to faster courts to promote attacking tennis?

 

[Gary Duane]

We all know how the courts were slowed down to benefit Nadal and help him keep Federer from winning everything in sight. Even Wimbledon bought in and slowed down the grass.

But here we are, a decade+ later, and the situation is different. Baseline bashing and pushing has become the dominant pro style for both ATP and WTA, even clay court specialists are having success on other surfaces, and the younger viewers want nothing to do with 5 hour groundstroke practice GS matches.

Supposedly the australian open courts were the fastest they've been in years. Same with Indian Wells. Are we slowly seeing a shift back to faster courts to promote attacking tennis?

No, we all don't know that...

 

[Booger]

No, we all don't know that...

Well now you do.

 

[Username_]

We all know how the courts were slowed down to benefit Nadal and help him keep Federer from winning everything in sight.

and nadal still can't get more titles
how pitiful aye

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

Some of Federer fans' complaints are getting really cringeworthy.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

We all know how the courts were slowed down to benefit Nadal and help him keep Federer from winning everything in sight. Even Wimbledon bought in and slowed down the grass.

But here we are, a decade+ later, and the situation is different. Baseline bashing and pushing has become the dominant pro style for both ATP and WTA, even clay court specialists are having success on other surfaces, and the younger viewers want nothing to do with 5 hour groundstroke practice GS matches.

Supposedly the australian open courts were the fastest they've been in years. Same with Indian Wells. Are we slowly seeing a shift back to faster courts to promote attacking tennis?

Good post. EXCEPT for that opening statement. Assume you were being facetious. Talk of slowing down tennis started back in the early/mid 90s from what I recall. Great to see more netplay from Federer and others on the faster surfaces.

 

[Gary Duane]

Well now you do.

 

[Noelan]

At least OP is particularly aggressive troll

 

[Charlie]

Some of Federer fans' complaints are getting really cringeworthy.

Clowns. You'd think they would finally be happy and content after this year's events but unfortunately there will always be need to bring Nadal and the rest of the Tour down. Very unlikable bunch.

 

[Booger]

Good post. EXCEPT for that opening statement. Assume you were being facetious. Talk of slowing down tennis started back in the early/mid 90s from what I recall. Great to see more netplay from Federer and others on the faster surfaces.

Then why weren't the courts slowed until Federer started winning everything? I honestly didn't know this was still a debate. It's not a conspiracy theory, the courts were absolutely slowed down. Fact.

 

[Newcomer]

Ban thread.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Then why weren't the courts slowed until Federer started winning everything? I honestly didn't know this was still a debate. It's not a conspiracy theory, the courts were absolutely slowed down. Fact.

Other attempts were made to deal with the faster game before courts were slowed down. Balls got brighter in the 90s. A larger (Type 3) ball was introduced some time around 1999-2001. Same weight but more air drag to slow it down. Everyone hated the larger ball so other countermeasures were sought after. This was before the rise of Roger and Rafa. EDIT: Blue courts introduced for improved color contrast to make it easier for players and spectators to follow fast balls.

Then why weren't the courts slowed until Federer started winning everything? I honestly didn't know this was still a debate. It's not a conspiracy theory, the courts were absolutely slowed down. Fact.

There was talk of slowing down courts prior to the rise & dominance of Federer. Grass courts at Wimbledon changed to 100% rye back in 2001, I believe. Players were already noticing the slowdown back then.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Same with Indian Wells. Are we slowly seeing a shift back to faster courts to promote attacking tennis?

IW wasn't any faster than previous years, I attend every year and have a basis of comparison. Miami wasn't any faster either. Fed still beat Nadal on very slow HC's which completely favored Rafa's style of play. Larry Ellison is a noted fan of Rafa (Nadal stays at Larry's house all week when there) and he'd never condone a fast HC as long as Rafa is an active player.

Anyway, I hope and pray they speed up the courts because (as AO proved), faster HC's promote a much more interesting style of tennis. Seeing Nadal and Thiem stand 50 feet behind the baseline to return serve is just cringe worthy to lots of tennis fans. Yeah, this is clay, but he's hardly any closer on grass or HC!

 

[Eggshen]

Highly doubt they speed the courts up. People seem to eat up WTA level speeds of groundstrokes back and forth with no one moving forwards/backwards. Hopefully some high level coach out there is teaching a kid, who otherwise would develop into a middling baseliner, how to play serve/volley tennis and work the receiving points in order to get to the net as soon as possible. The game is starving for someone to break out with that style because its now to the point where the players have probably played their whole young and pro careers not seeing anyone play that aggressive of a net game. That style requires courage and the ability to shake off passing shots and setbacks to continue playing your style. Not sure how many would want to accept that challenge.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

Talk of the change of grass in 2001:
http://www.tennisviewmag.com/tennis...urt-surfaces-slowing-down-game-does-it-matter

More court slowing in 2002:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/447146-are-us-open-tennis-courts-slowing-down

 

[Deleted member 743561]

Left-to-right:

"When I'm on Medicare like Larry, he'll be 110."

"Didn't see that one coming."

"Atta GOAT."

 

[Gazelle]

Bashing. Pushing.

Choose one.

 

[Goosehead]

IW wasn't any faster than previous years, I attend every year and have a basis of comparison. Miami wasn't any faster either. Fed still beat Nadal on very slow HC's which completely favored Rafa's style of play. Larry Ellison is a noted fan of Rafa (Nadal stays at Larry's house all week when there) and he'd never condone a fast HC as long as Rafa is an active player.

Anyway, I hope and pray they speed up the courts because (as AO proved), faster HC's promote a much more interesting style of tennis. Seeing Nadal and Thiem stand 50 feet behind the baseline to return serve is just cringe worthy to lots of tennis fans. Yeah, this is clay, but he's hardly any closer on grass or HC!

under-arm serves are within the rules..shame everyone goes mental when someone tries it.

 

[Eggshen]

Bashing. Pushing.

Choose one.

Ah the depth of tennis strategy these days in just a few words. But the game has evolved they say.

 

[Jon Snow]

Even Wimbledon bought in and slowed down the grass.

The same grass Federer won all his Wimbledon titles on.

 

[Eggshen]

But no the courts slowing down was more of a benefit to federer. Pretty sure they decided much earlier to slow the courts down because of Sampras and perhaps Goran as well. Just the general points ending faster thing. More rallys, more time on the court, more commercials, more money.

 

[Vanilla Slice]

I hope the courts speed up in certain areas, but I don't want ALL hard court tournaments to be fast or ALL hard court tournaments to be slow. It's quite hypocritical to call for a speeding up of every tournament as things would be boring once again. I feel that an ideal schedule with all speeds to keep the tour interesting would look something like this.

Australian Open (medium-fast)
Indian Wells (medium)
Miami (slow)

Monte Carlo (very slow)
Madrid (medium slow)
Rome (very slow)
Roland Garros (very slow)

Wimbledon (very fast)

Montreal (medium)
Cincinnati (very fast)
US Open (fast)

Shanghai (fast)
Paris (medium fast)
World Tour Finals (medium)

 

[Chadillac]

the younger viewers want nothing to do with 5 hour groundstroke practice GS matches.

I dont think anyone who actually plays tennis likes watching these type of matches, not just the younger

 

[Eggshen]

I pick fun of the baseliners nowadays but that's only because it's all the same thing. But the best matches in my opinion are the fast paced Serve/Volley vs. Baseline player. It's bang bang, quick thinking, produces some good side to side, forwards and backwards points. When the baseliner is serving, he's very aware that any short balls will give the opportunity for the other player to get a good approach shot and come in.

 

[abmk]

We all know how the courts were slowed down to benefit Nadal and help him keep Federer from winning everything in sight. Even Wimbledon bought in and slowed down the grass.

But here we are, a decade+ later, and the situation is different. Baseline bashing and pushing has become the dominant pro style for both ATP and WTA, even clay court specialists are having success on other surfaces, and the younger viewers want nothing to do with 5 hour groundstroke practice GS matches.

Supposedly the australian open courts were the fastest they've been in years. Same with Indian Wells. Are we slowly seeing a shift back to faster courts to promote attacking tennis?

IW wasn't fast at all. (no faster than previous years)
I was there. They played at decent speed (hardly fast) in the morning session. But courts were quite slow in the evening session. Stan was having trouble hitting through Nishioka.

 

[Booger]

IW wasn't fast at all. (no faster than previous years)
I was there. They played at decent speed (hardly fast) in the morning session. But courts were quite slow in the evening session. Stan was having trouble hitting through Nishioka.

I'm only repeating what I heard a couple times on the broadcast. Weird.

 

[Eggshen]

IW wasn't any faster than previous years, I attend every year and have a basis of comparison. Miami wasn't any faster either. Fed still beat Nadal on very slow HC's which completely favored Rafa's style of play. Larry Ellison is a noted fan of Rafa (Nadal stays at Larry's house all week when there) and he'd never condone a fast HC as long as Rafa is an active player.

Anyway, I hope and pray they speed up the courts because (as AO proved), faster HC's promote a much more interesting style of tennis. Seeing Nadal and Thiem stand 50 feet behind the baseline to return serve is just cringe worthy to lots of tennis fans. Yeah, this is clay, but he's hardly any closer on grass or HC!

Clay court specialists have historically always stood that far back even on faster grass and hc. It was an annoyance to serve and volley players because their steps into the court then split step was a very organized system and staying deeper disrupted the timing of the split step. If they split normal after their routine number of steps, the ball still hasn't gotten to the player and they lose that explosive push and momentum. Sampras was the exception because he was less systematic/less classic serve/volley and more of an athlete who went forward however he pleased.

But the success these guys have on courts other than clay playing like that is just a product of the courts all playing too similar to each other. You can argue all day whether it benefits the fast court players being able to compete on clay or the clay court player being able to compete on other surfaces.

 

[mightyjeditribble]

Courts seem to have slowed down compared to the 90s. The question whether the pendulum is swinging back (I think perhaps it is, and would be happy for it to do so to some degree) is an interesting one.

I think prefacing it with conspiracy theories that it was done to benefit a particular player (tongue-in-cheek or not) doesn't help with fostering meaningful discussion though.

I'd love to see conditions where you can't be successful just staying back, or being too attacking, but where a mixture of the styles is required (different mixture depending on surface / opponent).

I'm not necessarily someone who thinks the difference between surfaces should be too extreme, though. Grass should reward aggression, sure, and clay patience - but I do like a tour where players can succeed on all surfaces, given enough skill and adaptability.

 

[Booger]

I think prefacing it with conspiracy theories that it was done to benefit a particular player (tongue-in-cheek or not) doesn't help with fostering meaningful discussion though.

Not to derail, but literally every sport does this. Sports are entertainment businesses. It's not a conspiracy. Tom Brady and Peyton Manning were the driving force behind the NFL, so the league made sweeping rule changes to protect them and make it much easier for QB's to throw 5 TD passes/game. The defense can't even breathe on a QB or WR anymore. Defense was dominating the NHL so bad, they made the goalie pads smaller to allow for more goals. Golf changed the club size rules.

Tennis had talked about slowing the courts when Pete and Goran were having boring servebot matches, but to the best of my knowledge the bulk of the slowing was done just as Fed was winning everything and the dirtball king was coming of age. Now that they are in the twilight of their careers and tennis is struggling mightily to attract new viewers, I think it's time to go back. Who would it help most? Maybe Kyrgios? He makes a great villain...

 

[mightyjeditribble]

Not to derail, but literally every sport does this. Sports are entertainment businesses. It's not a conspiracy. Tom Brady and Peyton Manning were the driving force behind the NFL, so the league made sweeping rule changes to protect them and make it much easier for QB's to throw 5 TD passes/game. The defense can't even breathe on a QB or WR anymore. Defense was dominating the NHL so bad, they made the goalie pads smaller to allow for more goals. Golf changed the club size rules.

Tennis had talked about slowing the courts when Pete and Goran were having boring servebot matches, but to the best of my knowledge the bulk of the slowing was done just as Fed was winning everything and the dirtball king was coming of age. Now that they are in the twilight of their careers and tennis is struggling mightily to attract new viewers, I think it's time to go back. Who would it help most? Maybe Kyrgios? He makes a great villain...

Sure, they make changes that they think will be of benefit - top seeds routinely receiving byes, getting rid of fine-set finals etc. all designed to increase the chances of top players showing up at the tournaments and being involved in the latter stages.

Slower grass may have never partly unintentional however, resulting from switch to a more sturdy variety. Anyway, change in racquet and string technology also had something to do with it.

I just don't think there's any evidence for, or logical reason to expect, some specific consistent changes across the tour to benefit one player. It's just a typical claim used to denigrate a player's achievement, and I find it grating.

Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk

 

[Boom-Boom]

Ban thread.

Great thread

 

[Gary Duane]

Clowns. You'd think they would finally be happy and content after this year's events but unfortunately there will always be need to bring Nadal and the rest of the Tour down. Very unlikable bunch.

Charlie, think about it: WHY would you want to crap all over the opponents of an ATG? Because that's the best way of making the case that the ATG is not really "that good".

I pick fun of the baseliners nowadays but that's only because it's all the same thing. But the best matches in my opinion are the fast paced Serve/Volley vs. Baseline player. It's bang bang, quick thinking, produces some good side to side, forwards and backwards points. When the baseliner is serving, he's very aware that any short balls will give the opportunity for the other player to get a good approach shot and come in.

Yup. Contrast in styles makes for high drama...

 

[KINGROGER]

Charlie, think about it: WHY would you to crap all over the opponents of an ATG? Because that's the best way of making the case that the ATG is not really "that good".

Yup. Contrast in styles makes for high drama...

Some of my favourite matches are Federer vs Djokovic between 07 - 12 period.

 

[kramer woodie]

Saw a practice court being re-surfaced at a Challenger Tournament. I ask the operator of the tennis club, (basically as a joke question- I already
knew the answer) "Why not remove the texture from the mix (grit) and just give the court a nice clean smooth finish like back in the 1960s ?" Answer was: the players would just hate that and the balls would skid and stay low and too fast.

Courts have to be relatively close in speed to please the viewing audience who buy tickets and watch TV commercials. It's about making money
and being profitable. You best believe the powers-that-be test fan input to supply the paying public with what is comfortable and enjoyable to
watch. Late 1960s hardcourt was judged to be too fast. Grit (texture) came along to slow the game down in the 1970s. What the viewing public
will pay money for is what tennis will supply. That is for profit reasons only.

Aloha

 

[Fedfan34]

because we all know fed THRIVES in fast court conditions, I mean he's won Paris a bunch of times right? mmmmmmm thats what I thought