Comparing the surfaces of the clay surfaces: Paris, Rome, Monte Carlo, Madrid

[Mayonnaise]

How do these surfaces compare? I've never really been able to differentiate much between Paris, Rome, and Monte Carlo, in terms of speed and bounce. I know Madrid is quicker and lower bouncing (?) because of the elevation. And Hamburg was slow and low bouncing. How do you compare the 4 surfaces in terms of speed and bounce?

Kindly put it as something like this:

Speed:
Madrid > Rome > Paris > Monte Carlo

Bounce:
Monte Carlo > Paris > Rome > Madrid

The above are my guesses, but I don't know. What do you think?

 

[President]

Speed: Madrid>Paris>Rome>Monte Carlo

Bounce: Madrid>Paris>Monte Carlo>Rome

Madrid has a massive bounce because of the high altitude, as well as being very fast. Roland Garros is a very lively clay court, quite fast but also very high bouncing. Monte Carlo is just flat out slow, but also has a high bounce. Rome is by no means low bouncing, but I think that Monte Carlo just edges it. By the way, the old Hamburg Masters was easily the slowest court on tour. Quite a bit slower than even Monte Carlo, but with the lowest bounce of any clay court anywhere as well.

 

[The Green Mile]

I have always thought Monte-Carlo is the slowest of the clay courts, and Madrid is the fastest of them all. Rome and RG are around the same for me.

Madrid > Rome = RG > Monte Carlo

 

[Mayonnaise]

Speed: Madrid>Paris>Rome>Monte Carlo

Bounce: Madrid>Paris>Monte Carlo>Rome

Madrid has a massive bounce because of the high altitude, as well as being very fast. Roland Garros is a very lively clay court, quite fast but also very high bouncing. Monte Carlo is just flat out slow, but also has a high bounce. Rome is by no means low bouncing, but I think that Monte Carlo just edges it. By the way, the old Hamburg Masters was easily the slowest court on tour. Quite a bit slower than even Monte Carlo, but with the lowest bounce of any clay court anywhere as well.

Oh yeah, I heard that about Hamburg. Also, are your evaluations based on watching how the court plays or is there something official or statistical to support it? Like the thing you mentioned about Cincinnati where the ATP/ITF say it was slowed down.

 

[President]

Oh yeah, I heard that about Hamburg. Also, are your evaluations based on watching how the court plays or is there something official or statistical to support it? Like the thing you mentioned about Cincinnati where the ATP/ITF say it was slowed down.

There were some statistics a while back, I believe on ace count or something like that that I think backed up what I said, but I am way too lazy to dig it up right now. This is just my general impression. I don't remember saying anything about Cincinnati and the ITF, you might be thinking of somebody else. I do feel pretty confident in placing Madrid and Paris #1 and #2 in both speed and bounce height, from years of watching all these tournaments extensively.

 

[Mayonnaise]

There were some statistics a while back, I believe on ace count or something like that that I think backed up what I said, but I am way too lazy to dig it up right now. This is just my general impression. I don't remember saying anything about Cincinnati and the ITF, you might be thinking of somebody else. I do feel pretty confident in placing Madrid and Paris #1 and #2 in both speed and bounce height, from years of watching all these tournaments extensively.

Oops, sorry, that was Martin. You might be right. I'm really bad at judging speeds and bounces. To my eyes, the WTF appears high bouncing :lol: Oh dear.

 

[President]

Oops, sorry, that was Martin. You might be right. I'm really bad at judging speeds and bounces. To my eyes, the WTF appears high bouncing :lol: Oh dear.

Haha yeah, it might actually be the lowest bouncing court on tour these days.

 

[SpicyCurry1990]

Speed: Madrid>Paris>Rome>Monte Carlo

Bounce: Madrid>Paris>Monte Carlo>Rome

Madrid has a massive bounce because of the high altitude, as well as being very fast. Roland Garros is a very lively clay court, quite fast but also very high bouncing. Monte Carlo is just flat out slow, but also has a high bounce. Rome is by no means low bouncing, but I think that Monte Carlo just edges it. By the way, the old Hamburg Masters was easily the slowest court on tour. Quite a bit slower than even Monte Carlo, but with the lowest bounce of any clay court anywhere as well.

All of this 100%, man knows his clay

 

[Deleted member 512391]

Speed: Madrid>Paris>Rome>Monte Carlo

Bounce: Madrid>Paris>Monte Carlo>Rome

Madrid has a massive bounce because of the high altitude, as well as being very fast. Roland Garros is a very lively clay court, quite fast but also very high bouncing. Monte Carlo is just flat out slow, but also has a high bounce. Rome is by no means low bouncing, but I think that Monte Carlo just edges it. By the way, the old Hamburg Masters was easily the slowest court on tour. Quite a bit slower than even Monte Carlo, but with the lowest bounce of any clay court anywhere as well.

After losing FO final in 2006, Federer was asked by an journalist in a post-match interview what is the difference between Rome, where he pushed Nadal that year and had few match points, and Paris, where he lost in four sets, Federer stated that the conditions in Rome "were faster".
So, I don't think your comparison is correct.

UPDATE: Pity they removed the match from Youtube, I wanted to provide a link...

 

[Deleted member 716271]

RG is similar to Rome imo, but can play faster because it is usually hotter and drier in Paris in June than Rome a month earlier. Also, obviously the dimensions of Chatrier massively help Nadal and allow him to retrieve better creating the illusion of a "slower" court.

 

[Russeljones]

After losing FO final in 2006, Federer was asked by an journalist in a post-match interview what is the difference between Rome, where he pushed Nadal that year and had few match points, and Paris, where he lost in four sets, Federer stated that the conditions in Rome "were faster".
So, I don't think your comparison is correct.

UPDATE: Pity they removed the match from Youtube, I wanted to provide a link...

I am pretty sure Madrid has always been the fastest clay court of the clay Masters. Needless to say, Madrid in 2006 was an indoor hard court.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

I am pretty sure Madrid has always been the fastest clay court of the clay Masters. Needless to say, Madrid in 2006 was an indoor hard court.

Madrid seems faster than AO and Miami to me

 

[augustobt]

Madrid seems faster than AO and Miami to me

It is. And the bounce is lower as well.

 

[Russeljones]

Madrid seems faster than AO and Miami to me

The AO, since 2008, has been a parody of a hard court.

 

[Feather]

Ideal time to bump this thread

 

[Russeljones]

Ideal time to bump this thread

You think something's changed?

 

[Deleted member 756486]

Speed: Madrid>Rome>Paris>>>>>Monte Carlo (MC is absurdly slow)
Bounce: Madrid>Paris>Rome>Monte Carlo

 

[Deleted member 688153]

All I remember of OP is that LazyNinja (may their soul rest in peace) totally did their nut at one point due to OP's subtle yet hyper frequent trolling.

A relentlessly smug, thick-skinned poster's total meltdown, triggered by some annoying goat guy suddenly appearing and making 100+ posts a day in their threads.

It was beautiful.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Here's the speed index for the clay Masters:

 

[helterskelter]

It’s important to differentiate surface from conditions. A lot of what people say about Madrid being faster is it being at altitude. Similarly, Monte Carlo seems slow because it is early in the year and so it’s cold. If they played it in July, the ball would travel through the air faster and would bounce even higher.

 

[aldeayeah]

What helterskelter said. RG plays extremely different on a sunny breezy day than it does on a cool night with the roof closed.

Madrid also has a wide gamut of conditions because it has a night session and a roof.

 

[Mainad]

What helterskelter said. RG plays extremely different on a sunny breezy day than it does on a cool night with the roof closed.

Madrid also has a wide gamut of conditions because it has a night session and a roof.

Altitude too. Madrid is at a higher elevation than any other big claycourt tournament.

 

[thrust]

I have always thought Monte-Carlo is the slowest of the clay courts, and Madrid is the fastest of them all. Rome and RG are around the same for me.

Madrid > Rome = RG > Monte Carlo

Years ago, I believe Rome court speed was faster than RG and it probably still is today. Madrid is fast, primarily due to the thin air, due to its, height above sea level. MC, I think is the slowest, today.

 

[Break To Win]

Rome has always seemed to me the opposite of Hamburg. It seems that the clay is thinner in Italy, while in Germany, it was coarse sand, so it played slowly and with lower bounces.

Anyway, Rome is faster than Paris, which is a little faster than Monte Carlo. Madrid should be the fastest of the clay M1000, but maybe they use slower balls there.

 

[messiahrobins]

Speed:

Rome Madrid Paris Monte Carlo

Bounce

Madrid Paris Monte Carlo Rome

 

[DSH]

Here's the speed index for the clay Masters:

Is that speed index maintained today in clay tournaments?