Embarrassingly slow US Open courts. Moonballing wins!

[borg25]

Good for Nadal, but come on, its ridiculous that Nadal can stand 20 feet behind the baseline
and return 130 mph serves no problem because the court is as slow as a clay court.
There is little advantage in the serve for Anderson unless he nails the perfect serve.

Its absolutely ridiculous how much they have slowed these courts down. This makes
for horrible tennis, where defensive low risk moonballing can win over attacking players.

Like I said, good for Nadal, he got the W, but I find his defensive moonballing tennis
totally boring.

The only reason Fed beat Nadal at the AO was because the courts were faster. If you want to
see attacking tennis, speed the courts up at least to a medium pace.

 

[Spencer Gore]

No, the only reason Federer beat Nadal at the AO is because the organisers gave him an extra days rest. On an even playing field, Nadal wins that final in 4.

 

[Rafa24]

Awwweeee poor baby...... Do you want some cheese???

 

[EdSWright]

Imagine if Federer won Roland Garros by serving and volleying... you'd question the surface, and why it's so out of whack with tradition, right?

 

[I am the Greatest!]

Good for Nadal, but come on, its ridiculous that Nadal can stand 20 feet behind the baseline
and return 130 mph serves no problem because the court is as slow as a clay court.
There is little advantage in the serve for Anderson unless he nails the perfect serve.

Its absolutely ridiculous how much they have slowed these courts down. This makes
for horrible tennis, where defensive low risk moonballing can win over attacking players.

Like I said, good for Nadal, he got the W, but I find his defensive moonballing tennis
totally boring.

The only reason Fed beat Nadal at the AO was because the courts were faster. If you want to
see attacking tennis, speed the courts up at least to a medium pace.

They have reversed the speed of the courts. So AO is now the new US? and US is now the new AO? LOL.

Basically, the organizers wanted to promote the Fedal rivalry again after they met in the AO Finals. So they slowed the courts down so Rafa could make it far.

 

[clayqueen]

Good for Nadal, but come on, its ridiculous that Nadal can stand 20 feet behind the baseline
and return 130 mph serves no problem because the court is as slow as a clay court.
There is little advantage in the serve for Anderson unless he nails the perfect serve.

Its absolutely ridiculous how much they have slowed these courts down. This makes
for horrible tennis, where defensive low risk moonballing can win over attacking players.

Like I said, good for Nadal, he got the W, but I find his defensive moonballing tennis
totally boring.

The only reason Fed beat Nadal at the AO was because the courts were faster. If you want to
see attacking tennis, speed the courts up at least to a medium pace.

 

[clayqueen]

Basically, the organizers wanted to promote the Fedal rivalry again after they met in the AO Finals. So they slowed the courts down so Rafa could make it far.

 

[I am the Greatest!]

@clayqueen

19 > 16

 

[Nadal_Django]

Good for Nadal, but come on, its ridiculous that Nadal can stand 20 feet behind the baseline
and return 130 mph serves no problem because the court is as slow as a clay court.
There is little advantage in the serve for Anderson unless he nails the perfect serve.

Its absolutely ridiculous how much they have slowed these courts down. This makes
for horrible tennis, where defensive low risk moonballing can win over attacking players.

Like I said, good for Nadal, he got the W, but I find his defensive moonballing tennis
totally boring.

The only reason Fed beat Nadal at the AO was because the courts were faster. If you want to
see attacking tennis, speed the courts up at least to a medium pace.

Stay salty!!!

 

[junior74]

No, the only reason Federer beat Nadal at the AO is because the organisers gave him an extra days rest. On an even playing field, Nadal wins that final in 4.

UnacceptaBull

 

[clayqueen]

@clayqueen

19 > 16

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Don't just copy me, think for yourself.

 

[I am the Greatest!]

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Don't just copy me, think for yourself.

Imitation also is a form of mockery. Don't assume, think for yourself.

19 > 16

^What have you?

 

[smalahove]

Good for Nadal, but come on, its ridiculous that Nadal can stand 20 feet behind the baseline
and return 130 mph serves no problem because the court is as slow as a clay court.

Even if you're a die-hard Nadal fan, you have to acknowledge this.

You might think this is good development for the game of tennis, but there are issues with taking tennis into a such a direction. Just as the courts have been slowed down to neutralize the big servers, the pendulum seems to have swung over too much. And this nothing particular about Nadal, it's just he's by far the best to make these kinds of returns.

That being said, I wonder why the great servers facing him, don't utilize low paced serves to break his rythm, taking advantage that he stands so far behind. You're not going to hit an outright winner, but you might make him play a sub-par return. I mean, this is seldom seen, but when it happens, often as a consequence of an error on a first serve, it takes the returner by surprise, ending in a point won for the server.

 

[Bartelby]

That indeed was a very slow court added to a cakewalk draw.

 

[clayqueen]

Imitation also is a form of mockery. Don't assume, think for yourself.

19 > 16

^What have you?

Oh 'Lawd'. You are like an echo.

OK, repeat after me:

Nadal is the best player of this era.

 

[jimjam]

Oh 'Lawd'. You are like an echo.

I don't get involved in these mud-fights very often, but you gotta admit he got you with that comeback. It was quite smooth

 

[SummerBreeze]

No, the only reason Federer beat Nadal at the AO is because the organisers gave him an extra days rest. On an even playing field, Nadal wins that final in 4.

OK..

 

[fednad]

No, the only reason Federer beat Nadal at the AO is because the organisers gave him an extra days rest. On an even playing field, Nadal wins that final in 4.

Even playing field -- where everyone picks butts and arranges water bottles, takes medical time outs to disrupt opponent, take on court coaching ???

 

[albertobra]

I find a bit weird this argument, so much brought up here. A hard court clearly can be faster or slower, but it is still a hard court, and it is a totally different style of game, and that is the main point.
The same thing applies to grass court. So many here bring up argument of fast vs. slow grass court, which is clearly true, but the main point being is that grass court, involves a totally different style of game.
In both cases, in my view, what will make a player success on a court is his adaptation to surface, and the fact that is slightly faster or slightly slower, will have from very little to zero impact to the final result.

And what about clay courts? I have played in very fast clay courts, and in very slow ones as well. Why isn't this argument ever brought up when the surface is clay?