Federer's poor record at the Paris Masters.

[The_18th_Slam]

If you really want me to I'm sure I can find an article or a quote from a couple players comparing the court speed between Paris 2010 and WTF 2010

That wouldn't be proof. That would just be opinion.

although that will take a lot of effort, but IMO this is just silly.

To me, it's just as silly to say the WTF isn't slower now than it was in 2010.

Anyone who was following tennis closely around that time knows how fast the Paris courts were that year, and that the WTF courts were not close. I will dig around for the "proof" if you really want me to though. Were you watching tennis then? Paris 2010 was an extraordinarily fast court, and everyone commented on it.

So, basically, you're going to use your "eye test" for your claims. But for the claims I make, you need "proof". Is that it? Yeah, very consistent. Hypocrite.

 

[Noelan]

This is so true. We will hear USO is slowed down in few days.

It must be that Shanhgai is also slowed down this year , to alow to famous HC player Ramos Vinolas to defeat greatest fast HC player of all time and all the universes.
ATP conspiracy

 

[President]

@The_18th_Slam Here is some more proof.

What are the fastest and slowest surfaces on the ATP tour?

Each tournament's relative ace rate is calculated by estimating how many aces each player would hit in each match on a neutral surface, then comparing that number to the actual number of aces hit.

Paris Masters 10A% 1.39
World Tour Finals 10A% 1.08

http://tennisabstract.com/reports/surfaceSpeedATP.html

That is a direct statistical comparison between the two tournaments for 2010. The only tournaments that recorded a higher result than the 2010 Paris Masters are a very high altitude clay tournament and the indoor Montpellier and Vienna tournaments which are probably the fastest surfaces on tour. The 2010 WTF is of very ordinary speed in comparison.

 

[Noelan]

Not quite. The 2010 Paris masters was very quick by modern standards. Fed still lost in the semis to Monfils, but the tournament still gave very different results than the usual grinding, with Llodra (!) and Söderling in the semis as well.

Yeah I know heard that story 1000 times, still he didn't won it, also Novak lost to Lodra.

 

[President]

Not quite. The 2010 Paris masters was very quick by modern standards. Fed still lost in the semis to Monfils, but the tournament still gave very different results than the usual grinding, with Llodra (!) and Söderling in the semis as well.

Do you think the 2010 Paris Masters was faster than the 2010 World Tour Finals? I think it was quite clearly significantly faster.

 

[The_18th_Slam]

@The_18th_Slam Here is some more proof.



http://tennisabstract.com/reports/surfaceSpeedATP.html

That is a direct statistical comparison between the two tournaments for 2010. The only tournaments that recorded a higher result than the 2010 Paris Masters are a very high altitude clay tournament and the indoor Montpellier tournament which is one of the fastest surfaces on tour. The 2010 WTF is of very ordinary speed in comparison.

And in the same link:

2009 WTF: 1.18
2010 WTF: 1.08
2011 WTF: 0.97

There is my proof for the WTF getting slower.

 

[abmk]

Do you think the 2010 Paris Masters was faster than the 2010 World Tour Finals? I think it was quite clearly significantly faster.

Paris 2010 was considerably faster than YEC 2010 ...

 

[Sysyphus]

Yeah I know heard that story 1000 times, still he didn't won it, also Novak lost to Lodra.

Well exactly. Upsets are more occurrent in quick conditions. No rule that Fed must win every time.








Although Novak sure would lose more often

 

[President]

Paris 2010 was considerably faster than YEC 2010 ...

Please tell that to @The_18th_Slam

 

[The_18th_Slam]

Please tell that to @The_18th_Slam

Why? I asked for proof, not opinion.

 

[Sysyphus]

Do you think the 2010 Paris Masters was faster than the 2010 World Tour Finals? I think it was quite clearly significantly faster.

I have no idea about the conditions of WTF 2010, though my guess would be that Paris was quicker.
That's quite besides anything I've argued though.

 

[abmk]

Please tell that to @The_18th_Slam

I'm sure quite a few have already done that ..

But YEC did also appear to be slower from 2011 onwards to me ....

 

[The_18th_Slam]

I'm sure quite a few have already done that ..

But YEC did also appear to be slower from 2011 onwards to me ....

For the record, of course Paris 2010 was faster. I only asked him to "prove it" because he asked me to prove that the WTF was getting slower. And in the same link that he provided, the stats suggest that the WTF has been getting slower.

 

[President]

And in the same link:

2009 WTF: 1.18
2010 WTF: 1.08
2011 WTF: 0.97

There is my proof for the WTF getting slower.

Your original assertion was "The WTF wasn't as slow in 2010 as it is today." If I were to nitpick to the same extent you do, I would argue that we have no data for the WTF for 2012, 2013, and 2014 and thus no conclusions can be drawn from this data (Federer actually did better at the WTF the slower it got, it seems). In addition, I think 2011 was probably the slowest year in recent memory and since 2013 tour conditions have generally sped up. I am willing to concede that it probably was slower last year than it was in 2009, although I don't think it was faster in 2010 (from my eye test, I have no data for last year). The slowdown at the WTF is still nowhere near the huge gap in surface speed between the 2010 Paris Masters and the 2010 World Tour Finals though, as shown by this data.

 

[Bukmeikara]

Tsonga is like "Baby dont hurt me .... dont hurt me no more"

 

[The_18th_Slam]

Your original assertion was "The WTF wasn't as slow in 2010 as it is today." If I were to nitpick to the same extent you do, I would argue that we have no data for the WTF for 2012, 2013, and 2014 and thus no conclusions can be drawn from this data (Federer actually did better at the WTF the slower it got, it seems). I am willing to concede that it probably was slower last year than it was in 2009, although I don't think it was faster in 2010 (from my eye test, I have no data for last year). The slowdown at the WTF is still nowhere near the huge gap in surface speed between the 2010 Paris Masters and the 2010 World Tour Finals though, as shown by this data.

The only reason I asked you to prove it was to make a point. You seemed perfectly willing to go by your eye-test for your claims, but were asking for proof when I went by my eye-test. That seemed very hypocritical.

 

[Inanimate_object]

For the record, of course Paris 2010 was faster. I only asked him to "prove it" because he asked me to prove that the WTF was getting slower. And in the same link that he provided, the stats suggest that the WTF has been getting slower.

How predictably petty of you.

 

[The_18th_Slam]

How predictably petty of you.

Actually, it was very smart. I made him look for the proof I needed

 

[Noelan]

Well exactly. Upsets are more occurrent in quick conditions. No rule that Fed must win every time.
Although Novak sure would lose more often

As for Novak sure, If I were at the same wavelength with you I would say that Novaks mind was allready in Belgrade , DC Final you know, but I'm not. Loddra played fantastic tournament. I've heard that that year Frenchies didn't have enough time to prepare courts differently (no way that they would favored Tsonga/Loddra/Monfils or any other home players) (it was a very thin layer of substrate over the parquet in Bercy where previously held a competition in another sport)

And should, would , could

 

[President]

For the record, of course Paris 2010 was faster. I only asked him to "prove it" because he asked me to prove that the WTF was getting slower. And in the same link that he provided, the stats suggest that the WTF has been getting slower.

There really is no proof that the tour finals were slower in 2012, 2013, and 2014 than in 2010. You said "The WTF wasn't as slow in 2010 as it is today." We have no data for recent years. Since 2012/2013 I think the tour surfaces have started to speed up, although I have no proof of that (apart from various tournament directors saying that things have gone too far and need to be changed).

And the data showed that Federer actually seemed to do better at the WTF the slower the tournament got. Wasn't your original assertion that the court speed in Paris was a contributor to Federer's relative difficulties at that tournament? That is what we are discussing, yes? I think the slow and low surface at Paris is very well suited for Federer's game. That is all I was ever trying to argue.

 

[President]

The only reason I asked you to prove it was to make a point. You seemed perfectly willing to go by your eye-test for your claims, but were asking for proof when I went by my eye-test. That seemed very hypocritical.

That is because there was an extremely drastic difference in speed between Paris 2010 and Paris 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014. Do you really think the slowdown was that dramatic at the WTF? Come on, be reasonable man.

 

[The_18th_Slam]

There really is no proof that the tour finals were slower in 2012, 2013, and 2014 than in 2010.

Well, if you're gonna be pedantic, I'll say "ace rate" is not a reliable metric for speed of the surface. It's also very dependent on the quality of returners, the trueness of the surface, and other factors. Can you prove that the faster the surface, the higher the ace-rate? You can't, so how are the stats you provided proof of anything? See, I can do it, too.

Since 2012/2013 I think the tour surfaces have started to speed up, although I have no proof of that (apart from various tournament directors saying that things have gone too far and need to be changed) And the data showed that Federer actually seemed to do better at the WTF the slower the tournament got. Wasn't your original assertion that the court speed in Paris was a contributor to Federer's relative difficulties at that tournament? That is what we are discussing, yes? I think the slow and low surface at Paris is very well suited for Federer's game. That is all I was ever trying to argue.

Not necessarily. Look at Monte Carlo. He did better when the surface played faster, according to your stats. It's easy to extrapolate based on cherry-pickings to conclude whatever suits your agenda.

 

[The_18th_Slam]

That is because there was an extremely drastic difference in speed between Paris 2010 and Paris 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014. Do you really think the slowdown was that dramatic at the WTF? Come on, be reasonable man.

It doesn't have to be. I know Paris was very fast in 2010. I only asked you to prove it because you asked me to prove that the WTF was being slowed down. It's the principle I'm talking about.

 

[President]

It doesn't have to be. I know Paris was very fast in 2010. I only asked you to prove it because you asked me to prove that the WTF was being slowed down. It's the principle I'm talking about.

It's a question of degrees. Of course, if you want to be very pedantic you can say that you should provide proof for anything, but the surface in Paris was so obviously much faster than in later years that I felt that proof was unnecessary. That was not true for the WTF, you can see that, right? The difference is much slighter in comparison.

Anyway, do you still really believe that Federer's results in Paris are because the court is too slow and not well suited for his game? I just totally disagree (to me, I think scheduling is pretty much entirely the problem), but I guess we have established that there is no way to definitively prove this either way (obviously).

 

[The_18th_Slam]

It's a question of degrees. Of course, if you want to be very pedantic you can say that you should provide proof for anything, but the surface in Paris was so obviously much faster than in later years that I felt that proof was unnecessary. That was not true for the WTF, you can see that, right? The difference is much slighter in comparison.

Isn't that a little arbitrary? Where do you draw the line on when proof is necessary and when it isn't? Because, to me, it seems like you draw it where it favors you.

Anyway, do you still really believe that Federer's results in Paris are because the court is too slow and not well suited for his game? I just totally disagree (to me, I think scheduling is pretty much entirely the problem), but I guess we have established that there is no way to definitively prove this either way (obviously).

As I've said, there are multiple reasons. I listed one of them. I find that the most frustrating, because the surface is painfully slow (to me, just in case you ask me to prove it), and that's perhaps why that was the first and only reason I pointed out. But now that you're asking nicely instead of laughing at my answer as if it were stupid, I'll answer just as nicely:

There are multiple reasons why he has been less successful there. Some of them, in my opinion, are:
1. In his prime, he didn't care very much for it, because he was more concerned with Basel and WTF, which led to him skipping it in his best years (2004, 2005, 2006)
2. Back in the mid-2000s, the Masters weren't seen as important as they are today (this factors into 1)
3. Once he started caring for Masters seriously (which was around the point he stopped winning Slams), the surface became very slow, which isn't conducive to his game

 

[torpantennis]

The bounce on that court doesn't skid through. Rather, it's super slow and gum-like, which is very bad for Federer's game.

 

[President]

Isn't that a little arbitrary? Where do you draw the line on when proof is necessary and when it isn't? Because, to me, it seems like you draw it where it favors you.

When we are comparing the heights of two guys who are 6'4" and 5'8", wouldn't you say that it is a bit silly to ask for proof of the difference? But if they are 6'4" and 6'3", it is more understandable to want to measure them if you want to compare their height. The difference in the WTF is much more gradual, and again my feeling is that it is probably about the same speed as 2010 now (just my opinion, unfortunately we have no data).

As I've said, there are multiple reasons. I listed one of them. I find that the most frustrating, because the surface is painfully slow (to me, just in case you ask me to prove it), and that's perhaps why that was the first and only reason I pointed out. But now that you're asking nicely instead of laughing at my answer as if it were stupid, I'll answer just as nicely:

There are multiple reasons why he has been less successful there. Some of them, in my opinion, are:
1. In his prime, he didn't care very much for it, because he was more concerned with Basel and WTF, which led to him skipping it in his best years (2004, 2005, 2006)
2. Back in the mid-2000s, the Masters weren't seen as important as they are today (this factors into 1)
3. Once he started caring for Masters seriously (which was around the point he stopped winning Slams), the surface became very slow, which isn't conducive to his game

I totally agree with reasons 1 and 2. I have only been talking about the last 5 years. As you know already, I take issue with reason #3 because the Paris Masters is supposed to be the exact same surface as the WTF (a tournament at which IMO Federer has done very well at in this time period, only losing to one player, Djokovic, since 2010, apart from the 2013 injury fiasco), and in the years that we have data Paris actually appears to be faster. I just don't think the surface in Paris is the reason he has done relatively poorly at the tournament to date. It seems we won't come to common ground though, so let's end the discussion and agree to disagree.

 

[duaneeo]

Paris had a different champion (with a diverse group of players) for nine consecutive years from 2004 - 2012: Safin, Berdych, Davydenko, Nalbandian, Djokovic, Tsonga, Soderling, Federer, and Ferrer. I've always wondered what made it so difficult to win multiple times.

 

[President]

Paris had a different champion (with a diverse group of players) for nine consecutive years from 2004 - 2012: Safin, Berdych, Davydenko, Nalbandian, Djokovic, Tsonga, Soderling, Federer, and Ferrer. I've always wondered what made it so difficult to win multiple times.

It's at the end of the year and most players are burned out. The top guys also have the WTF in the very near aftermath of the Paris Masters, so oftentimes they don't put in their best effort, although Djokovic seems to be changing that paradigm.

 

[kishnabe]

Some opponents played mad amazing....ala Benneteau and Nalbandian.

 

[The_18th_Slam]

When we are comparing the heights of two guys who are 6'4" and 5'8", wouldn't you say that it is a bit silly to ask for proof of the difference? But if they are 6'4" and 6'3", it is more understandable to want to measure them if you want to compare their height. The difference in the WTF is much more gradual, and again my feeling is that it is probably about the same speed as 2010 now (just my opinion, unfortunately we have no data).

Well, fair enough. I generally don't know where to look these stats up, which is why it irked me that you asked for proof.

I totally agree with reasons 1 and 2. I have only been talking about the last 5 years. As you know already, I take issue with reason #3 because the Paris Masters is supposed to be the exact same surface as the WTF (a tournament at which IMO Federer has done very well at in this time period, only losing to one player, Djokovic, since 2010, apart from the 2013 injury fiasco), and in the years that we have data Paris actually appears to be faster. I just don't think the surface in Paris is the reason he has done relatively poorly at the tournament to date. It seems we won't come to common ground though, so let's end the discussion and agree to disagree.

But, since 2011, haven't his results at the WTF and Paris been comparable? I think so. But yes, let's agree to disagree.

 

[Livedeath]

This is so true. We will hear USO is slowed down in few days.

It has been since 2009.

 

[Gary20]

From 2011 onwards, it has been the exact same surface as the WTF which Federer has done very well at. I think he just doesn't want to exhaust himself before the WTF in most years.

Spot on. Fedrer is concentrating on WTF. Nadal is usually thinking about Davis Cup around now, Murray is talikng about pulling out of WTF. Ill bet Murray goes out early in Paris.

Paris indoors the least important of the Masters 1000 due to its position in the calendar.

 

[Luckydog]

has to do with placement in the calendar with it being between Basel and YEC

did not play it in his peak years in 04,05,06

Lost to a peaking nalby in 07, peaking murray in 08 -- neither of them bad losses.

lost to benneteau in 09 - an upset, but benneateau played really well ....

10 - surface was faster than in other years and it was fun to watch the tourney that year, he lost to monfils after having MPs - definitely a winnable match and tourney ..

was determined to win it in 11 and did win it ..

DNP in 12

lost to djoko in 13

lost to chardy in 14 , IIRC had MPs ...a bad loss ...

In 2009,the court was soooooo fast! In my memory,when Roger faced off Benneateau,the French guy made 25 1st serve in a row and won that tough match.I think at the present,the court has been as slow as sandpaper. BNP Paribas has become a totally different event.....

 

[Djokovic2011]

IMO the WTF got a bit lower from 2012 onwards. Maybe it was me but I noticed something different to it after watching it in 2011. In 2012 there was a slight change to the court.

Funny how that always seems to be the case whenever Djokovic starts dominating a tournament.

 

[Inanimate_object]

Funny how that always seems to be the case whenever Djokovic starts dominating a tournament.

That the court is possibly slower doesn't ever diminish the achievement of winning on it. You see alot of buffoons claiming that fast court tennis is "real" tennis. A win today in Paris means just as much as when it was lightning quick six or seven years ago.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Tsonga is like "Baby dont hurt me .... dont hurt me no more"

At least he's now got Noura to show him what is love.

 

[tennisaddict]

Hard courts should be slick and super fast. If we need slow surfaces, there is always clay .

Organizers have made a mess of the court during the last decade in the interest of increasing rallies in matches. Hence the 6 hr classic 2012 AO SF and Finals.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

This thread is special, very very special.