Hard court for the Rio Olympics 2016

[Deleted member 77403]

If Djokovic gets RG this year, then I am certain he will be making Rio a massive priority...and probably make a pit stop in Cincy on the way.

 

[Russeljones]

The decline of the verobrina trolls is almost sad.

 

[mike danny]

Back in 2008 Nadal was still developing his h/c game so he's a better h/c player now than he was then that's why he's dumped Novak twice at the USO final.

Nadal has improved so much on HC that he has won only 1 HC slam in the last 4 years.

Djokovic on the other hand has won 4.

Actually if we count this year Nadal has won 1 of the last 9 HC slams, while Djokovic has won 5 of the last 9 HC slams

 

[NatF]

The decline of the verobrina trolls is almost sad.

 

[Bartelby]

It's going to be very near water so presumably quite breezy.

 

[NatF]

It's going to be very near water so presumably quite breezy.

The return of Windray.

 

[RF-18]

Back in 2008 Nadal was still developing his h/c game so he's a better h/c player now than he was then that's why he's dumped Novak twice at the USO final.

Yea in two years nadal will be able to run like he does (he barely runs anymore now). Also HC is not good for his knees, who knows in what state he will be by then..

This was not good for nadal and he is probably angry now.

 

[octobrina10]

Nadal has improved so much on HC that he has won only 1 HC slam in the last 4 years...

Rafa defeated Djoko in the final of that HC slam.

 

[mike danny]

Rafa defeated Djoko in the final of that HC slam.

And Djoko defeated Rafa in 2 others. Your point?

 

[clayqueen]

So you should be thrilled then with the decision to have it on HC!

Great decision for Nadal.

I'm not bothered one way or the other.

 

[clayqueen]

And Djoko defeated Rafa in 2 others. Your point?

2:2 on Nole's preferred is good for Rafa.

 

[slal1984]

I guess they dont want Nadal to win...

 

[clayqueen]

Nadal has improved so much on HC that he has won only 1 HC slam in the last 4 years.

Djokovic on the other hand has won 4.

Actually if we count this year Nadal has won 1 of the last 9 HC slams, while Djokovic has won 5 of the last 9 HC slams

How many has he played?

 

[clayqueen]

I guess they dont want Nadal to win...

They know he won the OG on h/c so they do want him to win.

 

[Everanarose13]

Is this definitely confirmed??? Because I was watching a match a few weeks ago and I heard the commentators say how rio was going to be played on clay

 

[Deleted member 77403]

How many has he played?

And how many Olympics has Nadal played in since 2008?

That is actually a negative for Nadal, having missed out on several HC slams. He also missed out on defending his own Olympic title. When Nadal starts to perform consistently all season long, then he is a big threat...If he is constantly injured and skipping Olympics and Slams like he has, and lets not forget, he will be 30 by the time Rio happens, then it doesn't bode well for him.

 

[bluetrain4]

It's fine and understandable, but I would have liked to see red clay.

 

[kOaMaster]

I tend to say no to outdoor HC but honestly I don't care.

 

[LazyNinja19]

I get it. The majority of the tour is on Hard courts, so it makes sense to have the Olympics on HC.

But the surface should be chosen depending upon the conditions of the hosting nation. At London olympics, Grass was a suitable surface, since London is famous for the Wimbledon (even though Grass hardly has 3 weeks of tournaments in the calendar year).
Similarly, Clay courts form the majority of tennis surface in South America. So, Clay should have been the chosen surface.

But we clearly know why posters here supported Grass in London 2012, but won't support Clay in Rio 2016. Even though Grass tournaments are way lesser than Clay ones on the ATP tour.

It all comes down to Federer & Nadal. Yes! Even here. Just accept it people, and don't be hypocrites.

 

[Sysyphus]

Carpet. That would be cool.

 

[Sysyphus]

I get it. The majority of the tour is on Hard courts, so it makes sense to have the Olympics on HC.

But the surface should be chosen depending upon the conditions of the hosting nation. At London olympics, Grass was a suitable surface, since London is famous for the Wimbledon (even though Grass hardly has 3 weeks of tournaments in the calendar year).
Similarly, Clay courts form the majority of tennis surface in South America. So, Clay should have been the chosen surface.

But we clearly know why posters here supported Grass in London 2012, but won't support Clay in Rio 2016. Even though Grass tournaments are way lesser than Clay ones on the ATP tour.

It all comes down to Federer & Nadal. Yes! Even here. Just accept it people, and don't be hypocrites.

London olympics was grass because Wimbledon, though. When having the olympics in the same city as the mecca of tennis, it only makes sense holding it there.

 

[mike danny]

How many has he played?

Ok he played 6. But he still won only 1 out of those 6. Djokovic by contrast won 4 of those 6 HC slams Nadal participated in

 

[Russeljones]

I get it. The majority of the tour is on Hard courts, so it makes sense to have the Olympics on HC.

But the surface should be chosen depending upon the conditions of the hosting nation. At London olympics, Grass was a suitable surface, since London is famous for the Wimbledon (even though Grass hardly has 3 weeks of tournaments in the calendar year).
Similarly, Clay courts form the majority of tennis surface in South America. So, Clay should have been the chosen surface.

But we clearly know why posters here supported Grass in London 2012, but won't support Clay in Rio 2016. Even though Grass tournaments are way lesser than Clay ones on the ATP tour.

It all comes down to Federer & Nadal. Yes! Even here. Just accept it people, and don't be hypocrites.

You're all about Federer and Nadal. We've accepted that as soon as you made your first couple of posts.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

London olympics was grass because Wimbledon, though. When having the olympics in the same city as the mecca of tennis, it only makes sense holding it there.

Especially when the two tournaments happen weeks apart, then of course it should logically stay on grass. It would be a massive risk trying to rip out a grass surface throughout SW19 to put in HCs with such a small turn around.

 

[augustobt]

Fair enough.

The calendar of ATP tour is a complete mess, but it could be only worst if they put a major tournament played on clay in the middle of grass-medium/fast hard courts season.

 

[LazyNinja19]

London olympics was grass because Wimbledon, though. When having the olympics in the same city as the mecca of tennis, it only makes sense holding it there.

Of course the decision to play Olympics at Wimbledon was perfect. I agree, and this is what i said before. And i know there's no Clay court mecca in Brazil, like RG in Paris. But still, Clay court tennis is what tennis is about in that part of the world, and they should have tried to host olympics on it.

You're all about Federer and Nadal. We've accepted that as soon as you made your first couple of posts.

Nope uncle Russel. You're all about OHBH (Fed, Pete, Dimi) as everyone here knows.

Especially when the two tournaments happen weeks apart, then of course it should logically stay on grass. It would be a massive risk trying to rip out a grass surface throughout SW19 to put in HCs with such a small turn around.

Last time i checked, London did have Hard courts. Not to mention the Indoor Hard courts at the O2 arena. They could've hosted the Olympics there too. But of course, every other arena falls bland when compared to the prestigious SW19.

What i'm trying to say is, the posters in this thread saying Olympics shouldn't be held on Clay because HCs form the majority of the tour make no sense. Because i'm pretty sure majority of them did support the Olympics on Grass, which makes for even way lesser quantity on the ATP tour.

 

[clayqueen]

Nadal has improved so much on HC that he has won only 1 HC slam in the last 4 years.

Djokovic on the other hand has won 4.

Actually if we count this year Nadal has won 1 of the last 9 HC slams, while Djokovic has won 5 of the last 9 HC slams

Since 2012, Nadal has only played 4 h/c slams and won 1. Djokovic has played 7 and won 3. I suspect you are counting from 2011 which is when tennis started for some people.

 

[tennisaddict]

Nadal is the past, Novak is the future. Better to accept it now and save yourself a lot of misery in the future. :wink:

Wow. Bold statement.

May be we will visit this again closer to May.

 

[Crisstti]

I think it's shameful really. It's in South America ffs. No respect whatsoever for the tennis traditions of the place...

Yet when it was in England they had it on grass.

And yet more hc on the tour.

Because this isn't the era of Fedal anymore.

Djokovic is the number one player in the world now, by a considerable margin and a much better big match player.

He's not a better big match player than Nadal.

Djokovic has improved leaps and bounds since then.

He has improved his overall level, not sure he has improved much his top level.

 

[NatF]

Would of been nice to see clay. Would of felt more traditional - surely would of given home grown players more hope? Nonetheless it is unlikely to match the prestige of winning gold on center court at SW19.

 

[clayqueen]

Because this isn't the era of Fedal anymore.

Djokovic is the number one player in the world now, by a considerable margin and a much better big match player.

Big match player trailing 3:9 in slams.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

O


Last time i checked, London did have Hard courts. Not to mention the Indoor Hard courts at the O2 arena. They could've hosted the Olympics there too. But of course, every other arena falls bland when compared to the prestigious SW19.

What i'm trying to say is, the posters in this thread saying Olympics shouldn't be held on Clay because HCs form the majority of the tour make no sense. Because i'm pretty sure majority of them did support the Olympics on Grass, which makes for even way lesser quantity on the ATP tour.

Ahhh no. O2 arena does not have the facilities to host an event that big, with that many matches happening, in singles, doubles and mixed. It is designed for WTF only, since it is one match at a time. I have been to both, so I have a very good idea what the O2 is capable of doing. It was always going to be Wimbledon, and again, it had to be grass, because you can't change the surface that quickly from grass to HC in such a short period of time.

 

[merwy]

I would've liked clay as well. But Decrepitude makes a very good point saying hard court fits the season a lot better, since it's in the middle of hc season.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Big match player trailing 3:9 in slams.

http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/happy/rolling-on-the-floor-laughing-smiley-emoticon.gif

And how many times had he beaten Nadal in a big match back in 2008?

Nadal won ALL the big encounters between them at that point. Not quite what is happening right now.

 

[NatF]

Ahhh no. O2 arena does not have the facilities to host an event that big, with that many matches happening, in singles, doubles and mixed. It is designed for WTF only, since it is one match at a time. I have been to both, so I have a very good idea what the O2 is capable of doing. It was always going to be Wimbledon, and again, it had to be grass, because you can't change the surface that quickly from grass to HC in such a short period of time.

It would of been sacrilege to put a hard court at Wimbledon.

 

[LazyNinja19]

Ahhh no. O2 arena does not have the facilities to host an event that big, with that many matches happening, in singles, doubles and mixed. It is designed for WTF only, since it is one match at a time. I have been to both, so I have a very good idea what the O2 is capable of doing. It was always going to be Wimbledon, and again, it had to be grass, because you can't change the surface that quickly from grass to HC in such a short period of time.

oh okay. My bad. I didn't know this.
Anyways, it would have been a crime to not host the London Olympics at Wimbledon.

 

[Crisstti]

Ahhh no. O2 arena does not have the facilities to host an event that big, with that many matches happening, in singles, doubles and mixed. It is designed for WTF only, since it is one match at a time. I have been to both, so I have a very good idea what the O2 is capable of doing. It was always going to be Wimbledon, and again, it had to be grass, because you can't change the surface that quickly from grass to HC in such a short period of time.

So?, they could have built the whole thing. It's what they're doing in Brazil.

It would of been sacrilege to put a hard court at Wimbledon.

Yet apparently it's OK to hold the OG on HC in South America...

 

[clayqueen]

And how many times had he beaten Nadal in a big match back in 2008?

Nadal won ALL the big encounters between them at that point. Not quite what is happening right now.

Why didn't Novak bring his big match play to 3 FOs that he's lost since he became a pressurized man?

 

[NatF]

Yet apparently it's OK to hold the OG on HC in South America...

I said I would of preferred clay for tradition. Besides that it's hardly the same thing, Brazil doesn't have a slam that it would be resurfacing...

It was probably chosen because it's easier to make a hardcourt. Which is a shame and the reason why that surface is the most common now by far.

 

[vanioMan]

Well lets just remove the natural surfaces in this game and make every single tournament on hardcourt, shall we?

1968 Main tour:

22 Events

Outdoor Clay - 12/22 = 54.6%
Outdoor Grass - 6/22 = 27.3%
Indoor Carpet - 2/22 = 9.1%
Indoor Hard - 1/2 2= 4.5%
Outdoor Hard - 1 = 4.5%

1969 Main tour:

32 Events

Outdoor Clay - 16/32 = 50%
Outdoor Grass - 9/32 = 28.1%
Indoor Carpet - 3/32 = 9.4%
Outdoor Hard - 2/32 = 6.3%
Indoor Hard - 1/32 = 3.1%
Outdoor Carpet - 1/32 = 3.1%

2012 Main tour (including Olympics):

66 Events

Outdoor Clay - 23/66 - 34.8%
Outdoor Hard - 20/66 - 30.3%
Indoor Hard - 17/66 - 25.8%
Outdoor Grass 7/66 - 9.1%

Tennis Olympics (Open era):

1984 - Hardcourt
1988 - Hardcourt
1992 - Red clay
1996 - Hardcourt
2000 - Hardcourt
2004 - Hardcourt
2008 - Hardcourt
2012 - Grass
2016 - Hardcourt

This is for the people who say this is a fair decision. Fair my a**.

 

[tennisaddict]

why do we care so much about local sentiments ? It is not that there is any top local guy capable of going deep.

We have to go with the tennis season.

Versatile players should not have any complaints about surfaces.

 

[NatF]

Well lets just remove the natural surfaces in this game and make every single tournament on hardcourt, shall we?

1968 Main tour:

22 Events

Outdoor Clay - 12/22 = 54.6%
Outdoor Grass - 6/22 = 27.3%
Indoor Carpet - 2/22 = 9.1%
Indoor Hard - 1/2 2= 4.5%
Outdoor Hard - 1 = 4.5%

1969 Main tour:

32 Events

Outdoor Clay - 16/32 = 50%
Outdoor Grass - 9/32 = 28.1%
Indoor Carpet - 3/32 = 9.4%
Outdoor Hard - 2/32 = 6.3%
Indoor Hard - 1/32 = 3.1%
Outdoor Carpet - 1/32 = 3.1%

2012 Main tour (including Olympics):

66 Events

Outdoor Clay - 23/66 - 34.8%
Outdoor Hard - 20/66 - 30.3%
Indoor Hard - 17/66 - 25.8%
Outdoor Grass 7/66 - 9.1%

Tennis Olympics (Open era):

1984 - Hardcourt
1988 - Hardcourt
1992 - Red clay
1996 - Hardcourt
2000 - Hardcourt
2004 - Hardcourt
2008 - Hardcourt
2012 - Grass
2016 - Hardcourt

This is for the people who say this is a fair decision. Fair my a**.

Not sure where fair comes into this? Why should they be obligated to put a clay court down? If it's unfair to anyone it's to their own players who would appreciate a clay court. But it's quite possible that HC is more cost effective for them and therefore more fair to local economy etc...

They don't owe Rafa anything

 

[Crisstti]

I said I would of preferred clay for tradition. Besides that it's hardly the same thing, Brazil doesn't have a slam that it would be resurfacing...

It was probably chosen because it's easier to make a hardcourt. Which is a shame and the reason why that surface is the most common now by far.

Yeah, you expressed some mild support for it being on clay here while said it would have beena sacrilege to hold it on hc in England. No, indeed there isn't a slam nor any kind of big tournament in all of South America, despite many countries having a great tennis tradition and tennis being a very popular sport... certainly more popular than in the US, England, Asia...

They're spending a huge amount of money in building the whole thing. I seriously doubt money was the reason they chose hc. Though it's probably the case overall in the tour.

 

[vanioMan]

Not sure where fair comes into this? Why should they be obligated to put a clay court down? If it's unfair to anyone it's to their own players who would appreciate a clay court. But it's quite possible that HC is more cost effective for them and therefore more fair to local economy etc...

They don't owe Rafa anything

They "owe" the game and the traditions respect

 

[Deleted member 77403]

So?, they could have built the whole thing. It's what they're doing in Brazil.

Brazil did not have world class facilities already at their disposal. Wimbledon is Grand Slam, it has all the facilities built in...As part of their bid, London proposed to use Wimbledon which meant there were not going to be any potential planning delays, which worked in their favor in securing the bid.

Why didn't Novak bring his big match play to 3 FOs that he's lost since he became a pressurized man?

I never said he is perfect did I? I said he is a BETTER big match player than he was in 2008, and that is unquestionable. He has defeated Federer, Nadal, and Murray in several slam finals now. He is much more consistent in his game and is the world number one... big difference from 08, when he was still in Fedal's shadow.

 

[NatF]

Yeah, you expressed some mild support for it being on clay here while said it would have beena sacrilege to hold it on hc in England. No, indeed there isn't a slam nor any kind of big tournament in all of South America, despite many countries having a great tennis tradition and tennis being a very popular sport... certainly more popular than in the US, England, Asia...

They're spending a huge amount of money in building the whole thing. I seriously doubt money was the reason they chose hc. Though it's probably the case overall in the tour.

I was jesting with it being sacrilege...though that was to do with it being at Wimbledon on HC. A separate HC venue wouldn't of been as bad, though still wasteful IMO.

I'm sorry you're so upset at this news, so much so that apparently 'mild' support is enough to draw your ire . Brazil doesn't have the best economy IIRC. Wouldn't surprise me if money came into it. The only other logical explanation is to keep up with the format of the tour - though there are clay tournies after Wimbledon and before the summer HC's.

There doesn't seem to be a compelling reason for HC other than $$$. I think clay would of given it a special aura so it is a shame.

 

[Crisstti]

Brazil did not have world class facilities already at their disposal. Wimbledon is Grand Slam, it has all the facilities built in...As part of their bid, London proposed to use Wimbledon which meant there were not going to be any potential planning delays, which worked in their favor in securing the bid.




I never said he is perfect did I? I said he is a BETTER big match player than he was in 2008, and that is unquestionable. He has defeated Federer, Nadal, and Murray in several slam finals now. He is much more consistent in his game and is the world number one... big difference from 08, when he was still in Fedal's shadow.

If the OG should be played on hc due to "fairness" then they should have built the facilities. A much poorer country is.

And no, Brazil didn't have any worldclass facilities because there are no big tournaments played here... despite the tennis tradition and popularity. And now that there's going to be a one time big event, they can't even bother to respect the tennis tradition of the place.

 

[NatF]

They "owe" the game and the traditions respect

Perhaps, but I don't think it's some big outrage. A shame but hardly 'unfair' IMO. I understand our views differing on this though.

 

[Crisstti]

I was jesting with it being sacrilege...though that was to do with it being at Wimbledon on HC. A separate HC venue wouldn't of been as bad, though still wasteful IMO.

I'm sorry you're so upset at this news, so much so that apparently 'mild' support is enough to draw your ire . Brazil doesn't have the best economy IIRC. Wouldn't surprise me if money came into it. The only other logical explanation is to keep up with the format of the tour - though there are clay tournies after Wimbledon and before the summer HC's.

There doesn't seem to be a compelling reason for HC other than $$$. I think clay would of given it a special aura so it is a shame.

No way money came into it. They're spending tons of it to build these facilities. They surely could have cut expenses in a number of things before the surface if that was an issue. I mean, every tennis club can afford to have clay courts. It's surely no issue here.

It's on hc because the ITF wanted it so, period.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

If the OG should be played on hc due to "fairness" then they should have built the facilities. A much poorer country is.


And no, Brazil didn't have any worldclass facilities because there are no big tournaments played here... despite the tennis tradition and popularity. And now that there's going to be a one time big event, they can't even bother to respect the tennis tradition of the place.

These people are doing everything in their power to host the Olympics, and if they have a big thing like Wimbledon at their disposal to give them the edge of their competitors to be able to host the Olympics, they will use it. And yes, having Wimbledon in their back pocket did give them points that other countries needed to justify from not only building costs, but transportation etc. Also, since it happened straight after Wimbledon, it would be part of the grass season, and not just placed anywhere randomly on the calender to stick out like a sore thumb.

Regarding Brazil. While I feel they should have gone with clay, the only thing I can think is they are thinking it is happening before a Slam, and decided to cater towards that. Plus HCs are easier and cheaper to lay down...and in a country where there have been all kinds of politicial issues regarding the cost of hosting not only the Olympics but the World Cup, and I see them possibly penny pinching.