Hard Courts-The Medium Surface

[Conquistador]

Is it fair to say the best tennis players are shown on hard courts. My reason is because everyone didnt grow up on clay or grass. But Hard Courts are everywhere. In North America few clay courts and grass courts exist...In some countries there are a lot of clay courts but there are always hardcourts. Should we say that hard courts are kind of the even playing field. I mean It is an honor to become a specialist on clay or grass--but can we say that every variable kind of evens out when you play on hard courts--because they are in almost every country of the world?

 

[Nadal_Freak]

Every surface is equally important to showing someones greatness. Wimbledon and French Open show the true athletes while hard courts tend to favor ballbashers that need more grip on the surface to keep them balanced.

 

[deltox]

Every surface is equally important to showing someones greatness. Wimbledon and French Open show the true athletes while hard courts tend to favor ballbashers that need more grip on the surface to keep them balanced.

ballbashers? because they are hard court specialists?

i think indoor carpet is the best surface and it needs to be played more, as with grass. but hardcourts are the only reason some people get to play tennis because public parks can basically build HCs and check on them from time to time, clay courts require tons of upkeep. I dont mind the clay so much, but HC season is always the most exciting time of the year, usually starting around cinnci or indy til the masters. at least thats my opinion

 

[paterson]

A medium-paced hard court is the most fair surface because it allows agressive baseliners and all court players to play their absolute best tennis. The AO and USO usually produce the best quality tennis and most exciting matches.

I don't think you see the best tennis on clay. It's too specialized. It's a surface for guys who slide better than others. IMO, clay courts are not the ultimate test of talent for tennis players.

I am not a big fan of grass court tennis, it is a bit of a one-off. I'm in the minority, but I never really thought Wimbledon was all that great a tournament. Slowing down the grass surface has really improved Wimbledon. I remember back in the 90's when Sampras and Ivanisevic were hitting unreturnable serves and there was hardly a point played.

 

[Conquistador]

A medium-paced hard court is the most fair surface because it allows agressive baseliners and all court players to play their absolute best tennis. The AO and USO usually produce the best quality tennis and most exciting matches.

I don't think you see the best tennis on clay. It's too specialized. It's a surface for guys who slide better than others. IMO, clay courts are not the ultimate test of talent for tennis players.

I am not a big fan of grass court tennis, it is a bit of a one-off. I'm in the minority, but I never really thought Wimbledon was all that great a tournament. Slowing down the grass surface has really improved Wimbledon. I remember back in the 90's when Sampras and Ivanisevic were hitting unreturnable serves and there was hardly a point played.

I agree--the USTA is the best agency in the world when it comes to promoting their surface.

 

[Fedexeon]

Every surface is equally important to showing someones greatness. Wimbledon and French Open show the true athletes while hard courts tend to favor ballbashers that need more grip on the surface to keep them balanced.

Guess you won't be talking good bout grass court if Nadal hadn't won it last year. :twisted::twisted: