Historically, what strengths would one need to dominate each surface?

tennisplayer1993

Professional
I have always wondered what people felt the strengths needed to dominate certain surfaces

1) Grass
2) HC - Outdoor/Indoor
3) Clay
 

NEW_BORN

Hall of Fame
Clay - Error-free baseline game, patience, stamina
Grass - Massive serve, slick movement
HC - All-round game, powerful groundstrokes
 

Drlexus

Banned
Clay- supreme stamina and tactical acumen and one huge groundstroke that can pin guys behind the baseline to illicit the shortball so points can then be ended

Grass - great second serve and return of serve and solid volleys.

Hardcourt - clean technique and ability to take the ball early and on the rise.
 

Charlemagne

Hall of Fame
Clay- physicality, ability to create angles and complex schemes, stamina etc

Grass- good slice, good footwork and movement, big serve etc
 

NBP

Hall of Fame
In the midst of way too many boring Fed/Nadal AO threads, this one is very good.
 

Elektra

Professional
Nowadays tennis is monolithic where it is designed to help speed up the game and rewards people with weapons.

An all around finesse game to dominate each surface. First is having the ability to hold serve, creating good placement. Hard courts reward everybody's game and rewards different ways of playing but often helps servers and big forehand on a faster surface. On a slower surface, hardcourts reward counterpunchers and sometimes pushers. Hardcourt is all about hitting winners, even though rallies happen quite often. Hard court benefits players who are very athletic and have good footwork, hard court reward traction. Grass is good for people who have instinicts, it used to benefit crafty people like serve and volleys but nowadays grass benefits servers and players who play on making their shots. Grass tennis is not meant for the most athletic people, it rewards for short play and craftiness. Clay is for people who love to think, use their imagination on court and create rallies. Clay takes away or downgrades a players weapon which makes it easier to read and negate.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
For clay, you need stamina, patience and persistence, and an ability to rally a lot without unforced errors

For grass, you need an attacking instinct and to take risks, to be more aggressive on groundstrokes and volleys

For hardcourt, you need better footwork and an ability to hit a lot of winners
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Had he hit it that well he might have won a CYGS in 06 or 07 you know ;)

2006 was his chance, he had the advantage and then tactically went to sleep. Nadal was just too damn good on clay in 2007. I'm pretty happy with Fed's career though ;) Only thing missing for me is an 8th Wimbledon.
 
Last edited:
You need to seperate hc indoor and outdoor. Look at Federer vs Nadal h2h record on those 2 conditions to see what I mean

I think that is more accurate to say low-bouncing (fast) HC vs. high-bouncing (slow) HC than indoor vs outdoor HC (at least when it comes to Federer and Nadal).

:cool:
 

Rafa the King

Hall of Fame
2006 was his chance, he had the advantage and then tactically went to sleep. Nadal was just too damn good on clay in 2007. I'm pretty happy with Fed's carry though ;) Only thing missing for me is an 8th Wimbledon.

There still is something missing :eek:
Would you rather have a magical Wimbledon run which ends in his 8th there or would you rather take a 2nd RG beating Rafa in a 5-set epic
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
There still is something missing :eek:
Would you rather have a magical Wimbledon run which ends in his 8th there or would you rather take a 2nd RG beating Rafa in a 5-set epic

Wimbledon. Federer has done his business at the FO as far as I'm concerned. The DCS doesn't interest me as much as Wimbledon does.
 

Rafa the King

Hall of Fame
Wimbledon. Federer has done his business at the FO as far as I'm concerned. The DCS doesn't interest me as much as Wimbledon does.

Y'all not telling the truth. If Rafa was to have one last slam I'd pick him beating Federer and Djokovic back to back at WIM (or AO) over a magical La Decima run.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Y'all not telling the truth. If Rafa was to have one last slam I'd pick him beating Federer and Djokovic back to back at WIM (or AO) over a magical La Decima run.

I always tell the truth. DCS is irrelevant for me. Winning the FO twice would elevate Federer's status as a clay courter but plenty of players have 2 FO's - no one has 8 Wimbledons going all the way back to 1800's. Federer provided his mettle on clay by making 5 finals. That 8th Wimbledon, the most prestigious title in tennis, would be a transcendent achievement. It's also the tournament that is closest to Federer's heart which matters a great deal to me.
 

Rafa the King

Hall of Fame
I always tell the truth. DCS is irrelevant for me. Winning the FO twice would elevate Federer's status as a clay courter but plenty of players have 2 FO's - no one has 8 Wimbledons going all the way back to 1800's. Federer provided his mettle on clay by making 5 finals. That 8th Wimbledon, the most prestigious title in tennis, would be a transcendent achievement. It's also the tournament that is closest to Federer's heart which matters a great deal to me.

It's not about the DCGS, that's just something new people have thought about, it's about beating Rafa is paris
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
It's not about the DCGS, that's just something new people have thought about, it's about beating Rafa is paris

Nadal isn't the same. At their bests Nadal was too good there. I'd rather Federer avenged 2008 and stamped his mark at Wimbledon.
 
D

Deleted member 512391

Guest
Who needs Wawrinka's backhand when you have an oil painting?

I'm not sure how many Wimbledon's (and tournaments on grass in general) he would've won with Stan's backhand. It would've been easy to exploit his backhand on a faster and low-bouncing surface if he had that long back-swing. Also, Wawa's slice is non-existent, it's basically a floater that doesn't do any damage, except for giving him a time to recover and it would've been very easy to attack and pulverize such balls. Federer's slice is a scary weapon, especially on grass.

While Wawrinka has more power in his backhand and it's generally a heavier shot than Fed's, it lacks varieties and wouldn't allow Roger to fully employ his all-court game. It might've helped him against Nadal, but I'm not sure would it help him against the rest of the field.
 

SinjinCooper

Hall of Fame
Pre-Open Era: You had heard of tennis, and possibly played it. This level of preparation was more than adequate on all surfaces.

1968-2002: Scintillating all court tennis, everywhere but clay. On clay, ability to hit crosscourt, plus great fitness.

2003-present: Ability to hit crosscourt, plus great fitness. More than adequate on all surfaces.
 

Rafa the King

Hall of Fame
Nadal isn't the same. At their bests Nadal was too good there. I'd rather Federer avenged 2008 and stamped his mark at Wimbledon.

To each his own I guess my friend :) but I personally have 2 matches I always wished Rafa would get revenge for. The WIM 07 final, which he did in 07 and the AO 12 final.

@Martin J I meant that he'd have Wawrinka's bh on clay. He'd just have the ability to hit it that way too and Rog is nearest we've have to perfect all-rounder anyway
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
I'm not sure how many Wimbledon's (and tournaments on grass in general) he would've won with Stan's backhand. It would've been easy to exploit his backhand on a faster and low-bouncing surface if he had that long back-swing. Also, Wawa's slice is a non-existent, it's basically a floater that doesn't do any damage, except for giving him a time to recover and it would've been very easy to attack and pulverize such balls. Federer's slice is a scary weapon, especially on grass.

While Wawrinka has more power in his backhand and it's generally a heavier shot than Fed's, it lacks varieties and wouldn't allow Roger to fully employ his all-court game. It might've helped him against Nadal, but I'm not sure would it help him against the rest of the field.

I agree totally, Federer is at his best when he's on the baseline taking the ball early, using the short slice and mixing up play. With Wawrinka's backhand he'd suffer in pretty much every area aside from maybe trading backhand drives on clay - but even there Wawrinka hasn't had any more success against the big players on clay than Federer.

To each his own I guess my friend :) but I personally have 2 matches I always wished Rafa would get revenge for. The WIM 07 final, which he did in 07 and the AO 12 final.

For me it's the Wimbledon losses to Nadal and Djokovic, the AO 2009 was next. I'd like Federer to score a win over Nadal/Djokovic at the USO as well.

My list is quite long :D
 

H_Richardson

Semi-Pro
I agree totally, Federer is at his best when he's on the baseline taking the ball early, using the short slice and mixing up play. With Wawrinka's backhand he'd suffer in pretty much every area aside from maybe trading backhand drives on clay - but even there Wawrinka hasn't had any more success against the big players on clay than Federer.



For me it's the Wimbledon losses to Nadal and Djokovic, the AO 2009 was next. I'd like Federer to score a win over Nadal/Djokovic at the USO as well.

My list is quite long :D

More down to Federer having better shots in every other area. With Stan's backhand on clay only, he would be a little better. Every other surface and he would be worse.
 
Top