I've been blaming slow court surfaces for years but........

SamprasisGOAT

Professional
I think I have been wrong.

It's been the balls that have slowed the play down. Look at the Australian open. Played with balls that were less fluffy and quicker through the air. Guess what a fast court player won.

They say Wimbledon has the fluffiest balls on the tour. Maybe the courts aren't that slow and high bouncing it's just the balls.

I've watched 100s of games from the 70s 80s and 90s and the play is certainly quicker. Whether that's because of the balls or courts.

The slow court myth may be over.


Watch that video from 27mins for proof it's the balls
 
Last edited:
C

Chadillac

Guest
Some say nadal was only successful at roland garros because of the terrible babolat tennis balls
 
F

Fedfan34

Guest
I think I have been wrong.

It's been the balls that have slowed the play down. Look at the Australian open. Played with balls that were less fluffy and quicker through the air. Guess what a fast court player won.

They say Wimbledon has the fluffiest balls on the tour. Maybe the courts aren't that slow and high bouncing it's just the balls.

I've watched 100s of games from the 70s 80s and 90s and the play is certainly quicker. Whether that's because of the balls or courts.

The slow court myth may be over.


Watch that video from 27mins for proof it's the balls
Wasn't there a point where Rafa fell down in the match and Rogi walked to the net and asked him if he needed to stop/break?
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
French Open 2011.... Federer was on fire and beat Djokovic, ending his great unbeaten run.

It also happened to be the year they changed to Babolat balls and many of the players said they were faster and harder.

Djokovic called the balls "very, very fast" and "really difficult to control."

Federer said they're "faster, indeed, especially when they're fresh. That will be an issue."

Nadal complained about them and I believe Toni said something to the effect that if they're going to speed the balls up then we wont play.

Babolat however claimed the balls had the same performance characteristics as the previous ones. "The laboratory tests prove that these balls have the exact same specifications as last year. The same speed, the same rebound, the same size, all the same." Dunlop commented also, as they made the balls used previously. They said there was no way Babolat could make balls the same as theirs without having proprietary information. Ergo, the lab tests don't show everything.

The next year in 2012, miraculously, the balls were slower again according to reports...

The ball changes make a heap of difference and it's likely that this year's differences at the Aussie Open were a combination of the balls and the courts being a few months older (since painted).
 

kramer woodie

Professional
Ah yes the slow court "myth" may be over because a TT poster who cannot even spell "whether" says so. Brilliant

I always knew Talk Tennis was the place to come if you to separate tennis myths from truth!!
Best you look up the word whether: Indicating that a statement applies whichever of the alternatives mentioned is the case. Also, to make your sentence
structure correct you should have wrote: "I always knew TT was the place to come to if you are to separate.......blah,blah, etc.."

See we all can be small-minded and critical of others, especially if we consider ourselves as an authority.

I for one found this post interesting to consider, especially after the X-Pro I hit with complained about the Dunlop balls being heavy, hard, and traveling
like BB's. He prefers to use ProPenn Marathons, fluffy and slower.

Aloha
 

SamprasisGOAT

Professional
Best you look up the word whether: Indicating that a statement applies whichever of the alternatives mentioned is the case. Also, to make your sentence
structure correct you should have wrote: "I always knew TT was the place to come to if you are to separate.......blah,blah, etc.."

See we all can be small-minded and critical of others, especially if we consider ourselves as an authority.

I for one found this post interesting to consider, especially after the X-Pro I hit with complained about the Dunlop balls being heavy, hard, and traveling
like BB's. He prefers to use ProPenn Marathons, fluffy and slower.

Aloha
wow dude you nailed him for being a *****. Thanks
 

kramer woodie

Professional
The ball ?Has nothing to do with the surface ? I'm afraid physics laws will say no.
Correction the ball and the court surface both have an effect on the speed and bounce of the ball! A slow court is achieved by adding grit to the
court topcoat which grabs the felt of the ball, slowing it down which can cause the ball to jump higher or accelerate off the court surface at your
opponent depended upon shot elevation and amount/type of topspin stroke applied.

True fast courts which I have played on can be canvas, carpet, or true old style hardcourt. Old style hardcourt was either smooth asphalt or
smooth concrete (like a smooth slick slippery garage floor) with a topcoat finish. The ball would leave a 1 to 2 foot skid mark before
rising (bouncing) off the court. (As a side note balls then were white not optical yellow) Then there is grass. There are different grass types used
today plus more dirt is packed higher in order to slow down grass.

The court surface dependent upon texture has exactly the same effect upon the speed and bounce as shaped poly strings have on spin applied.

I was at the Maui Challenger just last month. Two practice courts were being resurfaced. As a joke I said to the club owner, "leave the grit out of
the mix, make the surface smooth so it's really fast." He said, "no way, the players would hate it, no kick off the court". A topspin shot would just
skid and stay low (somewhere between mid calf to mid thigh) and a slice would not slow down but skid and maybe rise only 4 to 6 inches.

I for one would prefer old style hardcourt court verse hitting a ball jumping up off the court above my head at 6 foot 4 inches.

Aloha
 

chjtennis

G.O.A.T.
I guess it's the combination of both balls and court speed. The player who can adapt better will win more in the end.
 

reaper

Legend
I played with balls marked as Wilson AO tonight. They do come on quicker than normal...so if your opponent plays one short and you move forward you can overrun them a bit.
 
I played with balls marked as Wilson AO tonight. They do come on quicker than normal...so if your opponent plays one short and you move forward you can overrun them a bit.
Been wondering about those. Did you get them from a big box store? Or was it a special order?
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
Best you look up the word whether: Indicating that a statement applies whichever of the alternatives mentioned is the case. Also, to make your sentence
structure correct you should have wrote: "I always knew TT was the place to come to if you are to separate.......blah,blah, etc.."

See we all can be small-minded and critical of others, especially if we consider ourselves as an authority.

I for one found this post interesting to consider, especially after the X-Pro I hit with complained about the Dunlop balls being heavy, hard, and traveling
like BB's. He prefers to use ProPenn Marathons, fluffy and slower.

Aloha
Best you reread what I said. He spelled the word "wheather", and then edited it later. I didn't even mention how he used the word.

As far as my post, I simply left out the word "wanted". It had nothing to do with sentence structure.

You managed to misunderstand twice in the two sentences I wrote.

It doesn't take an authority to know his post is drivel. He presented absolutely no evidence to argue against something that has been proven time and time again. We know for a fact that court surfaces have slowed down, even tournament directors have commented on it. It was done deliberately to make tennis more watchable.

Could different balls be affecting the pace? Sure. But to think that judging ball speed by eye(on a video, while completely discounting how much spin is being applied) does anything to discount all the information we have regarding court surfaces slowing is idiotic. The fact that he treats the balls and court speed as mutually exclusive is proof enough.
 

RF20Lennon

Legend
It's a combo of both. But after the 90's tournaments did start using a lot more sand in court construction which slowed them down considerably. This time--according to players and commentators, the surface was a little quicker and the balls were a little less fluffier so it played fast but not fast enough where they couldn't maintain decent baseline rallies. It's a good compromise IMO.

Hence you have S&V like Zverev who were successful as well as baseliners.
 

kramer woodie

Professional
Just an added trivia comments regarding old fast hardcourt. From 1960 to about 1967, the shoe of choice in my area was not a tennis shoe, but
a yachting shoe made by Red Ball. You know the sole is that gummy orange used for highly varnish wet boat decks. Only way to get traction and keep
from slipping. They lasted 2 to 3 weeks before they were worn out. Sometimes not even that long if you were a toe dragger with the back foot to
add timing when serving. You could not jump when serving in those day, one foot had to remain on the court until after the ball was struck. The
rule was changed I believe in 1969, allowing both feet to leave the court surface when serving.

If you want to know what old fast hardcourt was like, go play on a rained on court (light sprinkle) with about 1/16 inch of standing water. You
will quickly know what is was like to play old style hardcourt. Please, don't be too aggressive, keep your feet under you.

Aloha
 
Top