@justasport's info was spot on. Tiley: AO court speed same as last year

But that isn’t the case.

Since about 2011, the slams have been:

AO: medium-slow
RG: slow
Wimbledon: medium
USO: medium

Slow as hell conditions favoured for defensive baseline players like Djokovic, Murray, Nadal.

Thank god AO sped things up last year to finally allow some attacking tennis.

USO won’t change the courts so keep AO as the faster one now.

Ideally I’d like:

AO: medium
RG: slow
Wimbledon: medium fast (like Halle conditions)
USO: fast

But never going to happen.
The fast courts at the AO last year may have been good for the men but the women's event was a shocker. Medium fast at the AO would be ideal as fast leads the women's event to be very one dimensional serve dominated bashing. Medium at Wimbledon is plenty on the grass, US Open is fine other than TV dominating too much, as it does at Wimbledon.
 
At least it is now well known that the surface speed is going to tend to be a little quick and will play like last year. But, if Fed loses there will still be multiple threads complaining about how the AO is ruined because they made the courts slow this year.
 
The fast courts at the AO last year may have been good for the men but the women's event was a shocker. Medium fast at the AO would be ideal as fast leads the women's event to be very one dimensional serve dominated bashing. Medium at Wimbledon is plenty on the grass, US Open is fine other than TV dominating too much, as it does at Wimbledon.
I’m not really a fan of the current WTA anyway. All ball bashing clones with 2HBH and 0 net game.

Was way better when we had likes of Clisters and Henin along with peak Williams sisters, Sharapova etc.
 

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
Not so sure. Nadal adapted to the very same conditions just fine last year and was few games from winning. There will be more pressure on Fed this time around should they meet in the final again.

Also, faster surface makes it easier for those big hitters to overpower Fed. Slow Wimbledon conditions last year helped him defuse younger, more powerful players.
The Nadal bit is a good point, but I guess it depends on what "wrecking machine" is supposed to mean. I expect Fed will make at least QF and probably SFs but he does that basically every year at the AO regardless of court speed. Also not sure he'll have more pressure on him. It's not possible to have more pressure on yourself than Federer had last year is it? At worst it'll be the same amount of pressure. It would be the same situation if those 2 met in the final again after all.

All we do know is that all the people b.itching about the court speed helping Federer are simply failing to remember how close he came to losing multiple matches last year. It's far from a guarantee that Federer wins this thing no matter what the court speed is.
 
The fast courts at the AO last year may have been good for the men but the women's event was a shocker. Medium fast at the AO would be ideal as fast leads the women's event to be very one dimensional serve dominated bashing. Medium at Wimbledon is plenty on the grass, US Open is fine other than TV dominating too much, as it does at Wimbledon.
You think the WTA was multi-dimensional on slow courts?
 
The Nadal bit is a good point, but I guess it depends on what "wrecking machine" is supposed to mean. I expect Fed will make at least QF and probably SFs but he does that basically every year at the AO regardless of court speed. Also not sure he'll have more pressure on him. It's not possible to have more pressure on yourself than Federer had last year is it? At worst it'll be the same amount of pressure. It would be the same situation if those 2 met in the final again after all.
Despite the magnitude of the final, I think there was very little pressure last year because no one expected him to win. This year will be different. There's a very different kind of pressure this time imo; he's 2 in the world with 2 majors last year while Nadal has kept pace, a 4-0 record vs Nadal, and everyone knows this court favors him now. Everyone's made him the favorite.

But I also thought there was way more pressure at Wimbledon too, and he responded by not dropping a set.
 
I wonder where that USO CPR GIF came from. Hopefully not from Gilbert's pre tournament tweet. I thought it was kinda medium. Slow = IW/Miami. But IW played a little faster than usual. So if that's compensated by slower than usual Montreal/USO, it's fine. But I would rather have the early tournaments (coming up to RG) playing slow and the ones in the latter half playing fast, less taxing for the players. Last year's USO series was mostly disastrous with only Cincy getting rescued by Dimi/Kyrgios.
 

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
Despite the magnitude of the final, I think there was very little pressure last year because no one expected him to win. This year will be different. There's a very different kind of pressure this time imo; he's 2 in the world with 2 majors last year while Nadal has kept pace, a 4-0 record vs Nadal, and everyone knows this court favors him now. Everyone's made him the favorite.

But I also thought there was way more pressure at Wimbledon too, and he responded by not dropping a set.
I can see some differences for sure, but I'm still hesitant at slam level to make Federer a firm favourite over Nadal. It's more a 50/50 proposition now as opposed to Nadal being a huge favourite last year simply due to the history of the match up.

A majority might call Federer the favourite in a matchup now with Nadal, but I wouldn't. Not in BO5. He might face a different kind of pressure if he played Nadal again this year (and that may change the outcome for all I know), but it's hard to envision a situation where he'd be under more pressure tbh. Last year's match just had too much riding on it.
 
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/no-change-to-australian-open-court-speed

..."We've done it exactly the same as last year, and (most players) liked the surface last year."
Having spoken to the actual people who maintain the AO courts (since they maintain some courts near me) they (yes, the actual top guy from the company) said they have done the main show courts the same the past few years with the main difference being the timing they do them. Last year Rod Laver's top layer repaint was done in November whereas they had often done it as late as the end of December. That meant it had as much as a month's extra wear and smoothing out. Hisense arena however got a done a few weeks later so it was slower than Rod Laver even with the exact same paint being used.

When the local courts I use were repainted the first week of use everyone literally complained they'd been given a dud batch of tennis balls the courts were so slow. Within a couple of weeks they'd sped up a fair bit already and after two months they felt like different courts to the ones adjacent which were (then) freshly done.

So, when people say the AO was sped up/slowed down to help any particular player the people who do the maintenance are probably laughing. Most of the difference comes from how long the paint has been down and how much the court has been used. If you go to the back courts at the AO they only get done every couple of years so are much zippier than the main courts.
 
Having spoken to the actual people who maintain the AO courts (since they maintain some courts near me) they (yes, the actual top guy from the company) said they have done the main show courts the same the past few years with the main difference being the timing they do them. Last year Rod Laver's top layer repaint was done in November whereas they had often done it as late as the end of December. That meant it had as much as a month's extra wear and smoothing out. Hisense arena however got a done a few weeks later so it was slower than Rod Laver even with the exact same paint being used.

When the local courts I use were repainted the first week of use everyone literally complained they'd been given a dud batch of tennis balls the courts were so slow. Within a couple of weeks they'd sped up a fair bit already and after two months they felt like different courts to the ones adjacent which were (then) freshly done.

So, when people say the AO was sped up/slowed down to help any particular player the people who do the maintenance are probably laughing. Most of the difference comes from how long the paint has been down and how much the court has been used. If you go to the back courts at the AO they only get done every couple of years so are much zippier than the main courts.
So do we know when they painted the courts for this year? The article doesn't say, only that the speed should be the same as last year.

But they also said that last year...
 
So do we know when they painted the courts for this year? The article doesn't say, only that the speed should be the same as last year.

But they also said that last year...
Well ,they were painting our courts 2nd week of Dec and had come from finishing Melbourne Park. They still had another crew there finishing up at Margaret Court so, in theory, it'll be a little slower than Rod Laver. But since that court is more exposed to the elements and would likely get more play it could even up.
 
Are these Numbers correct?
How the hell did Anderson get to the final with basically a serve and no ground game?. Also Nadal’s forehand seemed faster at USO compared to AOo_O
Look at the draw and you have your answer. Didn't he play Carreno Busta in the semis? I mean, doesn't that say enough? Sam Q was probably his toughest opponent in the entire draw.
 

every7

Hall of Fame
Okay, this is what we all expected. The murmur has turned to a shout. The "ice rink" from 2017 is back!

Thankfully this year everyone has more of a chance to prepare for the slick surface and knows what to expect.

Really hoping some of the U.S. guys produce the great first strike tennis that they are capable of. It's not only Federer, many players will benefit with these conditions.

The jokers and slow court tricksters (Monfils, PCB et al) stay home your are not needed this year :eek:

VERY interested to see how Nadal goes on this surface on the second time around. Hoping he gets the double career slam but it will be extremely tough. Everything has been stacked against him.

I am predicting that David Goffin will make at least the 1/4F.

Federer is without doubt the overwhelming favourite. Let's see if he can capitalize on the almost perfect conditions arranged for his game, or if we will see a shock loss like in WTF :eek:
 
Okay, this is what we all expected. The murmur has turned to a shout. The "ice rink" from 2017 is back!

Thankfully this year everyone has more of a chance to prepare for the slick surface and knows what to expect.
Let's get serious a minute here--even AO 2017 was still nowhere near *fast* when you compare it to the 80's and the 90's. It was just a little bit faster than medium, we're not talking carpet here. It's not like the current crop of players suddenly have to relearn everything they know about tennis to have a chance to score a point (ie the change is much less drastic than Madrid 2012, it's still the same court with a bit more wear that makes it a little bit faster). Everyone will be fine and no-one will have to play on "ice" (lol).

Federer is without doubt the overwhelming favourite. Let's see if he can capitalize on the almost perfect conditions arranged for his game, or if we will see a shock loss like in WTF :eek:
That Federer is the favourite for many people (except for the usual crowd of VB jinxers, who have him as a "favourite" anywhere to try and "make him lose" by the sheer force of their Internet voodoo magic, but maybe they'll grow up some day) is just crazy at 36 1/2. Cautiousness should be the rule at his age, though--there's a reason why *nobody* had ever won a single Bo5, seven-round slam at the age of 35+ until last year (not even Rosewall, although he still holds the record for oldest slam winner). This kind of thing is anything but easy. On paper, if fit (and he sure looks like he is), he's the favourite against just about anyone in these conditions. Question is, will he be able to string seven matches together, especially if he gets a couple of tough ones in a row? We'll see.
 
Last edited:

zagor

Bionic Poster
The Nadal bit is a good point, but I guess it depends on what "wrecking machine" is supposed to mean. I expect Fed will make at least QF and probably SFs but he does that basically every year at the AO regardless of court speed. Also not sure he'll have more pressure on him. It's not possible to have more pressure on yourself than Federer had last year is it? At worst it'll be the same amount of pressure. It would be the same situation if those 2 met in the final again after all.
Fed's coming in this year as a defending champ who also holds 8th Wimbledon title and is on a 4-0 streak against Nadal. On top of that, most of his rivals are in questionable health. It's a far cry from last year where Fed was the injured warrior underdog for a change and for once embraced that role and swung away. I think it was also a bit of an uncharted territory for Nadal (off clay atleast) who's so used to the underdog status against his rivals.

Now you're a sensible guy so you know while Fed may be the favourite he's at best a slight one, however the media is anything but sensible. They'll create a narrative where Fed is an overwhelming favourite and a potential loss even against someone like Nadal would be shocking.

All we do know is that all the people b.itching about the court speed helping Federer are simply failing to remember how close he came to losing multiple matches last year. It's far from a guarantee that Federer wins this thing no matter what the court speed is.
It's just hedging bets I'd say (in most cases anyway). People are so butthurt at the prospect of Fed pulling away in slam lead (or heck, that he's still playing at a high level) that they're acting like it's a given he wins the title so they can be pleasantly "surprised" when he loses. Those same people giving him the title now will then also start posting about how he's a mental midget and similar after he loses, you know the drill.

Personally, I don't think Fed was ever the fast court specialist people make him out to be, the degree on which he relies on his defence (especially against big hitters) even today is underrated IMO. Faster surface offers advantages for him but it also makes him more vulnerable to getting blown off the court, especially without those catlike reflexes and agility he had when he was younger.
 
Last edited:

zagor

Bionic Poster
Are these Numbers correct?
How the hell did Anderson get to the final with basically a serve and no ground game?. Also Nadal’s forehand seemed faster at USO compared to AOo_O
Anderson is a tall ball basher (like Querrey), those type of players usually do well on a slower, high bouncing court as they have enough time to take big cuts at the ball and the ball is usually right in their wheelzone. While other might struggle penetrating the slower court, they comparatively don't because of their power.

I'd reckon Nadal's FH seemed faster/better at USO because the courts there take spin better, which is nothing new.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
Okay, this is what we all expected. The murmur has turned to a shout. The "ice rink" from 2017 is back!

Thankfully this year everyone has more of a chance to prepare for the slick surface and knows what to expect.

Really hoping some of the U.S. guys produce the great first strike tennis that they are capable of. It's not only Federer, many players will benefit with these conditions.

The jokers and slow court tricksters (Monfils, PCB et al) stay home your are not needed this year :eek:

VERY interested to see how Nadal goes on this surface on the second time around. Hoping he gets the double career slam but it will be extremely tough. Everything has been stacked against him.

I am predicting that David Goffin will make at least the 1/4F.

Federer is without doubt the overwhelming favourite. Let's see if he can capitalize on the almost perfect conditions arranged for his game, or if we will see a shock loss like in WTF :eek:
Everything stacked against Nadal? Same Nadal who was few games from winning last year in the same conditions, is ranked #1 now and whose only healthy (so far, that can change in a moment) main rival is a 36 years old?

Please, he's right behind Fed in the bookies for a reason.
 

zep

Hall of Fame
I liked last year's court speed. As long as it stays at that level, I am okay with. But if it's faster than that it would make for a poor show, no one wants to see non stop service winners.
 
I can see some differences for sure, but I'm still hesitant at slam level to make Federer a firm favourite over Nadal. It's more a 50/50 proposition now as opposed to Nadal being a huge favourite last year simply due to the history of the match up.

A majority might call Federer the favourite in a matchup now with Nadal, but I wouldn't. Not in BO5. He might face a different kind of pressure if he played Nadal again this year (and that may change the outcome for all I know), but it's hard to envision a situation where he'd be under more pressure tbh. Last year's match just had too much riding on it.
The good thing now is that we know he won't have half lost the match before it starts. If Nadal wins it will be simply that he was better on the day.
 

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
Fed's coming in this year as a defending champ who also holds 8th Wimbledon title and is on a 4-0 streak against Nadal. On top of that, most of his rivals are in questionable health. It's a far cry from last year where Fed was the injured warrior underdog for a change and for once embraced that role and swung away. I think it was also a bit of an uncharted territory for Nadal (off clay atleast) who's so used to the underdog status against his rivals.

Now you're a sensible guy so you know while Fed may be the favourite he's at best a slight one, however the media is anything but sensible. They'll create a narrative where Fed is an overwhelming favourite and a potential loss even against someone like Nadal would be shocking.
You and I both are unfortunately very aware of that.

As for the first part I agree, but it also depends on what Fed wants to do with his new status. For all we know he could carry his confidence over into 2018 and beat Nadal in the final easier than he did last year. And if he says the right things he could still play a certain type of underdog role. Something like "Did you see how close he came to beating me last year? Or "BO5 is different than BO3 and I'm 36 and he's only 31." Or even "Yeah he would've been the favourite if we played at the USO" (without explicitly mentioning his back problems). Not that he'd say any of those things, but there are still many ways for Federer to play that game if he wanted to. Of course this is a very long term hypothetical. There's a pretty good chance that at least one of them loses before the final which will render this type of talk useless.



It's just hedging bets I'd say (in most cases anyway). People are so butthurt at the prospect of Fed pulling away in slam lead (or heck, that he's still playing at a high level) that they're acting like it's a given he wins the title so they can be pleasantly "surprised" when he loses. Those same people giving him the title now will then also start posting about how he's a mental midget and similar after he loses, you know the drill.

Personally, I don't think Fed was ever the fast court specialist people make him out to be, the degree on which he relies on his defence (especially against big hitters) even today is underrated IMO. Faster surface offers advantages for him but it also makes him more vulnerable to getting blown off the court, especially without those catlike reflexes and agility he had when he was younger.
Yeah, the drill is old and tired. As far as Fed being a fast court specialist goes, I think Fed is easily the most adaptable of any player today so it's mostly a product of the era he's in now that he is what he is. He could've been a true fast court specialist if he needed to be and in the era we're in now he is a "fast court" specialist by comparison to anybody else. But there aren't many (if any) true fast courts left so Federer is what he is. He's more a medium fast specialist than anything (I'm counting tournaments like Cincy, Dubai, and present day Wimbledon here). I think getting blown off court can happen to even the best true fast court specialists on any day so I don't really care about that. If it happens it happens, but it doesn't mean Federer is better on slower courts than he is on faster ones, not that you're insinuating that here because you're not.
 

zep

Hall of Fame
Are these Numbers correct?
How the hell did Anderson get to the final with basically a serve and no ground game?. Also Nadal’s forehand seemed faster at USO compared to AOo_O
As far as I know the US open number is from the first/second day of the tournament. This was shown sometimes in the second week, as you can see it's up 3 points, by the end it was probably even quicker. But US open 2017 was slower than usual, just as it was in 2011. In 2011 they couldn't paint the court in time due to excess rain and last year they had to repaint it for some reason. The timing of the final paint layer makes a huge difference in court speed. A freshly painted court is always slower. It gets faster with time.

 

mike danny

Talk Tennis Guru
You and I both are unfortunately very aware of that.

As for the first part I agree, but it also depends on what Fed wants to do with his new status. For all we know he could carry his confidence over into 2018 and beat Nadal in the final easier than he did last year. And if he says the right things he could still play a certain type of underdog role. Something like "Did you see how close he came to beating me last year? Or "BO5 is different than BO3 and I'm 36 and he's only 31." Or even "Yeah he would've been the favourite if we played at the USO" (without explicitly mentioning his back problems). Not that he'd say any of those things, but there are still many ways for Federer to play that game if he wanted to. Of course this is a very long term hypothetical. There's a pretty good chance that at least one of them loses before the final which will render this type of talk useless.





Yeah, the drill is old and tired. As far as Fed being a fast court specialist goes, I think Fed is easily the most adaptable of any player today so it's mostly a product of the era he's in now that he is what he is. He could've been a true fast court specialist if he needed to be and in the era we're in now he is a "fast court" specialist by comparison to anybody else. But there aren't many (if any) true fast courts left so Federer is what he is. He's more a medium fast specialist than anything (I'm counting tournaments like Cincy, Dubai, and present day Wimbledon here). I think getting blown off court can happen to even the best true fast court specialists on any day so I don't really care about that. If it happens it happens, but it doesn't mean Federer is better on slower courts than he is on faster ones, not that you're insinuating that here because you're not.
I wouldn't be shocked if either Fed or Nadal or both get taken out before the final. People are taking their presence in the final for granted. This is not 2009 anymore.
 
You think the WTA was multi-dimensional on slow courts?
No but at least some games are watchable, when Halep particular is competitive. Last years Aussie wasn't watchable the finalists could be easily predicted from day 1, playing boring serve dominated ball bash Tennis.
 
No but at least some games are watchable, when Halep particular is competitive. Last years Aussie wasn't watchable the finalists could be easily predicted from day 1, playing boring serve dominated ball bash Tennis.
That was Venus' first final in eight years...


Edit: and Coco's first semi, Lucic-Baroni's first semi in 18 years. You saw that coming at the start of the tournament?
 
Last edited:
That was Venus' first final in eight years...


Edit: and Coco's first semi, Lucic-Baroni's first semi in 18 years. You saw that coming at the start of the tournament?
All of them boring bashers, Baroni was a surprise but not the others, Williams with the TUE help, no obvious injury and a quick court was always on for a comeback.
 
But that isn’t the case.

Since about 2011, the slams have been:

AO: medium-slow
RG: slow
Wimbledon: medium
USO: medium

Slow as hell conditions favoured for defensive baseline players like Djokovic, Murray, Nadal.

Thank god AO sped things up last year to finally allow some attacking tennis.

USO won’t change the courts so keep AO as the faster one now.

Ideally I’d like:

AO: medium
RG: slow
Wimbledon: medium fast (like Halle conditions)
USO: fast

But never going to happen.
Wrong. Were is your source to back this up
No way is Wimbeldon Medium. Grass is fast. That is why Federer has won 8 titles on it. Wimbeldon is at least speed 4 Medium-Fast.
Pro Deco Turf USO is speed 4 medium-fast as well.
AO was medium until the organisers sped up the 2016-2018 additions.AO is actually classified as Medium-Fast but Tilley said the CPR is 38 which is medium solidly
USO did appear slower than usual last year
Were is proof of this theory you have of the court slowing in 2010. They slowed between 2001 and 2003.
 
Wrong. Were is your source to back this up
No way is Wimbeldon Medium. Grass is fast. That is why Federer has won 8 titles on it. Wimbeldon is at least speed 4 Medium-Fast.
Pro Deco Turf USO is speed 4 medium-fast as well.
AO was medium until the organisers sped up the 2016-2018 additions.AO is actually classified as Medium-Fast but Tilley said the CPR is 38 which is medium solidly
USO did appear slower than usual last year
Were is proof of this theory you have of the court slowing in 2010. They slowed between 2001 and 2003.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.perfect-tennis.com/court-speed-2017/amp/

USO slowed down since around 2011/2012. Certainly not as fast as it was during 2004-2009 for example and last few years have been a disgrace.

AO was medium fast in 2016? It was slowed down in 2008 then I thought it was only during 2017 it started to play faster.
 
USO slowed down since around 2011/20
And even then it was slower than the old green decoturf.

This is a description of Mac or Edberg's style of play which has been sadly dead for 25 years
Only 17 years at most. We still had Rafter and Sampras (later career).

The difference between them is smaller than before but they aren't all slow. Today's players all clearly still have their preferences.
Overall convergence was towards slowness. Regarding court pace, 40s is medium fast and above that is fast. But we don't see any true fast courts.

Yes, but it is an era where everything is slowly just becoming the same no matter where you go, even less criminal things stand out like a sore thumb. Many tennis fans want to see diversity. Now, I don't mind if USO is slow, as long as AO is then fast. If they are both slow, what makes them unique?
A faster USO would be better, it would be more consistent with other preceding tourneys in the series.
 
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.perfect-tennis.com/court-speed-2017/amp/

USO slowed down since around 2011/2012. Certainly not as fast as it was during 2004-2009 for example and last few years have been a disgrace.

AO was medium fast in 2016? It was slowed down in 2008 then I thought it was only during 2017 it started to play faster.
But that does not mean that it was not medium-fast.
http://indianexpress.com/article/sports/tennis/us-open-2017-players-divided-over-court-speed-at-flushing-meadows-4829719
The organisers say USO will be at its normal speed medium-fast.
Google Pro Deco Turf in ITF CPR system. It is speed 4 medium-fast.
AO. Sometimes they paint and resurface the courts with more or less slica to make it faster or slower.
Secondly players opinions about the court contradict each other often. Federer said Wimbeldon never slowed down and so did Nadal. However players like Djokovic and Brown said the opposite. Henin and Williams were happy with Plexicushion but some players so it was slower than RA.
Craig Tiley.
Plexicushion was made faster in 2017-2018 not 2016 sorry.
Plexicushion was meant to be a little faster than RA according to Tiley but it also came out slower than it was meant to be. It is most likely that both played Medium or Medium-Fast before they made the court faster in 2017-2018.
The reason why RA was left in the first place was due to it getting sticky and causing injuries. Hewitt moaned about the surface as part of it too.
 
Federer said Wimbeldon never slowed down and so did Nadal. However players like Djokovic and Brown said the opposite
Safin also said that grass was slowed down, which helped him in his lone SF run in 2008.

And of course Henman. I think Henman's game was more vulnerable and more easily to be exposed on slow courts than anyone else, since he was a touch-based player who lacked power.

But there is a reason why Federer played S&V to win his first Wimby title in 2003 but stopped doing so in the very next year against the same crop of players (the only difference is Hewitt, but Fed could have beaten others comfortably by playing the same game as in 2003).
 
Also, those numbers you source gave are not official. USO never gave a CPR number for any of the slams. They only gave CPI for the 9 masters and the WTF. No way is USO only 35.7. It has to be at least 40. CPR is a more accurate system. It is used by ITF. International Tennis Federation. Wimbeldon is not even classified and has never been.
Cincinnati medium lol. That has always been one of the fastest courts on tour right with Shanghai. No way is that medium. Federer has won 7 titles and twice even win it without dropping a game. Jonathan also said elsewhere that Basel again one of th3 fastest court or tour is medium.
 
Good. The Australian Open has decided to stay medium-fast, as it should be.

I think there should be a healthy distribution for the majors in terms of speed:

AO = medium-fast
RG = slow
Wim = fast
USO = medium-slow

I am fine with the above. I wouldn't mind to see the AO and the USO switch between the two hard court speeds, but for people saying BOTH the USO and AO should be lightening fast hard courts I think that is unfair and not consistent with the tennis schedule.
 

mike danny

Talk Tennis Guru
Safin also said that grass was slowed down, which helped him in his lone SF run in 2008.

And of course Henman. I think Henman's game was more vulnerable and more easily to be exposed on slow courts than anyone else, since he was a touch-based player who lacked power.

But there is a reason why Federer played S&V to win his first Wimby title in 2003 but stopped doing so in the very next year against the same crop of players (the only difference is Hewitt, but Fed could have beaten others comfortably by playing the same game as in 2003).
Which shows that the slowness of the courts wasn't decisive from the start. Wimb was still faster in 2003-2004 than 2007-present. USO also was still faster in 2003-2010 than later.
 

mike danny

Talk Tennis Guru
Good. The Australian Open has decided to stay medium-fast, as it should be.

I think there should be a healthy distribution for the majors in terms of speed:

AO = medium-fast
RG = slow
Wim = fast
USO = medium-slow

I am fine with the above. I wouldn't mind to see the AO and the USO switch between the two hard court speeds, but for people saying BOTH the USO and AO should be lightening fast hard courts I think that is unfair and not consistent with the tennis schedule.
For many years whey were both slow, but no one gave a damn about it.
 
Top