New Tennis Abstract article on surface speed convergence

[Wander]

Surface Speed Convergence Revisited – Heavy Topspin

Jeff's data proves that - as most fans have observed over the past decades - pro tennis has developed to a direction where surface makes less of a difference to the players' tactics and average rally length etc. than it used to in the 80s and before.

Jeff's hypothesis is that this is due to a combination of actual changes to the surfaces and the changes to the rackets and strings - and he thinks the development of the equipment plays the larger role in this convergence although this is difficult to prove with data alone.

Seems pretty uncontroversial to me, but an interesting article nonetheless, and always good to see some numbers to show the difference!

 

[Angrybirdstar]

think the framework is flawed and devalues the exercise (using hard courts as a stable baseline for comparison with natural surfaces, rather than clay), but the conclusions are still correct

 

[TheFifthSet]

Surface Speed Convergence Revisited – Heavy Topspin

Jeff's data proves that - as most fans have observed over the past decades - pro tennis has developed to a direction where surface makes less of a difference to the players' tactics and average rally length etc. than it used to in the 80s and before.

Jeff's hypothesis is that this is due to a combination of actual changes to the surfaces and the changes to the rackets and strings - and he thinks the development of the equipment plays the larger role in this convergence although this is difficult to prove with data alone.

Seems pretty uncontroversial to me, but an interesting article nonetheless, and always good to see some numbers to show the difference!

Haven’t read the article but yes, he is absolutely correct. Surface and ball changes matter but re: homogenization of styles, they are secondary to equipment.

 

[MayorGorman]

Because he used Hard Court as a baseline, the only logical outcome is that Clay got faster. Difference in grass from hardcourt in 1996 was .3 shots less and in 2016 it was .29 less. Clay moved the other way. I point this out because its a weird article that he has data that he almost overlooks

 

[MayorGorman]

Because he used Hard Court as a baseline, the only logical outcome is that Clay got faster. Difference in grass from hardcourt in 1996 was .3 shots less and in 2016 it was .29 less. Clay moved the other way. I point this out because its a weird article that he has data that he almost overlooks

This was for the Womens side; the mens side is even less drastic. In fact points are ending quicker in 2016 than they were in 2005 by a margin of 0.09

 

[Hypo Crisis]

So glad Fed wasn't playing in the 80s

 

[Wander]

Because he used Hard Court as a baseline, the only logical outcome is that Clay got faster. Difference in grass from hardcourt in 1996 was .3 shots less and in 2016 it was .29 less. Clay moved the other way. I point this out because its a weird article that he has data that he almost overlooks

Jeff does point out that it's more probably the clay that has remained the most constant as a surface and if you used that as a baseline, the graphs would have both grass and hard court rally lengths trending towards clay over the years.

But that doesn't change the fact that it's modern rackets that are likely the largest culprit in players usually staying back and rallying from the baseline on all three surfaces.

Clay didn't get faster, I don't think, but modern power baseline game of course makes tennis on that surface also different from how it used to be with wooden rackets or with early composites before the poly string era.

 

[Crocodile]

I believe the change in surfaces argument is more valid than some would argue. You have to remember that if you go back to the 80’s and 70’s the GS surfaces would look like this:
1. French Open - slow clay
2. US Open - Forrest Hills - Grass
3. Wimbledon - Grass
4. Australia - Kooyong - Grass
Many countries also had super fast floor boards especially in Davis Cup.
The other thing is that the old grass courts used different species of grass and the courts were quite uneven compared to the much slower type of grass they use now at Wimbledon. If you went out and had a hit on a traditional grass court in the 70’s and 80’s, having a rally from baseline to baseline was rather quite difficult, so you went to the net so you didn’t have to deal with the ball bouncing unpredictably and low,
Now at Wimbledon, which is slower than the US Open, rallying from baseline to baseline is quite normal and easy.
Even in Sydney at White City on some of the courts the angle and slope of courts was quite pronounced and if you add the sea breeze that came through in the afternoon, it made things quite difficult for right handed players and quite advantageous for the lefties, hence many left handlers winning there over the years,
I do think polyester has helped the returner against a S & V and Pat Rafter did comment about this in the late 90’s after he injured his shoulder.

 

[Angrybirdstar]

The other thing is that the old grass courts used different species of grass and the courts were quite uneven compared to the much slower type of grass they use now at Wimbledon. If you went out and had a hit on a traditional grass court in the 70’s and 80’s, having a rally from baseline to baseline was rather quite difficult, so you went to the net so you didn’t have to deal with the ball bouncing unpredictably and low,

i remember reading that a lot of people complained about the grass at the AO but i can't recall if it was because it was durable enough to remain fast throughout, or because it allowed for a more reliable bounce than at Wimbledon. can you speak to the difference between the grasses used and their playing characteristics, and also for the USO if possible?

 

[Crocodile]

i remember reading that a lot of people complained about the grass at the AO but i can't recall if it was because it was durable enough to remain fast throughout, or because it allowed for a more reliable bounce than at Wimbledon. can you speak to the difference between the grasses used and their playing characteristics, and also for the USO if possible?

I can’t comment on Forrest Hills but have a friend who played there and will ask them and report back. In Australia however each of the cities had different playing grass courts and a lot depended on the weather they had leading up to an event and when the tournament was held. Memorial Drive in Adelaide which was Lleyton’s, Darren Cahill, John Fitzgerald and Mark Woodforde’s home state was usually very green and lush early on and sometimes cut a little longer because it’s normally a dry state with little rain but the rain they get falls in winter, so very different to Kooyong, White City and Milton,
What I will do is perhaps at one stage Dona write up of the different grass courts in Australia.
Incidentally the best grass courts known in the world can be found in a country town in Western Victoria, close to the South Australian border called Mildura.

 

[Dan Lobb]

I can’t comment on Forrest Hills but have a friend who played there and will ask them and report back. In Australia however each of the cities had different playing grass courts and a lot depended on the weather they had leading up to an event and when the tournament was held. Memorial Drive in Adelaide which was Lleyton’s, Darren Cahill, John Fitzgerald and Mark Woodforde’s home state was usually very green and lush early on and sometimes cut a little longer because it’s normally a dry state with little rain but the rain they get falls in winter, so very different to Kooyong, White City and Milton,
What I will do is perhaps at one stage Dona write up of the different grass courts in Australia.
Incidentally the best grass courts known in the world can be found in a country town in Western Victoria, close to the South Australian border called Mildura.

I recall reading that the Australian grass courts were from drier climates than either Wimbledon or Forest Hills, and were therefore harder and less irregular, and higher bouncing. Forest Hills was the wettest climate and the grass would get mushy and muddy with use, making the bounce lower and irregular and necessitating serve-and-volley play. Wimbledon was somewhere in between these two extremes.

 

[crimson87]

Vilas did well in the Australian grass vs WB partially due to that.

 

[Sudacafan]

Vilas did well in the Australian grass vs WB partially due to that.

To be fair, Vilas success at AO mainly originates in top players not competing there during those years.
OTOH, his 1974 Melbourne Masters was the real big grass title of his career.
Vilas could never pass the QFs at Wimbledon.

 

[Crocodile]

To be fair, Vilas success at AO mainly originates in top players not competing there during those years.
OTOH, his 1974 Melbourne Masters was the real big grass title of his career.
Vilas could never pass the QFs at Wimbledon.

Yes it was a very different time for the Australian Open which was sponsored by the cigarette company Marlborough and was held closer to December and the New Year. There were many journey men such as Colin Dibley and John Marks as well as Brian Teacher.
The other thing was that they had the ability to move the centre court from one side of the stadium to the other if it got chopped up and they redo the lines.
The other thing was that the summer season in Australia was much longer. They used to separate the women’s events from the men’s so in Melbourne Kooyong would host both the Victorian men’s and women’s titles as well as the Australian Open so the courts got a bit of a work out. Lendl never liked it much and decided to hire Tony Roche to help him volley which helped him make the final of Wimbledon against Pat Cash who was too good on grass,
I really enjoyed the summer circuit in Australia. You got to know all the players and there was lots of personality about the whole thing.

 

[Crocodile]

Here’s a typical TV commercial based around the grasscourt season in Australia.