Should Roland Garros install a roof like Hamburg or Wimbledon?

[pham4313]

It's frustrating to get weather delay like this, year after year, same thing. Plays got pushed back, screwed up schedules for players as well as frustration from viewers. A detachable roof like Hamburg would be nice. Players can hit all out too with no wind conditions

 

[sillymonkey]

Yes, Yes, Yes

 

[HoVa]

awww-haaww,

we, ze french, speet on your comments. snooteh amareecahns!

 

[tennis_guy]

The rain is annoying but changing the stadium it just wouldn't feel the same. like with wimbledon. I like the tradition.

 

[PROTENNIS63]

No they should just flip coins.

Just kidding.

 

[veroniquem]

They definitely should. Paris is not that far from London and the risk of rain is always very high there as well! (either that or have the FO in the south of France, Cannes or Nice!)

 

[sillymonkey]

The rain is annoying but changing the stadium it just wouldn't feel the same. like with wimbledon. I like the tradition.

Wimbledon is finally putting a lid on one of the show courts. So should RG. At least there can be some live matches if it's raining.

 

[lukarf]

The organizers actually want to install a roof and build some extra courts but look like it's not that easy to have the permissions...

 

[Otherside]

of course, they have to! People lose interest for tennis if 2 days of a slam rains away! If a finalsunday is wasted it's a disaster.

 

[robin7]

I was just thinking the same thing...

I think RG should just build a number of courts (say 4) with flexible roofs.

 

[leonidas1982]

I tend to like the ones at Hamburg.

 

[bluetrain4]

Either a roof on 1 or 2 courts, or lights for night play. During a 2-week Slam, there is bound to be rain, from insignficant amounts that annoy but don't get the tourney off track, to huge amounts that wreak havoc with the scedule.

The US Open can get away with no roof, because night play opens up a huge amount of make-up time if it rains (even the 2003 USO, which was inundated for most of the tourney finished on time). They'll start matches late under the lights, and during the first week will play outer-court matches at night if they have to. This could be done at Roland Garros instead of a roof.

Rain and delay is part of the sport and I don't necessarily think a roof is absolutely necessary. But, given the reality of huge television contracts and a viewing audience who wants reliable, live tennis (instead of a billion showings of Federer/Querry), I think a roof on at least one court much more of a positive than a negative.

Remember, if the forcast is for a short period of rain followed by clearing, then the roof doesn't even have to be used. They can wait out the rain. But, it is really helpful when there is no hope for clear skies over a long period.

 

[FEDEXP]

The class Grand Slam with the roof for many years already: the Australian Open.

 

[Fedace]

It's frustrating to get weather delay like this, year after year, same thing. Plays got pushed back, screwed up schedules for players as well as frustration from viewers. A detachable roof like Hamburg would be nice. Players can hit all out too with no wind conditions

Yes i do like those retractable cloth made roof like they have at Hamburg. they should put it over the entire Rolland Garros.

 

[thor's hammer]

Just watching Fed/Hajek at Hamburg, and have to wonder if this type of roof could be an option for the US Open? From an engineering perspective is the sheer size of Ashe prohibitive for a design like this?

 

[Gyomu]

The organizers actually want to install a roof and build some extra courts but look like it's not that easy to have the permissions...

They actually got the permissions easy as the project is supported by pretty much everyone (government, federation, etc) but they are stuck because of legal battles with environmental association who are opposing some part of the renovation project.

 

[NADALbULLS]

If you are a real man, you don't need a roof.

 

[Lukhas]

They're trying to. They have been havinga folder for an extension of the site for two or three years. But they keep having delays. Because they're planning to destroy a part of a protected site (even if the said part isn't protected), because the local inhabitants don't agree with it, because money, because this, because that...

More importantly, we should have been having night lights for ages to finish the matches when needed.

 

[floide]

Yes! A roof!

... and electricity as well.


(5 years gone, and nothing's changed at Philippe Chatrier.)

 

[Overdrive]

Sure, why not?