Speed of U.S. Open Courts

[Chopin]

I know a lot of fans of are upset that Nadal is tough on hard-courts and claim that the courts are slower, but is there any evidence that the U.S. Open is slower than it was 10 years ago?

What about the balls? Haven't they used the same tennis balls for a long time at the U.S. Open? We know that they did change the composition of grass at Wimbledon, which made it more suitable for baseline play, but I've never heard any official source explain the changes made to the U.S. Open courts.

These are serious questions, ladies and gentlemen. I don't know the answers.

Edit: I did some of my own research, and here's what I found via an ESPN article with a quote from the USTA:

"When Jim Curley became the tournament director in 2001, we tweaked the speed, making them slightly slower. After 2002, we did it again.

"Since 2003, we've been using the exact same formula. They have been designed to be played at the same speed for the last six years."

So, yes, they did slow them down in 2001 and again 2002, though the article is about a rumor they sped them up in 2009.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/notebook?page=notebook/tennis09032009

Edit 2: It seems they might have been slowed down again in 2011, even if accidentally:

“Both of these factors have resulted in the courts playing a little slower than usual,” the U.S.T.A. said in a statement.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/08/s...bumps-on-a-hardcourt.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

[newpball]

I certainly would love to see some scientific data on it instead of the usual hysterical outcries.

 

[90's Clay]

This is all the evidence you need:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5Rb1Bz4x3k


compared to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hb3r5bsaUSo


Its MUCH slower

 

[ubi1]

If Nadal wins the court is slow but if Nadal loses courts are fast.

Heck the fastest court on Tour Cincinnati is now being called slow because Nadal won it. Lmao.

 

[augustobt]

If Nadal wins the court is slow but if Nadal loses courts are fast.

Heck the fastest court on Tour Cincinnati is now being called slow because Nadal won it. Lmao.

Actually Nadal himself said that Cinci courts were slower than montreal this year.

 

[Chopin]

This is all the evidence you need:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5Rb1Bz4x3k


compared to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hb3r5bsaUSo


Its MUCH slower

Well, Nalbandian hit the ball very flat and Federer was better and hit flatter 10 years ago.

So, it's tough to compare. They look a little faster, but it would be nice to get something more official about how the court composition has changed.

 

[Chopin]

Edit: I did some of my own research, and here's what I found via an ESPN article with a quote from the USTA:

"When Jim Curley became the tournament director in 2001, we tweaked the speed, making them slightly slower. After 2002, we did it again.

"Since 2003, we've been using the exact same formula. They have been designed to be played at the same speed for the last six years."

So, yes, they did slow them down in 2001 and again 2002, though the article is about a rumor they sped them up in 2009.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/ten...tennis09032009

 

[ubi1]

Actually Nadal himself said that Cinci courts were slower than montreal this year.

Montreal is the fastest court on tour Today.

 

[Chopin]

It seems they might have been slowed down again in 2011, even if accidentally:

“Both of these factors have resulted in the courts playing a little slower than usual,” the U.S.T.A. said in a statement.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/08/s...bumps-on-a-hardcourt.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

[Chopin]

More from the NYT article:

"That was happening in the late 1990s, when big servers like Pete Sampras, Patrick Rafter, Richard Krajicek, Goran Ivanisevic and Todd Martin took advantage of fast-paced grass and hardcourts. After the 1998 Wimbledon final between Sampras and Ivanisevic, complaints poured in about points that ended in the blink of an eye. The I.T.F. conducted research projects to see how it could better manage the speed of the game, Miller said, but it “returned to a state of equilibrium of its own accord.”

“There have been extremely minor changes to the rules as far as the ball is concerned,” Miller said. “It’s possible surfaces were changed a little bit.”

 

[DRII]

2011 was the slowest year ever!

the weather probably has something to do with it as well...

 

[mellowyellow]

Just think if it were warm but high humidity today, would have been unbearable to watch.

 

[jackson vile]

The major changes to Wimbledon came right after 2000.

Federer won these major titles only once they were slowed down, and Nadal won on the same exact surfaces as Federer did.

People need to stop with excuses. The reason the baseline game became so big and the S&V players could no longer win was because the courts were slowed down as long time ago. Before Federer was even successful. Before Nadal was even known to any of us.

We know for a fact that faster balls are now used at Roland Garros, and they stopped watering the courts as much in order to make the conditions faster. We see that the types of players that are successful at RG is much different now. There are no complaints.

The AO went from Rebound Ace, which was super bounce and was supposed to benefit Nadal, however Nadal never played as well on that surface. Then it changed to Plexicusion, it's formula was changed multiple times to make it faster. Hewitt cried and screamed for a faster court for years, and was a large moving force for this change. Now it is lower bouncing and same speed, if not fasster, than Rebound Ace. That is when Nadal was able to obtain a championship on that surface, when the bounce was lower.

WTF is where they screwed up, now that crap is slow. The court is odd, and guess who does so well on this slow court, Federer. Tailor made for Federer, and it is slow! It is slower than USO, Cincy, and insanely slower than Montreal.

However, Nadal seemed to perform just fine on all those surfaces.

Federer fans are insecure and have to make up the strangest conspiracy theories to help them with their delusions of grandeur, nothing more.

I know a lot of fans of are upset that Nadal is tough on hard-courts and claim that the courts are slower, but is there any evidence that the U.S. Open is slower than it was 10 years ago?

What about the balls? Haven't they used the same tennis balls for a long time at the U.S. Open? We know that they did change the composition of grass at Wimbledon, which made it more suitable for baseline play, but I've never heard any official source explain the changes made to the U.S. Open courts.

These are serious questions, ladies and gentlemen. I don't know the answers.

Edit: I did some of my own research, and here's what I found via an ESPN article with a quote from the USTA:

"When Jim Curley became the tournament director in 2001, we tweaked the speed, making them slightly slower. After 2002, we did it again.

"Since 2003, we've been using the exact same formula. They have been designed to be played at the same speed for the last six years."

So, yes, they did slow them down in 2001 and again 2002, though the article is about a rumor they sped them up in 2009.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/notebook?page=notebook/tennis09032009

Edit 2: It seems they might have been slowed down again in 2011, even if accidentally:

“Both of these factors have resulted in the courts playing a little slower than usual,” the U.S.T.A. said in a statement.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/08/s...bumps-on-a-hardcourt.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

[ubi1]

The major changes to Wimbledon came right after 2000.

Federer won these major titles only once they were slowed down, and Nadal won on the same exact surfaces as Federer did.

People need to stop with excuses. The reason the baseline game became so big and the S&V players could no longer win was because the courts were slowed down as long time ago. Before Federer was even successful. Before Nadal was even known to any of us.

We know for a fact that faster balls are now used at Roland Garros, and they stopped watering the courts as much in order to make the conditions faster. We see that the types of players that are successful at RG is much different now. There are no complaints.

The AO went from Rebound Ace, which was super bounce and was supposed to benefit Nadal, however Nadal never played as well on that surface. Then it changed to Plexicusion, it's formula was changed multiple times to make it faster. Hewitt cried and screamed for a faster court for years, and was a large moving force for this change. Now it is lower bouncing and same speed, if not fasster, than Rebound Ace. That is when Nadal was able to obtain a championship on that surface, when the bounce was lower.

WTF is where they screwed up, now that crap is slow. The court is odd, and guess who does so well on this slow court, Federer. Tailor made for Federer, and it is slow! It is slower than USO, Cincy, and insanely slower than Montreal.

However, Nadal seemed to perform just fine on all those surfaces.

Federer fans are insecure and have to make up the strangest conspiracy theories to help them with their delusions of grandeur, nothing more.

I think this is the best post you've made that i have seen. Keep up the good work mate.

 

[DRII]

I think this is the best post you've made that i have seen. Keep up the good work mate.

I agree...

 

[Backspin1183]

Ever since Nadal came on the ATP Tour he's slowed down so many courts around the world! I believe Vina Del Mar has some of the fastest courts there. That's why Nadal lost Zeballos. Also whatever tournament Nadal hasn't won yet is fast.

 

[coloskier]

The major changes to Wimbledon came right after 2000.

Federer won these major titles only once they were slowed down, and Nadal won on the same exact surfaces as Federer did.

People need to stop with excuses. The reason the baseline game became so big and the S&V players could no longer win was because the courts were slowed down as long time ago. Before Federer was even successful. Before Nadal was even known to any of us.

We know for a fact that faster balls are now used at Roland Garros, and they stopped watering the courts as much in order to make the conditions faster. We see that the types of players that are successful at RG is much different now. There are no complaints.

The AO went from Rebound Ace, which was super bounce and was supposed to benefit Nadal, however Nadal never played as well on that surface. Then it changed to Plexicusion, it's formula was changed multiple times to make it faster. Hewitt cried and screamed for a faster court for years, and was a large moving force for this change. Now it is lower bouncing and same speed, if not fasster, than Rebound Ace. That is when Nadal was able to obtain a championship on that surface, when the bounce was lower.

WTF is where they screwed up, now that crap is slow. The court is odd, and guess who does so well on this slow court, Federer. Tailor made for Federer, and it is slow! It is slower than USO, Cincy, and insanely slower than Montreal.

However, Nadal seemed to perform just fine on all those surfaces.

Federer fans are insecure and have to make up the strangest conspiracy theories to help them with their delusions of grandeur, nothing more.

The main reason that WTF is tailor made for Fed is that it is indoors. Fed's record indoors is unmatched, no matter what the surface is. Including Madrid blue clay.

 

[BrooklynNY]

Honestly, when I was there watching Youzny vs Nole...it looked like the courts were slow as hell.... you could noticeably see the ball decelerate after the bounce.... In the air the ball is traveling fast, but once it bounces it must lose at least 40% of its velocity.
You could see the slice just stop, and become more of a dead ball, rather than a skipping low shot, as it traditionally was/used to be.

That's got to be another reason why volleying is so hard these days, and baselining and retrieving is popular.

It's also why guys like Youzny just cannot hit through someone like Nole or Nadal at all.