Tennis is not slower today

Enga

Professional
#3
The game is faster now but in a different way. In the end the reaction times are the same. But the geometry is much more... Vertical now. If racket technology advances even more to create even easier topspin, then it wont be only the 5'9" and lower cut off from the elite. It'll be anyone shorter than 6'3" as well.
 

wangs78

Hall of Fame
#5
Modern levels of topspin make the ball jump that much more on clay today. Whenever I play on clay after a long time off it, I find my groundstrokes to be late because of how fast a topspin **** accelerates up and toward the receiver after the bounce. It's crazy.
 
#6
The game is faster today than it was in the 1970s and 1980s due to the more "primitive" wooden racquets.

But the game was faster in the 1990s than today, since the 90s combined the improved technology of racquets with the faster grass and slower clay.
Agree. To my eye, late 90s to early 2000s masters cup tennis on fast hardcourt and indoor carpet is the fastest tennis ever. A mixture of attacking hitting and all court play (pre - Hewitt) , court speed, and the uptake of more powerful equipment.

Very interesting period of the game and the tennis from this era is extremely entertaining to watch imo.
 

IowaGuy

Hall of Fame
#7
Agree. To my eye, late 90s to early 2000s masters cup tennis on fast hardcourt and indoor carpet is the fastest tennis ever. A mixture of attacking hitting and all court play (pre - Hewitt) , court speed, and the uptake of more powerful equipment.

Very interesting period of the game and the tennis from this era is extremely entertaining to watch imo.
And great contrasts in style with Agassi vs. Sampras/Rafter, etc...
 
#8
Two things. They're forgetting that the balls play a huge part. Balls have gotten harder and zippier over time - even compared to the mid 90s.

Also, on clay there's the factor that a ball which has more topspin will land with a more vertical component to it so the slowing effect of the loose clay fibres is comparatively less than if the ball came at a lower angle (in which it skids more and sheds more linear speed).

So, it's not just the surface but all the balls and level of spin which have quite drastically changed tennis, not to mention has led to dry grass courts playing more like clay courts than they used to when balls were lower bouncing per se regardless of the surface.
 

tudwell

Hall of Fame
#9
It's both and neither. With poly strings, players are hitting bigger serves more consistently than ever before. Tour-wide rates of holding serve are at an unprecedented level. But this also means that a lot of the players who stand out in this era are exceptional returners. And the return in general has changed so that players can hit with more spin and precision, thus nullifying serve-and-volley tactics unless you have a serve at the level of Raonic or Karlovic (and they don't have the return stats to really do anything of note). This means that while on the one hand, the game is exceptionally fast (tons of huge serves, lots of aces, few breaks of serve), it's also turned into a baseline slugfest, which in days past was associated with slower surfaces.
 
#10
The balls are slower, the courts are slower. Some of the strings many use now (polys) are lower powered.

And in terms of racket technology, the much lauded Pro Stock PT57 is simply a variant of the Head Pro Tour 630 which came out in 1994.
 
#14
Tennis went backwards. The average 25-year-old ATP pro today would get embarrassed by the average 25-year-old ATP pro from the 90s.

Today’s pros hit with more spin, but they don’t know how to hit a return reliably or attack the net.
 
#16
Is this the part when you will tell me why do you think they are wrong ?
Serves for example, they dont measure the speed at the same point. Courts are also made with more sand now when your dealing with the upper line guys. People who make atp courts, its a better court, lasts much longer but very slow the first few weeks.

If you ever have a chance to play on a fresh hard court, notice how fast your shoes wear out. Shot speed is faster, but after the bounce is slower.

Tech hasnt only affected rackets and strings (grips too), courts are pretty nice now a days for us normal ppl
 

OhYes

Hall of Fame
#17
Serves for example, they dont measure the speed at the same point. Courts are also made with more sand now when your dealing with the upper line guys. People who make atp courts, its a better court, lasts much longer but very slow the first few weeks.

If you ever have a chance to play on a fresh hard court, notice how fast your shoes wear out. Shot speed is faster, but after the bounce is slower.

Tech hasnt only affected rackets and strings (grips too), courts are pretty nice now a days for us normal ppl
Yes and that's why those ppl from tweet think things are lvld up. Surface is slower but hits are stronger, balls were wearing out quicker which AO tried to change in last event, surface at Wimby is much better concerning weird bounces...
 

OhYes

Hall of Fame
#20
The more interesting thing will be the part where you explain why you think they are right.

Now, that would be an entertaining read.

:cool:
Oh gosh, expert in everything that has ever been, living encyclopedia has just called in.
We are not worthy of you Mr all knowing. Please forgive my ignorance to post in your place of knowledge.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
#21
Oh gosh, expert in everything that has ever been, living encyclopedia has just called in.
We are not worthy of you Mr all knowing. Please forgive my ignorance to post in your place of knowledge.
Clearly, your remark I addressed shows that you have an opinion on that matter, and since you are so invested in correcting other people's thoughts, let's hear it.

:cool:
 

OhYes

Hall of Fame
#22
Clearly, your remark I addressed shows that you have an opinion on that matter, and since you are so invested in correcting other people's thoughts, let's hear it.

:cool:
Yes I have an opinion which I shared. Now if you will excuse me, I have more important things to do than to talk with egoistic mediocrities.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
#23
Yes I have an opinion which I shared. Now if you will excuse me, I have more important things to do than to talk with egoistic mediocrities.
I read what you have wrote: a third of it (the bounces at Wimby) have nothing to do with the subject, a third of it say the opposite of the implication in the title of this thread (surfaces are slower vs tennis is faster), and a third of it (hits are stronger) doesn't explain how much the slowed surfaces compensate for the harder hits.

For example, US Open is obviously slower, as is Wimbledon, Paris Masters etc etc.

That is why I said that you posting your thoughts on the subject is an entertaining read.

Your insults show only that you are weak.

:cool:
 

OhYes

Hall of Fame
#24
I read what you have wrote: a third of it (the bounces at Wimby) have nothing to do with the subject, a third of it say the opposite of the implication in the title of this thread (surfaces are slower vs tennis is faster), and a third of it (hits are stronger) doesn't explain how much the slowed surfaces compensate for the harder hits.

For example, US Open is obviously slower, as is Wimbledon, Paris Masters etc etc.

That is why I said that you posting your thoughts on the subject is an entertaining read.

Your insults show only that you are weak.

:cool:
What does your stalking the weak says about you ?
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
#25
What does your stalking the weak says about you ?
You are mistakenly flattering yourself as you are just like everyone else here as any other poster I had an exchange with will testify. If a subject is interesting to me I will engage, if not I won't, regardless of who writes about it. Now, stop being off-topic and present your thoughts on the subject instead of making snarky remarks about opinions you don't like and personally attacking people for asking about your opinion.

:cool:
 

OhYes

Hall of Fame
#26
You are mistakenly flattering yourself as you are just like everyone else here as any other poster I had an exchange with will testify. If a subject is interesting to me I will engage, if not I won't, regardless of who writes about it. Now, stop being off-topic and present your thoughts on the subject instead of making snarky remarks about opinions you don't like and personally attacking people for asking about your opinion.

:cool:
Only thing you are interested is hooking on to my posts.
I am posting only in 1/10th of topic or maybe even less in General Pro Player Discussion. I am nowhere to be found in other sections of this forum. Yet you miraculously show up trying to bully me whenever I post. This can show just 2 things:
A) You are stalking me without any doubt
B) You are omnipresent being that has nothing to do and I'm just collateral damage.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
#27
Only thing you are interested is hooking on to my posts.
I am posting only in 1/10th of topic or maybe even less in General Pro Player Discussion. I am nowhere to be found in other sections of this forum. Yet you miraculously show up trying to bully me whenever I post. This can show just 2 things:
A) You are stalking me without any doubt
B) You are omnipresent being that has nothing to do and I'm just collateral damage.
I post a lot these days, and that is no secret to anyone, so if you are now in the clear, can you stop with the personal comments and concentrate on the subject that you were seemingly interested in.

You made a comment I found completely off the frame of the conversation, so I made a remark about it.

Let's focus on the topic: why do you think that spinnier game compensates for the slowing down of the surfaces?

:cool:
 
Last edited:

OhYes

Hall of Fame
#28
I post a lot these days, and that is no secret to anyone, so if you are now in the clear, can you stop with the personal comments and concentrate on the subject that you were seemingly interested in.

You made a comment I found completely off the frame of the conversation, so I made a remark about it.

Let's focus on the topic: why do you think that spinner game compensates for the slowing down of the surfaces?

:cool:
You are the one who engaged personal at first place, don't kid yourself. If you want to focus on topic, focus on it and find someone else to talk with you about it.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
#29
You are the one who engaged personal at first place, don't kid yourself. If you want to focus on topic, focus on it and find someone else to talk with you about it.
That is not true, but I won't pursue it further.

I will follow the comments of the people that have actually something to say.

:cool:
 
#30
The most interesting take-away for me in Fed's talk about how slow clay was back in the day, about how he did better on faster courts like Wimby, and how all courts are more even today is, if he did actually play better on faster courts and clay was sped up, he should have had a better record on clay. The comments were quite self-serving.

But I think there are changes that gradually have happened to try and neutralize technology and player improvements. No, 90's players wouldn't hadnily beat current players. The 90's was wrout with less fitness and technique in general, and certainly less control from the baseline. So I think the matchups would be close, but current players on current courts, with current technology and play would do what they do.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
#31
The most interesting take-away for me in Fed's talk about how slow clay was back in the day, about how he did better on faster courts like Wimby, and how all courts are more even today is, if he did actually play better on faster courts and clay was sped up, he should have had a better record on clay. The comments were quite self-serving.
Bolded: better than what?

He didn't say that the clay courts have reached the speed of HCs or at least not as a rule (there might be the occasional tournament in particular year that is so slow (HC) or so fast (clay) that it approaches the normal speed of the surface it has been compared with, but that is it.

I sometimes think that people choose to ignore the relative aspect of what is being said on purpose, intentionally derailing the point being made with a number of misleading implications.

:cool:
 
#37
I read something from you that sounds halfway decent, and then something like this happens. I guess I should take a note and not treat you like a reasonable poster.

:cool:
Most people think that people disagreeing with them is unreasonable, no matter how decent what they post is so I get ya. I don't share a lot of the same group thinking and preferences, so more than discussion my posts are just personal thoughts for me. Response is not always expected.

Then again, many of my posts are "in-kind" to the original...or just plain sarcastic...or trolly...or for fun. Decifering which is the case is not clear.

You're still alright in my book. At least some of it is decent.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
#38
Most people think that people disagreeing with them is unreasonable, no matter how decent what they post is so I get ya. I don't share a lot of the same group thinking and preferences, so more than discussion my posts are just personal thoughts for me. Response is not always expected.

Then again, many of my posts are "in-kind" to the original...or just plain sarcastic...or trolly...or for fun. Decifering which is the case is not clear.

You're still alright in my book. At least some of it is decent.
The point I was making is, why make such remarks while completely missing to address what I said about the topic here?

You could still disagreee with me, but reasoning why is better than such comments.

:cool:
 
#40
The game is faster now but in a different way. In the end the reaction times are the same. But the geometry is much more... Vertical now. If racket technology advances even more to create even easier topspin, then it wont be only the 5'9" and lower cut off from the elite. It'll be anyone shorter than 6'3" as well.
Diego Schwartzman seems to be holding his own in this era at only 5' 7", just got to hug the baseline and hit the ball on the rise.
 

Enga

Professional
#42
Diego Schwartzman seems to be holding his own in this era at only 5' 7", just got to hug the baseline and hit the ball on the rise.
That's true, that is what shorter people have to do now. But it is a limiting and a predictable way of playing, which requires a lot of skill, and small margins. I was watching highlights of Federer vs Chang the other day. Looked like Federer was toying with him. Cat and mouse all day. Chang had the skill to trade blows with anyone in the 90's, but come the 00's, along with topspin monsters like Federer, and Chang was like a junior player to them. Ultimately, it's probably pretty nice to be able to choose whether to play with back against the wall, or chest to the net, and not be forced one way or another.
 
#43
You are the one who engaged personal at first place, don't kid yourself. If you want to focus on topic, focus on it and find someone else to talk with you about it.
How about just giving him/us your actual opinion on the subject(I'm not in your argument, just genuinely want to know your opinion)?
 
#44
That's true, that is what shorter people have to do now. But it is a limiting and a predictable way of playing, which requires a lot of skill, and small margins. I was watching highlights of Federer vs Chang the other day. Looked like Federer was toying with him. Cat and mouse all day. Chang had the skill to trade blows with anyone in the 90's, but come the 00's, along with topspin monsters like Federer, and Chang was like a junior player to them. Ultimately, it's probably pretty nice to be able to choose whether to play with back against the wall, or chest to the net, and not be forced one way or another.
Fed could toy with Chang because Chang was 10 years older and had already lost his wheels by then.
 
Last edited:

OhYes

Hall of Fame
#45
How about just giving him/us your actual opinion on the subject(I'm not in your argument, just genuinely want to know your opinion)?
I did gave my opinion by creating thread with certain header, posting tweets with which I agree, and in talk with Chadalina I gave my opinion as well.
What else do you want? To put rpm of balls through decades with bounce height and trajectories, speed of forehands from 70s till now ? Sorry I dont have that data. If someone has, feel free to participate.
 
#46
I did gave my opinion by creating thread with certain header, posting tweets with which I agree, and in talk with Chadalina I gave my opinion as well.
What else do you want? To put rpm of balls through decades with bounce height and trajectories, speed of forehands from 70s till now ? Sorry I dont have that data. If someone has, feel free to participate.
Okay. Sorry. Must have somehow overlooked it :)
 
Top