Enga
Hall of Fame
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.
Subway Tennis
Legend
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
And great contrasts in style with Agassi vs. Sampras/Rafter, etc...
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
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.
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.
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.
C
Chadalina
Guest
If someone tells you water isnt wet on twitter, how do you respond?
O
OhYes
Guest
Is this the part when you will tell me why do you think they are wrong ?
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
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.
Today’s pros hit with more spin, but they don’t know how to hit a return reliably or attack the net.
beard
Legend
Again about time travelling tennis matchups
C
Chadalina
Guest
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
O
OhYes
Guest
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...
Tennis_Hands
Banned
The more interesting thing will be the part where you explain why you think they are right.
Now, that would be an entertaining read.
O
OhYes
Guest
Oh gosh, expert in everything that has ever been, living encyclopedia has just called in.The more interesting thing will be the part where you explain why you think they are right.
Now, that would be an entertaining read.
We are not worthy of you Mr all knowing. Please forgive my ignorance to post in your place of knowledge.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
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.
O
OhYes
Guest
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.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.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
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.
O
OhYes
Guest
What does your stalking the weak says about you ?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.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
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.
O
OhYes
Guest
Only thing you are interested is hooking on to my posts.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.
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
Banned
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?
Last edited:
O
OhYes
Guest
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.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?
Tennis_Hands
Banned
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.
ChaelAZ
G.O.A.T.
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.
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
Banned
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.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Caleb Pereira isn't exactly what one would call a reliable source
And higher bounce.
The conditions suit perfect for Djokovic's style of play.
https://jimfawcette.typepad.com/fnet/2012/02/hard-courts-fast-clay-slow-not-so-much-.html
ChaelAZ
G.O.A.T.
I sometimesthink that peoplechoose to ignore the relative aspect of what is being said on purpose, intentionally derailing the point being made with a number of misleading implications.
Fixed.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Fixed.
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.
ChaelAZ
G.O.A.T.
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.
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
Banned
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.
Spanglish72
Rookie
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.
Not a credible resource.
Enga
Hall of Fame
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.
Jaitock1991
Hall of Fame
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)?
Spanglish72
Rookie
Fed could toy with Chang because Chang was 10 years older and had already lost his wheels by then.
Last edited:
O
OhYes
Guest
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.
