The Grass Court Paradox

[Babblelot]

It is odd that every poll I've ever seen ranks Wimby at the top of fan favorites. It's also true that the very few players capable of winning Wimby will say it is the slam they covet most. At the same time, however, it's also the one slam that's most protested by the rest of the tour players (e.g., complaints, w/d, or the recent Spanish boycot). Complaints by fans suggesting that technology had made the men's game excessively boring initiated the powers that be at Wimby to slow the court surface.

At one time, 3 of the 4 slams were played on grass. Today, the ITF has virtually eradicated grass court tennis.

Do you think the grass court season should be on par with HC and clay?

More importantly, can you explain why the grass court season has been all but eradicated? Once the predominant surface, grass court tennis has been all but phased out.

-------------

Personally, I'm not a fan of grass court tennis and Wimby is by far my least favorite slam, so I think things are the way they are for a reason: grass court players/fans are a small minority.

 

[@wright]

Yes, they should have a Masters Series on grass before W. If they have more events, more players will take the surface seriously.

 

[gugafanatic]

Grass courts are difficult to monitor and look-after. It can be a very unpredictable surface with bad bounces, and top players tend to stay clear from practicing on it. Furthermore in countries like Spain and USA grass courts are not easily accesible, and hence players tend to play predominantly on hardcourts and clay.

 

[Andres]

And they're damn expensive to maintain.

 

[callitout]

This tries to explain it:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/3050897.stm

Basically history, atmosphere, aura have more to do with it than the specifics of grass court tennis. The Newport tournament gets little notice, but is played on grass. Its not simply the grass but the context which matters to Wimbledon. And yes youre right it is the most famous tennis tournament in the world.

 

[jeebeesus]

Grass should be smoked and enjoyed that way, not stomped on. These people have no respect! lolololololol!

 

[gugafanatic]

Grass should be smoked and enjoyed that way, not stomped on. These people have no respect! lolololololol!

Are you Marcelo Rios by any chance?? lol

 

[need2paint]

It's supposedly a matter of money. grass courts are expensive to maintain.

I would love to see a Masters Series tournament played in L.A., on grass. Maybe they could move the Indian Wells tournament to July and resurface the courts.

 

[35ft6]

A Master's Series on grass would be pretty rad. But unless it's indoors, it would be difficult to manage. You would either need a ton of grass courts, or one court indoors, a la Madrid (right? they only have one court?), otherwise rain could ruin it all.

 

[Babblelot]

This tries to explain it:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/3050897.stm

Basically history, atmosphere, aura have more to do with it than the specifics of grass court tennis. The Newport tournament gets little notice, but is played on grass. Its not simply the grass but the context which matters to Wimbledon. And yes youre right it is the most famous tennis tournament in the world.

Thanks, calliout. I like the analogy to the World Cup. Everyone's a fan for a month.

 

[@wright]

A Master's Series on grass would be pretty rad. But unless it's indoors, it would be difficult to manage. You would either need a ton of grass courts, or one court indoors, a la Madrid (right? they only have one court?), otherwise rain could ruin it all.

I think grass needs sun. It is a green plant, after all.

 

[Matthew]

Wimbledon is very prestigious and all, but lets face it - grass court tennis is boring. Especially in this day in age where the tour is dominated by big serves and big forehands. The only player who makes grass court tennis interesting is (who would have thought?) - Federer. But what kind of tennis COULDN'T he make interesting?

 

[baseliner]

Grass court tennis

Tennis as a worldwide sport is trying to get away from the (perceived) country club, elitist roots of the sport to appeal to a wider class of player and fan. Grass court tennis is viewed as not available to the masses. In many countries only the extremely wealthly can afford to play on a grass court. The USO went from grass to clay and now hard. The Aussie Open went from grass to hard leaving the Wimby the only GS on grass (which tickles the Brits). If they would put more of a gap between the French Open and Wimbledon it would give time for a Masters series tourney on grass. That is the only way to increase the importance of the grass court tour.

 

[Babblelot]

Here's the current breakout of Master Series events:

5 hardcout (3 USA, 1 Canada, 1 Europe)
3 clay (all Europe)
1 carpet (Europe)

Pacific Life Open (hardcourt, USA)
Nasdaq 100 Open (hardcourt, USA)
Monte Carlo (clay, Europe)
Rome (clay, Europe)
Hamburg (clay, Europe)
Montreal (hardcourt, Canada)
Cincinnati (hardcourt, USA)
Madrid (indoor/hard, Europe)
Paris (indoor/carpet, Europe)

If there were to be a change, I would agree with n2p in that the Pacific Life should be played on grass and moved to the week after Wimbledon. The way things play out on the schedule, I can't see playing a MS grass event before Wimbledon. Certainly, not one in the States, and certainly not at the expense of losing a claycourt MS event.

From the Pacific Life, the tour moves to L.A. and the USO series.

 

[rhubarb]

What's the point in playing a TMS after the relevant GS though? Surely the TMSes are there as a warm-up to the slam on that surface. So I don't think there's any way there should be a grass masters after Wimbledon, and certainly not in north America.

 

[zenit]

oh please just let grasscourt tennis die. wimbledon is probably one of the most boring tournaments to watch. Its always people who serve and hit hardest that do well in it. Would be cool to have 2 slams played on hard (fast surface) and 2 slams played on clay (slow). Would make slam domination for one player harder.

 

[Rabbit]

At one time, 3 of the 4 slams were played on grass. Today, the ITF has virtually eradicated grass court tennis.

Do you think the grass court season should be on par with HC and clay?

More importantly, can you explain why the grass court season has been all but eradicated? Once the predominant surface, grass court tennis has been all but phased out.

-------------

Personally, I'm not a fan of grass court tennis and Wimby is by far my least favorite slam, so I think things are the way they are for a reason: grass court players/fans are a small minority.

I don't know that the ITF has changed the surface, I thought that was more the choice of the home country.

I do think grass courts should be on par with clay and that hard courts should be the anamoly, for winter use only. Grass and clay are so much easier on the body and would help the pro tour.

The reason cited for eliminating grass courts is obviously the expense. They further justify that by saying that normal people don't play on grass and can't relate to it. This may be an ends justifying a means. I think that if grass courts were dominate like they once were, clubs would invest in them and they would make a comeback.

The grass court season disappeared because the Grand Slams changed their surface choice. Once upon a time, there was a clay court season which culminated with the French Open. The U.S. Open was the first to change surfaces from grass to clay. When that happened, a clay court circuit sprung up in the United States. Many of us old farts remember watching and enjoying the matches played during this time. The clay court circuit was great. Then, in '78, the Open decided to change to hardcourts. It took the old claycourt tournaments a couple of years to die out, but sadly they did.

Anyway, if you watch a calendar year, there are tournaments which are played on a surface like the next Grand Slam. The intent of this is to let the players get used to the surface before competing in the Slam which says that basically everything prior to a Slam is a warmup. The exception to this is the few tournaments played after a Slam that are on the same surface. The reason for the grasscourt decline is there is only two weeks between Roland and Wimbledon. If they pushed Wimbledon back some, maybe two weeks, then they'd have a month long grasscourt season which would be great.

The only reason that there is a small amount of grass court players now is the smaller number of grasscourt tournaments. I think that would change drastically if grass courts returned to the U.S. and Australian Opens. I think the number of grasscourt fans is greater than you give it credit. I also think the average Joe would love playing on grass. The younger guys would love the fast paced play and the older guys would love the fact that you can play 5 or 6 sets and not have your legs hurt like hell.

IMO, all Grand Slam tournaments should be played on natural (grass or clay) surfaces.

 

[Babblelot]

Hey, excellent post, Rabbit!

Yes, I understand the relationship between the timing of a season with respect to a slam. Yet, there are anomolies. The Pacific Life and NASDAQ are played between the AO and RG. Also, Newport is played after Wimbledon.

I chose PL, because I wasn't familiar with the facilities at Halle. I know there are a number of stops in the States that couldn't handle a MS event. But rhubarb said Halle could. So, I'll go with Halle, instead.

 

[ZhuangCorp]

I think either the Gerry Weber or Stella Artois tournament should be elevated to Masters Series status, then we would have a TMS on grass, right before Wimbledon.

 

[Rabbit]

Hey, excellent post, Rabbit!

Yes, I understand the relationship between the timing of a season with respect to a slam. Yet, there are anomolies. The Pacific Life and NASDAQ are played between the AO and RG. Also, Newport is played after Wimbledon.

I chose PL, because I wasn't familiar with the facilities at Halle. I know there are a number of stops in the States that couldn't handle a MS event. But rhubarb said Halle could. So, I'll go with Halle, instead.

Don't be so quick to call the Pacific Life an anomoly. The NASDAQ is the closest thing to a Grand Slam that ain't a Grand Slam. It's a two week event that features the same sized draw. Also, remember from my other post, there are some follow on tournaments after a Grand Slam. There are a number of clay court events that follow Roland Garros and are seen as alternative to the grass by the dirt ballers of the world.

I think Halle would make a great Master Series if there would be more grass court tournaments.

 

[rhubarb]

Don't be so quick to call the Pacific Life an anomoly. The NASDAQ is the closest thing to a Grand Slam that ain't a Grand Slam. It's a two week event that features the same sized draw.

Indian Wells and Miami both have a 96 draw, smaller than a GS.

 

[whealben]

Great post, Rabbit.

I learnt to play on grass, so I'm probably biased-but, as a surface, I love it. It most definitely is easier on your body, though I can understand the reasoning behind changing to hardcourt or clay. Maintaining a grass event is horrendously expensive.

But tennis was born in Britain. Wimby is the oldest of the Slams. Surely there's room for it in the modern game? I'd love to see a grass court Masters. (Queens would be good)

Oh and I completely agree with the poster who raised the point of class and snobbery in Tennis Clubs in this country.

I hate it, and it's still rife. So I'm not going to knock the proliferation of hard court tournaments if it means everyone has a chance to play the game.

I do loathe clay though, but that's a personal view. If I'd been brought up on it, I'd probably love it.

 

[Yours!05]

I think the number of grasscourt fans is greater than you give it credit. Concur - plenty where I live.
I also think the average Joe would love playing on grass. The younger guys would love the fast paced play and the older guys would love the fact that you can play 5 or 6 sets and not have your legs hurt like hell. Why don't they listen to Rabbit?

 

[Kaptain Karl]

Grass has a ... mystique ... a prestige ... Clay and Hard will simply never have. Personally, I miss the Har-Tru boom (brought on by the US Open switching to that in the late '70s).

Bring back more Har-Tru -- or Rubico. (Pretty much the same type of artificial clay.) A little slower than Hard; a little faster than European Red Clay.

I love how easy on the legs and back Har-Tru is....

- KK

 

[Aykhan Mammadov]

Babblelot asked very good question.

Still I don't see an answer. I don't know why there is not MS at grass, and why some Slams did change their surface.

The answer that it is expensive IS NOT serious. It is NOT for amateurs. It is pro tour where winner gets 1,000,000 $ in slam. And you want to assure that it is expensive and this is the reason ? And how about football , how about golf and etc... Must they die in such a situation ?

 

[Kevin Patrick]

The answer is simple.
All of the tournaments are very stubborn. They want to keep their dates, their field, etc. Look up the schedule from the 70s/80s at tenniscorner.net
It's almost exactly the same today. Things will NEVER change. There will always be too many events/no offseason. There are too many people involved. If tennis had one all-powerfull commisoner, changes would happen.
As it is now, there are only 2 weeks in between the French & Wimbledon.
Halle/Queen's/Netherlands/Manchester all want to keep their events & won't budge for the others. There will never be a grass masters series or a grass season.

 

[jhhachamp]

Babblelot asked very good question.

Still I don't see an answer. I don't know why there is not MS at grass, and why some Slams did change their surface.

The answer that it is expensive IS NOT serious. It is NOT for amateurs. It is pro tour where winner gets 1,000,000 $ in slam. And you want to assure that it is expensive and this is the reason ? And how about football , how about golf and etc... Must they die in such a situation ?

Aykhan, your post makes some sense to me! This may be a first, haha.

 

[GOAT]

When I think of the origin of tennis, the classic whites, wooden racquets, and grass courts always come to mind. Hate to say, but I only hear the older generation of tennis enthusiasts complaining about the lack of grass courts. The attention span of the present generation has changed, and grass isn't exactly the right place to hone the banging, high-flying styles of today's players. Factor in that the surface is difficult to maintain, etc., it's not exactly an ideal investment.

 

[Rabbit]

...The attention span of the present generation has changed,

One would think that the ADD generation would love grass court play.

If you read the posts carefully, you also see the older generation of players bemoaning the decline of clay in this country. Don't be so quick to judgement, unless you were a fan then, it's hard to know what is missing.

 

[bluegrasser]

I think there are reasons for the popularity of Wimbie - first the tradition, because many folks love history and sameness, surface next, because most of us haven't played on grass and find it intriguing , and lastly , less comentory and you can actually here the ball being struck.
In regards to the Spaniards , they're just cry babies and expect the game to be changed for them -*BS* Hey, Borg won Wim..five times in a row w/ a wood racquet ala baseliner, Hewitt ?, Agassi - hmm, go back in time and you find Mr. Budge and others. I say Wimbie stay as you are and sc..w the namesayers.

 

[bluegrasser]

that's HEAR the ball ! hey, it's early...

 

[Babblelot]

In regards to the Spaniards , they're just cry babies and expect the game to be changed for them.

...well, the powers that be at Wimbledon may have taken this into consideration when they decided to slow the courts down a few years ago.

Rabbit, great point about claycourt events being played after RG. I missed that one, too. Thanks.