The history of grand slam court speeds

[EnglishNadal]

Now firstly I’m no expert in this field and I’m only going off the many thousands of hours I’ve watched on YouTube.

Secondly I’d like to know everyone’s preferences regarding ideal court speeds at each individual slam. I’d go for

Australian open slow/medium speed

French open clay is clay and you can’t change the speed.

Wimbledon id like it super fast. I mean lighting fast but without uneven bounces.

Us open I’d like it fast/medium speed.

Here go’s with my opinion of grand slams court sped history. Don’t go to hard on me if you feel I’ve got it wrong!

Australian open 1988 to 2018

From 1988 to 2008 it was a genuinely medium paced court.

And then from 2009 to 2016 it’s been a slow hardcourt.

It seems to me 2017 and 2018 the courts at Melbourne played like a medium hardcourt again.




French open 1968 to 2018

Clay is clay and can’t change. The only thing that changes a clay court is weather. It plays different if it’s wet/damp or warm/dry. The surface it’s self hasn’t changed at Roland garros from 1968 to 2018.





Wimbledon 1968 to 2018

Here we go. The big one. The all England club. Weather makes a huge difference to grass. The warmer the weather the higher the bounce and the damper the weather the lower the bounce. From 1968 to about 1998 the grass played reasonably the same. Lighting fast most years and also it was very uneven bounce wise. I watched sampras Becker from 1995 and it was unbelievable how bad the turf was.

Then from 1999 to 2001 it changed a little. I think it was to do with the sampras vs ivanisevic finals in 1994 and 1998. The uneven bounces stopped then 1999 to 2001. It was still very quick but in my opinion it’s a lot better standard of tennis played. It was slightly higher bouncing.

Since 2002 it’s played like a fast hardcourt basically. Quite high bouncing now days too. But the bounce has gotten a whole lot more consistent and true since about 1998. It’s not super fast any more but it’s still probably the fastest out of all the big tournaments in the world eg: slams, masters 1000, Olympics, wtf.






Us open 1978 to 2018

Another can of worms here. I would say right from 1978 to 2004 the us open was a fast medium court. Then around 2005 time it changed. And since about 2010 It seems to have slowed down big time and currently maybe it’s slower then the traditionally slower Australian open.

 

[helterskelter]

Your histories are mostly right but there is a bit more variation on the hard-court Slams than you suggest.

Also, why do you think that it is impossible to vary the speed of clay? That is not so. The balls can vary. The amount of topsoil can vary. (Notably, Muster's title defense in 1996 was really hampered by how little topsoil there was on the court, and it's not coincidental that that year Sampras made the semis, beating Bruguera and Courier, and Stich made the final, beating Muster). The weather can alter the conditions, too.

Using the 1-5 court speed index, I would say that for most of the early 1990s it was something like this:

Australian Open: 2.5 (between medium-slow and medium)
Roland Garros: 1
Wimbledon: 5
US Open: 3.5 (between medium and medium-fast)

But in the late 1990s, the Australian Open started getting a bit slower, and the US Open started getting a bit faster, especially after Ashe opened, so it was more like:

Australian Open: 2 (medium-slow)
US Open: 4 (medium-fast)

Rebound ace always had a pretty high bounce because of the rubber content.

 

[helterskelter]

By the way, both combinations - 2.5, 1, 5, 3.5 and 2, 1, 5, 4 - are pretty fair, overall, as they average to a 3, which is medium. However, there was never a truly medium-paced Slam. Indian Wells and Canada were perhaps a bit closer to medium than any of the Slams.

Now, the average is clearly below a 3. It's probably something like:

Australian Open: 3.5
Roland Garros: 1
Wimbledon: 3
US Open: 2.5

 

[BeatlesFan]

Clay court speed and bounce can vary a great deal, OP. Agassi always hated playing MC because he said the speed and bounce were nothing like RG. The clay in Hamburg had a court speed index of 27, which is very fast for clay. The altitude in Madrid also affects playing conditions. So clay varies.

 

[helterskelter]

Clay court speed and bounce can vary a great deal, OP. Agassi always hated playing MC because he said the speed and bounce were nothing like RG. The clay in Hamburg had a court speed index of 27, which is very fast for clay. The altitude in Madrid also affects playing conditions. So clay varies.

One factor in Monte Carlo is that it's so early in the season that it's still often cold and damp. If they played Monte Carlo at the time they do play Roland Garros, it would likely be much warmer and so the ball would move through the air more. And if they played Roland Garros in mid-July or mid-August, the same is true there, too.

ALL tennis courts are subject to variation in speed and bounce because of numerous factors. Outdoor courts all the more so, because of variation in climate that's beyond the control of the tournament organizers. (I still think Djokovic would have beaten Nadal at Roland Garros 2013 had they played a day or two earlier, when it was quite a bit cooler. And Nadal would likely have won in straight sets in 2012 had it not started raining when it did).

 

[metsman]

In terms of the poly era, ideal court speeds were 2003. Every slam was a proper speed, and we had different styles win every slam.

 

[TMF]

It's good to be a Nadal fan for all these years.

Slowing down the court and ball bounce high suit perfectly for his clayish style that had a huge impact on his success off clay.

 

[Vanilla Slice]

Clay itself can’t change, but depending on the ball used, the tournament can get faster like the 2011 French Open

 

[tacou]

Clay is not clay....the grey little league stuff I play on =/= Roland Garros.

 

[OldschoolKIaus]

Also, why do you think that it is impossible to vary the speed of clay? That is not so. The balls can vary. The amount of topsoil can vary. (Notably, Muster's title defense in 1996 was really hampered by how little topsoil there was on the court, and it's not coincidental that that year Sampras made the semis, beating Bruguera and Courier, and Stich made the final, beating Muster).

Nice input about FO96!

 

[helterskelter]

Nice input about FO96!

You want my spiel on AO2000 and UO98 and next few years afterwards (post opening of Ashe stadium), too?

 

[EnglishNadal]

Thanks for everyone’s responses some very interesting points.

I must say I still think a clay court is a clay court speed wise. It only changes with altitude and weather. Warm or damp dry or wet.

 

[metsman]

Thanks for everyone’s responses some very interesting points.

I must say I still think a clay court is a clay court speed wise. It only changes with altitude and weather. Warm or damp dry or wet.

clay might be the easiest to change with the thickness of the top layer, seems like clay has been playing faster the last 10 years due to it, serving numbers are way up. So basically, all surfaces are getting closer together.

 

[George Turner]

I have a theory that they're bringing court speeds closer together because fans want to see the same players win everything. Fans are more greedy than they used to be.

Nadal would never have won Wimbledon in the 90's. He would have won on clay every year but todays fans would inevitably have criticized him for not winning on grass. Therefore, slow the grass down, he wins a couple of times, completes the career slam, greedy fans are happy.

Todays greedy fans would never have accepted Sampras, would have complained he can't win on clay, can't win without his serve etc. Greedy fans would rather see Djokovic win 4 majors consecutively and proclaim him the GOAT. These same fans often criticized Federer for not winning RG no matter how much he won elsewhere. because they're greedy.

Greedy fans want bigger, better, more. It doesn't matter to them that no young players are winning majors, as long as the big three rack up their numbers even more.

This is why i have an admiration for Mury fans; they are not so greedy. They cherish Murys Triumphs without expecting him to win every single major.

 

[helterskelter]

clay might be the easiest to change with the thickness of the top layer, seems like clay has been playing faster the last 10 years due to it, serving numbers are way up. So basically, all surfaces are getting closer together.

True, although court texture is an important factor that we don't often consider. A clay court and a hard court of the exact same speed will still play differently in some ways, so players may do better on one than on the other by a significant amount. For example, Nadal should like Miami more than he does based on court speed alone.

 

[metsman]

True, although court texture is an important factor that we don't often consider. A clay court and a hard court of the exact same speed will still play differently in some ways, so players may do better on one than on the other by a significant amount. For example, Nadal should like Miami more than he does based on court speed alone.

biggest thing is that moving on a clay court is a whole different challenge than a HC of any speed, and always will be.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

The perfect speed for clay was in the mid 90s, hence:

 

[helterskelter]

biggest thing is that moving on a clay court is a whole different challenge than a HC of any speed, and always will be.

Yes, that's what I meant. In movement terms, a slow hard court and a fast hard court are more similar than the former is to clay or the latter is to grass.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Clay itself can’t change, but depending on the ball used, the tournament can get faster like the 2011 French Open

Blue clay changes the dynamics of clay. So yes.... clay can change. Green American clay is much different than European red clay. These comments about clay being static or unchanging are absurd.

 

[Pfabgon]

One factor in Monte Carlo is that it's so early in the season that it's still often cold and damp. If they played Monte Carlo at the time they do play Roland Garros, it would likely be much warmer and so the ball would move through the air more. And if they played Roland Garros in mid-July or mid-August, the same is true there, too.

ALL tennis courts are subject to variation in speed and bounce because of numerous factors. Outdoor courts all the more so, because of variation in climate that's beyond the control of the tournament organizers. (I still think Djokovic would have beaten Nadal at Roland Garros 2013 had they played a day or two earlier, when it was quite a bit cooler. And Nadal would likely have won in straight sets in 2012 had it not started raining when it did).

And Nadal would’ve beat Djokovic at this year’s Wimbledon if the roof would have been opened.

 

[EnglishNadal]

Blue clay changes the dynamics of clay. So yes.... clay can change. Green American clay is much different than European red clay. These comments about clay being static or unchanging are absurd.

Yes green and blue clay are different but red clay always plays the same.

 

[LETitBE]

biggest thing is that moving on a clay court is a whole different challenge than a HC of any speed, and always will be.

grass as well,movement is key