US Open court speed will be slow this year

Firstservingman

Talk Tennis Guru
Is that view one that's in light of the current state of the tour? Serious Q. Like surely this wouldn't have been your position around AO time...?
Yes.
At the time of the AO, Fed's main threats were Djokovic, Nadal, and Murray. All would be given a large advantage over Fed with a slower court. Especially Djokovic.

Now most of the "top" players are non-factors, Fed's main worries are young, fresh players who could overpower him. This change neutralises them to an extent.
 

Krish872007

G.O.A.T.
Yes.
At the time of the AO, Fed's main threats were Djokovic, Nadal, and Murray. All would be given a large advantage over Fed with a slower court. Especially Djokovic.

Now most of the "top" players are non-factors, Fed's main worries are young, fresh players who could overpower him. This change neutralises them to an extent.
The court bounce and balls will be far more important I think - pure speed favours both Fed and Rafa over the hard hitters and big servers (who are also typically slower movers)
 

Krish872007

G.O.A.T.
US Open's quite fair with this actually. If they really wanted a guy like Isner to win, they could just change the surface to wood. No one would be able to get a racquet on most of his serves, and their knees would just crumble.
 

DRII

G.O.A.T.
Atlanta seemed to have the best/most entertaining speed/bounce combo this NA swing.

medium fast to fast and high bouncing.
 
Yes.
At the time of the AO, Fed's main threats were Djokovic, Nadal, and Murray. All would be given a large advantage over Fed with a slower court. Especially Djokovic.

Now most of the "top" players are non-factors, Fed's main worries are young, fresh players who could overpower him. This change neutralises them to an extent.
Okay, I get the reasoning at least.

Djok was gone by 2R, though. Murray was never a threat. Nadal, yes, but that was just Nad-Fed. Hadn't definitively solved him at that time. (Apologies for slow response - phone.)

My recollection is that the realization of the profoundly speedier courts dawned progressively during the tourney. Also, there were numerous serious challenges that he faced in his draw, irrespective of surface.

If Fed's mobility is hindered he's not gonna want sludge conditions, methinks. Would be preferable for his strikes to rocket through the court.
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
I've seen plenty of these indexes and they all seem complete and utter ****. Total garbage. The cream of human exrement.
e
I'll just watch the USO and see thank you very much.
 

Firstservingman

Talk Tennis Guru
Okay, I get the reasoning at least.

Djok was gone by 2R, though. Murray was never a threat. Nadal, yes, but that was just Nad-Fed. Hadn't definitively solved him at that time. (Apologies for slow response - phone.)

My recollection is that the realization of the profoundly speedier courts dawned progressively during the tourney. Also, there were numerous serious challenges that he faced in his draw, irrespective of surface.

If Fed's mobility is hindered he's not gonna want sludge conditions, methinks. Would be preferable for his strikes to rocket through the court.
The main thing that brings me to this way of thinking is that there are basically no players entered in this tournament that Fed would not be the overwhelming favourite against. Even Nadal, going on form and recent matches between the two.
I'm half expecting Federer to be wearing a microphone during his matches in New York.

Under these conditions, I think whichever type of court (and balls) give Federer the lowest possibility of a shock loss to someone who is suddenly redlining on the day would be the best. Because that is his main threat, really.

I'm also assuming he is healthy. If he isn't, that changes things, of course.
 

Federer and Del Potro

Talk Tennis Guru
The main thing that brings me to this way of thinking is that there are basically no players entered in this tournament that Fed would not be the overwhelming favourite against. Even Nadal, going on form and recent matches between the two.
I'm half expecting Federer to be wearing a microphone during his matches in New York.

Under these conditions, I think whichever type of court (and balls) give Federer the lowest possibility of a shock loss to someone who is suddenly redlining on the day would be the best. Because that is his main threat, really.

I'm also assuming he is healthy. If he isn't, that changes things, of course.
Zverev probably the scariest. Don't see a rando beating Federer unless his trash Montreal form rears its ugly head. Nadal always will have his chances against him, and Kyrgios.

But if he's healthy and on form he is the prohibitive favorite.
 

Firstservingman

Talk Tennis Guru
Yes, and Wawrinka has many more chances to blow opponents away on a slow court. Look at Thiem, the biggest mindless hitter on the Tour, and he's useless on fast HC.
Stan isn't playing. If he was, I would actually consider him a serious threat to Fed on this surface, yes. I don't think Thiem has the game to beat Fed in a Bo5 - but obviously Fed is unlikely to be able to go the whole two weeks without facing somebody even slightly difficult. If Thiem is the trickiest opponent he'll have to face then he's likely walking it home.

The wildcard here is
a) His health. If his back plays up, all bets are off.
b) A fluking, zoning big hitter. I still remember Cilic destroying Fed out of nowhere in New York in 2014.
 

Newcomer

Hall of Fame
Stan isn't playing. If he was, I would actually consider him a serious threat to Fed on this surface, yes. I don't think Thiem has the game to beat Fed in a Bo5 - but obviously Fed is unlikely to be able to go the whole two weeks without facing somebody even slightly difficult. If Thiem is the trickiest opponent he'll have to face then he's likely walking it home.

The wildcard here is
a) His health. If his back plays up, all bets are off.
b) A fluking, zoning big hitter. I still remember Cilic destroying Fed out of nowhere in New York in 2014.
Wawrinka never beat Federer outside of clay.
 

Vanilla Slice

Semi-Pro
So it's a thing now that the January-March hardcourts are slowly being sped up and the hardcourts from July-September are being slowed down?
 
So it's pretty much right in between the court speed of Indian Wells and Miami. The court speed at the Australian open made it really fun to watch, especially seeing players like Misha finally get a chance to shine, but both IW and Miami had some great matches as well that rewarded aggressive play, like Fed vs Big Bird and the awesome Federer-Kyrgios match!

I see commenters insisting that it's not so much court speed that matters as surface variety. We got really fast courts at the AO this year. What's wrong with a slower hard court for the US?
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
US Open's quite fair with this actually. If they really wanted a guy like Isner to win, they could just change the surface to wood. No one would be able to get a racquet on most of his serves, and their knees would just crumble.
No conditions (surface, balls, anything) would transform Isner into anything more than a perennial 3d/4th rounder in slams. It's who he is, serving people off court is just easier in a BO3 format.

All of the big servers that contended for slams had much more game outside their main weapon than John does, even an often ridiculed guy like Raonic.
 

xFullCourtTenniSx

Hall of Fame
Obviously the USTA doesn't want the fans questioning the ATP rankings. Nadal is #1, so Nadal should be able to win the US Open. In case he wasn't capable of that to begin with, they coated the courts with some honey and molasses to make things go along a little more smoothly.
 
Top