What are your impressions of the court speed so far?

[_maxi]

I'm watching Fed vs Lu in the center court I guess, and it doesn't seem to be faster than the wimbledon 2008, at all. Without comparison, I think it's pretty slow.. the ball is bouncing high.. that was my impresion. What's yours?

 

[NastyWinners]

I'm not seeing the 'fast court' that we were told was going to happen. Maybe once the grass gets warn down a bit more it will quicken.

 

[AAAA]

If we didn't see Lu play last year at Wimbledon there's no way to tell if his shots are slower this year compared to last.

This is Roger's first grass court match since the FO, he's hitting with a lot more spin on his shots atm which I think is because he's playing himself into form on grass after his 2 week lay-off.

 

[Deleted member 21996]

no idea... lets wait for the court speed Guru... ´
...the man who doesnt play tennis but dares to speak about the speed of surfaces like a pdh physicist...

 

[Pwned]

no idea... lets wait for the court speed Guru... ´
...the man who doesnt play tennis but dares to speak about the speed of surfaces like a pdh physicist...

You must be talking about the resident physics expert!

 

[Andres]

Who else but Quagmire!!??

GIGGITY GIGGITY GOO!!!

 

[Sarzy]

The commentators on the bbc thought it was playing quite fast.

 

[egn]

i was watching the blake match most of the morning great playing by seppi but anyway blakes court looked quite fast than i tuned into the fed match and suddenly it felt slow i think it is the way fed was playing we will have to see as the week progresses

 

[Sentinel]

You must be talking about the resident physics expert!

Whose judgment is based on a player whom I don't see in the draw.

Don't think he will be wasting time watching Wimbledon, so we will NEVER know if the court is slow or fast.

 

[Deleted member 21996]

Whose judgment is based on a player whom I don't see in the draw.

Don't think he will be wasting time watching Wimbledon, so we will NEVER know if the court is slow or fast.

non-sense... does that man need to see the matches to make claims about court speed? he doesnt even play tennis and that hasnt kept him from doing so...

just hand him a few stats on serve brake percentage...

 

[abmk]

Whose judgment is based on a player whom I don't see in the draw.

Don't think he will be wasting time watching Wimbledon, so we will NEVER know if the court is slow or fast.

correct

 

[Sentinel]

non-sense... does that man need to see the matches to make claims about court speed? he doesnt even play tennis and that hasnt kept him from doing so...

just hand him a few stats on serve brake percentage...

Sir
I take my hat off to you. I am nowhere in the same league as you. You are so so right. I can hear him tell you:

Elementary, my dear Gorecki. You don't need to actually SEE a match to analyse court speed. Serve break percentages are enough!

The cerebrally challenged may however need to check how far back a player is standing from the baseline while returning Federer's serve.

 

[coloskier]

The courts may not be fast, but they are definitely slippery. I know of at least one match where a player had to DNF because she slipped badly on the court, wrenching her knee, and Azarenka moves on to the 2nd round.

 

[IvanAndreevich]

Looks fairly fast to me. Not sure if it's faster than last year, though.

 

[Cesc Fabregas]

The courts are playing fast but the balls are heavy and slow.

 

[Jchurch]

The courts may not be fast, but they are definitely slippery. I know of at least one match where a player had to DNF because she slipped badly on the court, wrenching her knee, and Azarenka moves on to the 2nd round.

I think I have seen someone fall in just about every match I have caught today. Sure seems slippery.

 

[dincuss]

The courts are playing fast but the balls are heavy and slow.

especially the djoko match..
benneteu is playing so well

 

[Nadal_Freak]

Fast as it always is.

 

[NamRanger]

Fast as it always is.

Yeah, I wonder what's faster, Madrid or Wimbledon. Madrid because of the ALTITUDE OMGZ)RER!@#U$!@%!#

 

[dincuss]

Yeah, I wonder what's faster, Madrid or Wimbledon. Madrid because of the ALTITUDE OMGZ)RER!@#U$!@%!#

hahahah:twisted:

 

[imjimmy]

I don't see anything wrong with what Nadal_Freak said. The grass is fast as usual, meaning it looks to be of the same speed as it was last yr. Of course the grass is slower than it was in the 90's. Did we expect any different this yr? (they always say they're gonna increase the speed, but they never do) From where did Madrid come into discussion?

 

[_maxi]

Nicolas Almagro said after beating Monaco that the balls were very heavy, and with the humidity difficult to handle.

(In Spanish)

http://espndeportes.espn.go.com/news/story?id=857861&s=ten&type=story

 

[ChanceEncounter]

I don't see anything wrong with what Nadal_Freak said. The grass is fast as usual, meaning it looks to be of the same speed as it was last yr. Of course the grass is slower than it was in the 90's. Did we expect any different this yr? (they always say they're gonna increase the speed, but they never do) From where did Madrid come into discussion?

This whole thread talks about a "resident physics expert" for a reason.

 

[egn]

The courts are playing fast but the balls are heavy and slow.

Agreed here. I think someone mixed up the shipment of balls and wimbledon's balls wind up at rolland garros and vice versa

 

[dincuss]

Agreed here. I think someone mixed up the shipment of balls and wimbledon's balls wind up at rolland garros and vice versa

No they purposely did that to mess up the players:twisted::twisted:

 

[NamRanger]

I don't see anything wrong with what Nadal_Freak said. The grass is fast as usual, meaning it looks to be of the same speed as it was last yr. Of course the grass is slower than it was in the 90's. Did we expect any different this yr? (they always say they're gonna increase the speed, but they never do) From where did Madrid come into discussion?

The grass isn't even that fast. Some of the HC events look way faster, such as Dubai. N_F is never consistent with his surface arguments anyways. One year he said the AO was painfully slow, then another he said it was extremely quick. He said Nadal likes slow surfaces and quick conditions, but when Nadal got beat by quick conditions, he said it the reverse. It's simply a matter of multiple contradictions and ignorant statements that just crack us up.

 

[gj011]

Fast as it always is.

Yes I agree with this. I don't see why would grass this year be faster than last year.

 

[Feña14]

It's going to get quite hot as the tournament goes on, the temperatures expected are said to be around the highest since the record was broken in the 1970's.

They should be playing pretty fast before long.

 

[Cesc Fabregas]

The grass is actually pretty fast not 90's fast but still fast its the heavy balls that make it look slow.

 

[Cyan]

Fast.............................

 

[drakulie]

It was playing so fast, I couldn't see the ball.

<<<sarcasm>>>>

 

[ACE of Hearts]

LMAO, fast?Did u see the Djoker match?I hope that was sarcasm.No wonder Nadal has gotten to the final.

 

[zagor]

It's medium-slow as it was for the last like 7 years.Doesn't seem like they sped it up at all this year to me(a they said they will).

 

[Lsmkenpo]

The Slavenger/Dunlop balls they use at Wimbledon are big, slow and heavy.

Slowest ball used out of the 4 slams.

 

[ACE of Hearts]

I think it aint the balls.Its gotta be the court, u get so many different bounces and the rallies are a joke!!!!!The high bounce has helped Nadal win wimbledon.

 

[Cyan]

It is fast but the balls are the ones that should have been used at RG.... Looks like the messed up the balls. RG had the W balls and W has the RG balls.

 

[CountryHillbilly]

Surface was fast, but the balls were slow.

 

[Deleted member 21996]

no idea... lets wait for the court speed Guru... ´
...the man who doesnt play tennis but dares to speak about the speed of surfaces like a pdh physicist...

You must be talking about the resident physics expert!

Whose judgment is based on a player whom I don't see in the draw.

Don't think he will be wasting time watching Wimbledon, so we will NEVER know if the court is slow or fast.

non-sense... does that man need to see the matches to make claims about court speed? he doesnt even play tennis and that hasnt kept him from doing so...

just hand him a few stats on serve brake percentage...

correct

Sir
I take my hat off to you. I am nowhere in the same league as you. You are so so right. I can hear him tell you:

Elementary, my dear Gorecki. You don't need to actually SEE a match to analyse court speed. Serve break percentages are enough!

The cerebrally challenged may however need to check how far back a player is standing from the baseline while returning Federer's serve.

Fast as it always is.

Gotta love this man's Realiability. always one to trust for!

 

[Nadal_Freak]

I think the court needs to be played on ice to satisfy some of you fans. Djokovic had a really tough time breaking Benneteau. It is a fast surface. It's pathetic some of you won't admit to it because you hate Nadal.

 

[slicefox]

ye its always about nadal

everything...

 

[Lotto]

McEnroe was saying during the Federer match about the balls being quite heavy and getting "fluffed up" quite easily and quickly but that when you hit the ball cleanly it was really sliding through the surface...he thinks the balls are slow but surface is fast so. I dont know?

 

[NamRanger]

I think the court needs to be played on ice to satisfy some of you fans. Djokovic had a really tough time breaking Benneteau. It is a fast surface. It's pathetic some of you won't admit to it because you hate Nadal.

Yes, because surface complaints about grass have been going on only because Nadal made it to the final.



NOT.

 

[Nadal_Freak]

Yes, because surface complaints about grass have been going on only because Nadal made it to the final.



NOT.

It got talked about a bunch more once Nadal started to win there. Blame the ESPN crew for starting this junk up. The courts are fast. I don't know what proof there was that it played any other way. The serve is very tough to handle here.

 

[Deleted member 25923]

How can you guys tell the difference between surfaces and balls?

 

[Nadal_Freak]

How can you guys tell the difference between surfaces and balls?

You can tell by the balls on how fast the serves are coming in. The surface is how low and skidding are the courts going.

 

[NamRanger]

It got talked about a bunch more once Nadal started to win there. Blame the ESPN crew for starting this junk up. The courts are fast. I don't know what proof there was that it played any other way. The serve is very tough to handle here.

It got talked ALOT more in 2002 when Hewitt and Nalbandian were in the final, two counterpunching baseliners. It is not an anomaly for an offensive baseliner like Agassi or Washington, or even Courier to make it to the final. However, Nalbandian has NO business whatsoever being in the final of Wimbledon. Especially a pre-prime Nalbandian.


There has been talk from pros (pros who are completely unbiased and third parties to this whole Nadal/Federer thing), analysts, former pros, and so on and so on. BBC did an analysis of one of Federer's serves. The ITF itself said Wimbledon was slower. The former Wimbledon CEO said there was a concentrated effort into slowing down Wimbledon.


I don't know how much more evidence you need. I think it's very clear to me that you are not only biased, but ignorant and totally oblivious. You are so far up Nadal's ass that you have forgotten what it is to be a fan of tennis. All you can see is Nadal, Nadal, Nadal, Nadal. And to be quite honest, I'm really getting sick of it.

 

[Andres]

It got talked about a bunch more once Nadal started to win there. Blame the ESPN crew for starting this junk up. The courts are fast. I don't know what proof there was that it played any other way. The serve is very tough to handle here.

I'm sure you haven't heard what Henman had to say about the courts at Wimbledon.

 

[leonidas1982]

Courier's blog:

I recall very well making the transition from clay to grass and it was never easy or much fun for me. The better you play in Paris the tougher it is to be ready both physically and mentally for the big W but you do what you have to do. In my case, due to the way the grass played, I had to shelve my normal game, suck it up as best I could (trying to smile at least once during the tournament) and grind my way through the grass court world for a few weeks if I could last that long. It was Wimbledon after all...In my early years there I felt like I had absolutely no choice other than to serve and volley on both serves, which was not a recipe for success with my volleys (to say the least). After a few frustrating years and few wins I ended up trying to mix it up, staying back quite a lot and throwing in the serve and volley at times, but always going for quick points, trying to hit winners if I had a look. It lead to a little more success but one thing was consistent; it always took me a full week of practicing on a hard court after I would lose at Wimby to feel like a tennis player again. Wimbledon would take my game away from me and the hard courts would give it back. How things have changed...From what the players tell me now, the surface transition isn't as severe due to how firm the grass courts are, how heavy the balls are and how level the courts are compared to how they were back in the 20th century. I was astounded to hear consistently at the US Open last year that the Open was playing faster than Wimbledon. Are you kidding me? It blew my mind and was a far cry from the Sampras-Ivanisevic Wimby era for sure. It also explained to me how the players were able to consistently have lengthy baseline exchanges of extremely high quality, which were rare in my years of playing big W tennis. I would have liked Wimby to play slower than the Open a few yrs in the 90's. I doubt I would have won but at least I wouldn't have lost a week a year trying to find my game again!

http://www.tennisweek.com/news/fullstory.sps?inewsid=6634920

 

[zagor]

I'm sure you haven't heard what Henman had to say about the courts at Wimbledon.

Here I'll remind him:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1815724,00.html

But not everyone was happy with the new surface, especially those who contend the change may have robbed England of its best chance of crowning a homegrown Wimbledon champion since Perry took the title in 1936. Tim Henman, a serve-and-volley player, made four Wimbledon semifinals, but says the new grass forced him to alter his natural game midcareer. "I remember sitting at a change-over in 2002 in utter frustration and thinking 'What on earth is going on here? I'm on a grass court and it's the slowest court I've played on this year.' " Veteran tour pro and former Wimbledon doubles champion Jonas Bjorkman says the slower grass courts have homogenized the professional game. "There is a danger that we will have only one type of player soon because everyone is growing up on courts that are roughly the same speed," he says. To underline the point: Federer's great rival, Rafael Nadal, is widely considered a clay-court specialist, but has still made the final at Wimbledon the last two years

 

[Al Czervik]

The grass isn't even that fast. Some of the HC events look way faster, such as Dubai. N_F is never consistent with his surface arguments anyways. One year he said the AO was painfully slow, then another he said it was extremely quick. He said Nadal likes slow surfaces and quick conditions, but when Nadal got beat by quick conditions, he said it the reverse. It's simply a matter of multiple contradictions and ignorant statements that just crack us up.

lol, I can't make any sense of it. Some days heavy, slow clay is good, but not if it's low bouncing like Hamburg. It also has to be dry and baked so the ball kicks up high, but then you'd think those conditions would be quicker. I dunno.