Why nearly all clay prospects except Rafa are doing horrible this clay season?

No opposition for Federer at Wimbledon as well.

-Dimitrov: a bluff on all surfaces.
-Raonic: since 2017, he is injured/semi-retired.
-Isner: has better results at RG than WB.
-Del Potro: has better results at RG (1 SF and 1 QF) than WB (1 SF O QF).
-Djokovic: he is done.
-Nadal: ...
-Cilic: the only one who can trouble him a little bit, but nothing particularly impressive.
-Kyrgios: never pass the first rounds of a GS.
-Zverev: not good enough to beat Roger at WB.
 
AlexanderTheGreat08 said:
I mean Costa and Corretja
Click to expand...
Costa was too sporadic and his ability on the day in/out was always questionable. Corretja was more old school defensive/ neutral minded clay game, his biggest problem was probably the inability to transition to offense and to pull the trigger early when it was available. They both lacked having a very good overall serve, back then it was probably better than most on the dirt. To be fair they were both very successful on clay but I don't see their game then winning now.
 
BeatlesFan said:
Because Thiem has been hideously overhyped as some sort of clay God, even though his one-dimensional game is exposed for what it is on every surface, including clay. He won the Argentina tourney this year beating world-beater Alijaz Bedene in the final. When he meets Nadal, he wins 2 games and gets bageled in the second set. He's a non-factor on clay against Nadal or any great clay courter. And Chung has never even won a tournament in his entire career, why is he even considered a clay prospect? These are the two guys supposed to dethrone Nadal?
tumblr_p2rwidfvBw1rpqu91o1_500.gif
Click to expand...

This!
 
Meles said:
This is just utter nonsense. The clay game has changed because the main tour went to Poly strings. The old style you are mourning would never work today on clay. Now hard court players like Djokovic can be great on clay. The clay field is actually much tougher with more top players a threat on the surface.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Fact is that all Europeans play on clay since young. And those are the ones winning big things.

If other continents did the same... but they dont see the light and continue suck on all surfaces.
Training on clay plus poly makes you a good tennis player.
 
Clay has always been like this, no competition. Hence why Nadal has won so many FOs. The one year someone played amazing, Nadal lost.
 
The tour is in trouble right now. Look at https://live-tennis.eu/en/atp-live-ranking

2 players in the top 10 with New Career Highs are 32 year old Kevin Anderson and 33 year old Isner. Players who were declining 10 years ago, are suddenly rising up the ranks. Del Potro, with surgeries in both wrists, who cannot basically play on one side of his body anymore is as competitive today as he was 10 years ago (the decline being apparent in that 10 years ago he could beat much stronger Nadal and Federer in a row while now he no longer can beat a weaker combination of the two).

With the spread of the game, I'm not entirely sure why the younger generation is struggling so much with the older one. I suspect a lot of it may have to do with being taught to play with grinding styles, which (a) probably discourages a lot of the players before they become professionals, (b) make a lot of players who did become professionals hate the game, and (c) lead to a lot of injuries which prevent their development. Not everyone is Nadal to be able to recover from injuries with the mental fortitude and high level play that he has shown.

Further, I wonder if the older generation having learnt tennis with racket technology that is inferior to what they are playing with now, find the game easier, and have more tricks and techniques up their sleeves. With better racket technology, the same shots that feel natural and even hard to the younger gen, feels like easy mode for the older generation.
 
Tennisanity said:
Clay has always been like this, no competition. Hence why Nadal has won so many FOs. The one year someone played amazing, Nadal lost.
Click to expand...
You're deluded if you think that.

It's got to be sad to hate that bad an athlethe who knows nothing about you, uh? It puts things in perspective.
 
mightyrick said:
Nadal, Nishikori, Dimitrov, Berdych, Cilic, Wawrinka, Gasquet, Verdasco, Soderling, Tsonga, Murray... um do I need to go on? Del Potro's issues on clay merely have to do with injuries and longevity. He was absent a lot. Still, Del Potro was raised on clay and trained in the Spanish style.



I'm not sure about Edmund's training background. But Murray goes on the list, too. Murray has done a ton of Spanish-style training. Him and Nadal used to even drill together even when they were very young. Judy Murray was very smart with regards to getting Murray the very best coaching.

I don't know if Courier intended to buck the trend. I never really researched it... although I do think that would be interesting to know. I only know that he loved slow surfaces (from hearing him in interviews). Perhaps he just got lucky in the coaching that he had. Courier was well-known as one of the most fit players on the tour in his prime. I heard Agassi say in an interview one time that after some matches, Courier would actually run a couple miles round the facilities as a cool down after a match... while his opponents would go straight to the ice bath. :)
Click to expand...
So Del Potro has not really beaten anyone at the top of the clay game based on that list. The two players he's beat in the top 5 on clay are Soderling (Estoril 2011) and Murray (2009). He's not taken a set from Nadal on clay.:rolleyes: If we expand to top 10 players we get:
older Davydenko, young Tsonga, Nishikori2017:confused:, and Bendych 2012 (maybe that his biggest one, but Bendy not prime on clay by then).

So basically Del Potro is at best a dangerous nothing burger on clay.;)

On the Edmund front I thought there was some magical footwork technique that you might elaborate on.:oops:
 
Meles said:
So Del Potro has not really beaten anyone at the top of the clay game based on that list. The two players he's beat in the top 5 on clay are Soderling (Estoril 2011) and Murray (2009). He's not taken a set from Nadal on clay.:rolleyes: If we expand to top 10 players we get:
older Davydenko, young Tsonga, Nishikori2017:confused:, and Bendych 2012 (maybe that his biggest one, but Bendy not prime on clay by then).

So basically Del Potro is at best a dangerous nothing burger on clay.;)

On the Edmund front I thought there was some magical footwork technique that you might elaborate on.:oops:
Click to expand...


Do your homework, man. Back in 2011 (and by the Melesian logic) Del almost "won" against Capy. Check that Mugvis Cup match on YT. And if IRC, he was serving for the first set at RG 2007 (?)
 
We already had a 9 page thread discussion removing clay from the tour

The overwhelming consensus was to agree with the ITF who decided clay is not a real tennis surface

Get rid of it. Employed fans that are all outside of Western Europe are ready for this course of action
 
I think it’s bc everyone is trying to play more aggressively this year (ever since Roger said last year that the young guys weren’t coming to bet enough). The problem is no one has the talent to successfully emulate Roger and so when they try to hit winners they f up. When playing against Rafa these guys (like Thiem) SHOULD try to extend points and wear Rafa out. Not saying that it will necessarily translate into a win but playing aggressive against Rafa on clay is not going to work.
 
WhiskeyEE said:
What old style? Coria, Gaudio, and Puerta all used poly. Kuerten beat Federer at RG in 2004 in straight sets. Federer had already been using his current gut/luxilon ALU setup for several years and won his 1st Masters title on clay. Same with the rest of the tour by like 2001 at the latest.

Poly did not change the tour whatsoever in the mid 2000s. Kuerten himself was using poly by 1997. And Lleyton Hewitt won Wimbledon in 2002.

Even I was using poly in 2003 as a young teenager. Rofl.
Click to expand...
Everyone by 2001 at the latest is completely incorrect. More like 2004 would be my guess if you want to put a date on it. I don't know about the clay tour, but I'd assume given Kuerten that they had all switched by 2000.

I'd heard Hewitt adopted later, but that was from another TTW poster. Blake was forced to change and I suspect Federer on Poly in 2003 to 2004 were the final nails in the coffin as it was clear what it could do off clay. The point is everyone switched in 2002 or so off clay. Do you think they all benefited from the change versus the field like Federer? Well aware that Kuerten got a tech advantage for the 1997 RG title, but even he did not grow up on the stuff. A lot of early adopters did not fare as well and its pretty odd that nobody survived at the top of the game save Federer. Roddick remained in the top 10, but had to redo his forehand to deal with the new baseline reality brought on by Poly.

Getting back to clay these guys had the jump on Poly until the whole tour shifted and really only Kuerten dominated. JCF, Moya, and Safin I suspect were ahead of the curve on Poly. But once the whole tour got on Poly and all the players coming up had developed with it for a period of time that is just a big change. I'd put it ahead of graphite rackets even. The game Costa and JCF played on clay back then would not work well today. Puerta was a drug cheat. I love Coria, but he got accused as well and did not have a strong serve game.

Bottom line, the entire clay game changed once the whole tour was fully on and adapted to Poly. At this point suddenly hard court base liners became more of a threat on clay. Its much easier for a more diverse group of players to win on clay now so the specialist is all but dead. So we have better play on clay yet at the same time it seems a little more easier for a consistent group to dominate at the top (all Euros pretty much now). Its just not the same game and your bring up those earlier clay courters and not many of them would do well. I'm no Kuerten expert, but I'd hazzard a guess that he Courier, Lendl, and maybe Agassi would have done quite well. If you don't have a great serve/hold game you're not winning today on clay.o_O

The above are my current thoughts on the matter and far from authoritative because I simply did not follow clay closely enough during the late 90's really up until the Nadal/Federer thing. I've of course studied the period and know the stats fairly well. Frankly their was little discussion that I heard at the time on the matter and the first string craze that I heard in telecasts was the Nadal 2010 Babolat Hurricane.
 
-snake- said:
Do your homework, man. Back in 2011 (and by the Melesian logic) Del almost "won" against Capy. Check that Mugvis Cup match on YT. And if IRC, he was serving for the first set at RG 2007 (?)
Click to expand...
I did my homework right on tennis abstract.:rolleyes: Delpo did take the first set on Davis Cup in clay in 2011.
il_570xN.1124001998_ffsm.jpg

I'm pretty sure the Delpo clay myth began with the Fraudlings sitting around the fire after he nearly stopped Fed's fortunate 2009 RG run. Anyone beating Fed or close to beating him is some kind of a God, except of course for Thiem or Zverev.;)
 
Meles said:
I did my homework right on tennis abstract.:rolleyes: Delpo did take the first set on Davis Cup in clay in 2011.
il_570xN.1124001998_ffsm.jpg

I'm pretty sure the Delpo clay myth began with the Fraudlings sitting around the fire after he nearly stopped Fed's fortunate 2009 RG run. Anyone beating Fed or close to beating him is some kind of a God, except of course for Thiem or Zverev.;)
Click to expand...


Thiem won some measly 3-setters against the rodent, the Mugvis Cup was a 5-setter.
But I agree with your anal-ysis, though. He's a nonfactor.
 
-snake- said:
Thiem won some measly 3-setters against the rodent. The Mugvis Cup was a 5-setter ;).
But I agree with your anal-ysis, though. He's a nonfactor.
Click to expand...
That's my point, but sometimes the Mighty don't go down without a good clubbing upside the head.:D If you're call Nadal a rodent, Thiem has the most decisive victory against prime Nadal (straight sets, three break margin).

Delpo can cause all sorts of trouble, but doubt he can win a big title or even reach final.:oops:
 
Meles said:
That's my point, but sometimes the Mighty don't go down without a good clubbing upside the head.:D If you're call Nadal a rodent, Thiem has the most decisive victory against prime Nadal (straight sets, three break margin).

Delpo can cause all sorts of trouble, but doubt he can win a big title or even reach final.:oops:
Click to expand...


Eeeh, and when did Thiem win a M1000 on clay? You're content with just a final in the weak era? Pff. I doubt he (Del) gives a sh1t about clay anyway. Even before his latest injury, he tanked everywhere but at RG.
 
Meles said:
Everyone by 2001 at the latest is completely incorrect. More like 2004 would be my guess if you want to put a date on it. I don't know about the clay tour, but I'd assume given Kuerten that they had all switched by 2000.

I'd heard Hewitt adopted later, but that was from another TTW poster. Blake was forced to change and I suspect Federer on Poly in 2003 to 2004 were the final nails in the coffin as it was clear what it could do off clay. The point is everyone switched in 2002 or so off clay. Do you think they all benefited from the change versus the field like Federer? Well aware that Kuerten got a tech advantage for the 1997 RG title, but even he did not grow up on the stuff. A lot of early adopters did not fare as well and its pretty odd that nobody survived at the top of the game save Federer. Roddick remained in the top 10, but had to redo his forehand to deal with the new baseline reality brought on by Poly.

Getting back to clay these guys had the jump on Poly until the whole tour shifted and really only Kuerten dominated. JCF, Moya, and Safin I suspect were ahead of the curve on Poly. But once the whole tour got on Poly and all the players coming up had developed with it for a period of time that is just a big change. I'd put it ahead of graphite rackets even. The game Costa and JCF played on clay back then would not work well today. Puerta was a drug cheat. I love Coria, but he got accused as well and did not have a strong serve game.

Bottom line, the entire clay game changed once the whole tour was fully on and adapted to Poly. At this point suddenly hard court base liners became more of a threat on clay. Its much easier for a more diverse group of players to win on clay now so the specialist is all but dead. So we have better play on clay yet at the same time it seems a little more easier for a consistent group to dominate at the top (all Euros pretty much now). Its just not the same game and your bring up those earlier clay courters and not many of them would do well. I'm no Kuerten expert, but I'd hazzard a guess that he Courier, Lendl, and maybe Agassi would have done quite well. If you don't have a great serve/hold game you're not winning today on clay.o_O

The above are my current thoughts on the matter and far from authoritative because I simply did not follow clay closely enough during the late 90's really up until the Nadal/Federer thing. I've of course studied the period and know the stats fairly well. Frankly their was little discussion that I heard at the time on the matter and the first string craze that I heard in telecasts was the Nadal 2010 Babolat Hurricane.
Click to expand...

Federer was using ALU by early 2002. So maybe 2002 was when the last players changed.

Since when did Roddick change his forehand because of poly? Do you honestly believe he was using a Babolat Pure Drive without poly when he was at his peak? The racquet that was specifically designed to be used with poly? Roddick couldn't have hit his peak forehand (or serve) without poly.

And speaking of JCF, he was the only player to beat Nadal on clay in 2008. People can claim blisters all they want. Nadal is injured every time he loses and JCF schooled him that day.

The phenomenon you are referring to with regard to 'hard courters' doing better on clay has little to do with poly. Rather, it is due to surface homogenization (and heavier balls) and how that affected style of play. Obviously, baseliners are going to do better on clay than the serve and volleyers of the 90s. That doesn't mean that the top 10% of clay courters are better now. Just that the average level of play is better despite fewer players actually having clay as their favourite surface.
 
Last edited:
Im(moral) Winner said:
According to this post he switched to Luxilon ALU in 2003?
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/federer-historic-tensions.459954/#post-7328498
Click to expand...

“Coming up on tour I played with all gut until 2002,” Federer said. “And then I switched from the 85 to the 90 square inch racquet in 2002 before Rome. Then I think I won Hamburg with it, with the half and half (gut and Luxilon). Ever since I play with the same combination. I’ve never switched Luxilon or gut in the main or the crosses. I’ve always kept it the same way. I do believe it’s revolutionized the game to some degree. You can play with more topspin. With the same swing you could not find angles that we find in today’s game.

http://www.tennis-x.com/xblog/2014-08-30/16887.php

So he switched to ALU before the 2002 clay season.
 
WhiskeyEE said:
“Coming up on tour I played with all gut until 2002,” Federer said. “And then I switched from the 85 to the 90 square inch racquet in 2002 before Rome. Then I think I won Hamburg with it, with the half and half (gut and Luxilon). Ever since I play with the same combination. I’ve never switched Luxilon or gut in the main or the crosses. I’ve always kept it the same way. I do believe it’s revolutionized the game to some degree. You can play with more topspin. With the same swing you could not find angles that we find in today’s game.

http://www.tennis-x.com/xblog/2014-08-30/16887.php

So he switched to ALU before the 2002 clay season.
Click to expand...
So he did beat PETE with 85 all gut. :p
 
Meles said:
This is just utter nonsense. The clay game has changed because the main tour went to Poly strings. The old style you are mourning would never work today on clay. Now hard court players like Djokovic can be great on clay. The clay field is actually much tougher with more top players a threat on the surface.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
obviously today the clay field is a joke because the top tier talent on all surfaces on tour is a joke.

But I do think clay became faster in the late 00s, either through the balls or thinning the top layering. Serve hold numbers on clay just spiked around 2009 and have stayed at those levels since. Just another notch in the belt of homogenization, speeding up clay and slowing the others down so all surfaces came together and top players would be favored more, meaning bigger name matchups in late rounds etc.

90s were by far the most diverse conditions, I think in history only Federer would have a prayer of winning a CYGS in the 90s.
 
Meles said:
Everyone by 2001 at the latest is completely incorrect. More like 2004 would be my guess if you want to put a date on it. I don't know about the clay tour, but I'd assume given Kuerten that they had all switched by 2000.

I'd heard Hewitt adopted later, but that was from another TTW poster. Blake was forced to change and I suspect Federer on Poly in 2003 to 2004 were the final nails in the coffin as it was clear what it could do off clay. The point is everyone switched in 2002 or so off clay. Do you think they all benefited from the change versus the field like Federer? Well aware that Kuerten got a tech advantage for the 1997 RG title, but even he did not grow up on the stuff. A lot of early adopters did not fare as well and its pretty odd that nobody survived at the top of the game save Federer. Roddick remained in the top 10, but had to redo his forehand to deal with the new baseline reality brought on by Poly.

Getting back to clay these guys had the jump on Poly until the whole tour shifted and really only Kuerten dominated. JCF, Moya, and Safin I suspect were ahead of the curve on Poly. But once the whole tour got on Poly and all the players coming up had developed with it for a period of time that is just a big change. I'd put it ahead of graphite rackets even. The game Costa and JCF played on clay back then would not work well today. Puerta was a drug cheat. I love Coria, but he got accused as well and did not have a strong serve game.

Bottom line, the entire clay game changed once the whole tour was fully on and adapted to Poly. At this point suddenly hard court base liners became more of a threat on clay. Its much easier for a more diverse group of players to win on clay now so the specialist is all but dead. So we have better play on clay yet at the same time it seems a little more easier for a consistent group to dominate at the top (all Euros pretty much now). Its just not the same game and your bring up those earlier clay courters and not many of them would do well. I'm no Kuerten expert, but I'd hazzard a guess that he Courier, Lendl, and maybe Agassi would have done quite well. If you don't have a great serve/hold game you're not winning today on clay.o_O

The above are my current thoughts on the matter and far from authoritative because I simply did not follow clay closely enough during the late 90's really up until the Nadal/Federer thing. I've of course studied the period and know the stats fairly well. Frankly their was little discussion that I heard at the time on the matter and the first string craze that I heard in telecasts was the Nadal 2010 Babolat Hurricane.
Click to expand...
all 4 slam winners in 2003 were using poly.

Pro Hurricane tour was used by Nadal in the late 00's, before that he used duralast which was one of the earlier babolat polys, by 2010 he had switched to RPM. Luxilon obviously has always been the big name poly string, it's been around since the mid 90s, and definitely most if not all of my tennis playing time, but not popularized until Kuerten used them.

Poly had actually been around for decades, but no one used it because it was too stiff and sort of unplayable. In the late 90's/early 00s there were some technological advancements and mixing it in with other types led to co-poly strings which is what is commonly used today. Not pure polyster, and I personally and a lot of pros string with synthetic gut in the mains anyways.
 
Last edited:
Hawaiian grip said:
Get more clay and grass onto the tour, cut down on HC, and then we'll start having claycourters and grasscourters again. As simple as that. Most players outside of Southern Europe don't get that much clay court exposure to properly develop on the surface, let alone grass, which is only the surface of choice at very few elite clubs. The tour has been progressively turning into an all-HC tour, and people around here think clay is the problem...
Click to expand...

Every European country except the UK plays on clay during the outdoor season. Even the Northern European countries.
 
Sport said:
No opposition for Federer at Wimbledon as well.

-Dimitrov: a bluff on all surfaces.
-Raonic: since 2017, he is injured/semi-retired.
-Isner: has better results at RG than WB.
-Del Potro: has better results at RG (1 SF and 1 QF) than WB (1 SF O QF).
-Djokovic: he is done.
-Nadal: ...
-Cilic: the only one who can trouble him a little bit, but nothing particularly impressive.
-Kyrgios: never pass the first rounds of a GS.
-Zverev: not good enough to beat Roger at WB.
Click to expand...

The same field a prime nadal couldnt navigate through but a 36 year old surgically operated semi retired player did hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahshsh

Quoting fed is not an answer at all for rafa. Its an admission basicially. A childish one too. Or in VB case butthurt one. Hey dont look at me a burgular look over there that guy is a mugger

The comparison is false anyway. Sure the era is weak (which is why nadals no1 weeks are basically false and vultured weak era and his slams wins are vultured weak era) but comparing guys who have all made slam finals or won slams vs guys nadal is beating on clay hahahahahshshshhahaha. Lol i actually have to say guys as they are such bug mugs i cant name them. Hes beating thiem mug but who else? Such big mugs i dont even know names
 
Deon Sanders said:
We already had a 9 page thread discussion removing clay from the tour

The overwhelming consensus was to agree with the ITF who decided clay is not a real tennis surface

Get rid of it. Employed fans that are all outside of Western Europe are ready for this course of action
Click to expand...

We are starting to believe that you don’t like clay too much.
(OK, we got it: you hate clay. It’s clear to all.)
You can go to take care of something else now, you have sent the message.
 
Olli Jokinen said:
Every European country except the UK plays on clay during the outdoor season. Even the Northern European countries.
Click to expand...
Perhaps in the past. Nowadays even clubs in Southern Europe and South America are building more and more hard courts. I know clubs in Spain with more hard courts than clay courts.


Anyway, it all means jack if you don't get as many opportunities to play competitive claycourt tennis. Players outside of Southern Europe/South America train ON and FOR hard court tennis, and it's really not their fault –it's the tour's.
 
Deon Sanders said:
We already had a 9 page thread discussion removing clay from the tour

The overwhelming consensus was to agree with the ITF who decided clay is not a real tennis surface

Get rid of it. Employed fans that are all outside of Western Europe are ready for this course of action
Click to expand...
Was thinking of starting a thread/poll how clay should be relegated to the new ITF transitional tour only, you know for player development...
 
Meles said:
So Del Potro has not really beaten anyone at the top of the clay game based on that list. The two players he's beat in the top 5 on clay are Soderling (Estoril 2011) and Murray (2009). He's not taken a set from Nadal on clay.:rolleyes: If we expand to top 10 players we get:
older Davydenko, young Tsonga, Nishikori2017:confused:, and Bendych 2012 (maybe that his biggest one, but Bendy not prime on clay by then).

So basically Del Potro is at best a dangerous nothing burger on clay.;)

On the Edmund front I thought there was some magical footwork technique that you might elaborate on.:oops:
Click to expand...

Um, there's really no point in discussing things with you once you dig in on a position. You already have your answer, so believe what you like and happy.
 
mightyrick said:
Um, there's really no point in discussing things with you once you dig in on a position. You already have your answer, so believe what you like and happy.
Click to expand...
I'm trying to be flexible and understand what you're seeing with Edmund.

I'm dug in nicely on Delpo at this point.:D
 
Meles said:
I'm trying to be flexible and understand what you're seeing with Edmund.

I'm dug in nicely on Delpo at this point.:D
Click to expand...

But are you trying to really understand?

Like I said, with Edmund, I see his movement, footwork, and early preparation being his real weapon. Because of those things, he is able to get into position to hit shots (off both sides) without being late. Not only that, since he is not late, he has good spacing to the ball and can create good power (off both sides).
To me, Edmund has clearly done a lot of drilling on ball anticipation and footwork training (much like Andy Murray). The guy seemingly is always in position to hit the ball with good spacing. And that isn't luck. The guy has clearly drilled on that. You aren't born with that kind of skill.

Compare to someone like Shapovalov. I see him being "fast", but his footwork and anticipation isn't the best. When he is on the run, sometimes he overruns the ball and jams himself... sometimes he stops too far short and ends up reaching for the ball. Hence, he hits a lot of shanks/mis-hits in those kinds of situations. Shapovalov can hit the ball every bit as hard as Edmund, but he can't do it with the Edmund's consistency because Shapovalov simply doesn't have Edmund's movement and anticipation skills.
 
Meles said:
So Del Potro has not really beaten anyone at the top of the clay game based on that list. The two players he's beat in the top 5 on clay are Soderling (Estoril 2011) and Murray (2009). He's not taken a set from Nadal on clay.:rolleyes: If we expand to top 10 players we get:
older Davydenko, young Tsonga, Nishikori2017:confused:, and Bendych 2012 (maybe that his biggest one, but Bendy not prime on clay by then).

So basically Del Potro is at best a dangerous nothing burger on clay.;)

On the Edmund front I thought there was some magical footwork technique that you might elaborate on.:oops:
Click to expand...

older Davydenko ? davydenko was ~27 at that time and that was a prime year of his.
Delpo also beat Murray on clay in 09 and Soderling in 11 (top 10 players)
and has already been pointed out , he nearly took Nadal to a 5th set in DC 2011.

He also beat your hypemachine Thiem #14 on clay in 16.

he didn't play on clay in 10,14,15....had to skip RG in 13,16 due to injuries. So its no wonder he doesn't more top 10 scalps on clay, not because of lacking level, but because of injury issues.
 
abmk said:
older Davydenko ? davydenko was ~27 at that time and that was a prime year of his.
Delpo also beat Murray on clay in 09 and Soderling in 11 (top 10 players)
and has already been pointed out , he nearly took Nadal to a 5th set in DC 2011.

He also beat your hypemachine Thiem #14 on clay in 16.

he didn't play on clay in 10,14,15....had to skip RG in 13,16 due to injuries. So its no wonder he doesn't more top 10 scalps on clay, not because of lacking level, but because of injury issues.
Click to expand...

Him taking Federer to 5 at the FO in 2009 is more impressive than anything the next gen have done on clay anyway tbh.
 
Meles said:
Everyone by 2001 at the latest is completely incorrect. More like 2004 would be my guess if you want to put a date on it. I don't know about the clay tour, but I'd assume given Kuerten that they had all switched by 2000.

I'd heard Hewitt adopted later, but that was from another TTW poster. Blake was forced to change and I suspect Federer on Poly in 2003 to 2004 were the final nails in the coffin as it was clear what it could do off clay. The point is everyone switched in 2002 or so off clay. Do you think they all benefited from the change versus the field like Federer? Well aware that Kuerten got a tech advantage for the 1997 RG title, but even he did not grow up on the stuff. A lot of early adopters did not fare as well and its pretty odd that nobody survived at the top of the game save Federer. Roddick remained in the top 10, but had to redo his forehand to deal with the new baseline reality brought on by Poly.

Getting back to clay these guys had the jump on Poly until the whole tour shifted and really only Kuerten dominated. JCF, Moya, and Safin I suspect were ahead of the curve on Poly. But once the whole tour got on Poly and all the players coming up had developed with it for a period of time that is just a big change. I'd put it ahead of graphite rackets even. The game Costa and JCF played on clay back then would not work well today. Puerta was a drug cheat. I love Coria, but he got accused as well and did not have a strong serve game.

Bottom line, the entire clay game changed once the whole tour was fully on and adapted to Poly. At this point suddenly hard court base liners became more of a threat on clay. Its much easier for a more diverse group of players to win on clay now so the specialist is all but dead. So we have better play on clay yet at the same time it seems a little more easier for a consistent group to dominate at the top (all Euros pretty much now). Its just not the same game and your bring up those earlier clay courters and not many of them would do well. I'm no Kuerten expert, but I'd hazzard a guess that he Courier, Lendl, and maybe Agassi would have done quite well. If you don't have a great serve/hold game you're not winning today on clay.o_O

The above are my current thoughts on the matter and far from authoritative because I simply did not follow clay closely enough during the late 90's really up until the Nadal/Federer thing. I've of course studied the period and know the stats fairly well. Frankly their was little discussion that I heard at the time on the matter and the first string craze that I heard in telecasts was the Nadal 2010 Babolat Hurricane.
Click to expand...
they were indeed not yet playing with so much topspin, angles and power back in the mid 00s on clay, and also the serve was less important then. like Metsman, i also suspect that the top-layer at RG has been made thinner and the subsurface packed harder meanwhile. plus lighter balls are in use now on clay. so the comparison with Costa and also Coria is hard to draw.
i agree with you on Dimitrov's, Delpo's and Edmund's clay prowess.
as for Thiem, he's still coming back from an injury. i can't guess how much he can improve his game in coming years, but for now i have no reason to write him off. not disagreeing on your Coric hype, but in his recent match has Thiem shown that he's just the bigger talent than the hardworking Croatian peasant. :D
 
Last edited:
NatF said:
Him taking Federer to 5 at the FO in 2009 is more impressive than anything the next gen have done on clay anyway tbh.
Click to expand...
I don't know, I think Fed was all over the place at the time. He declined quite a lot in 2009. Plus, he was under pressure, because Rafa was out. Except for the final, all his RG matches were really bellow par. Come on, he needed five sets for Roddick and lost to Delpo at USO final. He bageled Delpo at AO 09 and destroyed Roddick at AO 09. I doubt Roddick and Delpo improved that much in just a few months to match Fed's peak level.

Sorry to tell you but I think Fed was much tougher at FO 12 than in 2009.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GrassMasters
It's hard to compare Clay achievements before and after Rafa
Replies
11
Views
467
messiahrobins
messiahrobins
TheFifthSet
Why Rafa is so great on clay.....
Replies
16
Views
3K
Steve0904
Steve0904
nadalbestclass
Bodo - Why does this man still have a job?
Replies
40
Views
5K
Pozarevacka
Pozarevacka
P
Where should Swiatek rank all time or in the Open Era on clay
2
Replies
73
Views
2K
Rochester
R
Phenomenal
This thread about my thoughts on tennis (with my little knowledge compare to all) I wanted to give my thougths about tennis players on my first post
Replies
10
Views
961
Phenomenal
Phenomenal
Back
Top