Wimbledon has become extremely slow !

G

goforgold99

Semi-Pro
Today Henman said in his commentary that the wimbledon balls have become really heavy.

And I noticed that too, especially from '06 to '07 there was a significant slowdown in the speed of the court and ball. The ball just doesn't travel so fast through the air anymore. You see a player hit the ball really hard and by the time it reached the grass it has slowed down already so much :evil: *lol* just ridiculous

Also Bartoli said something about this today:
But you know, I felt like the grass is so slow. It's so hard to win one point from the baseline. [...] I think it gets really slower and slower honestly [..]I mean, two years ago it was different

Why do they change Wimbledon like that? This is complete ******** to slow it down more and more. We have enough baseline rallies in other tournaments, even hardcourts.

Wimbledon should have kept is S&V character!
 
Last edited:
Yawn. Another one of these threads. Henman is still making excuses for his tough losses. Anyone that watched tennis today saw how many unreturned serves there were.
 
Nadal_Freak said:
This has been the excuse as of late. Lose at Wimbledon and blame the courts.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess the pot is the same color as the kettle...

Nadal_Freak said:
The conditions were too fast. That was a problem for why Nadal took so long to beat Djokovic. Nadal's serve wasn't good enough in this tournament to dominate and he refused to make adjustments on his return game. Way behind the baseline was a bad tactic in altitude. But I guess Nadal will never feel comfortable taking the ball early on the return.
Click to expand...
 
Nadal_Freak said:
Yawn. Another one of these threads. Henman is still making excuses for his tough losses. Anyone that watched tennis today saw how many unreturned serves there were.
Click to expand...

this is the same couch potatoe that said Nadal lost in Madrid due to altitude and court speed...
 
Nadal_Freak said:
Those were legit. The altitude in Madrid and the lighter balls and less top layer at RG. Wimbledon has made no changes since 2001.
Click to expand...

Of course. Dear lord Rafa loses and the courts suck, but when everyone has proved Wimbledon is slower we should believe some guy in Texas instead of the experts :roll:
 
hah did you not hear Brad Gilbert straight out ask Verdasco if it was like clay? Verdasco who has actually been PLAYING on these courts. He said they were extremely fast. And laughed when Gilbert compared them to clay.
 
bruce38 said:
Wimbledon is much slower than it used to be. That's why Nadal was able to beat Fed last year.
Click to expand...
Wrong. Nadal won because he is a major matchup issue to Fed. The courts suited Fed perfectly. Nadal found a way to still be a matchup problem on fast grass. Mainly with his lefty slice serve being a real weapon here.
 
Mardy Fish also confirms it in his interview today:

Q. People have been saying the courts are slowing down, the grass is slowing down for years. Do you sense a difference now compared to other years?

MARDY FISH: Yeah, I mean, you do. You know, like I said a couple days ago, you know, it still takes the serve a little bit, you know, and you're able to ‑‑ you're able to get some free points on your serve, you know, 'cause it stays low and sort of skids if you hit the right serve.

I think the balls have a huge thing to do with it. They're so heavy. I mean, you know, I'm usually right around the 128, 132‑ish area on my first serve for the most part. I think I probably hit one serve 130 today, you know.

So the balls are really heavy. You know, I think those guys that like to stay back, they just feel like they can kind of take a cut at the ball and it's not really gonna fly too much, you know, 'cause the balls are pretty heavy.

You know, the grass is so good, you know, it just bounces up there just like a hard court. If you don't hit the approach, you know, years past you could kind of come to the net and maybe get away with a slice or a bad slice or a bad approach or just, you know, approach in general, and you just can't do that anymore against good players here.
 
Noveson said:
hah did you not hear Brad Gilbert straight out ask Verdasco if it was like clay? Verdasco who has actually been PLAYING on these courts. He said they were extremely fast. And laughed when Gilbert compared them to clay.
Click to expand...
Verdasco has some sense. He knows the game and the courts well. Bartoli is a sore loser like Henman was when he blamed his losses after 2001 at Wimbledon due to the grass.
 
goforgold99 said:
Mardy Fish also confirms it in his interview today:

Q. People have been saying the courts are slowing down, the grass is slowing down for years. Do you sense a difference now compared to other years?

MARDY FISH: Yeah, I mean, you do. You know, like I said a couple days ago, you know, it still takes the serve a little bit, you know, and you're able to ‑‑ you're able to get some free points on your serve, you know, 'cause it stays low and sort of skids if you hit the right serve.

I think the balls have a huge thing to do with it. They're so heavy. I mean, you know, I'm usually right around the 128, 132‑ish area on my first serve for the most part. I think I probably hit one serve 130 today, you know.

So the balls are really heavy. You know, I think those guys that like to stay back, they just feel like they can kind of take a cut at the ball and it's not really gonna fly too much, you know, 'cause the balls are pretty heavy.

You know, the grass is so good, you know, it just bounces up there just like a hard court. If you don't hit the approach, you know, years past you could kind of come to the net and maybe get away with a slice or a bad slice or a bad approach or just, you know, approach in general, and you just can't do that anymore against good players here.
Click to expand...
Thats alot of 'You Knows'
 
Nadal_Freak said:
Wrong. Nadal won because he is a major matchup issue to Fed. The courts suited Fed perfectly. Nadal found a way to still be a matchup problem on fast grass. Mainly with his lefty slice serve being a real weapon here.
Click to expand...

Come on, we all know Rafa got lucky last year. I would suggest he may never make another GS final again (except maybe the FO).
 
Bartoli, Henman, Mardy Fish...

anyone else so we can list the sour grapes losers so nadal freak can keep his BS?
 
Nadal_Freak said:
Verdasco has some sense. He knows the game and the courts well. Bartoli is a sore loser like Henman was when he blamed his losses after 2001 at Wimbledon due to the grass.
Click to expand...
So why did you blame the altitude and courts for both Nadal's Madrid and French Open losses
 
Nadal_Freak said:
Those were legit. The altitude in Madrid and the lighter balls and less top layer at RG. Wimbledon has made no changes since 2001.
Click to expand...

Yea because you would no better than Tim Henman who played on those courts....and I am sure you were down at RG every year measuring the weight and depth of top layer at RG all across the court and keeping calcuations..you probably took it back to your lab as well right and examined the substance and particles that composed it...right. You also play in each tournament every year over the past few years..how do we question you. You calculate all the trajectories and arcs of each tennis ball hit. You also double check it using the conservation of energy formula I bet you do you little ******* =] ET=mgh+1/2mv^2+W..I bet you take tons of time each day and go out each you and hit a ball from point A to point B and time how long it takes to get there and make sure each time you hit it at exact speed. Wait that is nuts you use a ball machine probably and after correctly calculating the force by wind launch it off 100 times each year find the avg time and measure the instantaneous velocity of each contact and than when each ball is at the peak of its bounce. You also probably have one of your little buddies with a meter stick sitting there measuring the height of the bounce, or have one rigged up with a video camera so you can look at it later right? You do it for every shot right!

So if you do all of that to both courts than hell you can say court A actually got faster while court B is the same, but if you like everyone else is eying it via television and have no scientific evidence than forget about trying to prove one changed and the other did it. As of now I go with what the people who are playing on it are saying..the French Open this year was a bit faster but still pretty slow but just right speed that it could make a slight difference and wimbledon is a bit slower and plays more like a really fast hardcourt than like lightning fast grass. Either way it should not make some remarkable difference that Fed/Nadal who have been playing on these surfaces and are masters are suddenly getting their buts whipped. Nadal was extremely successful at Rome which is "fast clay" and Fed is really successful at Halle which is usually noted as "slower grass" so they both should be fine.

Case end and point.
 
and continued:


Q. When Goran was coming on in his heyday, he was blasting a lot of aces. One theory was that the authorities were pretty cautionary about it. The surface getting too fast, do you think that's kind of what happened?

MARDY FISH: I don't know what happened. I was talking to Tim Henman just when I was stretching out after the match about it. Asked him what he would do now. He said, you know, it's just ‑‑ it's almost impossible for a serve and volleyer, unless you're sort of a freak like Karlovic ‑ not him a freak, but the serve is a freak serve. You know, if you can get away with it like, that, I mean, he can do it on clay, so that's a little different ballgame.

We just can't really get away with it anymore, I don't think. You know, against someone like Novak or against someone like Andy Murray a couple weeks ago in Queen's, I'm just not sure how I'm supposed to play those guys on grass anymore.

You know, am I supposed to serve and volley and try to get away with, you know, serving really well and get a cheap break here or there, because, you know, they're serving good, too, or am I supposed to stay back? You know, it's kind of a what are you supposed to do on the grass, you know, nowadays.

Are you supposed to play it maybe like a US Open‑type court, you know, a faster hard court? But it's almost slower than that. It's trying to figure out exactly how you're supposed to play it, you know, a guy like me.


I completely agree with Mardy
 
egn said:
Yea because you would no better than Tim Henman who played on those courts....and I am sure you were down at RG every year measuring the weight and depth of top layer at RG all across the court and keeping calcuations..you probably took it back to your lab as well right and examined the substance and particles that composed it...right. You also play in each tournament every year over the past few years..how do we question you. You calculate all the trajectories and arcs of each tennis ball hit. You also double check it using the conservation of energy formula I bet you do you little ******* =] ET=mgh+1/2mv^2+W..I bet you take tons of time each day and go out each you and hit a ball from point A to point B and time how long it takes to get there and make sure each time you hit it at exact speed. Wait that is nuts you use a ball machine probably and after correctly calculating the force by wind launch it off 100 times each year find the avg time and measure the instantaneous velocity of each contact and than when each ball is at the peak of its bounce. You also probably have one of your little buddies with a meter stick sitting there measuring the height of the bounce, or have one rigged up with a video camera so you can look at it later right? You do it for every shot right!

So if you do all of that to both courts than hell you can say court A actually got faster while court B is the same, but if you like everyone else is eying it via television and have no scientific evidence than forget about trying to prove one changed and the other did it. As of now I go with what the people who are playing on it are saying..the French Open this year was a bit faster but still pretty slow but just right speed that it could make a slight difference and wimbledon is a bit slower and plays more like a really fast hardcourt than like lightning fast grass. Either way it should not make some remarkable difference that Fed/Nadal who have been playing on these surfaces and are masters are suddenly getting their buts whipped. Nadal was extremely successful at Rome which is "fast clay" and Fed is really successful at Halle which is usually noted as "slower grass" so they both should be fine.

Case end and point.
Click to expand...
I have no alternative agenda unlike Fish, Henman, and Bartoli. All losers and now whining about it. Uncalled for imo. They are just following the stereotype ESPN started.
 
Nadal_Freak said:
I have no alternative agenda unlike Fish, Henman, and Bartoli. All losers and now whining about it. Uncalled for imo. They are just following the stereotype ESPN started.
Click to expand...

You use it as an excuse for why Nadal loss to Federer in Madrid and Soderling at the french Open. You do it all the time.
 
At the moment Nadal_Freak there is 4 players mentioning the change in grass so far you haven't named anybody apart from yourself that Madrid and RG was speed up
 
Nadal_Freak said:
I have no alternative agenda unlike Fish, Henman, and Bartoli. All losers and now whining about it. Uncalled for imo. They are just following the stereotype ESPN started.
Click to expand...

Yes Bartoli had her finest ever career moment by far at Wimbledon when she reached the final. She of all people would really would have an alterior motive to point out Wimbledon now being different conditions. :rolleyes:
 
Nadal_Freak said:
I have no alternative agenda unlike Fish, Henman, and Bartoli. All losers and now whining about it. Uncalled for imo. They are just following the stereotype ESPN started.
Click to expand...

I hope you realize that every year 254 people who make the wimbledon main draw men and women's combined lose and only 2 people 1 women and 1 man walk out winners..so I guess all of them who ever mention it are losers.
 
Nadal_Freak said:
Those were legit. The altitude in Madrid and the lighter balls and less top layer at RG. Wimbledon has made no changes since 2001.
Click to expand...

I have officially placed you on my ignore list. I cannot possibly stand to read anymore of your nonsense any longer. how you have not been permanently banned is beyond me.
 
gj011 said:
Did you watch the match? It is not only about aces.
Click to expand...
yes i watched the match. a freak like karlovic can still do s&v of course.

but did you watch all the other matches? you can see the ball slow down and sit up.

it is so obvious how slow it has become after '06. anyone who does not notice it must be blind ;)
 
Okay Nadal Freak is ridiculous but youguys are being stupid. Verdasco just striaght up said the courts are very fast. Who the hell are you to possibly argue against that? Especially just to denounce Nadal's win.
 
Noveson said:
Okay Nadal Freak is ridiculous but youguys are being stupid. Verdasco just striaght up said the courts are very fast. Who the hell are you to possibly argue against that?
Click to expand...
1)
I haven't found any interview of Verdasco saying the courts are fast. Someone first got to prove and show that to me

2)
In case Verdasco really said so, we have 4 other Pros saying the opposite.

So 4:1 for slow plus my own opinion that it is slow ;)
 
Noveson said:
Okay Nadal Freak is ridiculous but youguys are being stupid. Verdasco just striaght up said the courts are very fast. Who the hell are you to possibly argue against that? Especially just to denounce Nadal's win.
Click to expand...

How was your match today against Haas, Noveson. Will you win tomorrow?

Can you tell us about the speed of the courts since you just played on them ;)
 
goforgold99 said:
1)
I haven't found any interview of Verdasco saying the courts are fast. Someone first got to prove and show that to me

2)
In case Verdasco really said so, we have 4 other Pros saying the opposite.

So 4:1 for slow plus my own opinion that it is slow ;)
Click to expand...

The grass changed in 2001 and is exactly the same since. It was faster in the 90s but it is the same as it was in 2002.
 
gj011 said:
How was your match today against Haas, Noveson. Will you win tomorrow?

Can you tell us about the speed of the courts since you just played on them ;)
Click to expand...

Was a tough match. I'm tired that was a long time on court. Oh they are like the super fastest fast surface ever.

goforgold99 said:
1)
I haven't found any interview of Verdasco saying the courts are fast. Someone first got to prove and show that to me

2)
In case Verdasco really said so, we have 4 other Pros saying the opposite.

So 4:1 for slow plus my own opinion that it is slow ;)
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: It was just on tv. Plus your own opinion:lol:, man don't even know what to say that. Fish said the balls bounce up more and you have time, no where did he say they were extremely slow or slow as green clay or anything like that. Whose the other three?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Present Surface speeds of the Slams
Replies
38
Views
6K
JimF
J
skypadq
what 's are the chance that wimbledon return that 90's slick grass ?
Replies
23
Views
2K
UnderratedSlam
UnderratedSlam
K
my thoughts on slow grass
Replies
3
Views
890
newnuse
N
B
Court Speed on pro tour.
Replies
2
Views
871
bluetrain4
B
thalivest
How can grass now be that slow?
Replies
16
Views
2K
superstition
superstition
Back
Top