Wimbledon has become extremely slow !

Brad Gilbert just commented that Andre told him that the courts are slow .(Gilbert was talking about the closed-roof exhibition)
 
icedevil0289 said:
I'm not an expert, but it certainly looks slow to me. And no, I am not trying to discredit nadal's win by saying it is slow, because federer also won on that slow grass. Grass is suppose to be a surface where serve and volley is primarily dominant and all I see are long baseline rallies and occasionally people coming to net. I don't know if that has to do with the surface, technology, or the fact that people just don't know how to volley that well. I suppose it's a combination of both.
Click to expand...

The game has changed. What serve and volleyers should be succeeding exactly? Can you name a single top player who is a serve and volleyer? Combine that with the much larger racquets in general, lower powered strings, and you have a much more steady spin oriented game. Much easier to return with. Not a tiny 85 inch racquet with full gut like when Sampras dominated Wimbledon in the 90's. It's just a different game.
 
TennisandMusic said:
The game has changed. What serve and volleyers should be succeeding exactly? Can you name a single top player who is a serve and volleyer? Combine that with the much larger racquets in general, lower powered strings, and you have a much more steady spin oriented game. Much easier to return with. Not a tiny 85 inch racquet with full gut like when Sampras dominated Wimbledon in the 90's. It's just a different game.
Click to expand...

I suppose you are right. Perhaps it has more to do with the game changing, then the surface changing, but it still is slow. I mean it's not green clay or anything, but slower than what grass is supposed to play like. I guess I just want more variety, that's all. I just wanted to clear up that it has nothing to do with nadal winning wimbly.

Of course there are no top players that are serve and volley players. I was just saying in general, grass is mainly known for s&v or was.
 
Last edited:
TennisandMusic said:
The game has changed. What serve and volleyers should be succeeding exactly? Can you name a single top player who is a serve and volleyer? Combine that with the much larger racquets in general, lower powered strings, and you have a much more steady spin oriented game. Much easier to return with. Not a tiny 85 inch racquet with full gut like when Sampras dominated Wimbledon in the 90's. It's just a different game.
Click to expand...

Firstly, the game didn't just change it was intentionally slowed down, to the point where the last guys whose games were specifically designed to conquer Wimbledon, i.e. Henman and Philippoussis, had the game changed out from under them.

The players whose careers overlapped the pre- and post-change era noticed, commented, complained about it.

With those slowed conditions, tour wide, what incentive is there for any player to groom his game in that manner?

The racquet size thing is another false mantra, in that two of those players most recently included in the GOAT discussion bucked the trend, stuck with smaller heads, and beat back a boatload of oversized toting contenders.

The change in playing conditions, i.e. court speed and balls, have allowed those larger heads to be exploited more and more. Quick surfaces muted that impact and provided opportunity for those whose games were groomed for quicker conditions to flourish. Slow courters had their season and surfaces like the former at AO provided the middle ground.

The game didn't change in spite of the conditions, it changed as a result of a change in habitat. Homogenization of both environment and the players inhabiting it.

5
 
FiveO said:
Firstly, the game didn't just change it was intentionally slowed down, to the point where the last guys whose games were specifically designed to conquer Wimbledon, i.e. Henman and Philippoussis, had the game changed out from under them.

The players whose careers overlapped the pre- and post-change era noticed, commented, complained about it.

With those slowed conditions, tour wide, what incentive is there for any player to groom his game in that manner?

The racquet size thing is another false mantra, in that two of those players most recently included in the GOAT discussion bucked the trend, stuck with smaller heads, and beat back a boatload of oversized toting contenders.

The change in playing conditions, i.e. court speed and balls, have allowed those larger heads to be exploited more and more. Quick surfaces muted that impact and provided opportunity for those whose games were groomed for quicker conditions to flourish. Slow courters had their season and surfaces like the former at AO provided the middle ground.

The game didn't change in spite of the conditions, it changed as a result of a change in habitat. Homogenization of both environment and the players inhabiting it.

5
Click to expand...

Henman and Phillipousis were meant to conquer Wimbledon? Where did you pull that idea from?

You do realize a lot of guys played with the same racquet as sampras right? The Prestige and Pro Staff were quite popular for some time. There was never the glut of 98's and 100's that there are now ten years ago. And you know that Federer increased his racquet size (yes I know it is still a 90, but he plays with a very conservative grip) and added poly strings to his mix too right? He benefits from the same things other players do.

The homogenization in styles is a result of the strings and racquets without question. We are still playing on hard courts, grass and clay! Do you really think they somehow magically started behaving the same way? No of course not.

Is the grass changed? YES. It changed from 70% rye and 30% fescue to 100% rye. That's it folks. Everything else that has changed would be things like racquets, strings, balls, and how players play. Stop complaining. How much different do you think grass can be? It's getting beyond insane. Go look at the videos I posted in the other fast grass thread, the play looks extremely similar.
 
TennisandMusic said:
Henman and Phillipousis were meant to conquer Wimbledon? Where did you pull that idea from?

You do realize a lot of guys played with the same racquet as sampras right? The Prestige and Pro Staff were quite popular for some time. There was never the glut of 98's and 100's that there are now ten years ago. And you know that Federer increased his racquet size (yes I know it is still a 90, but he plays with a very conservative grip) and added poly strings to his mix too right? He benefits from the same things other players do.

The homogenization in styles is a result of the strings and racquets without question. We are still playing on hard courts, grass and clay! Do you really think they somehow magically started behaving the same way? No of course not.

Is the grass changed? YES. It changed from 70% rye and 30% fescue to 100% rye. That's it folks. Everything else that has changed would be things like racquets, strings, balls, and how players play. Stop complaining. How much different do you think grass can be? It's getting beyond insane. Go look at the videos I posted in the other fast grass thread, the play looks extremely similar.
Click to expand...

Believe me I know about racquet size, the majority of the tour played 93 and 95's, AA and Chang played 100+, Moya entered with a 98. In fact aside from AA's brief stint at the top, no one playing over a 100" head has ever reached #1.

Okay, why then today at what is for the most part accepted as the fastest Major, the USO and its warm-up events are the flatter ball strikers who penetrate the court picked and have proven to be the most problematic for Nadal?

It's slower but a certain player type has a better chance than any other.

Remove the formerly fastest surface and what happens?

Who knows if Henman and/or Flipper would have won Wimbledon in the former conditions, they were the best practitioners of the former grass court style to follow the Sampras, Ivanisevic, Stich, Martin, Krajicek, Pioline generation.

Ivanisevic eventually won Wimbledon.

Henman continued to SF and QF after shoulder surgery and the surface change until he aged out,

Flipper finalled in '03 after what? 3 or 4 knee surgeries, hell even Bjorkman reached a SF.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

5
 
TennisandMusic said:
Henman and Phillipousis were meant to conquer Wimbledon? Where did you pull that idea from?
Click to expand...

They werent meant to win a slam anywhere since they arent good enough players to win one. Seems pretty simple. Henman couldnt beat a young Hewitt on faster grass back in 1999-2000 so what on earth would make one think he could beat peak Hewitt in the 2002 semis on any grass, and after that he was getting old anyway. All the years before that he lost to better players on the traditional faster grass. Philipoussis made a Wimbledon final and lost to a much better player than him- Federer of course, that was the extent of his potential at Wimbledon.
 
navratilovafan said:
They werent meant to win a slam anywhere since they arent good enough players to win one. Seems pretty simple. Henman couldnt beat a young Hewitt on faster grass back in 1999-2000 so what on earth would make one think he could beat peak Hewitt in the 2002 semis on any grass, and after that he was getting old anyway. All the years before that he lost to better players on the traditional faster grass. Philipoussis made a Wimbledon final and lost to a much better player than him- Federer of course, that was the extent of his potential at Wimbledon.
Click to expand...
Call Wimbledon lower bouncing grass to be more clear about it. Thanks.
 
FiveO said:
Believe me I know about racquet size, the majority of the tour played 93 and 95's, AA and Chang played 100+, Moya entered with a 98. In fact aside from AA's brief stint at the top, no one playing over a 100" head has ever reached #1.

Okay, why then today at what is for the most part accepted as the fastest Major, the USO and its warm-up events are the flatter ball strikers who penetrate the court picked and have proven to be the most problematic for Nadal?

It's slower but a certain player type has a better chance than any other.

Remove the formerly fastest surface and what happens?

Who knows if Henman and/or Flipper would have won Wimbledon in the former conditions, they were the best practitioners of the former grass court style to follow the Sampras, Ivanisevic, Stich, Martin, Krajicek, Pioline generation.

Ivanisevic eventually won Wimbledon.

Henman continued to SF and QF after shoulder surgery and the surface change until he aged out,

Flipper finalled in '03 after what? 3 or 4 knee surgeries, hell even Bjorkman reached a SF.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

5
Click to expand...

The grass at wimbledon has not changed since 2001. So nothing "changed until [Henman] aged out." That's silly!

Again, hard courts suit "big hitters" more because you just don't have to have the movement on them that you do on grass. The ball comes to you much more than it does on grass, but you DO have more time to set up your shot because of the higher bounce. Again, look at the videos I posted in the other thread featuring 90's era grass. It still does not move through the court that fast, and certainly nothing like a hard court. But the bounce is (still) low. That makes the actual play fast.

I've actually seen measured speeds of the ball off the court after a bounce and grass was the slowest, hard court was in the middle and clay was actually the fastest! However, look at the angle and height of the bounces of the ball off these courts. Clay is by far the highest and most vertical of the trajectories after the bounce. This gives players quite a bit of time, therefore making the courts "slow". If the ball speed off clay itself was slow, why would players be able to play successfully playing 10 feet off the baseline? If it was a slow surface would the ball travel that deeply after the bounce? Of course not, it would never even reach them!

The bottom line is that grass is a "slow" surface with low bounces, and sometimes skids, which results in very "fast" play. There is not much time to move to the ball, therefore the surface rewards shot making and aggressive play. As Navratilova states "the athlete comes out on grass." This is why guys like Federer and Nadal have dominated on the surface,

Hard courts are a faster surface with medium bounces. The ball moves through the court very well and doesn't require near the athleticism that grass or clay does, which is why ball bashers like Blake, Berdych etc. can have success against guys like Nadal or even Federer (Olympics) but they would never have a chance on clay or grass. It is also why Sampras was able to still do extremely well from 00-02 at the US Open when his athleticism had pretty much left him in his last two years on tour. He struggled at Wimbledon in 01 and 02 yet WON the US Open in 02 because he could still knock the cover off the ball and get to the net. It's just an entirely different thing than grass, one that is readily apparent after you have played on both.

The grass has not radically changed. Has it changed a little? Yes, this is a well known fact. However the style of play needed is still the same. Aggressive shotmaking, whether it's coming in for a volley, or from the baseline. Federer has been much more dominant on grass than any other surface because he is A) A better shotmaker than most and B) A better athlete than most. The two keys required for success on grass. And this is because it plays fast.
 
Hard courts don't take spin nearly as well as grass and clay. Clay is amazing for its topspin and grass is amazing for its underspin. Hardcourts don't react to it as much and flat ball hitters love that fact. The serve on grass is usually very good as most serves use slices. Kick serves aren't as nearly as effective as the ball seems to slow down some on grass. The ball has many variations on grass. It can have slow bounces or fast bounces depending on the spin used. It is not as predictable of a bounce either. It used to be mostly all low bouncing but those days are over. That is what disgusts most people about the changes. It's still very unique though and the hardest slam to break on.

US Open is unique that all spins are not that much different where rhythm is much easier to have and flat shots are going through the court quick. Topspin is least effective on this surface as you know the bounces won't deviate that much and not get too high bouncing. Agressive returners are well suited to this surface. The serve is a pain as well as the court is pretty fast but players that take it early don't have too worry about bad bounces. Players that stand far back struggle due to having to cover so much ground. Well that is what I see about hardcourts. Topspin goes through the court quicker which is not exactly a good thing.
 
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...

Oh please, you don't know the first thing about Henman. Henman was not one to make excuses. His best surface was grass, so I think he knows a little bit more then you would. I mean he's actually played there, and is part of the the Club.

And I agree with the others, if Nadal makes an excuse you say it's justified due to x, y and z. But if any other player makes the same statement, then you consider it making excuses. You can't have it both ways.

Seriously, it's sickening just how off the wall some of these fans are.
 
jukka1970 said:
Oh please, you don't know the first thing about Henman. Henman was not one to make excuses. His best surface was grass, so I think he knows a little bit more then you would. I mean he's actually played there, and is part of the the Club.

And I agree with the others, if Nadal makes an excuse you say it's justified due to x, y and z. But if any other player makes the same statement, then you consider it making excuses. You can't have it both ways.

Seriously, it's sickening just how off the wall some of these fans are.
Click to expand...
Henman wasn't an ace machine. He probably thrived more on the low bounces more than anyone. That doesn't mean the surface is any slower now. It just means it absorbs less energy due to the surface being firmer.
 
drakulie said:
But he isn't taking break from tennis. Right now, while Wimbledon is being played he is practicing for a Davis Cup match July 10.
Click to expand...
And that is a long time away. Much longer than Wimbledon. that started almost a week ago. Nadal took a week off and than is now practicing lightly for a tournament in 2 weeks from now. He already said the injury wasn't chronic so it is not as serious as some made it out to be.
 
jukka1970 said:
Oh please, you don't know the first thing about Henman. Henman was not one to make excuses. His best surface was grass, so I think he knows a little bit more then you would. I mean he's actually played there, and is part of the the Club.

And I agree with the others, if Nadal makes an excuse you say it's justified due to x, y and z. But if any other player makes the same statement, then you consider it making excuses. You can't have it both ways.

Seriously, it's sickening just how off the wall some of these fans are.
Click to expand...

The dude is an excuse machine, are you kidding me?

Does no one remember him complaining about Wimbledon opening the ball cans a week early, even though that wasn't even true. And he said that was the reason we was losing! He blamed it on flat balls!

LMFAO, I love how people take his word so seriously because somehow he has some reputation of a grasscourter legend on this forum. The man was better on fast hardcourts. Just because he was English doesn't mean he was a Wimbledon favorite... ever

Read this article
http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/news/story?id=2068311

Wimbledon hopeful Tim Henman has pinpointed a reason why he has so far failed to win his home Grand Slam -- flat tennis balls.

Four times a semifinalist at the All England Club but yet to win a grand slam, Britain's top player says he has finally got to the bottom of an issue which has been irking him for some time.

"Wimbledon said they open all the balls 'about' a week before the tournament," Henman said. "I think that might have a part to play in why you feel like you're using flat balls after four or five games," said the attacking serve-volleyer.
Click to expand...
 
Blinkism said:
LMFAO, I love how people take his word so seriously because somehow he has some reputation of a grasscourter legend on this forum. The man was better on fast hardcourts. Just because he was English doesn't mean he was a Wimbledon favorite... ever
Click to expand...
The guy is a 4-times Semi-finalist, 4 times Quarterfinalist at Wimbledon. Reached the QF or better 8 times. Eight.

Yes, he was a favourite.
 
Andres Guazzelli said:
The guy is a 4-times Semi-finalist, 4 times Quarterfinalist at Wimbledon. Reached the QF or better 8 times. Eight.

Yes, he was a favourite.
Click to expand...

I don't remember anyone but the English media hyping him up, but if you want to consider his as a former favorite that's fine.

Doesn't take away from the fact that he had more than 1 excuse for losing (slow grass)..

We've found at least 2 excuse he's used, I'm sure there's more.
 
Nadal_Freak said:
And that is a long time away. Much longer than Wimbledon. that started almost a week ago. Nadal took a week off and than is now practicing lightly for a tournament in 2 weeks from now.
Click to expand...

I love how you claim to love nadal so much, yet have no clue what is going on with him.

Last week, he played hewitt, and then wawrinka on consecutive days. The following day, he cited his injury, and withdrawal from wimbledon because he needed 3-4 weeks of rest. Right now, less than one week later, he is already on a practice court, and preparing for a match on July 10 (5 days after wimbledon ends).

Nadal_Freak said:
He already said the injury wasn't chronic so it is not as serious as some made it out to be.
Click to expand...


This would include him (Nadal). Please keep in mind, he is the one who first reported this mysterious "injury".
 
Blinkism said:
Just because he was English doesn't mean he was a Wimbledon favorite... ever
Click to expand...


Henman was for about 5-6 years always one of the favourites to win Wimbledon. Fairly obvious you haven't a clue, and never watched one Wimbledon he participated in.
 
Nadal_Freak said:
Henman wasn't an ace machine. He probably thrived more on the low bounces more than anyone. That doesn't mean the surface is any slower now. It just means it absorbs less energy due to the surface being firmer.
Click to expand...



Higher vertical component = lower horizontal component. Common sense.
 
Blinkism said:
I don't remember anyone but the English media hyping him up, but if you want to consider his as a former favorite that's fine.

Doesn't take away from the fact that he had more than 1 excuse for losing (slow grass)..

We've found at least 2 excuse he's used, I'm sure there's more.
Click to expand...


He was a huge favorite to win in 2001 when Sampras went out and 2002 also.
 
I wish the names were deleted to deter what is sure to happen, but here goes:

The Evans Report: Breathtaking Brilliance Nadal Wins Wimbledon
By Richard Evans
Sunday, July 06, 2008

In a fascinating statistic BBC television used their technological bank to offer up a comparison of the speed of Federer’s serve in 2003 and today. A serve leaving his racket at the same speed on both occasions would now reach the returner 9 mph slower after it had hit the modified grass — a type of Welsh rye grass called Aberelf — that had been sown on the All England’s Club lawns about six years ago. It also bounced considerably lower than it does today. In other words a serve should be easier to return.
Click to expand...

http://www.tennisweek.com/news/fullstory.sps?inewsid=6613296

5
 
Even if its slow what can we do. You play on what is there and I m sure they are not going to do anything about it.
 
drakulie said:
I love how you claim to love nadal so much, yet have no clue what is going on with him.

Last week, he played hewitt, and then wawrinka on consecutive days. The following day, he cited his injury, and withdrawal from wimbledon because he needed 3-4 weeks of rest. Right now, less than one week later, he is already on a practice court, and preparing for a match on July 10 (5 days after wimbledon ends).




This would include him (Nadal). Please keep in mind, he is the one who first reported this mysterious "injury".
Click to expand...

Wait, does this mean that Nadal will be playing at Newport???????

So he skips the most coveted title in the world, in his defending year, to play in Rhode Island? What is Carlos Moya being inducted?
 
valiant said:
Even if its slow what can we do. You play on what is there and I m sure they are not going to do anything about it.
Click to expand...
That's what people was saying back in the 90's 'what can we do' then there was complaints on the seeding as you had clay court specialists who would never make the second week and were seeded way below their atp ranking eventually this lead to the majority of them skipping the event and thus giving low ratings
 
All-rounder said:
That's what people was saying back in the 90's 'what can we do' then there was complaints on the seeding as you had clay court specialists who would never make the second week and were seeded way below their atp ranking eventually this lead to the majority of them skipping the event and thus giving low ratings
Click to expand...
If enough players complain about the speed the will change it and make it faster again. I'm pretty sure they will!

But as long as Rog isn't telling the truth in his pressers, and pretending it hasn't slowed down for what reason ever, they are not gonna change it
 
hm .. I'm afraid I'm gonna state the OBVIOUS here - Wimbledon is slower - whether the surface, or the balls.. Proof? Watch.
 
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
1K
UnderratedSlam
UnderratedSlam
K
my thoughts on slow grass
Replies
3
Views
849
newnuse
N
B
Court Speed on pro tour.
Replies
2
Views
850
bluetrain4
B
thalivest
How can grass now be that slow?
Replies
16
Views
2K
superstition
superstition
Back
Top