Yet Another court speed thread this time with DATA ,DATA and DATA

#51
The average for both tours says something different. Also, it represents "data", or you have no idea what "data" means.

:cool:
Nope, it doesn't represent any data about the speed. It only means that more baseline players played well with the same speed in 2017 than 2019. The surface speed metrics clearly indicates that Wimbledon 2017 with 1.03 is not faster than Wimbledon 2019 with 1.04.
 
#56
Can we agree, then, that Wimbledon 2019 has essentially the same speed than in 2017? It means Wimbledon 2019 is tied with Wimbledon 2017 as the slowest Wimbledon ever.

Don't you agree?
Personally I don't accept any data that is exceptionally further from what I have grasped by myself. This was just to pull your leg.

Data might help in removing doubts, or resolve equally possible but conflicting conclusions. But nothing more than that.

But they can never change my viewpoint unless they are thoroughly ground breaking.


I have been watching since 2002, seriously never missed a year ATP tour since 2005(except 2015) , I always watch old matches and highlights just to kill time.



For all I know, all my knowledge(Whatever little ultimately it might be) I , personally have not seen grass play like this. Seriously there's something off about it. I would keep saying that even if one of Fed or Djokovic won the title. Speed is definitely slow. I have seen players this year's retrieving shots that they shouldn't really , especially without any insane foot speed. Serves that you get a sense of "Unreturnable" just after being hit, getting returned nonetheless.
 
#57
Nope, it doesn't represent any data about the speed. It only means that more baseline players played well with the same speed in 2017 than 2019. The surface speed metrics clearly indicates that Wimbledon 2017 with 1.03 is not faster than Wimbledon 2019 with 1.04.
how is it calculated?
could you share a link perhaps?
 
#59
Excellent thread. I already had seen those DATA.

According to the surface speed metrics, Wkmbledon 2017 is THE SLOWEST WIMBLEDON EVER with 1.03. It means Roger Federer won the slowest Wimbledon ever. The second slowest Wimbledon ever was Wimbleodn 2019 with 1.05 of surface speed metrics, which is close to 2017

So in conclusion, according to the surface speed metrics, Wimbledon speed has dramatically declined from 2016 onwards. Now, it is false that Wimbledon 2019 is the slowest Wimbledon ever. Wimbledon 2017 is the slowest Wimbledon ever
We cant know that until tbis Wimbledon is over, the grass could get significantly slower due to wear and weather conditions. At the moment there is only a slight difference

It slowing down since 2016 would explain why Nadal has reversed his early round losses though
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
#66
Excellent thread. I already had seen those DATA.

According to the surface speed metrics, Wkmbledon 2017 is THE SLOWEST WIMBLEDON EVER with 1.03. It means Roger Federer won the slowest Wimbledon ever. The second slowest Wimbledon ever was Wimbleodn 2019 with 1.05 of surface speed metrics, which is close to 2017

So in conclusion, according to the surface speed metrics, Wimbledon speed has dramatically declined from 2016 onwards. Now, it is false that Wimbledon 2019 is the slowest Wimbledon ever. Wimbledon 2017 is the slowest Wimbledon ever
Dude Federer also won Indian Wells and Miami in 2017, how is that proof that Federer prefers slower grass? The dude won Wimbledon while serve and volleying way back.
 
Last edited:
#73
The data suggests 2011 and 2014 were the fastest editions of Wimbledon in the last 10 years. This is obviously wrong, since notorious slow court specialist (according to resident TTW experts) Novak Djokovic won both of them :cool:
To be fair, Djokovic is pretty underrated on faster surfaces. Won Shanghai a few times, didn't he?
 

Blade0324

Hall of Fame
#74
Honestly data or not, who cares if it's slower, faster or what! Grass is no longer a viable surface for tennis given the change in technology and physical nature of the game they should just eliminate grass completely.
 
#78
How do you prove the game is slow then?
1. you can start with the existing data for example:
- evolution of service speed
- evolution of rally strokes (forehand / backhand) speed
- evolution of winners speed

2. add here the court dimension

3. add the time the ball spends in air before the bounce with time in air after the bounce

4. try to imagine how much the courts should have been slowed down, to make the game slower than it used to be some 10 / 20 / 30 years ago
I mean, if for example, 20 years ago the ball required precisely 1.00 second to travel from player 1 to player 2, and the speed of an average rally shot increased by 20-30 km/h, by how much the court shall be "slowed down" to compensate for the increased speed in the shot production, and actually to slow down the entire game, to let's say have 1.20 seconds currently as time required for the ball to travel from player 1 to player 2
 

BeatlesFan

Talk Tennis Guru
#79
The data suggests 2011 and 2014 were the fastest editions of Wimbledon in the last 10 years. This is obviously wrong, since notorious slow court specialist (according to resident TTW experts) Novak Djokovic won both of them :cool:
Who claims this? Djokovic wins on every surface and always has been able to. He beat peak 2007 Fed in Canada on a very fast (by today's standards) HC and beat Fed twice on grass. I think Djokovic could even have succeeded on carpet because of his flexibility and amazing ROS.
 
#84
This was discussed the other day, in the 2010s service holds have gone up on all courts even the slowest so means little
This will be mainly because the serve +1 combination has been improved so much by string tech such that it's had a great comparative impact on service game hold rates than the serve + volley combo had in the 90s.
 
#86
I want to see games stats when W is over.

We have this for careers:

https://www.atptour.com/en/stats/service-games-won/all/grass/all/

So lets start here. There are 20 players who round to 90% holding.

https://www.atptour.com/en/stats/service-games-won/all/hard/all/

Only 6 here. So it's clear that men win more games on grass serving, and the men at the top of the lists are mostly from this era.

If you go back just one year you still see this huge gap between the top guys on grass and HC.

https://www.atptour.com/en/stats/service-games-won/2018/grass/all/

17 guys round to 90%.

https://www.atptour.com/en/stats/service-games-won/2018/hard/all/

On HC 4 round to 90%.

Check other years. I don't see any evidence that servers are becoming increasingly disadvantaged on grass. I expect at the end of W this year it will be about the same again.

So IF courts are slower, there are other factors counter-acting that factor allowing players to continue dominating on grass. I personally suspect that some efforts are being made to keep big servers from dominating so much that they will lose almost no games.
 
#88
"Aces" also don't represent data about the "speed". "Speed is not measured in aces/match.
Quite right.

There's typically a correlation but it's too reductionist to use as empirical proof for one tournament, it's just one data point from multiple that should be considered.

There is no way of measuring court speed.
There is, they just haven't implemented it yet, to my knowledge.

It should be a case of a combination of a device that launches a ball at the court from a series of fixed elevations, with a fixed speed, a fixed amount of spin, etc... and another device that measures how the ball carries i.e. something equivalent to the golf stimpmeter used for evaluating the speed of greens. They should use a control ball that remains fixed and a ball from that given tournament to give an idea how the ball is affecting things.
 
#89
Quite right.

There's typically a correlation but it's too reductionist to use as empirical proof for one tournament, it's just one data point from multiple that should be considered.



There is, they just haven't implemented it yet, to my knowledge.

It should be a case of a combination of a device that launches a ball at the court from a series of fixed elevations, with a fixed speed, a fixed amount of spin, etc... and another device that measures how the ball carries i.e. something equivalent to the golf stimpmeter used for evaluating the speed of greens. They should use a control ball that remains fixed and a ball from that given tournament to give an idea how the ball is affecting things.
If it's so important why not use the technology instead of guessing and everybody having an opinion?
 
#90
Personally I don't accept any data that is exceptionally further from what I have grasped by myself. This was just to pull your leg.

Data might help in removing doubts, or resolve equally possible but conflicting conclusions. But nothing more than that.

But they can never change my viewpoint unless they are thoroughly ground breaking.


I have been watching since 2002, seriously never missed a year ATP tour since 2005(except 2015) , I always watch old matches and highlights just to kill time.



For all I know, all my knowledge(Whatever little ultimately it might be) I , personally have not seen grass play like this. Seriously there's something off about it. I would keep saying that even if one of Fed or Djokovic won the title. Speed is definitely slow. I have seen players this year's retrieving shots that they shouldn't really , especially without any insane foot speed. Serves that you get a sense of "Unreturnable" just after being hit, getting returned nonetheless.
But how does it appear off to you compared to 2017? Maybe you just forgot about the tournament with the passage of two years. I remember TT whined and whined about 2017 and rightly so. It was terrible how sluggish the courts were that year and we are seeing a repeat of it this year. The data is consistent with my impressions that way because I felt it was sluggish but low in 2017 and it feels like that again this year. It was slow last year too but the higher bounce possibly made it easier for players to hit TS shots off and also get more kick.
 
#92
That surface speed metric seems rather useless since, as we know, hard courts are continually being slowed as well.

USO last year was the slowest ever and we don't see any truly fast(ish) hard courts like we did even a few years ago. Dubai maybe? Or maybe not.
 
Last edited:
#95
I am afraid your data is interesting but not really relevant and could not be used in any credible published 'paper' as the test sample each year is so random and different that it really is of little use. For your data to be close to
relevant you would have to repeat the previous years draw with the same players playing each other on the same court at the same time of day and even then there are too many variables. Are the players using the same racquet, string and tension, have they changed their game style at all and are they fully fit or carrying an injury and you would have to replicate temperature and humidity as well. The only way to test the court bounce height would be to create a test similar to what is used in Engineering and that is a rebound test. So using the tournament balls, you would have a clear perspex tube and drop the ball from a predetermined height and measure the rebound height and this would have to be done many times to get a true sample and then this could be compared yearly otherwise you are guessing. The ball would also bounce higher if the ground was harder, for example less rain and higher temperatures which is what has happened this year, maybe the roof is contributing. Another factor could be that nearly every player hits with more spin these days which fluffs the balls much more quickly than in past years which would also slow the game down.
 
#97
Although it's extremely amusing.. they complain that every player (but one) and every commentator is wrong that it's slow, and scream show us data. Show them data and it's not the right data. The entire VB has lost it.
My question to you is, when did the VB ever “have it”?
 
Top