Wimbledon has become to a 2nd Roland Garros - thoughts?

[Saarbrigga]

There are still people out there which believe the courts of Wimbledon are still the same as 10 years ago, this is so ridicolous!

90 s:
flat bouncing balls + become faster at the moment of hitting the ground

since 2005:
higher bouncing balls + slow down at the moment of hitting the ground.

Here some facts no one can ignore:

Goran Ivanisevic, Wimbledon Champ 2001 + Finalst 92, 94 and 98 ):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdrdckAM3uo
0:35 - 0:40;
"Grass became slower and slower, it s more like clay"

Marat Safin, Semifinalist 2008:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0JR_Fgdy_g
0:13 - 0:25
"I played well because the courts became slower and slower throughout the years. It s not like 8 years ago when it was really fast, today you can play from the baseline and no one comes even close to the net."

Jimmy Connors and Martina Navratilova talk about the change of the surface, from low bouncing fast do high bouncing slow.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBuwSL6pecM&feature=related
1:04 - 2:30

AND HERE S THE FINAL PROVE OF IT:
Speed Comparation 2003 vs. 2008:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soJ_FVnijAw&feature=related


If the conditions would be like 10 years ago, Federer would dominate here like Nadal dominates Roland Garros.

I heard some rumours the All England Club thinks about speed the courts up again for 2012, i hope so much they gonna do it!!!
It s nothing against Rafa, but the changes of Wimbledon and Melbourne (slow rebound ace becomes to a slower blue plastic) are the death for all serve and volley players. If it s still like it is now, any Roland Garros champion in the future can win Wimbledon as well, vica verca.



PS: Rafa is not a claycourt specialist (watch the poll) like Guga, Bruguera, Muster, Corretja, he s a well rounded player and much better as all of them.

[jayl0ve]

You make a good point because it's hard to argue with ATP players on this subject...but seriously grass is still damn fast compared to almost any other surface (except maybe indoor carpet or a wood floor or something). You don't notice that everybody starts shanking shots left and right (or even completely missing the ball) for the 1st week or so of Wimbledon?? That's because the bounce is really low!

[Saarbrigga]

It is faster as some slow courts, but it s still a main difference from 10 years ago, just watch the animation who proves it.

[emate007]

I think you meant: 'speed it up like the old days' ??

If so I agree, Wimby should be radically different from clay. As it used to be, where you were penalized for being slow to come in to net.

I'm not advocating more terrible bounces/bad groundskeeping. But grass should favor net players, and somehow that's clearly not the case anymore. How many volley winners were there in the semis and finals combined? More than 30? I would guess not, I saw a pop-up stat in the mens final that Berdych had 5 and Nadal 1 at the end of the second set.

WTF, YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG.

Or at least, that should be doing it wrong...

[djarvik]

I changed the "slow" to "speed" in the poll.

I completely agree. Honestly, I doubt that anyone will disagree with this one.

In my opinion they should be "working" on making every surface unique, every year.

[Cro Morgan]

Problem with Wimbledon and fast grass - it's basically a dirt surface by the time the final rolls around. They should be playing on Astroturf.



Either that, or make players wear these for the duration of the tournament:

[Saarbrigga]

I think you meant: 'speed it up like the old days' ??

Yes.

Thx for Djarvic, he already fixed it.

[Coolhand Texas]

speed the damn thing back up!!

[Mike Rotchtickles]

The facts are that in 2001, Wimbledon tore out all its courts and planted a new variety of groundcover. The new grass was 100% perennial rye, the old courts had been a mix of 70% rye and 30% red fescue.
The new lawn was more durable, and allowed Wimbledon's groundsmen to keep the soil underneath drier and firmer. A firmer surface causes the ball to bounce higher. Also, rye, unlike fescue, grows in tufts that stand straight up, these tufts slow a tennis ball down as it lands.

But it's not just the surface that determines the speed of the court.
Different type of weather conditions also affect the soil (which affect the bounce) and the way the ball travels through the air (which also affects the bounce and perceived court speed).

The unusually dry conditions this year were in favor of guys like Nadal, but still the court speed is far away from that of clay, as some have otherwise inferred.

Just putting this here as a point of interest,
last years ace stats for the four Slams were as follows:

2009 French Open ace numbers:
1822 aces (total for the entire tournament)

2009 Australian Open ace numbers:
2082 aces (total for the entire tournament)

2009 US Open ace numbers:
2469 aces (total for the entire tournament)

2009 Wimbledon ace numbers:
Total - 2868 Aces (for the first 4 rounds only!)

[Saarbrigga]

Good post!

I would say today it s like this, from slow to fast:

French Open
Australien Open / Wimbledon (both similar, wimby slightly faster)
US Open

And don t forget you can t move on hard as he can on clay and grass. I played all my matches on clay and carpet, just 1 time on hard, it kills your knees and feet, it hurts there very much.
This prefers Federer because he has a footwork like Ali, he s very light footed.
Nadal moves similar fast but not with the same light footwork, he should have much more pain in knees and feet as Federer.

[Mike Rotchtickles]

This prefers Federer because he has a footwork like Ali, he s very light footed.
Nadal moves similar fast but not with the same light footwork, he should have much more pain in knees and feet as Federer.

Yeah that's true enough.
hard courts, whatever speed, is just bad for Rafa's knees and while he moves very well on it, he moves much better on natural surfaces.

And the court speeds you mentioned seem about right from what I've seen and read.
Just to say that outside of the slams, amongst the fastest playing surfaces seem to be those at Queen's and the one in Cincinnati.
I don't know what the experience would be to see it up close and from court-side, but just judging off the TV, I've watched some of the matches during those tourney's and the court speeds there just seem extremely fast.

[Saarbrigga]

Just to say that outside of the slams, amongst the fastest playing surfaces seem to be those at Queen's and the one in Cincinnati.

+ Halle in Germany, which is also damn fast.

[Coolhand Texas]

I went to cincy to see the tournament and they play pretty fast i would say

[fedfan]

It's the bounce more than the speed that I'd like them to try and sort, it's the fact the ball bounces so high that makes attacking the net so tough and benefits players with a lot of topspin.

It's a tough call, I don't think people want it to go back to one-two punches every point.

[Coolhand Texas]

but also wimby and RG used to be so different that we would not see a RG winner win wilmbledon in the same year.

now its happened 3 years in a row. (I know the players have something to do with that though)