The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 3480
Original post by Roger1
From what I've seen so far this season, Aussie Open seemed slower than the French. And I've already given my reasons why the US Open is the fastest GS in my previous post, so please refer to it. :smile:

Lol the French Open was even slower then last year. Australien open is More faster then French.
Original post by ubi1
Lol the French Open was even slower then last year. Australien open is More faster then French.


My grammer is more gooder than you'res is
Original post by ubi1
In terms of speed its like this fastest to slowest:
Wimbledon
Us Open
Australian Open
French Open


Wimbledon faster than US open these days ... Seriously Ubi?
Reply 3483
Original post by Zepploydath
My grammer is more gooder than you'res is

Yes this thread is now an English exam.
Reply 3484
Original post by hskjlclcn
Wimbledon faster than US open these days ... Seriously Ubi?

Yh:biggrin:
Original post by ubi1
Yes this thread is now an English exam.


It's fine, I take it as a positive that I can't understand your posts.
Original post by ubi1
Nadal is more unlucky. 3/4 SLAMS are on Fast surfaces. Only 1/4 is on Slow surface.


I'd argue that the likes of Nadal are lucky that those 3 fast surfaces aren't faster.
Reply 3487
back in the 60's Most of the slams were on clay. Imagine if it still was that way.:wink:
Reply 3488
Original post by ubi1
back in the 60's Most of the slams were on clay. Imagine if it still was that way.:wink:


You mean grass?
Original post by Prendah
You mean grass?


He's just full of rubbish. If there were 3 Masters on grass, just like there are on clay, I'm certain Fed would have a great deal more.
Reply 3490
Original post by Prendah
You mean grass?


If that was still the case, Fed would have won like 25 slams, not to mention the numerous other tournaments on grass.
Original post by ubi1
Back then Nadal's game wasn't as good as it is now.


I'd be worried if it was not, he's 5 years younger. I'd also point out that clay and when they play in a tournament plays a big part. For example did you know that Fed leads 4-3 in finals not contested on clay and excluding finals they draw 4-4 outside clay.
Reply 3492
Original post by Prendah
You mean grass?

US Open used to be on Clay.
Reply 3493
Original post by ubi1
US Open used to be on Clay.


For 3 years in the 70s.
Reply 3494
Original post by Roger1
If that was still the case, Fed would have won like 25 slams, not to mention the numerous other tournaments on grass.

The slams already Favor Federer. 2 slams on hard and 1 grass statistically Federer is the best on those surfaces.
(edited 10 years ago)
Reply 3495
Original post by ubi1
The slams already Favor Federer. 2 slams on hard and 1 grass statistically Federer is the best on those surfaces.


It's not about the surfaces, it more to do with the speed and the bounce. So Australian Open and French Open both favour Rafa, as they are slow as hell and bounce a lot higher causing all sorts of problems for Federer's backhand. Wimby (only just) and US open favour Fed as they are medium/fast and so are compatible with Rogi's aggressive style of play. The bounce at these slams is also relatively low and thus Federer's backhand doesn't break down that often as it does on surfaces with high bounce.
Original post by ubi1
The slams already Favor Federer. 2 slams on hard and 1 grass statistically Federer is the best on those surfaces.


Surface homogenisation has helped Nadal more than Federer.
Reply 3497
Original post by Zepploydath
Surface homogenisation has helped Nadal more than Federer.

HOW?:eek:
Original post by ubi1
HOW?:eek:


Because the courts have slowed.
Reply 3499
Original post by Rakas21
Because the courts have slowed.

Since when? 6/9 Masters on Hard courts. 2/4 slams on Hard 1/4 on grass 3/4 slams in Feds Favor. Most of the calender is Played on Hard, and Federer is the best statistically on Hard and Grass.

Latest