Join TSR now and chat about whatever you’re intoSign up now
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ubi1)
    HOW?:eek:
    Because the courts have slowed.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ubi1)
    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.
    No i mean the actual surfaces (especially Wimbledon) are much slower than they used to be.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    No i mean the actual surfaces (especially Wimbledon) are much slower than they used to be.
    Aye, why are grass courts getting slower? There meant to be the fastest.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    No i mean the actual surfaces (especially Wimbledon) are much slower than they used to be.
    People have been saying this every year for the past 10 years without any evidence to back this up. This is my summation:

    Australia: Slow for years now - I don't know why some people think it was ever fast. It's been slow for a decade now.

    French Open: It's clay. It's supposed to be slow. Although since 2011 it seems to have got faster, which some have attributed to the balls rather than the surface itself. 2011 was particularly fast.

    Wimbledon: Medium-Fast surface for a good 10 years now. It's really funny how people say every year that it's slowed down but I've barely noticed a difference for the past 3 years, and I've seen it live twice in those years. The changes to the surface occurred in the very early 2000s, so the surface Federer won on in 2003 was after the surface change. Federer even said in 2008 'Well, I don’t think it’s that much of a difference since I played Pete here in 2001 really. '

    I've heard Mardy Fish actually talk about the balls having a big impact on the speed. They are particularly heavy at Wimbledon, you'll know if you've ever used the Wimbledon standard Slazenger ultra vis line.

    US Open: Fast. No visible slowing to me, the fastest surface.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sirocco11)
    People have been saying this every year for the past 10 years without any evidence to back this up. This is my summation:

    Australia: Slow for years now - I don't know why some people think it was ever fast. It's been slow for a decade now.
    I think it was pretty fast when it had rebound ace. Only after the introduction of plexicushion in 2008, the Australian Open slowed down below the level of clay.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Who qualified for WTF faster Nole or Nadal?
    Nole Qualified in 18 weeks and 5 days 2011.
    Nadal did in?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sirocco11)
    People have been saying this every year for the past 10 years without any evidence to back this up. This is my summation:

    Australia: Slow for years now - I don't know why some people think it was ever fast. It's been slow for a decade now.

    French Open: It's clay. It's supposed to be slow. Although since 2011 it seems to have got faster, which some have attributed to the balls rather than the surface itself. 2011 was particularly fast.

    Wimbledon: Medium-Fast surface for a good 10 years now. It's really funny how people say every year that it's slowed down but I've barely noticed a difference for the past 3 years, and I've seen it live twice in those years. The changes to the surface occurred in the very early 2000s, so the surface Federer won on in 2003 was after the surface change. Federer even said in 2008 'Well, I don’t think it’s that much of a difference since I played Pete here in 2001 really. '

    I've heard Mardy Fish actually talk about the balls having a big impact on the speed. They are particularly heavy at Wimbledon, you'll know if you've ever used the Wimbledon standard Slazenger ultra vis line.

    US Open: Fast. No visible slowing to me, the fastest surface.
    And this is the problem, in my opinion. Whether or not the surfaces have recently changed or not doesn't really matter but with the hard courts and grass playing slower than they used to and clay playing faster, the surfaces are too similar. If that's to do with balls then that makes the solution to the problem even easier.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Natty.B)
    I'm really liking Berdych's tweets!
    I'm not exactly keen on his sycophantic Nadal tweets:

    Name:  Berdych tweet.PNG
Views: 126
Size:  42.3 KB

    Totally inappropriate for the number six-ranked player in the world to fawn over another professional like this. This mug mentality probably explains why he has been owned comprehensively by Nadal in recent years.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I would love to see how the last 10 Wimbledons would had been if it was still super fast unlike now.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ashnard)
    I'm not exactly keen on his sycophantic Nadal tweets:

    Name:  Berdych tweet.PNG
Views: 126
Size:  42.3 KB

    Totally inappropriate for the number six-ranked player in the world to fawn over another professional like this. This mug mentality probably explains why he has been owned comprehensively by Nadal in recent years.
    Straight out of TalkTennis, Ashnard! Well other than those Nadal tweets, (which i don't see what the big deal is, but i'm a Nadal fan so i'm being biased :P) his other tweets are a bit funny.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Natty.B)
    Straight out of TalkTennis, Ashnard! Well other than those Nadal tweets, (which i don't see what the big deal is, but i'm a Nadal fan so i'm being biased :P) his other tweets are a bit funny.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Had a feeling you would catch me out . Have you finished your exams yet? Must have been difficult for you trying to revise right in the middle of the clay-court season.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xxxKINGxxx)
    I would love to see how the last 10 Wimbledons would had been if it was still super fast unlike now.
    Federer would have won 10 in a row. It's not rocket science really. Slowing down the surfaces have really help pushers like Nadal and Djokovic, as it allows them to retrieve impossible balls like on clay. If the grass was still as fast as the one before 2002, then Fed would have S&V his way to the trophy every year.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ashnard)
    Had a feeling you would catch me out . Have you finished your exams yet? Must have been difficult for you trying to revise right in the middle of the clay-court season.
    Haha, I always know if it is TalkTennis yeah it wasn't great having the clay season on at that time, I watched mostly highlights of Roland Garros. I finish my exams tomorrow! Went back a few pages and I am shocked by what I saw...did you actually say you don't dislike Nadal? :P


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Just a random question - anyone else at uni seen anything like this before? The first guy who stands up has balls the size of Jupiter!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0uuXDtd_fs
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Roger1)
    Federer would have won 10 in a row. It's not rocket science really. Slowing down the surfaces have really help pushers like Nadal and Djokovic, as it allows them to retrieve impossible balls like on clay. If the grass was still as fast as the one before 2002, then Fed would have S&V his way to the trophy every year.
    'It is not rocket science'? Ok that is some assumption, Federer would win some, but not ten in a row, a player like Tsonga or Berdych probably would win it once because faster surfaces suits their game. People seem to forget exactly when the Wimbledon grass was slowed down.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Natty.B)
    'It is not rocket science'? Ok that is some assumption, Federer would win some, but not ten in a row, a player like Tsonga or Berdych probably would win it once because faster surfaces suits their game. People seem to forget exactly when the Wimbledon grass was slowed down.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    One thing is for certain that Nadal or Djokovic wouldn't make the final, let alone win it. Murray, maybe but Fed's main competition would be guys like Tsonga or berdych, as per your post.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Roger1)
    One thing is for certain that Nadal or Djokovic wouldn't make the final, let alone win it. Murray, maybe but Fed's main competition would be guys like Tsonga or berdych, as per your post.
    I think guys like Roddick/Isner/Karlovic even would've had a much bigger role to play too. I seem to recall they slowed it down a little largely due to Pistol Pete?
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Roger1)
    One thing is for certain that Nadal or Djokovic wouldn't make the final, let alone win it. Murray, maybe but Fed's main competition would be guys like Tsonga or berdych, as per your post.
    I don't think that Tsonga is all that well suited to a very fast court. I suspect if Wimbledon were very fast then Fed vs Roddick would have been the main story with perhaps somebody like Cilic or Del Potro pushing through in recent years.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think guys like Roddick/Isner/Karlovic even would've had a much bigger role to play too. I seem to recall they slowed it down a little largely due to Pistol Pete?
    I don't think that Tsonga is all that well suited to a very fast court. I suspect if Wimbledon were very fast then Fed vs Roddick would have been the main story with perhaps somebody like Cilic or Del Potro pushing through in recent years.
    Tsonga loves to S&V, so would be perfectly suited to the faster grass courts. Roddick was pretty much done by 2005 due to injuries, so not sure how he would fare after that time period on faster grass courts, but one thing is for sure, he definitely would have won at least one of those 4 matches at Wimbledon against Fed, had the courts been faster. Not too sure about Delpo, as he struggles with his movement on grass. Isner, karlovic and Cilic- Absolutely no chance!
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 23, 2014
Poll
Which Fantasy Franchise is the best?
Useful resources

Quick link:

Unanswered sport threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.