Aussie Open 2014: Ball and Courts faster...

[DarthFed]

Waist level balls are Federer's dream. 7 Wimbys to show for it.

Waist and below would qualify as low bouncing, you get above that and his backhand especially is in trouble.

Waist level and below are absolutely essential for his back hand to be at its best, but we should not paint a picture as if it is a disaster with high bouncing balls.

He has multiple red clay titles, French semis, Finals, and a win to prove it.

Historically, the only disaster for Roger was shoulder high balls fed from the topspin monster. But as of now, it doesn't take much height to cause the backhand trouble. He also doesn't handle pace as well as he once did.

I think there is some truth to that. When you say it "does not take much", I am a bit amused..Tsonga and Berdych absolutely annihilate the ball on quicker courts.

It's more not taking much height on the ball to give him issues. And Tsonga also blew him out at RG last year despite never having reached the final of a clay court event in his career.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Waist and below would qualify as low bouncing, you get above that and his backhand especially is in trouble.

Waist level and below are absolutely essential for his back hand to be at its best, but we should not paint a picture as if it is a disaster with high bouncing balls.

He has multiple red clay titles, French semis, Finals, and a win to prove it.

Historically, the only disaster for Roger was shoulder high balls fed from the topspin monster. But as of now, it doesn't take much height to cause the backhand trouble. He also doesn't handle pace as well as he once did.

I think there is some truth to that. When you say it "does not take much", I am a bit amused..Tsonga and Berdych absolutely annihilate the ball on quicker courts.

It's more not taking much height on the ball to give him issues. And Tsonga also blew him out at RG last year despite never having reached the final of a clay court event in his career.

Um, Tsonga beat him at Wimbledon too.....

 

[DarthFed]

Waist level and below are absolutely essential for his back hand to be at its best, but we should not paint a picture as if it is a disaster with high bouncing balls.

He has multiple red clay titles, French semis, Finals, and a win to prove it.

Historically, the only disaster for Roger was shoulder high balls fed from the topspin monster. But as of now, it doesn't take much height to cause the backhand trouble. He also doesn't handle pace as well as he once did.

I think there is some truth to that. When you say it "does not take much", I am a bit amused..Tsonga and Berdych absolutely annihilate the ball on quicker courts.

It's more not taking much height on the ball to give him issues. And Tsonga also blew him out at RG last year despite never having reached the final of a clay court event in his career.

Um, Tsonga beat him at Wimbledon too.....

Yes, both were incredibly weak losses. I have not forgotten.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Historically, the only disaster for Roger was shoulder high balls fed from the topspin monster. But as of now, it doesn't take much height to cause the backhand trouble. He also doesn't handle pace as well as he once did.

I think there is some truth to that. When you say it "does not take much", I am a bit amused..Tsonga and Berdych absolutely annihilate the ball on quicker courts.

It's more not taking much height on the ball to give him issues. And Tsonga also blew him out at RG last year despite never having reached the final of a clay court event in his career.

Um, Tsonga beat him at Wimbledon too.....

Yes, both were incredibly weak losses. I have not forgotten.

But it kinda nullifies the "high bouncing" theory. It is more a matter of losing to a younger stronger opponent regardless of style.

 

[Front242]

While Tsonga's performance at Wimbledon against Roger was indeed brilliant, Roger made it look even better. After winning the first 2 sets pretty routinely, he really took the foot off the gas and started I believe every set there after by dumping serve and his ROS was so pathetic from the 3rd set onwards that match that all Tsonga had to do from there on out was continue to hold serve. And to his credit he did serve incredibly well.

 

[DarthFed]

I think there is some truth to that. When you say it "does not take much", I am a bit amused..Tsonga and Berdych absolutely annihilate the ball on quicker courts.

It's more not taking much height on the ball to give him issues. And Tsonga also blew him out at RG last year despite never having reached the final of a clay court event in his career.

Um, Tsonga beat him at Wimbledon too.....

Yes, both were incredibly weak losses. I have not forgotten.

But it kinda nullifies the "high bouncing" theory. It is more a matter of losing to a younger stronger opponent regardless of style.

True, but that is mostly Roger now being able to lose to the 2nd tier guys whereas before they had no prayer. Also, going 5 vs. Tsonga at Wimbledon is about 100 times better performance than losing in straights to him on clay. Roger needs low bounce more than before, not that it guarantees him victory of course.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

It's more not taking much height on the ball to give him issues. And Tsonga also blew him out at RG last year despite never having reached the final of a clay court event in his career.

Um, Tsonga beat him at Wimbledon too.....

Yes, both were incredibly weak losses. I have not forgotten.

But it kinda nullifies the "high bouncing" theory. It is more a matter of losing to a younger stronger opponent regardless of style.

True, but that is mostly Roger now being able to lose to the 2nd tier guys whereas before they had no prayer. Also, going 5 vs. Tsonga at Wimbledon is about 100 times better performance than losing in straights to him on clay. Roger needs low bounce more than before, not that it guarantees him victory of course.

Agree. But is easy to forget that historically only the #1 and #2 players virtually NEVER lose to the "second tier" in big matches. We sort of take this for granted..that is how sick the top level is.

I also think the natural progression of the second tier getting closer to the first tier is happening. Wawrinka twice last year pushed Joker to the absolute limit. And Tsonga did the same to him at the French recently.

 

[Ricardo]

Yeah I agree about Federer not handling pace that good these days. In fact, he's often in trouble on both wings when a ball comes at him quickly. His backhand looks wobbly when handling anything pacy, while he doesn't stretch as well on his forehand side, and it's becoming easier to take him out of position on that wing too. That's actually one of the reasons why the Nadal match-up has become an even bigger problem for him, since in addition to attacking the backhand, Nadal can now go after his forehand and risk far less than he would have a few years ago. Nadal's CC backhand has been giving Federer trouble for a while now. The same applies to the Fed-Djoko match-up. Djokovic dominates the forehand to forehand CC exchanges, especially with how well Novak hits on the run and creates obscene angles with his forehand.

Djoker dominates the fh to fh CC exchanges uh? not sure about that, you have numbers or??? most of their last few encounters have still been close matches, given that Djoker's bh is a much better rally shot than Fed's single bh how would Fed even win games if he gets dominated even in fh exchanges? he can serve well but he can't serve like Karlovic to win games just by serving unreturnables alone.....

Agreed about Nadal vs Fed, Roger hardly has a prayer against him these days. There is just so little aspect of the game in his favor at the moment.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Yeah I agree about Federer not handling pace that good these days. In fact, he's often in trouble on both wings when a ball comes at him quickly. His backhand looks wobbly when handling anything pacy, while he doesn't stretch as well on his forehand side, and it's becoming easier to take him out of position on that wing too. That's actually one of the reasons why the Nadal match-up has become an even bigger problem for him, since in addition to attacking the backhand, Nadal can now go after his forehand and risk far less than he would have a few years ago. Nadal's CC backhand has been giving Federer trouble for a while now. The same applies to the Fed-Djoko match-up. Djokovic dominates the forehand to forehand CC exchanges, especially with how well Novak hits on the run and creates obscene angles with his forehand.

Djoker dominates the fh to fh CC exchanges uh? not sure about that, you have numbers or??? most of their last few encounters have still been close matches, given that Djoker's bh is a much better rally shot than Fed's single bh how would Fed even win games if he gets dominated even in fh exchanges? he can serve well but he can't serve like Karlovic to win games just by serving unreturnables alone.....

Agreed about Nadal vs Fed, Roger hardly has a prayer against him these days. There is just so little aspect of the game in his favor at the moment.

I went back and look at the stats in some of their recent encounters. There was winners, aces, unforced errors, first serve %...but nothing about Fh to FH CC exchanges. Who would have thought? I mean you'd think that the stat guys would do nothing but register who wins every forehand to forehand cross court exchanges... Good god, do your job guys! Even more weird, I couldn't find a single stat saying Nadal dominates the forehand to backhand exchanges against Federer. I guess that's not true either.

So anyway, with that out of the way, Djokovic's forehand is more consistent than Roger's forehand at this point in time, and he moves noticeably better. Whenever Roger stretches on his forehand side these days, he seems to be out of the rally, while Novak is unbelievable at hitting angles from preposterous positions, even with the forehand. Yes, his forehand has become somewhat heavier, more difficult to handle, and he's the one often taking Roger out of position.

Of course their matches are competitive because Federer is still a very good player and no player will dominate EVERY rally. Plus tennis is a more complex game than simply trading cross court shots off of the same wing (ie Federer will hit a slice backhand, run around his forehand on the next shot, hit an inside out forehand, take Novak out of position, attack the net, etc... He'll also get 1-2 punches, some cheap points on serve, draw some errors... It's not like the match is just them rallying endlessly where Novak will win the majority of the points).

 

[brokenshoelace]

Steve Tignor is my hero. Please, everyone read this and calm down about all the surface talk. He hits the nail on the head:

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2014/01/surface-matter/50217/#.UtT1gvQW3vg

 

[brokenshoelace]

I know this was just one writer's opinion, but hopefully he made enough sense for everyone to stop their own propaganda campaign in this thread, including carefully selecting quotes/articles that support their claims only, while ignoring the conflicting reports. Tignor to his credit, didn't do that at all. He carefully compiled information, provided all the different takes on the court speed, and drew his conclusions.

 

[Ricardo]

Yeah I agree about Federer not handling pace that good these days. In fact, he's often in trouble on both wings when a ball comes at him quickly. His backhand looks wobbly when handling anything pacy, while he doesn't stretch as well on his forehand side, and it's becoming easier to take him out of position on that wing too. That's actually one of the reasons why the Nadal match-up has become an even bigger problem for him, since in addition to attacking the backhand, Nadal can now go after his forehand and risk far less than he would have a few years ago. Nadal's CC backhand has been giving Federer trouble for a while now. The same applies to the Fed-Djoko match-up. Djokovic dominates the forehand to forehand CC exchanges, especially with how well Novak hits on the run and creates obscene angles with his forehand.

Djoker dominates the fh to fh CC exchanges uh? not sure about that, you have numbers or??? most of their last few encounters have still been close matches, given that Djoker's bh is a much better rally shot than Fed's single bh how would Fed even win games if he gets dominated even in fh exchanges? he can serve well but he can't serve like Karlovic to win games just by serving unreturnables alone.....

Agreed about Nadal vs Fed, Roger hardly has a prayer against him these days. There is just so little aspect of the game in his favor at the moment.

I went back and look at the stats in some of their recent encounters. There was winners, aces, unforced errors, first serve %...but nothing about Fh to FH CC exchanges. Who would have thought? I mean you'd think that the stat guys would do nothing but register who wins every forehand to forehand cross court exchanges... Good god, do your job guys! Even more weird, I couldn't find a single stat saying Nadal dominates the forehand to backhand exchanges against Federer. I guess that's not true either.

So anyway, with that out of the way, Djokovic's forehand is more consistent than Roger's forehand at this point in time, and he moves noticeably better. Whenever Roger stretches on his forehand side these days, he seems to be out of the rally, while Novak is unbelievable at hitting angles from preposterous positions, even with the forehand. Yes, his forehand has become somewhat heavier, more difficult to handle, and he's the one often taking Roger out of position.

Of course their matches are competitive because Federer is still a very good player and no player will dominate EVERY rally. Plus tennis is a more complex game than simply trading cross court shots off of the same wing (ie Federer will hit a slice backhand, run around his forehand on the next shot, hit an inside out forehand, take Novak out of position, attack the net, etc... He'll also get 1-2 punches, some cheap points on serve, draw some errors... It's not like the match is just them rallying endlessly where Novak will win the majority of the points).

oh i am sorry you couldn't find the stats for it, but you are missing the point..... pretty sure most people see Nadal's fh dominates Fed's bh which with or without official stats, is obvious - your above comment on this is a bit cheap. But Novak dominates Fed in fh CC exchanges? that's odd, if Novak has an edge that i can see but 'dominate'? yeah sure.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Yeah I agree about Federer not handling pace that good these days. In fact, he's often in trouble on both wings when a ball comes at him quickly. His backhand looks wobbly when handling anything pacy, while he doesn't stretch as well on his forehand side, and it's becoming easier to take him out of position on that wing too. That's actually one of the reasons why the Nadal match-up has become an even bigger problem for him, since in addition to attacking the backhand, Nadal can now go after his forehand and risk far less than he would have a few years ago. Nadal's CC backhand has been giving Federer trouble for a while now. The same applies to the Fed-Djoko match-up. Djokovic dominates the forehand to forehand CC exchanges, especially with how well Novak hits on the run and creates obscene angles with his forehand.

Djoker dominates the fh to fh CC exchanges uh? not sure about that, you have numbers or??? most of their last few encounters have still been close matches, given that Djoker's bh is a much better rally shot than Fed's single bh how would Fed even win games if he gets dominated even in fh exchanges? he can serve well but he can't serve like Karlovic to win games just by serving unreturnables alone.....

Agreed about Nadal vs Fed, Roger hardly has a prayer against him these days. There is just so little aspect of the game in his favor at the moment.

I went back and look at the stats in some of their recent encounters. There was winners, aces, unforced errors, first serve %...but nothing about Fh to FH CC exchanges. Who would have thought? I mean you'd think that the stat guys would do nothing but register who wins every forehand to forehand cross court exchanges... Good god, do your job guys! Even more weird, I couldn't find a single stat saying Nadal dominates the forehand to backhand exchanges against Federer. I guess that's not true either.

So anyway, with that out of the way, Djokovic's forehand is more consistent than Roger's forehand at this point in time, and he moves noticeably better. Whenever Roger stretches on his forehand side these days, he seems to be out of the rally, while Novak is unbelievable at hitting angles from preposterous positions, even with the forehand. Yes, his forehand has become somewhat heavier, more difficult to handle, and he's the one often taking Roger out of position.

Of course their matches are competitive because Federer is still a very good player and no player will dominate EVERY rally. Plus tennis is a more complex game than simply trading cross court shots off of the same wing (ie Federer will hit a slice backhand, run around his forehand on the next shot, hit an inside out forehand, take Novak out of position, attack the net, etc... He'll also get 1-2 punches, some cheap points on serve, draw some errors... It's not like the match is just them rallying endlessly where Novak will win the majority of the points).

oh i am sorry you couldn't find the stats for it, but you are missing the point..... pretty sure most people see Nadal's fh dominates Fed's bh which with or without official stats, is obvious - your above comment on this is a bit cheap. But Novak dominates Fed in fh CC exchanges? that's odd, if Novak has an edge that i can see but 'dominate'? yeah sure.

Emphasis on "as off late." Meaning their recent matches.

 

[Ricardo]

I know this was just one writer's opinion, but hopefully he made enough sense for everyone to stop their own propaganda campaign in this thread, including carefully selecting quotes/articles that support their claims only, while ignoring the conflicting reports. Tignor to his credit, didn't do that at all. He carefully compiled information, provided all the different takes on the court speed, and drew his conclusions.

The court speed may have been slowed down to lesser extent than some claimed, in general it has happened but maybe not quite so much. Seems like changing the balls had at least as much impact, and when you combine surface and ball change the difference is quite obvious - that the game itself has slowed down tremendously, and this is where i think ATP has gone too far.... it was perhaps too fast in the 90s when big servers could win too much just off the serves but in making such 'correction' it has disadvantaged attacking players, those who try to finish points off quickly and go for winners early.

 

[Ricardo]

Yeah I agree about Federer not handling pace that good these days. In fact, he's often in trouble on both wings when a ball comes at him quickly. His backhand looks wobbly when handling anything pacy, while he doesn't stretch as well on his forehand side, and it's becoming easier to take him out of position on that wing too. That's actually one of the reasons why the Nadal match-up has become an even bigger problem for him, since in addition to attacking the backhand, Nadal can now go after his forehand and risk far less than he would have a few years ago. Nadal's CC backhand has been giving Federer trouble for a while now. The same applies to the Fed-Djoko match-up. Djokovic dominates the forehand to forehand CC exchanges, especially with how well Novak hits on the run and creates obscene angles with his forehand.

Djoker dominates the fh to fh CC exchanges uh? not sure about that, you have numbers or??? most of their last few encounters have still been close matches, given that Djoker's bh is a much better rally shot than Fed's single bh how would Fed even win games if he gets dominated even in fh exchanges? he can serve well but he can't serve like Karlovic to win games just by serving unreturnables alone.....

Agreed about Nadal vs Fed, Roger hardly has a prayer against him these days. There is just so little aspect of the game in his favor at the moment.

I went back and look at the stats in some of their recent encounters. There was winners, aces, unforced errors, first serve %...but nothing about Fh to FH CC exchanges. Who would have thought? I mean you'd think that the stat guys would do nothing but register who wins every forehand to forehand cross court exchanges... Good god, do your job guys! Even more weird, I couldn't find a single stat saying Nadal dominates the forehand to backhand exchanges against Federer. I guess that's not true either.

So anyway, with that out of the way, Djokovic's forehand is more consistent than Roger's forehand at this point in time, and he moves noticeably better. Whenever Roger stretches on his forehand side these days, he seems to be out of the rally, while Novak is unbelievable at hitting angles from preposterous positions, even with the forehand. Yes, his forehand has become somewhat heavier, more difficult to handle, and he's the one often taking Roger out of position.

Of course their matches are competitive because Federer is still a very good player and no player will dominate EVERY rally. Plus tennis is a more complex game than simply trading cross court shots off of the same wing (ie Federer will hit a slice backhand, run around his forehand on the next shot, hit an inside out forehand, take Novak out of position, attack the net, etc... He'll also get 1-2 punches, some cheap points on serve, draw some errors... It's not like the match is just them rallying endlessly where Novak will win the majority of the points).

oh i am sorry you couldn't find the stats for it, but you are missing the point..... pretty sure most people see Nadal's fh dominates Fed's bh which with or without official stats, is obvious - your above comment on this is a bit cheap. But Novak dominates Fed in fh CC exchanges? that's odd, if Novak has an edge that i can see but 'dominate'? yeah sure.

Emphasis on "as off late." Meaning their recent matches.

what do you think i was referring to? Novak wouldn't even have an edge if it was the younger Federer across the net. Note i wrote in 'most of their last few encounters' have been close.... i can see Novak has an edge in CC fh, but dominate? not even close.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Steve Tignor is my hero. Please, everyone read this and calm down about all the surface talk. He hits the nail on the head:

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2014/01/surface-matter/50217/#.UtT1gvQW3vg

I think everybody is calm.

With over 20 hours of AO under my belt now, the rallies are DEFINTATELY not as long. Match times are shorter. Inside out forehands are devastating. I have even seen a bunch of 2nd serve aces...

Monfils, our resident grinder, was up 6-4,6-4 and even in the third on Frat Boy in 90 minutes.

Maybe this was the intention from the beginning.

But who cares in the end..by the final weekend they will be "slower" anyway.

Anyone who lived through the early 90s and had to suffer through Goran/Edberg/Sampras/Krajicek
is not complaining about the "fast" courts

 

[Luxilon Borg]

I know this was just one writer's opinion, but hopefully he made enough sense for everyone to stop their own propaganda campaign in this thread, including carefully selecting quotes/articles that support their claims only, while ignoring the conflicting reports. Tignor to his credit, didn't do that at all. He carefully compiled information, provided all the different takes on the court speed, and drew his conclusions.

To be clear, I don't think ANYBODY on this thread has a propaganda campaign going. Just reporting the chatter. I for one am totally neutral. The speed is the speed, whether faster or slower. I personally thought it was interesting in that I have never heard this much jabber about surface speed before a Slam aside from when they slowed down the grass at Wimby.

I think where the discussions get interesting is that IF the court is faster, who does help, who does it hurt. Again..IF.

 

[Tennis Miller]

Steve Tignor is my hero. Please, everyone read this and calm down about all the surface talk. He hits the nail on the head:

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2014/01/surface-matter/50217/#.UtT1gvQW3vg

I think everybody is calm.

With over 20 hours of AO under my belt now, the rallies are DEFINTATELY not as long. Match times are shorter. Inside out forehands are devastating. I have even seen a bunch of 2nd serve aces...

Monfils, our resident grinder, was up 6-4,6-4 and even in the third on Frat Boy in 90 minutes.

Maybe this was the intention from the beginning.

But who cares in the end..by the final weekend they will be "slower" anyway.

Anyone who lived through the early 90s and had to suffer through Goran/Edberg/Sampras/Krajicek
is not complaining about the "fast" courts

I'd leave Edberg out of this group, and I'd confine it to Wimbledon. Those Goran/Pete serving contests were particularly awful tennis (although wonderful outcomes for anyone who loved Pete)

Cheers

TM

 

[brokenshoelace]

Edberg was one of the most eye-pleasing players in history.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Steve Tignor is my hero. Please, everyone read this and calm down about all the surface talk. He hits the nail on the head:

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2014/01/surface-matter/50217/#.UtT1gvQW3vg

I think everybody is calm.

With over 20 hours of AO under my belt now, the rallies are DEFINTATELY not as long. Match times are shorter. Inside out forehands are devastating. I have even seen a bunch of 2nd serve aces...

Monfils, our resident grinder, was up 6-4,6-4 and even in the third on Frat Boy in 90 minutes.

Maybe this was the intention from the beginning.

But who cares in the end..by the final weekend they will be "slower" anyway.

Anyone who lived through the early 90s and had to suffer through Goran/Edberg/Sampras/Krajicek
is not complaining about the "fast" courts

I'd leave Edberg out of this group, and I'd confine it to Wimbledon. Those Goran/Pete serving contests were particularly awful tennis (although wonderful outcomes for anyone who loved Pete)

Cheers

TM

No I don't think you can just confine it to Wimbledon. There were was a ton of indoor tennis played in the 90s, far more than now. Those serving battles were horrible.

I think the proof is the lack of players at the top that don't even remotely resemble Wayne Arthurs, Greg Rusedski, Goran, or even Noah, Kraijeck, and their ilk.

As someone who sat through many S&V/chip n charge battles at US Open and fell asleep say Good Riddance.

The Boris Stefan 3 stroke battles were god awful too.