Aussie Open 2014: Ball and Courts faster...

[Luxilon Borg]

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

Yes, much more so when played a counter puncher or power baseliner.

His forehand, alas, was a disaster.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

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

While I agree with most of what Tignor is saying, I find that there is only one new
observation in it. As Rafa did not play in AO last year, and assuming the court speed
got increased incrementally twice, it is natural for Rafa to find it as lot faster.

Having said that, I really doubt whether players can remember the exact
way a court behaved one year ago and compare it to this year properly especially
when they play in so many courts throughout the year. It can all become a muddle
even for a well meaning player. I would rather believe in a scientific measurement
of the pace instead of in people's opinion.

The system surely needs a reform. While it is good to have different types of
courts in different tournaments (to encourage diversity in styles of play), there has
to be some kind of standardization done for the court speed of a particular tournament.
It should not be simply left up to the whims and fancies of the tournament director.

I took a more careful look at the ITF court pace rating system. The court
pace rating takes into account both the speed and the bounce of the ball.
Without turning this into a physics lecture, the formula takes both coefficient
of friction (which determines the forward speed of the ball after hitting the
ground) and the coefficient of restitution (which determines the bounce)
into account.

So, we should make sure not to use "pace" and "speed" interchangeably.
ITF court pace rating is a combined indicator of both speed and bounce.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

AO: Almost one week in: Assessment of speed of play

So we just about a week in. What are your views in the speed of play?

Personally I think it is faster than the last two years, just about as fast,
and maybe faster than Flushing Meadows.

 

[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

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.

You're right, I should have included indoor in the unwatchable category. I didn't feel the USO was that bad. But those Wimbledon serving contests were particularly atrocious tennis.

Cheers

TM

 

[brokenshoelace]

So we just about a week in. What are your views in the speed of play?

Personally I think it is faster than the last two years, just about as fast,
and maybe faster than Flushing Meadows.

It seems to be playing faster than last year, but I don't see how it's faster than Flushing Meadows, which played especially fast last year. I think all the pre-tournament hysteria has distorted people's views. Plus, none of the players really mentioned about the courts being THAT fast (ie US Open fast).

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

its just faster than the gloopy melted tar effect of recent years down there, Frew McMillan on eurosport mentioned something about the Tennis balls maybe lighter this year ??

weather its that or the grit mixed in the surface that's been reduced is up for debate, for some reason tourneys are always a bit cagey about any changed in the courts..when Wimbledon changed its grass seed mix/type in 2001 I don't remember a big fanfare about it the meeja at the time.

I think the general feeling around the circuit is that the courts had gone too slow and it was getting too hard for to get reward with a winner on a good attacking shot..

slowly as if by magic the courts on the tour will speed up a bit..like shanghai or Tokyo..one or both of those tourneys last autumn, we were all going on about how the quicker courts made for exciting more attacking tennis..

do players and fans really want another AO final 2012 ??..I'll wager not, and remember that grindfest at the time everyone was going..these guys are like ironmen, later folk thought,,nearly 6hrs ?..its too long.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

So we just about a week in. What are your views in the speed of play?

Personally I think it is faster than the last two years, just about as fast,
and maybe faster than Flushing Meadows.

It seems to be playing faster than last year, but I don't see how it's faster than Flushing Meadows, which played especially fast last year. I think all the pre-tournament hysteria has distorted people's views. Plus, none of the players really mentioned about the courts being THAT fast (ie US Open fast).

I think the relative speed of the court was massively over shadowed by the heat.

As a matter of fact I am SURE the players were happier about faster play. A slow bouncing court
in 107 degrees? Why not just pour gasoline on your head and light a match.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

its just faster than the gloopy melted tar effect of recent years down there, Frew McMillan on eurosport mentioned something about the Tennis balls maybe lighter this year ??

weather its that or the grit mixed in the surface that's been reduced is up for debate, for some reason tourneys are always a bit cagey about any changed in the courts..when Wimbledon changed its grass seed mix/type in 2001 I don't remember a big fanfare about it the meeja at the time.

I think the general feeling around the circuit is that the courts had gone too slow and it was getting too hard for to get reward with a winner on a good attacking shot..

slowly as if by magic the courts on the tour will speed up a bit..like shanghai or Tokyo..one or both of those tourneys last autumn, we were all going on about how the quicker courts made for exciting more attacking tennis..

do players and fans really want another AO final 2012 ??..I'll wager not, and remember that grindfest at the time everyone was going..these guys are like ironmen, later folk thought,,nearly 6hrs ?..its too long.

Good post.

To answer your question, I actually think most tennis fans do NOT want another 6 hour final.

 

[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.

You're right, I should have included indoor in the unwatchable category. I didn't feel the USO was that bad. But those Wimbledon serving contests were particularly atrocious tennis.

Cheers

TM

I remember sitting in the stands in the late 80s, it may have been 89, watching Noah and Dr. Dirt
play 5 sets of chip and charge and S/V. Not a SINGLE ground stroke rally. My dad turned to me and said, "this is awful". And he was right.

 

[Tennis Miller]

its just faster than the gloopy melted tar effect of recent years down there, Frew McMillan on eurosport mentioned something about the Tennis balls maybe lighter this year ??

weather its that or the grit mixed in the surface that's been reduced is up for debate, for some reason tourneys are always a bit cagey about any changed in the courts..when Wimbledon changed its grass seed mix/type in 2001 I don't remember a big fanfare about it the meeja at the time.

I think the general feeling around the circuit is that the courts had gone too slow and it was getting too hard for to get reward with a winner on a good attacking shot..

slowly as if by magic the courts on the tour will speed up a bit..like shanghai or Tokyo..one or both of those tourneys last autumn, we were all going on about how the quicker courts made for exciting more attacking tennis..

do players and fans really want another AO final 2012 ??..I'll wager not, and remember that grindfest at the time everyone was going..these guys are like ironmen, later folk thought,,nearly 6hrs ?..its too long.

Good post.

To answer your question, I actually think most tennis fans do NOT want another 6 hour final.

Not sure where I read this, but I believe the 2012 final would have been about a four hour match if the time allowed between points had been even moderately enforced. Both Rafa and Nole responded to the moment by slowing play WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY down between points, excessive ball bouncing, etc.

I don't think it was the court speed as much as the unreasonably long delays between points.

Cheers

TM

 

[brokenshoelace]

its just faster than the gloopy melted tar effect of recent years down there, Frew McMillan on eurosport mentioned something about the Tennis balls maybe lighter this year ??

weather its that or the grit mixed in the surface that's been reduced is up for debate, for some reason tourneys are always a bit cagey about any changed in the courts..when Wimbledon changed its grass seed mix/type in 2001 I don't remember a big fanfare about it the meeja at the time.

I think the general feeling around the circuit is that the courts had gone too slow and it was getting too hard for to get reward with a winner on a good attacking shot..

slowly as if by magic the courts on the tour will speed up a bit..like shanghai or Tokyo..one or both of those tourneys last autumn, we were all going on about how the quicker courts made for exciting more attacking tennis..

do players and fans really want another AO final 2012 ??..I'll wager not, and remember that grindfest at the time everyone was going..these guys are like ironmen, later folk thought,,nearly 6hrs ?..its too long.

Good post.

To answer your question, I actually think most tennis fans do NOT want another 6 hour final.

Not sure where I read this, but I believe the 2012 final would have been about a four hour match if the time allowed between points had been even moderately enforced. Both Rafa and Nole responded to the moment by slowing play WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY down between points, excessive ball bouncing, etc.

I don't think it was the court speed as much as the unreasonably long delays between points.

Cheers

TM

Yeah, this.

Nadal and Djokovic play long rallies everywhere. This wasn't exclusive to the AO final. Anyone can check their 2011 US Open final. There FO match last year was 5 sets, including the last set going 10-8 (or something like that) and wasn't nearly as long as the AO match. Does that mean the AO surface is slower? No, obviously. It's wrong to automatically equate match length with surface spend. Obviously it MIGHT play a factor, but it's not a definitive indication. Also, AO was always a medium pace courts. It really never played slow, at least not when compared to slower hards like Indian Wells for example.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

its just faster than the gloopy melted tar effect of recent years down there, Frew McMillan on eurosport mentioned something about the Tennis balls maybe lighter this year ??

weather its that or the grit mixed in the surface that's been reduced is up for debate, for some reason tourneys are always a bit cagey about any changed in the courts..when Wimbledon changed its grass seed mix/type in 2001 I don't remember a big fanfare about it the meeja at the time.

I think the general feeling around the circuit is that the courts had gone too slow and it was getting too hard for to get reward with a winner on a good attacking shot..

slowly as if by magic the courts on the tour will speed up a bit..like shanghai or Tokyo..one or both of those tourneys last autumn, we were all going on about how the quicker courts made for exciting more attacking tennis..

do players and fans really want another AO final 2012 ??..I'll wager not, and remember that grindfest at the time everyone was going..these guys are like ironmen, later folk thought,,nearly 6hrs ?..its too long.

Good post.

To answer your question, I actually think most tennis fans do NOT want another 6 hour final.

Not sure where I read this, but I believe the 2012 final would have been about a four hour match if the time allowed between points had been even moderately enforced. Both Rafa and Nole responded to the moment by slowing play WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY down between points, excessive ball bouncing, etc.

I don't think it was the court speed as much as the unreasonably long delays between points.

Cheers

TM

Yes, they both are guilty of taking too much time between points. Given that they are top
players, they often get away with it too. Once they played a 3-set match in Madrid for close to
or over four hours.

Fed immediately dismissed it as a long and difficult match and said that they both take
too much time.

 

[brokenshoelace]

its just faster than the gloopy melted tar effect of recent years down there, Frew McMillan on eurosport mentioned something about the Tennis balls maybe lighter this year ??

weather its that or the grit mixed in the surface that's been reduced is up for debate, for some reason tourneys are always a bit cagey about any changed in the courts..when Wimbledon changed its grass seed mix/type in 2001 I don't remember a big fanfare about it the meeja at the time.

I think the general feeling around the circuit is that the courts had gone too slow and it was getting too hard for to get reward with a winner on a good attacking shot..

slowly as if by magic the courts on the tour will speed up a bit..like shanghai or Tokyo..one or both of those tourneys last autumn, we were all going on about how the quicker courts made for exciting more attacking tennis..

do players and fans really want another AO final 2012 ??..I'll wager not, and remember that grindfest at the time everyone was going..these guys are like ironmen, later folk thought,,nearly 6hrs ?..its too long.

Good post.

To answer your question, I actually think most tennis fans do NOT want another 6 hour final.

Not sure where I read this, but I believe the 2012 final would have been about a four hour match if the time allowed between points had been even moderately enforced. Both Rafa and Nole responded to the moment by slowing play WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY down between points, excessive ball bouncing, etc.

I don't think it was the court speed as much as the unreasonably long delays between points.

Cheers

TM

Yes, they both are guilty of taking too much time between points. Given that they are top
players, they often get away with it too. Once they played a 3-set match in Madrid for close to
or over four hours.

Fed immediately dismissed it as a long and difficult match and said that they both take
too much time.

In fairness, that Madrid match WAS a long match (ie it would have been long based on the actual tennis alone), but could have been shorter if they didn't take as much time in between points. The thing is, part of why the take time in between points (at least against each other) is due to the physical nature of the match and how long the rallies are. But yeah, between the FO last year and their Montreal match, they showed that they can play a long match with long rallies without taking 40 seconds between points every time.