Michael Chang Interview

[Iona16]

^ So many interesting ideas in there, tented. I'd hate to raise the net and concede to 'tall-man' tennis, completely. I'm wondering who was the last man to win a Slam who stood under 6'. I think I have the answer on the tallest players: Safin and Del Potro. (3 total, and relative out-lyers.) Anyone else?

The ATP website have Hewitt and Agassi listed as 5'11. Agassi was the last person under 6' to win a slam - Australian Open in 03. Before that it was Hewitt at Wimbledon 03.

Gaudio won the FO in 04 so he just pips Agassi to the post.

Oops.

 

[Moxie]

^ So many interesting ideas in there, tented. I'd hate to raise the net and concede to 'tall-man' tennis, completely. I'm wondering who was the last man to win a Slam who stood under 6'. I think I have the answer on the tallest players: Safin and Del Potro. (3 total, and relative out-lyers.) Anyone else?

The ATP website have Hewitt and Agassi listed as 5'11. Agassi was the last person under 6' to win a slam - Australian Open in 03. Before that it was Hewitt at Wimbledon 03.

Gaudio won the FO in 04 so he just pips Agassi to the post.

You're right. I thought Gaudio was taller than Coria, but they're both 5'9". After that, I think the only Slam winners have been Roger, Rafa, Novak, Andy, Marat and Juan Martin.

@masterclass: You idea is definitely "outside of the box" (in more ways than one.) I don't think playing with the structure of the court or net-height are the answers, at least yet. Shorter players just have to be craftier, as I see it. Or maybe just "better" in a lot of ways. I still think Ferrer is a valuable example: he's 5'9", and he's made a great career for himself. It may not/probably will not ever translate to a Slam, but it's a very good career. And just because Isner and Raonic, as examples, are taller, they are less likely, IMO, to ever spend as long as he has at #3-5 in the world. And I personally doubt that either will ever be ranked higher, or win a Major. So, if the question is about the chances of a player under 6' winning a Major again, we may all be in agreement, but if the question is if height is the single in factor in determining a solid success, I would say it isn't.

 

[Mastoor]

Thanks Brit

 

[tented]

Interesting thoughts tented. I too have often thought about the height question when talking about a one size fit all standard court that was determined long ago (1877-1882) when the average player height was less than today. I believe most agree that the biggest advantage in bigger height comes in the service. It is the single shot where the individual has the most control of the point, and it is meant to give one an advantage. But a smaller player today is at a clear disadvantage from a pure mathematical standpoint.

I don't like the raising the net idea, because it puts the small player at even a larger disadvantage.

I don't, either, since that would put the small to average guys at an even greater disadvantage, while enabling tall-man tennis. I simply thought it would be an interesting exhibition to watch Isner, Karlovic, Janowicz, etc. serve with the net raised half a foot.

My idea (though it might look strange) would be to use graduated service lines on the court. Taller players would have to serve from lines further back that were made based on a mathematical equation that would equalize the heights by increasing the serving distance from the net.

The slope of the line that goes from the service line to the top of the center of the net is 1/7 or 1 foot rise for each 7 feet of run. The distance from a service line to the opposite baseline is 60 ft. The height of a ball over the baseline on that imaginary line with that slope would be about 8' 7" or 103 inches. The average pro player makes contact with the ball at 1.5 times their height according to studies made by Bruce Elliot.

So a player would have to be about 68 2/3 inches tall to hit a flat serve on a line that hit's the opponents service line*. A player 6 ft tall would have to stand 3 ft behind the baseline to serve a ball on that same flat slope trajectory as the player 5' 8.67" on the baseline. A player 6' 8" tall or 80" would need to serve about 10 ft behind the baseline to achieve the same slope.

Though it seems more fair, I doubt if many current taller players would agree to this change.

*Of course, this is without needing to account for gravity or ball speed or spin. Higher ball speed reduces the time gravity has to act on the ball. Lower speed and topspin will help get the ball in the box easier.

Respectfully,
masterclass

That's quite complicated, but interesting since you're ultimately seeking a mathematical fairness between the players because of height differences. But no, I don't see it happening, either, even though it would also be fun, like the higher net, to watch as an exhibition.