Who will surprise and disappoint us at Wimbledon?

[britbox]

What rather than who will disappoint us at Wimbledon the most? The grass and maybe the weather. I really wish the grass didn't get so mangled in the 2nd week that they're basically playing on clay. Grass is meant to favour aggressive, attacking play and the trodden, rock hard muddy baselines and patches of rock hard soil on the courts is just like clay by the time week 1 is over. By week 2 gone is the low bounce rewarding old school aggression and imo vasly superior viewing and all we're left with is basically clay. The ball bounces much higher, flat shots barely skimming over the net are less effective, balls can be more easily run down, too many rallies. I like rallying but not every damn point. While I'd hate to see 90's speed grass with today's racquet head technology (it'd be unwatchable actually), they could surely speed the damn courts up a bit. It's way too slow now. Halle was a breath of fresh air and those courts are by no means too fast and still allow for entertaining rallies but also reward the attacking players. Wish Wimbledon would speed up akin to that.

Rock hard worn grass is nothing like clay buddy. It's slower because the grass is more durable and less patchy than yesteryear because of a change in the compound around 2002. Rock hard worn grass was the fast grass of yesteryear. Fast, low and unpredictable bounce.

 

[huntingyou]

What rather than who will disappoint us at Wimbledon the most? The grass and maybe the weather. I really wish the grass didn't get so mangled in the 2nd week that they're basically playing on clay. Grass is meant to favour aggressive, attacking play and the trodden, rock hard muddy baselines and patches of rock hard soil on the courts is just like clay by the time week 1 is over. By week 2 gone is the low bounce rewarding old school aggression and imo vasly superior viewing and all we're left with is basically clay. The ball bounces much higher, flat shots barely skimming over the net are less effective, balls can be more easily run down, too many rallies. I like rallying but not every damn point. While I'd hate to see 90's speed grass with today's racquet head technology (it'd be unwatchable actually), they could surely speed the damn courts up a bit. It's way too slow now. Halle was a breath of fresh air and those courts are by no means too fast and still allow for entertaining rallies but also reward the attacking players. Wish Wimbledon would speed up akin to that.

stop the nonsense. Roger fans can't let it go, their insecurity at this point it's old news. Roger has won 7 SW19 in the same grass you complaint about which btw has always showed the conditions you describe above.

IT'S NOT CLAY and IT DOESN'T PLAY AS CLAY.

every year they repeat the same myth; I remember at one point I brought stats from the 90s and compared them to this era showing it's actually HARDER on average to break serve in this era. But why? It's a fact the grass was modified to last longer and allow a more PREDICTABLE bounce which in turn makes look slower. But why it's harder to break serve in this grass? Technology my friend; if the grass was never improved then it would be virtually impossible to break serve due to the ability of your average joe to hit 125 MPH and crazy spin.

17% break percentage.......that's it. During Sampras time it was no lower than 18%.

Tell me, what year did this match took place? Describe to me the condition of the baseline and the court in general:

[video=youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miXBu4_aOgE[/video]


Say ain's so..........a baseliner staying back and actually winning the whole thing

 

[Asmodeus]

Wow! Not much love this year for the seven-time champ. I don't think he'll disappoint that much though I wouldn't be surprised if he does not win the title. From my perspective, any slam that Federer wins at 31/32 years old is simply a nice bonus for his fans. Even if he doesn't win another, it really doesn't matter. His career has been enjoyable watch.

 

[Mog]

Wow! Not much love this year for the seven-time champ. I don't think he'll disappoint that much though I wouldn't be surprised if he does not win the title. From my perspective, any slam that Federer wins at 31/32 years old is simply a nice bonus for his fans. Even if he doesn't win another, it really doesn't matter. His career has been enjoyable watch.

Thanks Asmodeus. Said it well.
Roger has done it all. It is Wimbledon and I am not ready to write him off yet. In two years if he gets one/two slams I will be very happy.

 

[Front242]

What rather than who will disappoint us at Wimbledon the most? The grass and maybe the weather. I really wish the grass didn't get so mangled in the 2nd week that they're basically playing on clay. Grass is meant to favour aggressive, attacking play and the trodden, rock hard muddy baselines and patches of rock hard soil on the courts is just like clay by the time week 1 is over. By week 2 gone is the low bounce rewarding old school aggression and imo vasly superior viewing and all we're left with is basically clay. The ball bounces much higher, flat shots barely skimming over the net are less effective, balls can be more easily run down, too many rallies. I like rallying but not every damn point. While I'd hate to see 90's speed grass with today's racquet head technology (it'd be unwatchable actually), they could surely speed the damn courts up a bit. It's way too slow now. Halle was a breath of fresh air and those courts are by no means too fast and still allow for entertaining rallies but also reward the attacking players. Wish Wimbledon would speed up akin to that.

stop the nonsense. Roger fans can't let it go, their insecurity at this point it's old news. Roger has won 7 SW19 in the same grass you complaint about which btw has always showed the conditions you describe above.

IT'S NOT CLAY and IT DOESN'T PLAY AS CLAY.

every year they repeat the same myth; I remember at one point I brought stats from the 90s and compared them to this era showing it's actually HARDER on average to break serve in this era. But why? It's a fact the grass was modified to last longer and allow a more PREDICTABLE bounce which in turn makes look slower. But why it's harder to break serve in this grass? Technology my friend; if the grass was never improved then it would be virtually impossible to break serve due to the ability of your average joe to hit 125 MPH and crazy spin.

17% break percentage.......that's it. During Sampras time it was no lower than 18%.

Tell me, what year did this match took place? Describe to me the condition of the baseline and the court in general:

[video=youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miXBu4_aOgE[/video]


Say ain's so..........a baseliner staying back and actually winning the whole thing

Firstly, no insecurity for this Fed fan. I didn't expect him to win last year and was very pleasantly surprised. I'd prefer it for general viewing if it were faster as I said in my post which had nothing to do with Federer actually. You can put him into the bracket of attacking players, sure, but I didn't just mean for him. I find it a zzzfest seeing huge long rallies point after point. In the match you posted sure the grass was all mangled and rock hard but you could still hit more clean winners and it wasn't as easy to run down balls as it is in the 2nd week these days. I'm stressing 2nd week as I've no problem with and enjoy the first week as the grass is much better then. Watch some clips from Halle or Newport to see how decent grass should play.

And the high bouncing balls in week 2 do actually play much more like clay than grass when the grass gets to that stage of crud. Federer is a baseliner, most players are today so of course baseliners can and do win the whole thing. It's just far too full of long rallies these days because it's definitely slower than it was back in the 90s. Though they'd never do it for tv viewing and sponsors and the whole big picture, I'd actually love if they played all the mickey mouse first few rounds on the smaller courts and completely stay away from centre court and court 1 till the 2nd week so the grass played more like it's supposed to. Well, I can dream 'cos that'll never happen but it would make for much more entertaining viewing in the latter stages, the way grass is supposed to be played. Fast, attacking, shoot to kill but also pushing opponents back and utilizing finesse. In week 2 the grass is so damn slow though most of the top guys can even run down dropshots.

 

[Kieran]

Agassi winning Wimbledon was the first time anyone won it from the baseline in 10 years - since Connors. And it was a one-off. Imagine now somebody winning W by playing aggressive S&V stuff...

 

[Front242]

Agassi winning Wimbledon was the first time anyone won it from the baseline in 10 years - since Connors. And it was a one-off. Imagine now somebody winning W by playing aggressive S&V stuff...

Exactly. Ain't happening. Llodra would be an animal on 90s grass or any grass that plays as it should. Instead he's lucky to win matches now and he's one of the last standing S&V players out there and great to watch. Especially like his game at the Paris indoors where the speed gives his game more to work with but again, with this slow grass his skills are nullified. And it's clearly not just his age. He'd be effective it the grass was faster.

 

[huntingyou]

Agassi winning Wimbledon was the first time anyone won it from the baseline in 10 years - since Connors. And it was a one-off. Imagine now somebody winning W by playing aggressive S&V stuff...

Exactly. Ain't happening. Llodra would be an animal on 90s grass or any grass that plays as it should. Instead he's lucky to win matches now and he's one of the last standing S&V players out there and great to watch. Especially like his game at the Paris indoors where the speed gives his game more to work with but again, with this slow grass his skills are nullified. And it's clearly not just his age. He'd be effective it the grass was faster.

didn't courier made finals the following year? I thought Lendl did pretty good as well despite not winning.

your llodra comment are delusional; you can put moon cheese on the courts and the same top 4 guys will be competing for the title at the business end of the week.

BTW, when you said players track balls down more easily in the second week; it happens to be the TOP dogs who track balls because they are incredible fast and know how to play defense...something a player like agassi couldn't.

stop romanticizing a surface the has changed very little for the best; Novak, Murray and rafa would be contender on any slam with old or "new" grass..they are just better than the rest.

 

[Front242]

Agassi winning Wimbledon was the first time anyone won it from the baseline in 10 years - since Connors. And it was a one-off. Imagine now somebody winning W by playing aggressive S&V stuff...

Exactly. Ain't happening. Llodra would be an animal on 90s grass or any grass that plays as it should. Instead he's lucky to win matches now and he's one of the last standing S&V players out there and great to watch. Especially like his game at the Paris indoors where the speed gives his game more to work with but again, with this slow grass his skills are nullified. And it's clearly not just his age. He'd be effective it the grass was faster.

didn't courier made finals the following year? I thought Lendl did pretty good as well despite not winning.

your llodra comment are delusional; you can put moon cheese on the courts and the same top 4 guys will be competing for the title at the business end of the week.

BTW, when you said players track balls down more easily in the second week; it happens to be the TOP dogs who track balls because they are incredible fast and know how to play defense...something a player like agassi couldn't.

stop romanticizing a surface the has changed very little for the best; Novak, Murray and rafa would be contender on any slam with old or "new" grass..they are just better than the rest.

We'll never know because we'll never see them play on proper grass sadly but I dare say they wouldn't fare as well. They're better than the rest because of their defense but you can't outrun a bullet and the current grass courts apart from Halle and Newport in particular are far from as fast as they should be. The high bouncing balls in the 2nd week of Wimbledon make things even easier for the top ranked players because of their formidable defensive skills. If the grass was faster and the ball stayed lower they'd be getting to far less balls and seeing winners fly past them much more. There's a reason after all as you know being a Nadal fan that he struggles greatly in week 1 and then is happy as Larry in week 2 with the balls bouncing much higher straight into his hit zone and aiding his topspin that doesn't work at all for him in week 1. Thus, fast grass makes things a lot harder not just for him but all defensive players. And that's a fact. And I stand by my comment that Llodra would be extremely successful on proper grass as his S&V game is brilliant, thanks in large part to playing doubles.

 

[huntingyou]

Agassi winning Wimbledon was the first time anyone won it from the baseline in 10 years - since Connors. And it was a one-off. Imagine now somebody winning W by playing aggressive S&V stuff...

Exactly. Ain't happening. Llodra would be an animal on 90s grass or any grass that plays as it should. Instead he's lucky to win matches now and he's one of the last standing S&V players out there and great to watch. Especially like his game at the Paris indoors where the speed gives his game more to work with but again, with this slow grass his skills are nullified. And it's clearly not just his age. He'd be effective it the grass was faster.

didn't courier made finals the following year? I thought Lendl did pretty good as well despite not winning.

your llodra comment are delusional; you can put moon cheese on the courts and the same top 4 guys will be competing for the title at the business end of the week.

BTW, when you said players track balls down more easily in the second week; it happens to be the TOP dogs who track balls because they are incredible fast and know how to play defense...something a player like agassi couldn't.

stop romanticizing a surface the has changed very little for the best; Novak, Murray and rafa would be contender on any slam with old or "new" grass..they are just better than the rest.

We'll never know because we'll never see them play on proper grass sadly but I dare say they wouldn't fare as well. They're better than the rest because of their defense but you can't outrun a bullet and the current grass courts apart from Halle and Newport in particular are far from as fast as they should be. The high bouncing balls in the 2nd week of Wimbledon make things even easier for the top ranked players because of their formidable defensive skills. If the grass was faster and the ball stayed lower they'd be getting to far less balls and seeing winners fly past them much more. There's a reason after all as you know being a Nadal fan that he struggles greatly in week 1 and then is happy as Larry in week 2 with the balls bouncing much higher straight into his hit zone and aiding his topspin that doesn't work at all for him in week 1. Thus, fast grass makes things a lot harder not just for him but all defensive players. And that's a fact. And I stand by my comment that Llodra would be extremely successful on proper grass as his S&V game is brilliant, thanks in large part to playing doubles.

fed fans are part of a hive mind :laydownlaughing:laydownlaughing

tell me, who is going to beat the novaks and the Rafas at a slam with your old grass? I want names buddy.

Rafa struggles are easy to explain and has more to do with his game than whatever you want to believe about grass in the first week. The guy needs TIME to adapt his game, especially his ROS. As you know, he takes big swings from 18 feet behind the baseline normally on slower surfaces. When he gets to grass, he stand just a few feet behind the baseline and attempt a "hack" return when he basically blocks the ball or slices it if he can guess right. Even during second serve returns, he struggles. As he get's acclimate to the surface and elevates his level, in addition to additional dirt under his feet for sure footing and comfort....he becomes more formidable as the tournament progress.

Just this past RG, he looked like dog poop in the first week.....what happened in the second week? So it's Rafa vulnerable on clay at RG during the first week? relative to what?

Personally, I just think the guy get's better as the tournament progress, call me naive but typically that's how great champions roll.

Funny that you never addressed the fact that it's TOUGHER to break serve in this era than the previous one at Wimbledon despite the grass being "slow":angel:

 

[Front242]

Agassi winning Wimbledon was the first time anyone won it from the baseline in 10 years - since Connors. And it was a one-off. Imagine now somebody winning W by playing aggressive S&V stuff...

Exactly. Ain't happening. Llodra would be an animal on 90s grass or any grass that plays as it should. Instead he's lucky to win matches now and he's one of the last standing S&V players out there and great to watch. Especially like his game at the Paris indoors where the speed gives his game more to work with but again, with this slow grass his skills are nullified. And it's clearly not just his age. He'd be effective it the grass was faster.

didn't courier made finals the following year? I thought Lendl did pretty good as well despite not winning.

your llodra comment are delusional; you can put moon cheese on the courts and the same top 4 guys will be competing for the title at the business end of the week.

BTW, when you said players track balls down more easily in the second week; it happens to be the TOP dogs who track balls because they are incredible fast and know how to play defense...something a player like agassi couldn't.

stop romanticizing a surface the has changed very little for the best; Novak, Murray and rafa would be contender on any slam with old or "new" grass..they are just better than the rest.

We'll never know because we'll never see them play on proper grass sadly but I dare say they wouldn't fare as well. They're better than the rest because of their defense but you can't outrun a bullet and the current grass courts apart from Halle and Newport in particular are far from as fast as they should be. The high bouncing balls in the 2nd week of Wimbledon make things even easier for the top ranked players because of their formidable defensive skills. If the grass was faster and the ball stayed lower they'd be getting to far less balls and seeing winners fly past them much more. There's a reason after all as you know being a Nadal fan that he struggles greatly in week 1 and then is happy as Larry in week 2 with the balls bouncing much higher straight into his hit zone and aiding his topspin that doesn't work at all for him in week 1. Thus, fast grass makes things a lot harder not just for him but all defensive players. And that's a fact. And I stand by my comment that Llodra would be extremely successful on proper grass as his S&V game is brilliant, thanks in large part to playing doubles.

fed fans are part of a hive mind :laydownlaughing:laydownlaughing

tell me, who is going to beat the novaks and the Rafas at a slam with your old grass? I want names buddy.

Rafa struggles are easy to explain and has more to do with his game than whatever you want to believe about grass in the first week. The guy needs TIME to adapt his game, especially his ROS. As you know, he takes big swings from 18 feet behind the baseline normally on slower surfaces. When he gets to grass, he stand just a few feet behind the baseline and attempt a "hack" return when he basically blocks the ball or slices it if he can guess right. Even during second serve returns, he struggles. As he get's acclimate to the surface and elevates his level, in addition to additional dirt under his feet for sure footing and comfort....he becomes more formidable as the tournament progress.

Just this past RG, he looked like dog poop in the first week.....what happened in the second week? So it's Rafa vulnerable on clay at RG during the first week? relative to what?

Personally, I just think the guy get's better as the tournament progress, call me naive but typically that's how great champions roll.

Funny that you never addressed the fact that it's TOUGHER to break serve in this era than the previous one at Wimbledon despite the grass being "slow":angel:

He looked like dog poop in week 1 of RG largely because of the cold and damp conditions. It's no surprise as he himself has stated many times his game works better in clear blue sky and warm temperatures and hence why he started doing much better when the sun came out. It's not like he trains in monsoon season after all. He's used to practicing in perfect conditions back home. Also think some credit should be given to Brands, Klizan and Fognini who really took it to him. It wasn't all about Nadal playing crap there just as he didn't play poop against Isner last year either.

Regarding who would beat Nadal and Djokovic on fast grass, let me first say Djokovic has less trouble with big hitters than Nadal and as such I'll limit if for now to who would trouble Nadal on fast grass:

Federer, Haas, Berdych (sure laugh, he's only faced him on the zombie slow 2nd week grass and I guarantee on fast grass the outcome would be different), Tsonga, Rosol, Brands, Soderling, Roddick, Petzschner if in form like 2010 (would've have won if not for the deliberate MTOs used to break his rhythm that day imo as he was running away with the match serving bombs and hitting bullets all around the court before the MTO get out of jail free card was used), Kohlschreiber, Youzhny and probably have his work cut out against Janowicz and Gulbis too and even might this year if they meet in the first week. Let's face it neither of will make it to week two anyway. There are probably loads more.

 

[huntingyou]

He looked like dog poop in week 1 of RG largely because of the cold and damp conditions. It's no surprise as he himself has stated many times his game works better in clear blue sky and warm temperatures and hence why he started doing much better when the sun came out. It's not like he trains in monsoon season after all. He's used to practicing in perfect conditions back home. Also think some credit should be given to Brands, Klizan and Fognini who really took it to him. It wasn't all about Nadal playing crap there just as he didn't play poop against Isner last year either.

Regarding who would beat Nadal and Djokovic on fast grass, let me first say Djokovic has less trouble with big hitters than Nadal and as such I'll limit if for now to who would trouble Nadal on fast grass:

Federer, Haas, Berdych (sure laugh, he's only faced him on the zombie slow 2nd week grass and I guarantee on fast grass the outcome would be different), Tsonga, Rosol, Brands, Soderling, Roddick, Petzschner if in form like 2010 (would've have won if not for the dirty MTOs that day imo), Kohlschreiber, Youzhny and probably have his work cut out against Janowicz and Gulbis too and even might this year if they meet in the first week. Let's face it neither of will make it to week two anyway. There are probably loads more.

I'm done with you, you are wasting my time. Not even an attempt at objectivity.....when it comes to Nadal, it's always about his opponent.

THERE IS NOT FAST GRASS OR SLOW GRASS......you have new grass and worn down grass. It has always been the case unless you can use synthetic grass of course.

Now janowics and Youzhny and perhaps even my mother too can beat Nadal in a GS.

Before I leave you for good in your nonsense, checkNadal's H2H against so called big hitters.

Finally, Nadal has WHOOPED top ranked players during COLD and DAMP weather on clay. Your ability to draw conclusions of few samples it's grotesque.

 

[Iona16]

ah, Br. Kieran--me thinks the Serbian Slayer is capable of the same as well. Nadal will not be seeded fifth; I just can't see the AELTC doing that in light of his record there and being top dog this year with an 8th FO.

In 2010 Federer was the No. 1 seed for Wimbledon ahead of Nadal in a reverse of their world rankings. Nadal moved into the top spot after winning the French Open, while Federer slipped to No. 2 after losing in the quarterfinals in Paris.

I'm afraid all that is relevant is Rafa's ranking when the draw is made and his grass-court record over the past 2 years. His 8th French Open title isn't a factor in his seeding for Wimbledon and neither is his Wimbledon record over the past 6-7 years.

Yes, but, isn't Ferrer's grass court record also a factor? Rafa is only 325 points behind David, and Ferrer has never featured hugely at Wimbledon, whereas, two years ago, if that's the measure, Nadal was in the final. It'll be interesting to see where they put Nadal.

hey Moxie

As far as I'm aware they will base the men's seedings on the ATP rankings and a formula which takes into account a player's performance on grass in the past two seasons, with added weighting on the most recent year. I think Ferrer reached the quarters last year + I think he won a grass title. Not sure how he did the year before. As far as I'm aware the seeding will be out in less than 7 hrs so we don't have long to wait. I'm pretty sure he will be 5 though.

I honestly think that Wimbledon should just use the world rankings.

I'm curious to know just what seed people think Rafa should be. Would you put him as no. 4 if you could?

I don't have any problem going with rankings. Frankly, I think it's the fairest way. Straight-forward, and no politics. Plus, as we've said before, in many ways the ones who would like a "preferred seeding" for Rafa are the top seeds. Who wants to see Nadal in their QFs? Tough luck. I think Rafa can beat his way to the finals, anyway.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2013/jun/19/rafael-nadal-fifth-wimbledon-seeds

Wimbledon's decision to seed Rafael Nadal fifth mocks form and class

Even on grass, David Ferrer, the most honest of men, will admit it is absurd to be seeded at his world ranking of four ahead of a player who has won the title twice.

Wimbledon stands alone from the rest of tennis in its view of the surface as a determining factor in the seedings. But it not only mocks form, it ignores class, the only two criteria worth considering. It also puts a higher premium on grass than is warranted – yet, even on grass, Ferrer, the most honest of men, will admit it is absurd to be seeded at his world ranking of No4 ahead of a player who has won the title twice.

----

Wimbledon does seem to be getting quite a bit of criticism from tennis journalists for making Nadal the 5th seed. Is the criticism fair? If they had not used the formula then Rafa would still be the 5th seed. The journalist states that Ferrer should not be seeded above a player that has won the title twice. If we took Wimbledon titles into account then Federer and Nadal would be seeded #1 and #2. If we were going by current form then we'd have Nadal as #1 seed. Where do you draw the line?

 

[herios]

Wimbledon does seem to be getting quite a bit of criticism from tennis journalists for making Nadal the 5th seed. Is the criticism fair? If they had not used the formula then Rafa would still be the 5th seed. The journalist states that Ferrer should not be seeded above a player that has won the title twice. If we took Wimbledon titles into account then Federer and Nadal would be seeded #1 and #2. If we were going by current form then we'd have Nadal as #1 seed. Where do you draw the line?

THis is silly. Then why not put Roger always seeded #1, because he won it as many times? I am sick of this stupid opinions.

 

[Moxie]

Please pull it back a hair, friends. Wimbledon's grass is a natural surface, and it will wear down across 2 weeks. There's no wishing for that to be different. How much it wears down also depends on the weather. How the clay plays also depends on the weather. But, Front, as much as Rafa played like "dog poop" in the first week of RG, as you would have it, he still won. Doesn't it say something that he overcame the conditions that didn't favor him?

By the same token, the grass players have to overcome the conditions that don't favor them, should they arise. A Slam is 7 matches under all conditions, and the winner is the last man standing. Rain, wind, roof closed or roof open, fast grass or worn-down turf. Some conditions may favor one over the other, on a given day, but the adaptability is also the mark of the champion.

 

[Mastoor]

I have no idea what would be disappointments and surprises, but I want to inform you that the final will be between the top two seeds.

No1e will beat Murray in straight sets, then he will eat some grass before licking his fingers one by one.

Any logic can be disqualified as lazy, but lets try with this. Murray had some back problems in last couple of months, Fed barely won a title in 10 months, Rafa is probably expected to go out in week 1 and even if he doesn't they don't expect him to beat No1e on grass.

Ah great to have you back, Mastoor, wounds undoubtably well-licked. I love the way everyone wants to believe Rafa won't be in London for more than a couple of days. I understand the obvious attraction for Roger's fans, but I'm amused to see this mantra lodge itself so easily into the brains of Camp Monte Carlo.

Novak is world #1, so he's going to be expected to step up, which he failed miserably to do last year. He did very well in Paris, because though he shoulda been dispatched in 4, he played valiantly to get it to five. I did predict this, Mastoor, when I told you that because of Rafa's enforced sojourn, Novak had a huge opportunity to take him to five sets this year.

The first arrows in the battle will fly in the morning, when we see the draw. Honestly, it'll be what it is and they're all going to be scrapping like thirsty hounds this year. I expect it to be the bloodiest Wimbo in years...

Absolutely, I sense butchery too.

Rafa senses the end is near so ever since he returned he has been playing every tournament as if it was his last one. The question is for how long he can stand keeping up with it.

No1e won't give up his #1 easily and he is going to step up and I am sure Murray, Fed and other players can't wait to make some major result too.

Anyway, i've been looking forward to the draw when we will all start guessing who is Rosol of this year.

 

[Front242]

Please pull it back a hair, friends. Wimbledon's grass is a natural surface, and it will wear down across 2 weeks. There's no wishing for that to be different. How much it wears down also depends on the weather. How the clay plays also depends on the weather. But, Front, as much as Rafa played like "dog poop" in the first week of RG, as you would have it, he still won. Doesn't it say something that he overcame the conditions that didn't favor him?

By the same token, the grass players have to overcome the conditions that don't favor them, should they arise. A Slam is 7 matches under all conditions, and the winner is the last man standing. Rain, wind, roof closed or roof open, fast grass or worn-down turf. Some conditions may favor one over the other, on a given day, but the adaptability is also the mark of the champion.

Regarding calling Rafa's play in week 1 of RG dog poop, Moxie, that phrase came from huntingyou originally and not me. I didn't think he played that badly, just not his best but largely this was down to the conditions not suiting him and probably favouring his early opponents and yes everyone has to adapt to the conditions as you say. Luckily for him the weather improved and he also didn't play any big hitters after week 1 in any case, which coupled with the sunny conditions, changed from said dog poop to much better than dog poop from week 2. In full agreement that all players need to adapt to conditions.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Nothing is overblown and misunderstood in tennis like the issue of surfaces. We know the surfaces are more homogenous but according to some, the AO is mega slow (it isn't) and Wimbledon plays like clay in the second week. I honestly think this is a direct result of the emergence of Rafael Nadal as an all court player. And yeah, I'm aware slowing down the surfaces was an issue before he came along, but you never heard anything is silly as Wimbledon playing like clay until he reached the final for the first time.

 

[calitennis127]

Nothing is overblown and misunderstood in tennis like the issue of surfaces. We know the surfaces are more homogenous but according to some, the AO is mega slow (it isn't) and Wimbledon plays like clay in the second week. I honestly think this is a direct result of the emergence of Rafael Nadal as an all court player. And yeah, I'm aware slowing down the surfaces was an issue before he came along, but you never heard anything is silly as Wimbledon playing like clay until he reached the final for the first time.

Yeah, I know. Poor Nadal is the victim of all these unfair and false implications.

 

[Front242]

Nothing is overblown and misunderstood in tennis like the issue of surfaces. We know the surfaces are more homogenous but according to some, the AO is mega slow (it isn't) and Wimbledon plays like clay in the second week. I honestly think this is a direct result of the emergence of Rafael Nadal as an all court player. And yeah, I'm aware slowing down the surfaces was an issue before he came along, but you never heard anything is silly as Wimbledon playing like clay until he reached the final for the first time.

The main issue with the AO these days isn't the speed but the bounce which imo was much better on the older Rebound Ace surface. Hardcourt is meant to reward aggressive play and the higher bounce on Plexicushion has detracted a lot from that as defensive players can now more easily run balls down as they hang in the air longer and don't fly through the air as easily for clean winners as they did on the Rebound Ace surface. The way it is now we're subjected to 6 hour finals which frankly is ridiculous for a hardcourt surface. Rally after rally after rally. I'm fine with rallies in matches but not on practically every point. When the bounce has been altered on the surface to the extent that it makes hitting winners so much harder that doesn't make it a proper hardcourt anymore. Lower bouncing hardcourt matches are not only more normal length but imo (and each to their own if you happen to love 6 hours of sprinting along the baseline but I don't) much more aesthetically watchable as the lower bounce enables players to hit a lot more winners.

And no this isn't a help Federer by changing the surface comment, I happen to think it makes it better to watch first and foremost and I do like a lot of other players beside Federer but it's screwing up their chances too the way the surface plays now.