Topic: Who likes the changes at Wimby?

[huntingyou]

I'm so against about slowering the courts! Wy we wouldn't have two slower courts and two faster courts in GS's. There is FO and AO( i think it should be more slower, this new surface is faster then the old one right?) and on the other side Wimbledon and US Open. It would be so fun to watch different surfaces.
I just wanna ask, why is grass on Wimbledon every year slower and slower?

Myth......the grass became gradually slower in a period of two or three years. The same grasscourt where Roger lost last week....is the same grasscourt where he won 5 in a row.

The game has become bigger and bigger, blame racket technology if you want but players today can rip the ball off both wings over 100 mph. In the 90s for example; Pete serve was around 130 mph.....today 130 mph is nothing because almost every player on tour can hit that mark!

Watch Sampras vs Goran final and then watch Roger vs Nadal final (any of them) and you will understand WHY Wimbledon officials had to change the grasscourt.

Still, if you go out there and step on the court to hit a few balls....you will soon understand Grass is still Grass....just like Sampras said!

But why is slower, is the type of grass different or what? I can unterstand why the officials had to change the grasscourt but I still think that players can play with the old speed with new rackets

The ground under thee grass change for once, to eliminate bad bounces which were too frequents, sometimes deciding the outcomes of matches. That's why SnV was a necessity.....they couldn't afford to let the ball hit the ground during thr second week.

Now you have a "truer" bounce....similar to hardcourts but still with the element of grass which is unpredictable. The grass itself was mix with another kind (don't remember the name) in order to conservate the grasscourts....go and watch the 90s and you will see just after a couple of days the grass was GONE on the path to the net...creating HAVOC on the game. Now this mix last longer.....because this grass is stronger it has the by product of slowering the ball but not enough to take away the quality of grasscourt tennis!

Technology make it easier to stay back and rip winners.....SnV is a risky proposition, it always has been.

I think if you change the grass back to the 90s which mean lessening the quality of the court itself...you will players like Karlovic for example who have no skills whatsoever being a threat to win it. Now, is almost impossible to return his serve.....imagine old slick grass with a bad bouncing court! Impossible!

[miticfam]

OK, I think I unterstand now, thank you very much for explanation

[Chris1987]

I always agree with what you say Huntingyou, but there's no need to get aggressive and start attacking others!

Some might say almost everything Huntingyou says is aggressive and in attack of somebody else  

when people are expose.....they tend not to like that. That's all...really, just look at the nature of this thread and read all the biased opinions from most posters and then look at what I had to say regarding that!

If you disagree that's cool......

That was a very calm response, I didn't see that one coming I thought you'd be in for my head   Most of the opinions and comments these past 2-3 weeks have been biased and in some cases far too aggressive and bad natured with regards to this whole Fed vs Rafa thing, your by no means the only 1 to have done this but some of you just need to talk a step back and calm it a little as I've not seen so many people fired up on here for 2 and a hlaf years when it was a constant battle of Maria vs the Williams Sisters.

Not at all......why would I? You are not calling grass green clay or any nonsense like that.

Like I said; it's all cool......people can disagree. The reason why there are heated arguments is because Nadal haters try to downplay rafa's achievements.......backdoor compliments are not welcome. It puzzle me how many people truly dislike Nadal..........there was an unconventional player in the past called Borg, he did alright!

Just seen you going at a few comments so expected me to feel that as well now  but fair play you didn't go for that too. Green grass as clay is not a comparison that can be made, the only way that can be said is that compared to 10-20 years ago its slightly more like that because now the bounce is a little higher while the speed is slightly slower.
The Nadal haters as you put it have said some stupid things of late about his achievements but at the same time the Nadal fans have not been angels and some of them have been much worse at talking down Fed's achievements and that even now he's still the number 1 and been in 2 Slam Finals this year. Its all got too much from both sides I feel.

if Rafa says Roger is the best....then he is!

Still #1 and going into the best part of the year for him. Fast hardcourts! I always respect Roger and think he is almost there when it comes to Sampras....I for one don't buy the weak competition argument or 90s were full of amazing players!

I think he is still the favorite for the UO and Rafa can't be better than TOP 3 favorite, he has issues that need fixing if he is going to win the UO or AO.

something you have to understand is: Rafa get's ridicule 24/7........even Drysdale last year said Rafa will never win SW19.......and pretty much called him 1D at this year AO. Why? His unconventional game! Too difficult for some people to really apreciate what can do!

You're one of the few Rafa fans on here that has come out and said that about Fed, and thats refreshing to see I think you call it extremely well with regards to the US Open.

I understand that there have been a lot of negative comments over Rafa over the years and still upto this point from all across the world, but its upto Rafa to prove those doubters wrong and I KNOW he definitely will. During the early times on here I was one of the only ones to continuously defend Rafa as a lot didn't like him and was the only person to guarantee that Rafa would definitely win Wimbledon one day- all the others thought I was mad, but I knew with his game, talent and desire he's do it one day. Now I'm still saying the same about him on a hardcourt. His motivation to improve and win at all costs wll see him win either the Australian or US Open or even both- I'm sure of that and when he does then you get to remind the doubters exactly that 

Well, that was refreshing to read.... Thank you both!

You know me by now Dallas I'll just be completely honest, look at all sides and call it as I see it  That conversation with Huntingyou made me realise that he is one Rafa fan that's not completely killed Fed off yet, and is still very respectful of his achievements and what he has left in his game, as well as having very similar views over Rafa as I do 

[Babblelot]

The graphic where Roger's serve at 126 MPH in 2003 has more pop at the return end vs this year is BULLCRAP!

That's not scientific in nature but pure stupidity and lack of any scientific knowledge!

For people who went to an actual science class.......there is stuff known as dependable and independent VARIABLES, something thatwas totally ignore in that comparison.

From that graph......can we tell what TYPE of serve Roger used? You have a horizontal and vertical plane and the ball travels in both planes with more inclination towards the horizontal and biased towards the vertical.....can you tell me percentage wise what trajectory did Roger's serve travel in both example?

What about the spin? The spin changes EVERYTHING ON A SERVE......the reaction, bounce and direction is directly affected by the SPIN. A 126 MPH serve with 4000 RPM is totally different than a 126 MPH serve at 1000 RPM.

There is no way in hell you can deduct the court is slower today vs 2003 in that graphic alone.

Instead we have STATS that tell MOST of the story...but why pay attention to those? Roger's serve HIS BEST this SW19 vs any other SW19 he had in the past. He wasn't even broken at Halle...........and at Wimby he was UNTOUCHABLE with ACES and service winners....STATS only possible on GRASS!

Roger's serve is better today vs 2003....MUCH improve and he can thank the spin he is using NOW...more heavy, more Sampras LIKE!

Also people ignore Rafa won Queens which is consider faster with a lower bounce vs SW19. Rafa is a GRASSCOURTER, he shares the athleticism and creativity of past great grasscourters like Sampras and Becker.

Sore losers and haters....that's what you are....I challenge anybody to prove to me that grass doesn't play like grass anymore. The bounce is little bit higher due to the improve dirt under the grass.....eliminating BAD BOUNCES, instead of winning a point base on LUCK...Now you have to earn it base on YOUR SKILLS.

I don't expect people to show face and actually challenge me with a smart reply.....just like I didn't get any on the question pose by MT on why Rafa/Roger H2H is what is today taking into accounts the dynamics on Hardcourts.

Apparently you haven't figured out why you're not getting any responses (other than this smart aleck remark).    Toodles.

I got to huntingyou, then scrolled down. How far did you get?

[monstertruck]

The graphic where Roger's serve at 126 MPH in 2003 has more pop at the return end vs this year is BULLCRAP!

That's not scientific in nature but pure stupidity and lack of any scientific knowledge!

For people who went to an actual science class.......there is stuff known as dependable and independent VARIABLES, something thatwas totally ignore in that comparison.

From that graph......can we tell what TYPE of serve Roger used? You have a horizontal and vertical plane and the ball travels in both planes with more inclination towards the horizontal and biased towards the vertical.....can you tell me percentage wise what trajectory did Roger's serve travel in both example?

What about the spin? The spin changes EVERYTHING ON A SERVE......the reaction, bounce and direction is directly affected by the SPIN. A 126 MPH serve with 4000 RPM is totally different than a 126 MPH serve at 1000 RPM.

There is no way in hell you can deduct the court is slower today vs 2003 in that graphic alone.

Instead we have STATS that tell MOST of the story...but why pay attention to those? Roger's serve HIS BEST this SW19 vs any other SW19 he had in the past. He wasn't even broken at Halle...........and at Wimby he was UNTOUCHABLE with ACES and service winners....STATS only possible on GRASS!

Roger's serve is better today vs 2003....MUCH improve and he can thank the spin he is using NOW...more heavy, more Sampras LIKE!

Also people ignore Rafa won Queens which is consider faster with a lower bounce vs SW19. Rafa is a GRASSCOURTER, he shares the athleticism and creativity of past great grasscourters like Sampras and Becker.

Sore losers and haters....that's what you are....I challenge anybody to prove to me that grass doesn't play like grass anymore. The bounce is little bit higher due to the improve dirt under the grass.....eliminating BAD BOUNCES, instead of winning a point base on LUCK...Now you have to earn it base on YOUR SKILLS.

I don't expect people to show face and actually challenge me with a smart reply.....just like I didn't get any on the question pose by MT on why Rafa/Roger H2H is what is today taking into accounts the dynamics on Hardcourts.

Apparently you haven't figured out why you're not getting any responses (other than this smart aleck remark).    Toodles.

I got to huntingyou, then scrolled down. How far did you get?

About this far .

[Babblelot]

2. You and Dmast argue that slower courts and bigger, more powerful racquets preclude players from attacking

This is an extreme simplification of my point. The racquet technology isn't just about power. It's about being able to hit shot routinely that players couldn't hit in the past. It's about spin and the ability to hit off center shots without losing effectiveness.

You, too, are using an extreme simplification of your point. Sounds like you are describing  Nadal. Players in general can't do what he does.

Anyway, I'm arguing that by the late 1990s, virtually all players save for Rafter were enjoying the new found freedom big, high tech racquets afforded them. Pat had one himself. Instead of playing from the baseline like his peers, however, he had dedicated his career to the S&V and attacking off the return, +100x per match.

Stepanek is not my ideal speciman, but he's the best in today's game. You talk about winning propositions. Ranked #12 in the world, Radek says you're wrong on that point, too. And there are hundreds and hundreds of baseliners who wish they were half as successful as Stepanek. So depending how you count--Radek is either alone or group him with Ancic, Llodra and Mahut--it doesn't really matter. His unique style yields dividends. And if you want to count the other three, there are still hundreds and hundreds of baseliners who wish they were half as successful as they, ranked 24, 36 and 59, respectively.

Dmast, the two TC commentators (Brits, and I've yet to learn their names) had a very similar discussion to this during the Stepanek-Andreev match tonight. One guy was all-Dmast: technology allows players to hit passing shots they couldn't pull off before and generate sick spin and offers Rafa as a prime example. The other guy was all-Babblelot: great athletes, more S&V, technology works both ways and in the end is nuetral, and Rafa is a freak and not the ruin of S&V.

In the end, they got as far as you and I   

[monstertruck]

2. You and Dmast argue that slower courts and bigger, more powerful racquets preclude players from attacking

This is an extreme simplification of my point. The racquet technology isn't just about power. It's about being able to hit shot routinely that players couldn't hit in the past. It's about spin and the ability to hit off center shots without losing effectiveness.

You, too, are using an extreme simplification of your point. Sounds like you are describing  Nadal. Players in general can't do what he does.

Anyway, I'm arguing that by the late 1990s, virtually all players save for Rafter were enjoying the new found freedom big, high tech racquets afforded them. Pat had one himself. Instead of playing from the baseline like his peers, however, he had dedicated his career to the S&V and attacking off the return, +100x per match.

Stepanek is not my ideal speciman, but he's the best in today's game. You talk about winning propositions. Ranked #12 in the world, Radek says you're wrong on that point, too. And there are hundreds and hundreds of baseliners who wish they were half as successful as Stepanek. So depending how you count--Radek is either alone or group him with Ancic, Llodra and Mahut--it doesn't really matter. His unique style yields dividends. And if you want to count the other three, there are still hundreds and hundreds of baseliners who wish they were half as successful as they, ranked 24, 36 and 59, respectively.

Dmast, the two TC commentators (Brits, and I've yet to learn their names) had a very similar discussion to this during the Stepanek-Andreev match tonight. One guy was all-Dmast: technology allows players to hit passing shots they couldn't pull off before and generate sick spin and offers Rafa as a prime example. The other guy was all-Babblelot: great athletes, more S&V, technology works both ways and in the end is nuetral, and Rafa is a freak and not the ruin of S&V.

In the end, they got as far as you and I   

I caught that discussion too!  No real conclusions drawn, but plenty of opinions and ideas.

btw  How'd you like the match?
I was rootin' for Radek, but enjoyed the great play of both!
Andreev was serving lights out dude!!!

[Babblelot]

2. You and Dmast argue that slower courts and bigger, more powerful racquets preclude players from attacking

This is an extreme simplification of my point. The racquet technology isn't just about power. It's about being able to hit shot routinely that players couldn't hit in the past. It's about spin and the ability to hit off center shots without losing effectiveness.

You, too, are using an extreme simplification of your point. Sounds like you are describing  Nadal. Players in general can't do what he does.

Anyway, I'm arguing that by the late 1990s, virtually all players save for Rafter were enjoying the new found freedom big, high tech racquets afforded them. Pat had one himself. Instead of playing from the baseline like his peers, however, he had dedicated his career to the S&V and attacking off the return, +100x per match.

Stepanek is not my ideal speciman, but he's the best in today's game. You talk about winning propositions. Ranked #12 in the world, Radek says you're wrong on that point, too. And there are hundreds and hundreds of baseliners who wish they were half as successful as Stepanek. So depending how you count--Radek is either alone or group him with Ancic, Llodra and Mahut--it doesn't really matter. His unique style yields dividends. And if you want to count the other three, there are still hundreds and hundreds of baseliners who wish they were half as successful as they, ranked 24, 36 and 59, respectively.

Dmast, the two TC commentators (Brits, and I've yet to learn their names) had a very similar discussion to this during the Stepanek-Andreev match tonight. One guy was all-Dmast: technology allows players to hit passing shots they couldn't pull off before and generate sick spin and offers Rafa as a prime example. The other guy was all-Babblelot: great athletes, more S&V, technology works both ways and in the end is nuetral, and Rafa is a freak and not the ruin of S&V.

In the end, they got as far as you and I   

I caught that discussion too!  No real conclusions drawn, but plenty of opinions and ideas.

btw  How'd you like the match?
I was rootin' for Radek, but enjoyed the great play of both!
Andreev was serving lights out dude!!!

Great match! I was pulling for Radek but I like Andreev--he can play on the concrete. Radek has been 1-and-done at both Toronto and Cincy.