Author Topic: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open  (Read 4238 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Clay Death

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 16589
  • Gender: Male
  • Camelot Elite Tennis Society
    • Camelot Elite Tennis Society
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #20 on: July 10, 2013, 08:05:05 PM »
welcome back dmast. great to have you back.
 
we have all missed you.

Offline Lugburz

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 8233
  • Gender: Male
  • Chelsea till I die!
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #21 on: July 10, 2013, 08:06:13 PM »
Yeah, good to see you back, Dmast! I was saying about a month ago that I was the prick that pissed you off. We don't talk politics at T4U anymore. Anyway, glad you're back. Folks here have missed you a lot and will be thrilled to see you're back. Now all we need back is Pacer and we'll be whole again.


http://www.tennis4you.com/forum/index.php?topic=17668.0

amd few others  ;-()
In the absence of light, darkness prevails!
------------------------------------------------------

TOMMY HAAS
Philipp Kohlschreiber  -  Stanislas Wawrinka - TB - NM - GD - EG - IS - DL - RF - DT - JWT

Offline Lugburz

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 8233
  • Gender: Male
  • Chelsea till I die!
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #22 on: July 10, 2013, 08:46:54 PM »
So is it fair to blame strings and court speed for disappearance of S&V?
In the absence of light, darkness prevails!
------------------------------------------------------

TOMMY HAAS
Philipp Kohlschreiber  -  Stanislas Wawrinka - TB - NM - GD - EG - IS - DL - RF - DT - JWT

Offline Clay Death

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 16589
  • Gender: Male
  • Camelot Elite Tennis Society
    • Camelot Elite Tennis Society
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #23 on: July 10, 2013, 09:05:11 PM »
I don't thinks so general lugburz.
 
 
strings and technology can only take you so far.
 
 
majority of the gains in power and speed are coming from the athletes themselves now. the average height of a tourning pro in the top is approaching 6 foot 3.
 
that has never been the case in our sport.
 
they also hit the ball differently than they used to.
 
 
 
with respect to the court speeds, faster courts would make it even more difficult to approach the net.
 
the runaway speed of the game is dictating how the war is to be waged on the court. you cant volley what you cant see.
 
 
going forward simply entails too much risk. those are also the words of roger federer as well.
 
 
 
all these guys are serving bigger than they ever did 10-15 years ago and yet you cant pay your mortgage if you try serve n volley in the modern game.
 
 
the game is being played exactly the way it has to be played. any other way means having to choose another career to make a living.
 
 
 
the very best tennis academies in the world are also teaching precisely the method and style of play that maximizes a player`s chance to win on the tour.
 
 
you do need to be able to volley a little bit obviously but the most critical aspect of the sport now is supreme fitness and rock solid ground strokes off both wings.
 
and then if you have deadly finishing power off both wings with consistency then you can challenge the best of the best.
 
 
 
 

Offline Lugburz

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 8233
  • Gender: Male
  • Chelsea till I die!
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #24 on: July 10, 2013, 09:18:35 PM »
Well players are more athletic thats for sure. Even though things back in early 2000's looked similar. I remember well Safin, Haas, Hewitt, Kuerten, Nalbandian etc those guys also had great stamina.

The thing is, I actually think that faster courts would make S&V possible simply because faster courts mean better advantage to the service. Making return much less efficient, so there's your chance to attack the net, and finish it off.

Also strings used to be much less dependent if I'm not mistaken, flatter shots would mean easier volleys. Today its all about the ultimate control and creating monster loopy top spin.
Its kinda off to say that these players today are much more powerful shotmaking wise. They are more athletic and have more stamina, but to say the they hit harder is very debatable.
In the absence of light, darkness prevails!
------------------------------------------------------

TOMMY HAAS
Philipp Kohlschreiber  -  Stanislas Wawrinka - TB - NM - GD - EG - IS - DL - RF - DT - JWT

Offline dmastous

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 15265
  • Gender: Male
    • http://www.tips4tennis.com
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #25 on: July 10, 2013, 10:01:23 PM »
So I agree the size of athlete and increasing height is adding to power and spin. Much of what tennis players do is based on what Billie Jean King calls the Kinetic Chain. Starting with the ground, up the hips, thru the waist, shoulders, arm, and finally racquet. The taller the player the longer the kinetic chain, the more power/spin they get. However, the other reason taller players are more successful, is they are not as affected by the high bounce the increasing spin provides.
Much has been discussed about Federer's one handed backhand verses Nadal's heavy top spin in clay. It's just not a battle Federer can win (unless he switches to a two hander). Taller players with two handed backhands handle Nadal's spin much better. It's closer to their swing sweet spot (so to speak). That's the other reason taller players have seen more success in tennis. Everyone is looking for more spin, and taller players aren't as affected by it.
But the technology (the dead string, the perimeter weighting the bigger headsize and sweet spot) in addition to the slower Ryegrass at Wimbledon have all conspired to make serve/volley tennis nothing more than an occasional tactic, not a main strategy.
I think Herc's point about the academies all teaching one style of play is also true. That's the computerization of tennis that I was talking about. They've run the numbers and this the way the numbers say you should play.  Everything else is moot.
Now the volley isn't even being taught as much. We see guys who don't even know what to do if their opponent gets the first volley back (assuming they come to the net at all). They hit the volley and hope it's not returned. They don't know where to move to. They don't know how to construct a point at the net. It's just not taught anymore. Volley technique is taught (perfected by the numbers), but movement and point construction (at net) are not, because it's just not necessary any more.
There is the example I always use of a serve/volley player coming into the net off a ball in the backhand corner, he shades to that side and cuts the court in half because he knows the only real shot his opponent has is down the line. A cross court shot is nearly impossible with old racquets. A definite hightlight reel shot if hit. The serve/volley player wins that point most of the time. Now it's not that simple. Racquet technology+physical fitness+twohanded backhand technique (made possible by the tech, and the fitness and training, their basically playing with two forehands now) have made that cross court shot possible, in fact likely. The serve/volley player has gone from in command, to a sitting duck.
All of this has turned tennis into a sport where everyone does the same thing, baseline bashing. The ones who do it best are the best in the world.

Is a tree as a rocking horse
An ambition fulfilled
And is the sawdust jealous?
I worry about these things .

Kevin Godley & Lol Crème (I Pity Inanimate Objects)

Offline Alex

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 12236
  • Gender: Male
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #26 on: July 10, 2013, 10:05:20 PM »
blah, tennis is getting boring. what am I supposed to do? watch Djokovic and Murray running pushing/grinding 24/7,  and you call that tennis. I don't think so.

this is tennis
Federer - Roddick: Best shot & Best game ever - Basel 2002

Offline Clay Death

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 16589
  • Gender: Male
  • Camelot Elite Tennis Society
    • Camelot Elite Tennis Society
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #27 on: July 10, 2013, 11:10:42 PM »
So I agree the size of athlete and increasing height is adding to power and spin. Much of what tennis players do is based on what Billie Jean King calls the Kinetic Chain. Starting with the ground, up the hips, thru the waist, shoulders, arm, and finally racquet. The taller the player the longer the kinetic chain, the more power/spin they get. However, the other reason taller players are more successful, is they are not as affected by the high bounce the increasing spin provides.
Much has been discussed about Federer's one handed backhand verses Nadal's heavy top spin in clay. It's just not a battle Federer can win (unless he switches to a two hander). Taller players with two handed backhands handle Nadal's spin much better. It's closer to their swing sweet spot (so to speak). That's the other reason taller players have seen more success in tennis. Everyone is looking for more spin, and taller players aren't as affected by it.
But the technology (the dead string, the perimeter weighting the bigger headsize and sweet spot) in addition to the slower Ryegrass at Wimbledon have all conspired to make serve/volley tennis nothing more than an occasional tactic, not a main strategy.
I think Herc's point about the academies all teaching one style of play is also true. That's the computerization of tennis that I was talking about. They've run the numbers and this the way the numbers say you should play.  Everything else is moot.
Now the volley isn't even being taught as much. We see guys who don't even know what to do if their opponent gets the first volley back (assuming they come to the net at all). They hit the volley and hope it's not returned. They don't know where to move to. They don't know how to construct a point at the net. It's just not taught anymore. Volley technique is taught (perfected by the numbers), but movement and point construction (at net) are not, because it's just not necessary any more.
There is the example I always use of a serve/volley player coming into the net off a ball in the backhand corner, he shades to that side and cuts the court in half because he knows the only real shot his opponent has is down the line. A cross court shot is nearly impossible with old racquets. A definite hightlight reel shot if hit. The serve/volley player wins that point most of the time. Now it's not that simple. Racquet technology+physical fitness+twohanded backhand technique (made possible by the tech, and the fitness and training, their basically playing with two forehands now) have made that cross court shot possible, in fact likely. The serve/volley player has gone from in command, to a sitting duck.
All of this has turned tennis into a sport where everyone does the same thing, baseline bashing. The ones who do it best are the best in the world.



superb post.

Offline Clay Death

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 16589
  • Gender: Male
  • Camelot Elite Tennis Society
    • Camelot Elite Tennis Society
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #28 on: July 10, 2013, 11:17:12 PM »
Well players are more athletic thats for sure. Even though things back in early 2000's looked similar. I remember well Safin, Haas, Hewitt, Kuerten, Nalbandian etc those guys also had great stamina.

The thing is, I actually think that faster courts would make S&V possible simply because faster courts mean better advantage to the service. Making return much less efficient, so there's your chance to attack the net, and finish it off.

Also strings used to be much less dependent if I'm not mistaken, flatter shots would mean easier volleys. Today its all about the ultimate control and creating monster loopy top spin.
Its kinda off to say that these players today are much more powerful shotmaking wise. They are more athletic and have more stamina, but to say the they hit harder is very debatable.



well the speeds/velocities of the shots are measurable general lugburz.


even the women are blasting 90+ MPH drives to the corners. that is no illusion. it is happening and being measured.



nole can routinely hit 110 MPH forehands. people could not even serve that hard in the old days. and he can hit 100 MPH backhands as well.


now add a little bit of spin and you will break your wrist trying to volley such a shot assuming you saw it in the first place.


I am just using nole as an example but you get the idea. going forward is simply too risky.


they are doing what gives them the best chance to win. solid baseliners have the best chance to win no matter the surface.


now guys like andy murray and nole have also mastered the returns so they become a little too hard to beat. being as tall as they are, their serves are not too shabby either.



Online Babblelot

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 32686
  • Gender: Male
  • Chicago, IL
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #29 on: July 12, 2013, 02:40:52 AM »
Wish I found this 7' gem, first. Had it preserved in my favorite player thread.

If you watch, you'll see Agassi was ripping 1000mph groundies past an attacking Rafter with 1997 technology!  :scared:  But notice Andre's court position. He's right on top of the baseline. 1997 technology forced you to play tennis from the tennis court!

The other thing you'll notice, Rafter got beat several times but it didn't phase him. He understands that's part of the package. To quit, like today's players, would be for a baseball player to quit because he's only getting a hit 3 out of 10 at bats. That's a lot of fail, isn't it? Well, today's players have no courage. They play to hit 10 out of 10. That's like a batter taking pitches until he walks.




I have no idea what Dmast was talking about when he said players didn't know how to use the technology. He needs to watch Andre in this video if he thinks players didn't know how to use the latest technology because they grew up playing with wooden racquets.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2013, 02:53:19 AM by Babblelot »
1995 USO, 1997 USO, 2004 USO, 2005 RG, 2005 USO, 2006 RG, 2006 USO, 2007 USO, 2008 RG, 2008 USO, 2009 USO, 2010 USO, 2011 USO, 2012 USOhttp://www.gifsoup.com/view4/1856936/2005safin-o.gif
http://www.gifsoup.com/view1/1857331/2004gaudio-o.gif

Online Babblelot

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 32686
  • Gender: Male
  • Chicago, IL
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #30 on: July 12, 2013, 04:17:50 AM »
Here's a clinic on how to play attacking tennis and how to play from the baseline. The key here, as I see it, is the combination of (1) technology that was the perfect blend of power and control, and (2) a court that is much faster than virtually all today.

Agassi's position on ROS. Right on top of the baseline!  :scared:



Agassi uses that state of the art technology to fight off a serve that eats him up and manages to get the ball back in play. He couldn't have made this return 15 years prior. Rafter rushes in and has a look at the open court.



But Andre's feeble ROS actually gives him an opening as Rafter tries to recover. Andre rips a running FH winner down the line.





This is a 4 duece, 7' game. Rafter is getting beaten like a drum. But he fights courageously and relentlessly. The crowd is going nuts. Rafter takes the game and the match in 4 sets.



A 1000mph topspin FH that Rafter has to pick up below his knees!!  :scared:


« Last Edit: July 12, 2013, 04:50:03 AM by Babblelot »
1995 USO, 1997 USO, 2004 USO, 2005 RG, 2005 USO, 2006 RG, 2006 USO, 2007 USO, 2008 RG, 2008 USO, 2009 USO, 2010 USO, 2011 USO, 2012 USOhttp://www.gifsoup.com/view4/1856936/2005safin-o.gif
http://www.gifsoup.com/view1/1857331/2004gaudio-o.gif

Offline Alex

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 12236
  • Gender: Male
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #31 on: July 12, 2013, 04:33:04 AM »
and when Herc responds to a post with ' :)) :))' I want to vomit  :gleam: ...

 :)) :))

Online Babblelot

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 32686
  • Gender: Male
  • Chicago, IL
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #32 on: July 12, 2013, 04:44:22 AM »
and when Herc responds to a post with ' :)) :))' I want to vomit  :gleam: ...

 :)) :))

23,000 of his 30,000 posts are  :)) :))

It's one way to get your post count up!  ;-()
1995 USO, 1997 USO, 2004 USO, 2005 RG, 2005 USO, 2006 RG, 2006 USO, 2007 USO, 2008 RG, 2008 USO, 2009 USO, 2010 USO, 2011 USO, 2012 USOhttp://www.gifsoup.com/view4/1856936/2005safin-o.gif
http://www.gifsoup.com/view1/1857331/2004gaudio-o.gif

Offline Jamesdster

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 6399
  • Gender: Male
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #33 on: July 12, 2013, 01:06:45 PM »
Dmast!  Great to "see" you!  As one of the few T4U folks I have met in person, you were missed.  As you can see by my post total, I am not that big of a contributor out here, but I do swing by now and again.

Babs - I forget how good IT WAS!  Rafter COULD NOT BE PASSED AT THE NET!!!  He got to eveything.  You had to simply hope he missed the volley.
I was at this casino minding my own business, and this guy came up to me and said, "You're gonna have to move, you're blocking a fire exit." As though if there was a fire, I wasn't gonna run. If you're flammible and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit.  - Mitch Hedberg

Offline dmastous

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 15265
  • Gender: Male
    • http://www.tips4tennis.com
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #34 on: July 12, 2013, 05:19:29 PM »

I have no idea what Dmast was talking about when he said players didn't know how to use the technology. He needs to watch Andre in this video if he thinks players didn't know how to use the latest technology because they grew up playing with wooden racquets.

I'm not intimating that Agassi & Rafter were idiots. Tennis is all about muscle memory. Play with a wood racquet long enough and your swing will be a wood racquet swing. Regardless of how long you play with a bigger frame. I'm saying they didn't take full advantage of what the bigger frames with bigger sweet spots gave them. If you are a professional tennis player, you aren't thinking about your forehand form, or your serve form, you are thinking about what where you are going to hit the ball and how you're going to hit the ball, and the body does what is necessary.
Agassi was close to today's game though. But the reason he hit the ball so hard was because he hit the ball on the rise. This takes tremendous timing and hand eye coordination, which Agassi has plenty of.

Is a tree as a rocking horse
An ambition fulfilled
And is the sawdust jealous?
I worry about these things .

Kevin Godley & Lol Crème (I Pity Inanimate Objects)

Offline Alex

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 12236
  • Gender: Male
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #35 on: July 12, 2013, 06:39:46 PM »

I have no idea what Dmast was talking about when he said players didn't know how to use the technology. He needs to watch Andre in this video if he thinks players didn't know how to use the latest technology because they grew up playing with wooden racquets.

I'm not intimating that Agassi & Rafter were idiots. Tennis is all about muscle memory. Play with a wood racquet long enough and your swing will be a wood racquet swing. Regardless of how long you play with a bigger frame. I'm saying they didn't take full advantage of what the bigger frames with bigger sweet spots gave them. If you are a professional tennis player, you aren't thinking about your forehand form, or your serve form, you are thinking about what where you are going to hit the ball and how you're going to hit the ball, and the body does what is necessary.
Agassi was close to today's game though. But the reason he hit the ball so hard was because he hit the ball on the rise. This takes tremendous timing and hand eye coordination, which Agassi has plenty of.
dmass good to see you back

when we love someone here we say
 :)) :))


Online Babblelot

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 32686
  • Gender: Male
  • Chicago, IL
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #36 on: July 12, 2013, 07:25:19 PM »

I have no idea what Dmast was talking about when he said players didn't know how to use the technology. He needs to watch Andre in this video if he thinks players didn't know how to use the latest technology because they grew up playing with wooden racquets.

I'm not intimating that Agassi & Rafter were idiots. Tennis is all about muscle memory. Play with a wood racquet long enough and your swing will be a wood racquet swing. Regardless of how long you play with a bigger frame. I'm saying they didn't take full advantage of what the bigger frames with bigger sweet spots gave them. If you are a professional tennis player, you aren't thinking about your forehand form, or your serve form, you are thinking about what where you are going to hit the ball and how you're going to hit the ball, and the body does what is necessary.
Agassi was close to today's game though. But the reason he hit the ball so hard was because he hit the ball on the rise. This takes tremendous timing and hand eye coordination, which Agassi has plenty of.
Ah!  :bright idea:

Looking back at the 1997 top 20, I see what you're saying now. It turns out the big hitters, save for Agassi, are the youngsters. Rafter is the youngest of the S&Vers. But that being said, the old, attacking guard were still quite successful competing with the young guns. I like your ideas about adding racquet and string regulations. That would definitely change things.

Then, at least as I'm concerned, there's the court speed; IMO technology and court speed go together. As much as I am hesitant to speed courts with today's technology out of concern that big servers with very little game will dominate, the others here seem to think otherwise...
« Last Edit: July 12, 2013, 07:27:28 PM by Babblelot »
1995 USO, 1997 USO, 2004 USO, 2005 RG, 2005 USO, 2006 RG, 2006 USO, 2007 USO, 2008 RG, 2008 USO, 2009 USO, 2010 USO, 2011 USO, 2012 USOhttp://www.gifsoup.com/view4/1856936/2005safin-o.gif
http://www.gifsoup.com/view1/1857331/2004gaudio-o.gif

Online Babblelot

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 32686
  • Gender: Male
  • Chicago, IL
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #37 on: July 12, 2013, 07:28:54 PM »
lol

I edited that a lot, but now it's finally done and I'm happy about it and proud of myself.

 :)) :))
1995 USO, 1997 USO, 2004 USO, 2005 RG, 2005 USO, 2006 RG, 2006 USO, 2007 USO, 2008 RG, 2008 USO, 2009 USO, 2010 USO, 2011 USO, 2012 USOhttp://www.gifsoup.com/view4/1856936/2005safin-o.gif
http://www.gifsoup.com/view1/1857331/2004gaudio-o.gif

Offline Lugburz

  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 8233
  • Gender: Male
  • Chelsea till I die!
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #38 on: July 12, 2013, 07:35:31 PM »
We certainly don't want to see big serves with little game to rule the game.
Just as much as I don't wanna see a player with no tendency to attack and finish off the point rule the game either.
In the absence of light, darkness prevails!
------------------------------------------------------

TOMMY HAAS
Philipp Kohlschreiber  -  Stanislas Wawrinka - TB - NM - GD - EG - IS - DL - RF - DT - JWT

Offline masterclass

  • Tennis Pro
  • *****
  • Posts: 366
Re: This is tennis. Do you recognize it? Rafter-Agassi 4R 1997 US Open
« Reply #39 on: July 13, 2013, 04:56:29 AM »
Hi everyone!

I've said it all before, I'll say it again here, and it will be a book.  Read on if you want... :)
The #1 mistake Professional Tennis made in the last 30 years was allowing the huge racquet and string changes in their essential equipment.

What tennis did was allow the equivalent of Major League Baseball allowing use aluminum and various composite over-sized metal bats.
The essential equipment is part of the sport. You can't change the equipment drastically and keep the same or even similar sport.

Major League Baseball has wisely kept solid wooden baseball bats that haven't changed significantly in over 100 years (after they changed from flat sided to round).  The bat dimensions have been limited. No more than 42 inches long and the barrel no more than 2 and 3/4 inches in diameter. The other aluminum, graphite, laminate, composite bats that are made can be used for various lesser leagues and amateur players, but not pro baseball.  The ball's dimensions, weight and composition are all regulated in the rules.  Occasionally, some balls have been produced over the years that some have said are "juiced" or livelier than the year before, but these instances are investigated and straightened out.

If baseball had gone the way of tennis, everyone would be hitting like King Kong and the nature of the game would change drastically. Modern records would be meaningless in comparison to historical records. Then to follow what tennis did to compensate for the equipment mistake, they would have had to redesign the ball park dimensions to go from 400 foot to 1000 foot distances from home plate to the outfield fences, and play with at least 2 sets of outfielders and probably an extra infielder or two. 

Baseball has made slight changes over the years to compensate for when the sport became out of balance, such as when pitching and defense began overwhelming hitting and offense.  They decreased the strike zone somewhat.  But that was a tinkering type of adjustment.  Quite slight.

Pro Tennis has erred greatly, not once but twice.  First, they allowed drastically alterations to the basic equipment. These modern composite racquets with 100+ sq inch heads are fine for youngsters, old people, and amateurs but they should have never been introduced in the pro game.  The strings they are allowing these days are in my mind, the equivalent of the spaghetti strings that were banned in the late 70's. Combined with the racquet changes in composition and size - 100+ sq. inch head sizes with bigger sweet spots, they have allowed less skilled players to hit the ball harder and with tremendous spin and control. One used to hit with a wooden racquet that had a head size around 65 to 70 sq inches. It took much greater skill to hit the ball hard and with spin.

It is NOT evolution of the sport to allow equipment that changes the nature of the game so much. Whoever gives you the "evolution of the sport" line is marketing out of their butt.  It is a degrading of the professional sport to allow equipment that allows players with less skill to succeed.  How can you even begin to compare players of different generations when the newer players have advantages of superlative racquets and strings?   

They allowed more and more changes in new equipment, via more exotic, stronger, but lightweight frames, bigger heads, then what?  The pendulum swung way in favor of the serve and volley players and offensive game and less skilled athletes. One-two shots and done. The clay courters, grinders, baseliners, and coaches complained they could not compete, especially on hard courts and grass and threatened not to play.

The next mistake made was instead of reverting to the older type of wooden racquets, from around 2001 to 2010, the tournaments decided to scramble to start changing the courts and balls to try and compensate by slowing hard courts and grass down. Hard courts are easier to regulate and slow down with gritty top layers of paint.  Clay courts are slower by nature and can be controlled to an extent by amount of clay and watering.  Balls were made somewhat bigger and heavier, but you can only do that to a certain extent.  But then when these changes were made, the game changed again to favor base-liners and grinders and counter punchers. It has, especially on the jarring hard courts, become a game where stamina is at a premium and the last man standing wins.  Some may find this lengthy play to be exciting, but others look at it as repetitive and boring, making more players prone to injuries, and conducive to temptation to use advanced performance and recovery enhancing techniques.

What was done with grass?  You can change the grass as they did at Wimbledon to be more of an upright type in an attempt to change the angle of the bounce somewhat and allow the ground to get denser for higher bounces that will slow the game a bit, especially once the grass starts wearing out.  But fresh grass is fresh grass.  You can adjust a bit, by cutting it a tad higher, but it can't be too high as you will get irregular bounces.  You can water it only so much or balls won't bounce properly. 

I don't want to hear the slippery excuse.  Grass courts have always been a different beast, and people learned to play on them and excelled without producing more than the normal amount of injuries.  You have to use a different sort of footwork and movement on them.  Try to play on them like clay or hard court, and you deserve to go down.  You can't try to take big strides, plant hard, and reverse direction, or slide like on clay.  Footwork must be precise, quick, and you must avoid overly committing with overly aggressive movement. 

A full hard run to the ball to either side, will probably be your last shot.  Grass wasn't meant to be for rallying side to side for 20 shots. You are better off letting the ball go if it is out of range.  There is no rule that says you have to try and run every ball down and hurt yourself trying.  Grass by it's nature is intended to be more of a North-South game (baseline to net), not East-West (sideline to sideline) like clay.  You try to come in and cut off the ball as much as possible, because it is much easier for the offensive player to hit winners with slice and angle, and the ball tends to not bounce as high or as regularly as on a solid surface, making it more difficult to defend from the back of the court.

Weather can play a part.  If it is humid, the grass can get more slippery, and you have to make the adjustment with shorter more steady steps.  Sometimes you can still slip.  But grass is softer than hard court so it doesn't hurt as much if you fall or take the odd leap ala Boris Becker or Gael Monfils.   Players that can't make these adjustments don't do as well on grass.  Simple as that.

Many players that grew up and trained on hard courts also can't adjust to clay.  Players also get hurt on clay if they stumble or don't slide right.  Hard courts offer more solid dependable footing, but are more jarring over time, especially if they are slow.  One can get injured in sport. It's a risk all players take.  Bigger, heavier people usually fall down harder and are not usually as coordinated in their movements as smaller, lighter, more adroit people and are generally more injury prone. Tennis was for years played by average sized to somewhat bigger than average, but always athletic people for a reason.  Now you have less coordinated, less athletic basketball sized players playing tennis because the racquet technology requires less skill, balls bounce higher and the courts are slow enough so they don't have to move so fast, but their big size along with the equipment allows them to hit the ball harder than the average size person to make their size an advantage.

People don't change much.  They might get slightly bigger, yes. They might get a bit stronger, yes, due to various modern training techniques and special diets, nutrients, and potions.  But when the equipment changes as drastically as it has, it affects everything.

The sport was called Lawn Tennis.  It was mostly played on grass. Why have grass courts gone away in Pro Tennis?  Don't let anyone tell you it is because they are expensive and hard to maintain.  How many 7200 yard golf courses with 18 finely manicured greens as big or bigger than a tennis court, and fairways cut to perfection, are played on asphalt or acrylic surfaces or dirt?   I would say that most pro tournaments could afford having grass courts, especially masters 1000 and slams.

I would say that grass courts have mostly gone away because a greater number of players over the years don't know how to play grass court tennis properly, coming from clay and hard court backgrounds.  Most public outdoor courts in the US are hard court or Har-Tru. Most public courts in Europe are red clay.  Then these players have to play a couple of tournaments on grass, and they are out of their element.

Look at last year when Madrid went to blue clay.  Many players complained, some notable players even threatened to boycott the tournament, because they were not able to adapt well to the surface.  Many other players adapted fine due to their backgrounds or natural ability to move correctly on the surface.  The players that adapted to the surface didn't have a problem and did well in the tournament, while the players that didn't got beaten, hurt, upset, you name it.  Look at Wimbledon this year; it's a similar story.

Many players today have been "spoiled" by the surfaces playing rather similarly. When they don't play like what they are used to, they complain, mostly because they didn't train on having to adapt to different surfaces.  They tend to get hurt because they don't or can't adapt. 

Fresh grass will continue to play differently compared to clay, and clay will play a bit differently than hard court, and hard court a bit differently than grass, even if the effective speeds of the courts are made similar.  The transition from clay to grass can be difficult for some, easier for others. It's been that way for at least 60 years. 

The best thing Pro Tennis could do is restrict their equipment. I don't know if they will. It's hard to put the genie back in the bottle, especially with the marketing geniuses and money involved.

I would start with the strings and regulate them, make all players play with the same pure gut strings (even if it breaks more often), and gradually reduce the racquet head sizes, back to around 85 sq inches. and see what happens.  Players will complain, some won't adapt, but it will be good for the game.  At the same time, they will have to alter the surfaces again.  Convert some of the slow hard courts to real grass tournaments.  Hard court should be medium fast at least.  Clay courts should still be relatively slow and favor point construction.

My guess is that if these changes were made, it will all result in fewer injuries.  Less play where the last man standing after 5 hours wins because he didn't make the last unforced error.  Reduced needs for entourages with physios, doctors, trainers trying to enhance their player to a superhuman level.  Make the surfaces have variety, restrict the equipment, and place a premium on skill rather than endurance, and it should make it easier for talented youngsters to be competitive on their favorite surfaces as well.

Respectfully,
masterclass
Legends of Tennis