Low and slow Wimbledon grass now a leveller - Tennis - Eurosport

[PeteWasLucky]

http://www.eurosport.com/tennis/low-and-slow-wimbledon-grass-now-a
-leveller_sto6240360/story.shtml
--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[kaennorsing]

Op donderdag 6 juli 2017 22:03:57 UTC+2 schreef PeteWasLucky:
> http://www.eurosport.com/tennis/low-and-slow-wimbledon-grass-now-a
> -leveller_sto6240360/story.shtml

Surprisingly, the only one dismissing the slower court... is Rafa.

[TT]

Not at all surprising, Rafa has traditionally been the ONLY top player
who is able to voice reliable opinion on surface speed.

If I filled my ace stats graph now I'm sure there'd be no difference to
past years.

[arahim]

On Thursday, July 6, 2017 at 2:35:31 PM UTC-7, TT wrote:
> kaennorsing kirjoitti 7.7.2017 klo 0:21:
> > Op donderdag 6 juli 2017 22:03:57 UTC+2 schreef PeteWasLucky:
> >> http://www.eurosport.com/tennis/low-and-slow-wimbledon-grass-now-a
> >> -leveller_sto6240360/story.shtml
> >
> > Surprisingly, the only one dismissing the slower court... is Rafa.
> >
>
> Not at all surprising, Rafa has traditionally been the ONLY top player
> who is able to voice reliable opinion on surface speed.
>

How fast was blue clay?

[Court_1]

Yes, Nadal has the only reliable opinion about the current grass conditions. The other 10+ players who have stated the grass seems slower this year and the various commentators who have said same all know nothing. You are just saying that in case Nadal loses to Federer on slower grass conditions the way he lost to Federer on the slower hc conditions of IW and Miami! *rolls eyes*

[TT]

Look... in reality this 'slow court' is put forward every time it looks
like Rafa is playing well. So it has nothing to do with reality.

Of course it plays slightly slower on sunny summer than rainy summer -
but that has nothing to do with the court itself which is the same every
year.

[Court_1]

Multiple players who have actually played on the courts have come out and said that Wimbledon feels slower this year and yet you know better that the courts are exactly the same year after year? Please be quiet with your rubbish.

[TT]

You don't understand the issue at all.

Often players are asked...
"Roger Federer thinks the court is slow this year, what do you think?"
"What do you think about slowing of the courts"
"Some players have said that the courts are slow..."

Stuff like that. Most people agree with the question with
authority/claim inserted in the question. Especially on case like this
when it's a matter of opinion. Some players (federer) try to make an
excuse out of it.

[TT]

And of course Fedtard journos and fans have made an excuse out of it for
years. My ace stats show that their nonsense is not at all fact based.

[Court_1]

On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 5:17:29 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:

> You don't understand the issue at all.
>
> Often players are asked...
> "Roger Federer thinks the court is slow this year, what do you think?"
> "What do you think about slowing of the courts"
> "Some players have said that the courts are slow..."
>
> Stuff like that. Most people agree with the question with
> authority/claim inserted in the question. Especially on case like this
> when it's a matter of opinion. Some players (federer) try to make an
> excuse out of it.

Stop your psychobabble! Multiple players can come out and say X about the surface and you question them but Nadal says Y about the surface and you are always ready to believe whatever he says.

I don't know how the grass is playing this year and neither do you so unless you are in the 128 player draw and have played on the courts your opinion is worthless (as is mine.)

[Court_1]

I'm not making any excuse for Fed's losses to Nadal over the years because of surface changes. I don't really give a flying fig how fast or slow the grass is at Wimbledon this year but if you want to question the opinions of 10 players who have played on the courts and say the courts seem slower, go ahead. You sound like a loon though and can't be taken seriously.

[TT]

So this 'news' is nothingburger as always... some players say it's
slower and some say it's same as always.

As for me... I could of course do the ace stats at this point but
there's no reason to believe the grass has changed at all.

As for you and rest of the clueless ones... you and some players
complained for a few years how slow the new AO surface is - while now
they've noticed that it's actually super fast, which I btw claimed all
the time.

So in a nutshell: You know nothing while I know everything.

[Court_1]

Yes, everybody is clueless except you of course. The AO has traditionally been slow for the past decade but the speed was quicker this year. They did stats about this issue on ESPN which I posted at the time. But no, we should ignore the ESPN info and listen to Nadal ass-licker TT!

[TT]

Did a quick check based on ace stats 1st and 2nd round...

The expected ace count end of tournament is 2520 (+-220)
That would be in top 20% of slowest Wimbledon years.

However the first round was well below average while the 2nd was
slightly above... first round could have been influenced by retirements.

[TT]

Of course.

The AO has traditionally been slow for the past decade but the speed was
quicker this year. They did stats about this issue on ESPN which I
posted at the time. But no, we should ignore the ESPN info and listen to
Nadal ass-licker TT!
>

What kind of stats? Links?

The AO speed was not quicker just this year, it has been fucking fast
for several years now. It just took this long for brainless Fedfuckers
to notice it.

[stephenJ]

On 7/7/2017 2:55 AM, TT wrote:
> Court_1 kirjoitti 7.7.2017 klo 8:31:
>> On Thursday, July 6, 2017 at 5:35:31 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>>> kaennorsing kirjoitti 7.7.2017 klo 0:21:
>>>> Op donderdag 6 juli 2017 22:03:57 UTC+2 schreef PeteWasLucky:
>>>>> http://www.eurosport.com/tennis/low-and-slow-wimbledon-grass-now-a
>>>>> -leveller_sto6240360/story.shtml
>>>>
>>>> Surprisingly, the only one dismissing the slower court... is Rafa.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not at all surprising, Rafa has traditionally been the ONLY top player
>>> who is able to voice reliable opinion on surface speed.
>>>
>>> If I filled my ace stats graph now I'm sure there'd be no difference to
>>> past years.
>>
>> Yes, Nadal has the only reliable opinion about the current grass
>> conditions. The other 10+ players who have stated the grass seems
>> slower this year and the various commentators who have said same all
>> know nothing. You are just saying that in case Nadal loses to Federer
>> on slower grass conditions the way he lost to Federer on the slower hc
>> conditions of IW and Miami! *rolls eyes*
>>
>
> Look... in reality this 'slow court' is put forward every time it looks
> like Rafa is playing well. So it has nothing to do with reality.

Completely false. Commentators have been talking about W grass being
slower since 2002, long before Rafa arrived on the scene, and it has
been remarked upon consistently ever since, both in years Nadal has won
and years he hasn't.

Bottom line is that only someone with an agenda or ax to grind would
deny the obvious: in the early 2000s, Wimbledon changed its grass to be
significantly slower so as to benefit baseline players and reduce the
impact of huge serving on play.




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[John Liang]

So clay court of today is faster than USO and AO in 90s....

[TT]

No, it is used as an excuse why Nadal is doing well and Federer isn't
and nothing else. Across all surfaces.

In any case that is absurd on the case of Wimbledon which changed the
composition of grass in 2002. All the fedfucking bitterness about 'slow
grass' when Federer won all his Wimbledon titles on it...

> Bottom line is that only someone with an agenda or ax to grind would
> deny the obvious: in the early 2000s, Wimbledon changed its grass to be
> significantly slower so as to benefit baseline players and reduce the
> impact of huge serving on play.
>
>

Hasn't worked. Serving has overall improved.

http://postimg.org/image/95uv1c15h/

[TT]

No, dumbo... players are just serving better on average.

http://postimg.org/image/95uv1c15h/

[The Iceberg]

Both are true - the liar Chris Gorringe and the liars at the LTA slowed down the grass in the early 2000's to stop big servers and also to stop Tim Henman winning. At the time, these LTA/Brit-tennis liars denied they were slowing things down but finally admitted they did just that around 2010.
It also exactly true like TT say that the Fedfans always use the excuse about it being slow when Nadal is doing well.

[Court_1]

On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 6:12:03 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:

> The AO has traditionally been slow for the past decade but the speed was
> quicker this year. They did stats about this issue on ESPN which I
> posted at the time. But no, we should ignore the ESPN info and listen to
> Nadal ass-licker TT!
> >
>
> What kind of stats? Links?

When I was watching the AO, ESPN did a graph to show how the courts were quicker and they were also using lighter balls which made it seem even faster. I posted the graph link during the AO. You'll have to do a search to find it. Here is another link which shows the AO 2017 was faster:

https://i1.wp.com/theultimatetennisblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/i.jpg?resize=558%2C288

> The AO speed was not quicker just this year, it has been fucking fast
> for several years now.

Now it has not! It has been med-slow in the past.

In any case, it doesn't matter. IW and Miami are med-slow hardcourts and Federer handled Nadal at both this year.

[TT]

Court_1 kirjoitti 7.7.2017 klo 15:01:
> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 6:12:03 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>
>> The AO has traditionally been slow for the past decade but the speed was
>> quicker this year. They did stats about this issue on ESPN which I
>> posted at the time. But no, we should ignore the ESPN info and listen to
>> Nadal ass-licker TT!
>>>
>>
>> What kind of stats? Links?
>
> When I was watching the AO, ESPN did a graph to show how the courts were quicker and they were also using lighter balls which made it seem even faster. I posted the graph link during the AO. You'll have to do a search to find it. Here is another link which shows the AO 2017 was faster:
>
> https://i1.wp.com/theultimatetennisblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/i.jpg?resize=558%2C288
>
>
>

Looks like they're telling that ball flies faster in the air quicker the
court is. The pic doesn't make much sense...

>> The AO speed was not quicker just this year, it has been fucking fast
>> for several years now.
>
> Now it has not! It has been med-slow in the past.

Yes it used to be. But something has changed in past years as you can
see from my ace stats pic. Not just this year.

>
> In any case, it doesn't matter. IW and Miami are med-slow hardcourts and Federer handled Nadal at both this year.
>

lol... so it's all about Federer after all...

-

Change of topic... watched a couple good films...

The Ghost and Mrs. Muir (1947)
... sort of silly ghost romance film. But dear lord Gene Tierney looks
good in this... 7/10

Doubt (2008)
...Totally recommend... Brilliant acting from everyone. Amy Adams
surprisingly convincing as good hearted naive nun. 8/10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0918927/reference

[The Iceberg]

On Friday, 7 July 2017 13:58:41 UTC+1, TT wrote:
> Court_1 kirjoitti 7.7.2017 klo 15:01:
> > On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 6:12:03 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
> >
> >> The AO has traditionally been slow for the past decade but the speed was
> >> quicker this year. They did stats about this issue on ESPN which I
> >> posted at the time. But no, we should ignore the ESPN info and listen to
> >> Nadal ass-licker TT!
> >>>
> >>
> >> What kind of stats? Links?
> >
> > When I was watching the AO, ESPN did a graph to show how the courts were quicker and they were also using lighter balls which made it seem even faster. I posted the graph link during the AO. You'll have to do a search to find it. Here is another link which shows the AO 2017 was faster:
> >
> > https://i1.wp.com/theultimatetennisblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/i.jpg?resize=558%2C288
> >
> >
> >
>
> Looks like they're telling that ball flies faster in the air quicker the
> court is. The pic doesn't make much sense...
>
> >> The AO speed was not quicker just this year, it has been fucking fast
> >> for several years now.
> >
> > Now it has not! It has been med-slow in the past.
>
> Yes it used to be. But something has changed in past years as you can
> see from my ace stats pic. Not just this year.

Courty always falls for any fake news - what on earth is that pic even gauged by?

> > In any case, it doesn't matter. IW and Miami are med-slow hardcourts and Federer handled Nadal at both this year.
> >
>
> lol... so it's all about Federer after all...

yep!

[Court_1]

On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 8:58:41 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:

> The Ghost and Mrs. Muir (1947)
> ... sort of silly ghost romance film. But dear lord Gene Tierney looks
> good in this... 7/10

I want to see that movie.

> Doubt (2008)
> ...Totally recommend... Brilliant acting from everyone. Amy Adams
> surprisingly convincing as good hearted naive nun. 8/10

I saw it and loved it. I think in previous film threads I suggested you watch it. Yes, acting was great by all(especially by Hoffman and Streep IMO) and the story was engaging.

[Court_1]

On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 9:50:02 AM UTC-4, The Iceberg wrote:


> Courty always falls for any fake news - what on earth is that pic even gauged by?

It's not fake news you buffoon! ESPN had a graph which clearly showed the AO court speed was faster in 2017 and the balls used were lighter. Go back to your ditch. There were several articles written about it as well. Google it if you can figure out how to do that. *rolls eyes*

[The Iceberg]

it is fake news cos what's it based on? what was this graph based on? random data by some biased Fedfan analyst? I think the Wimbledon grass is slightly slower this year, judging by live front-row viewing, the bounce and serve effectiveness and returns, Karlovic even crashed out in 1st round, BUT that's just a guess, it could well be the players getting worse/better. TT's ace stats are prob just as valid.

[Whisper]

TT tends to go way ott. Not too long ago he was suggesting Rafa was a
better volleyer than Sampras/McEnroe.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[heyg...@gmail.com]

The source was listed at the bottom of the graph..you know, where sources usually are listed. ;-)

[Whisper]

Not completely right. The strings make even mediocre servers hit bigger
these days. They should make the pros use standard equipment from
earlier eras so true talent can be tested.

[Pelle Svanslös]

On 7.7.2017 17:22, Whisper wrote:
> On 7/07/2017 9:23 PM, TT wrote:
>> John Liang kirjoitti 7.7.2017 klo 14:18:
>>> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 8:04:16 PM UTC+10, TT wrote:
>>>> Court_1 kirjoitti 7.7.2017 klo 12:38:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Did a quick check based on ace stats 1st and 2nd round...
>>>>
>>>> The expected ace count end of tournament is 2520 (+-220)
>>>> That would be in top 20% of slowest Wimbledon years.
>>>>
>>>> However the first round was well below average while the 2nd was
>>>> slightly above... first round could have been influenced by
>>>> retirements.
>>>
>>> So clay court of today is faster than USO and AO in 90s....
>>>
>>
>> No, dumbo... players are just serving better on average.
>>
>> http://postimg.org/image/95uv1c15h/
>>
>
>
> Not completely right. The strings make even mediocre servers hit bigger
> these days.

How do they do that?

--
“Donald Trump is the weak man’s vision of a strong man.”
-- Charles Cooke

[Carey]

Limpy is mistaken as usual. One can serve with more spin with the new strings,
but not 'bigger'.

[John Liang]

NO dumbass and tit it is you who sugget that using ace count as an indication of court speed not me. So now the extra ace count suggest better serving on average. So tell us the truth the higher ace count was better serving on average or fast court speed.

[Gracchus]

On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 5:58:41 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:

> Change of topic... watched a couple good films...
>
> The Ghost and Mrs. Muir (1947)
> ... sort of silly ghost romance film. But dear lord Gene Tierney looks
> good in this... 7/10

I thought it was very well done. George Sanders was great as usual playing the charming cad. IIRC, Natalie Wood was doing her scenes concurrently with "Miracle on 34th Street."

> Doubt (2008)
> ...Totally recommend... Brilliant acting from everyone. Amy Adams
> surprisingly convincing as good hearted naive nun. 8/10

How could it not be good when it features "the top of the food chain"? Still, it's probably not one I'd watch again.

[Guypers]

Wimbledon courts are a joke, slower than my grandma's walk, awful!

[The Iceberg]

On Friday, 7 July 2017 15:29:35 UTC+1, Carey wrote:
> Limpy is mistaken as usual. One can serve with more spin with the new strings,
> but not 'bigger'.

no he's not, the weight, balance and material of racquets these days makes it much easier to hit bigger serves.

[Court_1]

On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 11:18:18 AM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:

> > Doubt (2008)
> > ...Totally recommend... Brilliant acting from everyone. Amy Adams
> > surprisingly convincing as good hearted naive nun. 8/10
>
> How could it not be good when it features "the top of the food chain"? Still, it's probably not one I'd watch again.

I disagree. I thought "Doubt" was excellent and I'd definitely watch it again.

[Gracchus]

OK, do so and tell me about the experience. I'll enjoy it vicariously.

[MBDunc]

With more control (as seen with clearly increased 1st serve percentages since 90:ies) and also sustain. Back in wood era and with first fibres/graffites it was practically impossible serve 100% through long match. You had to pace your serving or your arm just went numb. Now rackets are more forgiving with better vibration/shock absorbs which makes constant big serving less risky for your physics.

.mikko

[Court_1]

On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 12:24:34 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:

> > I disagree. I thought "Doubt" was excellent and I'd definitely watch it again.
>
> OK, do so and tell me about the experience. I'll enjoy it vicariously.

:)

[TT]

Links?

[TT]

Gracchus kirjoitti 7.7.2017 klo 18:18:
> On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 5:58:41 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
>
>> Change of topic... watched a couple good films...
>>
>> The Ghost and Mrs. Muir (1947)
>> ... sort of silly ghost romance film. But dear lord Gene Tierney looks
>> good in this... 7/10
>
> I thought it was very well done. George Sanders was great as usual playing the charming cad. IIRC, Natalie Wood was doing her scenes concurrently with "Miracle on 34th Street."
>

Yeah, very well done film and didn't receive Oscar nomination for
cinematography for nothing.

Didn't know that about Wood... but I did think she looked the same age.

I don't basically like these chick flick ghost romances... except this
one... plus gave Ghost, Portrait of Jennie (1948) and The Uninvited
(1944) 8... crap... what's next, giving Umbrellas of Cherbourg a 10?

>> Doubt (2008)
>> ...Totally recommend... Brilliant acting from everyone. Amy Adams
>> surprisingly convincing as good hearted naive nun. 8/10
>
> How could it not be good when it features "the top of the food chain"? Still, it's probably not one I'd watch again.
>

Not sure I would either. Still a good one.

[TT]

P.S.

Here's a very good 70s film with age difference...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDWXTvBxeeY

Also Rex Harrison... err William Holden. Well they look exactly the same
anyway. No ghosts.

[TT]

Both, and strings, balls, weather.

[grif]

I saw "John Wick". I learnt something important in this film: do not kill a hitman's puppy. I also wonder if John Wick would win a fight against Jason Bourne. This is also important.

Celebrating action films:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3_d5Y0Gr3c

[TT]

John Wick would beat anyone except perhaps Chuck Norris.

[Gracchus]

On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 12:09:00 PM UTC-7, grif wrote:

> I saw "John Wick". I learnt something important in this film: do not kill a hitman's puppy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4dX0YCvtDg

I'm now watching a 3-part Netflix documentary called "Five Came Back." It's about five film directors (Ford, Wyler, Huston, Capra, & Stevens), their dealings during WWII, and how the experience changed them. Quite interesting so far.

[grif]

I'll keep an eye out for it. They gave away 5 million free copies of "Payday 2" (it's like a heist simulator) on Steam, so I've been re-enacting scenes from "Heat" (where a bank heist goes badly wrong) with a dipshit crew.
http://i.imgur.com/eREcI0F.jpg
"There is a flip side to that coin. What if you do got me boxed in and I gotta put you down? Cause no matter what, you will not get in my way. We've been face to face, yeah. But I will not hesitate. Not for a second."

[Shakes]

On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 3:59:19 AM UTC-7, StephenJ wrote:

> Completely false. Commentators have been talking about W grass being
> slower since 2002, long before Rafa arrived on the scene, and it has
> been remarked upon consistently ever since, both in years Nadal has won
> and years he hasn't.
>
> Bottom line is that only someone with an agenda or ax to grind would
> deny the obvious: in the early 2000s, Wimbledon changed its grass to be
> significantly slower so as to benefit baseline players and reduce the
> impact of huge serving on play.
>
>

As per this article, it was changed in 2001:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/07/sports/tennis/as-blotches-surface-wimbledon-groundskeepers-try-to-maintain-the-grass.html?_r=0

"In consultation with the Sports Turf Research Institute, Wimbledon in 2001 switched to a perennial ryegrass, which yields higher bounces."

[Shakes]

Another article confirms the same that the new grass debuted at the 2001 Championships:


http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1815724,00.html


"In 2001, Wimbledon tore out all its courts and planted a new variety of groundcover. The new grass was 100% perennial rye; the old courts had been a mix of 70% rye and 30% creeping red fescue. The new lawn was more durable, and allowed Wimbledon's groundsmen to keep the soil underneath drier and firmer. A firmer surface causes the ball to bounce higher. A high bounce is anathema to the serve-and-volley player, who relies on approach shots skidding low through the court. What's more, rye, unlike fescue, grows in tufts that stand straight up; these tufts slow a tennis ball down as it lands.

****Ivanisevic and Rafter were able to blast their way through the new grass because an exceptionally rainy two weeks had kept the courts soft.****"

[PeteWasLucky]

> Another article confirms the same that the new grass debuted at the 2001 Championships:

Interesting. Ryegrass is like most of other grass, it is standing vertical grass while the creeping red fescue is too soft and stays on the ground.

Getting rid of the red fescue should add 30% more resistance to the forward path of the ball.

[Patrick Kehoe]

On Thursday, July 6, 2017 at 2:55:28 PM UTC-7, arahim wrote:

> On Thursday, July 6, 2017 at 2:35:31 PM UTC-7, TT wrote:
> > kaennorsing kirjoitti 7.7.2017 klo 0:21:
> > > Op donderdag 6 juli 2017 22:03:57 UTC+2 schreef PeteWasLucky:
> > >> http://www.eurosport.com/tennis/low-and-slow-wimbledon-grass-now-a
> > >> -leveller_sto6240360/story.shtml
> > >
> > > Surprisingly, the only one dismissing the slower court... is Rafa.
> > >
> >
> > Not at all surprising, Rafa has traditionally been the ONLY top player
> > who is able to voice reliable opinion on surface speed.
> >
>

> How fast was blue clay?

>
> > If I filled my ace stats graph now I'm sure there'd be no difference to
> > past years.

:))))))))))))))

P

[Patrick Kehoe]

AND, the year after they revamped the drainage at Wimbledon, it was do be the second part of their 'surface/ground' rejig... the head grounds-keeper (who had been their for a couple of decades) said it was the new drainage and 'sub-air' system that compacted the soil differently, creating a playing surface which caused a noticeable bounce compared to 'just a couple seasons ago'... The grounds chief believed the drainage actually had more to do with the change in 'playing quality' than the chance in the grass and their agronomist agreed. (2002)

P

[Patrick Kehoe]

Unlikely to be 30%... that percentage would represent too great a playing differential... but, significant certainly...

P

[stephenJ]

On 7/7/2017 9:16 AM, Whisper wrote:
> On 7/07/2017 8:59 PM, stephenJ wrote:

>> On 7/7/2017 2:55 AM, TT wrote:
>>> Court_1 kirjoitti 7.7.2017 klo 8:31:

>>>> On Thursday, July 6, 2017 at 5:35:31 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>>>>> kaennorsing kirjoitti 7.7.2017 klo 0:21:
>>>>>> Op donderdag 6 juli 2017 22:03:57 UTC+2 schreef PeteWasLucky:
>>>>>>> http://www.eurosport.com/tennis/low-and-slow-wimbledon-grass-now-a
>>>>>>> -leveller_sto6240360/story.shtml
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Surprisingly, the only one dismissing the slower court... is Rafa.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Not at all surprising, Rafa has traditionally been the ONLY top player
>>>>> who is able to voice reliable opinion on surface speed.
>>>>>

>>>>> If I filled my ace stats graph now I'm sure there'd be no
>>>>> difference to
>>>>> past years.
>>>>

>>>> Yes, Nadal has the only reliable opinion about the current grass
>>>> conditions. The other 10+ players who have stated the grass seems
>>>> slower this year and the various commentators who have said same all
>>>> know nothing. You are just saying that in case Nadal loses to
>>>> Federer on slower grass conditions the way he lost to Federer on the
>>>> slower hc conditions of IW and Miami! *rolls eyes*
>>>>
>>>
>>> Look... in reality this 'slow court' is put forward every time it
>>> looks like Rafa is playing well. So it has nothing to do with reality.
>>

>> Completely false. Commentators have been talking about W grass being
>> slower since 2002, long before Rafa arrived on the scene, and it has
>> been remarked upon consistently ever since, both in years Nadal has
>> won and years he hasn't.
>>
>> Bottom line is that only someone with an agenda or ax to grind would
>> deny the obvious: in the early 2000s, Wimbledon changed its grass to
>> be significantly slower so as to benefit baseline players and reduce
>> the impact of huge serving on play.
>>
>

> TT tends to go way ott. Not too long ago he was suggesting Rafa was a
> better volleyer than Sampras/McEnroe.

What I don't get is why Nadal fans generally, and TT in particular, are
so defensive about this. First, it's obvious, and second, Nadal isn't
even the biggest beneficiary of it. Federer, with 7 titles, is easily
the biggest historical beneficiary of the slower grass, and even if you
think he would have been just as successful on pre-2000s grass (I don't,
but if), Joker, with 3 titles, has benefited more than Nadal, and
Murray, with 2, has benefited just as much.

But it's always the Rafa fans that bristle when the obvious slowed-down
grass is mentioned.




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[John Liang]

There is enough reasons to think Federer would have won more Wimbledon on the faster grass court, unless you think there were better fast court players than Federer.

[Shakes]

On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 3:54:06 PM UTC-7, PeteWasLucky wrote:

Tell me the truth, :), you came up with the 30% number above based on the statement in the article that it used to be 30% red fescue, right ?

[Patrick Kehoe]

Actually, the same was true of the forehand. Your elbow would get destroyed if you tired to hit like Rafa. That's why you extended through the shot with a slightly bent elbow and the face of the racquet almost completely flat (like a mirror) to the target line. You COULD rotate it at impact BUT you had to choose your moments when to do so IF you were going to give it a real thump. If you didn't in about an hour your forearm would begin to burn.

P

[PeteWasLucky]

> Tell me the truth, :), you came up with the 30% number above based on the statement in the article that it used to be 30% red fescue, right ?

What's wrong in what I said? I said making it all ryegrass will increase the forward resistance of the ball by the additional percentage of ryegrass.

Also removing the other slippery grass will cause the ball to bounce higher.

The total effect is slower higher bounce court.

[TT]

And if it was all red fescue then the ball would instantly stop when
hitting grass. Waleed math.