I was reading on v2 an article by Legendkiller who is certainly a nice poster but he was arguing that the lack of SVIng was down to players not learning the skills much more than the change of conditions at Wimbledon.
How further from the truth can he be?
I was glad to read recently that Henman recognises 2002 as the year Wimbledon slowed down dramatically. I have always said so and it is very easy to prove. I have always maintained that the 2001 implementation of 100% Reye grass for the first time did not affect the pace (certainly not noticeably) and it can be easily verifiable by checking who was in finals and semi in 2001 (Rafter/Ivanisevic). It is important to note as well that in 2001 no player complain about the courts' pace. You will not find a single interview from a player talking about fast or slow 2001 conds.
In 2002, everybody talked about the slow conditions and quite a few players could not put their fingers on what it is. It’s again 100 Reye grass exactly like in 2001 so what the difference? It can only be the bigger balls for sure. And that exactly confirms what Woodford (who kept tennis balls of wimbledon) of the decades he played was observing.
Did LK forget that in 2002, the year they increased the ball's size, Sampras lost in the first round of Wimbledon versus George Basle? Did he forget the thrashing Henman got versus Hewitt? Does he remember who were the players reaching the 1/4F in 2002? (Hewitt, Nalbandian, Lapenti, Andrea Sa, Kraji, Henman, Schalken, Malisse) and who got to the semi? (Hewitt, Henman (thanks to playing Andre Sa), Malisse and Nalbandian.
So suddenly in 2002 everybody forgot how to play SV?
LK says guys like Pete and Edberg could still volley their way to Wimbledon's wins? The truth is actually much closer to something like guys like Llodra and Isner would most likely beat Sampras and Edberg easily on those slow conds….unless he thinks George Basle would still teach Llodra and Isner lessons on how to volley on grass.
C'mon LK you can do better than this!!!
2002 - The year Wimbledon changed!!!
posted on 28/6/12
Yes JT though the serve is something that hardly gets affected with age.
We can see with the Murray Karlo match how there was a need to slow things down.
Karlo woudl simply be unstoppable in 1990s conditions. I am serious completely unstoppable. At best he would lose a set in game or TB but woudl need most of them.
posted on 28/6/12
Honestly, I didn't even mind slowing things down a little bit, but to get to a point where no player can S&V anymore just took is just excessive.
I think 2003 Wimbledon was perfect. Much faster than now, but slower than the 90s.
posted on 28/6/12
I think 2003 Wimbledon was perfect. Much faster than now, but slower than the 90s.
--------------------------------
Yes I completely agree about the need to slow things down a bit and I also think in 2003 they reverted back to faster balls, maybe not to pre 2001 but they certainly realised that 2002 was poor year with players and people being chocked by the tennis played.
So they probably got balls size in between 2001 and 2002.
Problem is when Rafa turned up and got kicked by a Gilles Muller in the 2nd round of Wimby 2005, they realised they had to help him a bit.
In 2006, Querrey was also very close to kick Nadal out of the first round and only survided thanks to better stamina. Wimby kept slowing things down.
posted on 28/6/12
What do you think about the modern version of S&V:
rather than chip and charge - hit and charge!
posted on 29/6/12
I have been watching the Rafter-Ivanisevic final of 2001. Both players serve volleying consistently on both first and second serve (close to 100%). Similar story in the Federer-Sampras match in 2001, although Federer didn't go in consistently on second serve, but when he didn't, Sampras sometimes chip charged off the serve return.
Have never seen much footage of 2002, either at the time or later. Even missed the Henman-Hewitt match.
posted on 29/6/12
Yes HB! But say that to your friend Lydian who has argued for years that 2001 was already slowing because of grass.
Grass has nothing to do with change of pace at Wimbledon.
posted on 29/6/12
Ten,
I feel you need to write another article her:
2012 - The Year Wimbledon Changed - Again!
posted on 29/6/12
What happened after 2002? In 2005 I see Henmann complaining about slowing courts as a reason his game was losing its edge. Did they revert back to slow balls?
' Wimbledon just changed the texture of the grass to make the courts more durable and that makes them slower because the grass is spongier.""
This was from 2005. Does it not mean that the grass also played a very important role in the slowing of the surface assisting returning and with the true bounce, helping the baselines play. The grass composition is just as much responsible as the balls are I believe.
posted on 29/6/12
I wish but one swallow doesn't make a summer.
posted on 29/6/12
of course it does...you just watch