Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

[meganfernandez]

Why can't they get the balls in Europe though? This would seem to give WTA players based in the US some advantage, however slight.

Guess the Wilson Regular Duty just isn't distributed there. But how hard can it be to special-order them for the #1 player in the world? Or any top player? Next time I go to Europe, I'll take some cans and sell them on the black market.

I think Iga said that when they do order them what they get isn't the same as what is used in tournament play.

They must be ordering from a European distribution center, though. They need to buy Wilson Regular Duty when they're in the States in the spring and ship them home themselves. Heck, she can pay someone to fly here, buy 10 cases, ship them, and return to Europe. This doesn't seem like a hard problem to solve, right? A tad inconvenient, but if it's so important, it's worth the trouble.

She's probably right about switching the balls. Why don't they use the same ball for the whole year? Why switch at all? Or at least the same ball for each surface.

[ponchi101]

Well, we know why they don't use the same balls. Wimbledon has its contract with Slazenger. Babolat has become a force in Europe, Wilson or Head are the premier manufacturers in the USA. It is the same as always: $$$.
And if you try to make it a universal ball, the AELTC will not abide. So welcome to multiple balls.

[ti-amie]

The death watch has begun. Do we have an Iga is washed up thread yet?

[ponchi101]

No, not that much. She is 20 and remember how she went after her 1st RG. She also took a dip.
She is still a top player. It is just that right now, TOP PLAYER means something very different than in the 80's, 90's and 2000's.

[ti-amie]

[ti-amie]

[AcesAnnie]

The USO women's field has become even more wide open. With the recent struggles of Swiatek, this adds even more of the ladies having a shot at winning the USO championship. It is going to be very interesting.

[ponchi101]

Excuse me? Stefanos is part and parcel of this situation. Apostolos is not coaching him and Stefanos is openly saying "Please, stop". Stefanos is in full agreement.

[ti-amie]

Well this is a surprise. Madison Keys loves the lighter balls.

/s

[ponchi101]

I prefer Wilson's Extra Duty. A bit harder.
But I play very differently than Maddie (also keeping in mind she is like 10 times better).

[ashkor87]

Just to clarify.. how the court surface and speed matters:

in general, there are two kinds of players - those who generate their own power and pace - Osaka, Andreescu, Rybakina, Keys, Sabalenka, Pavlyuchenkova, Swiatek, Kvitova, Alexandrova, Samsonova..
who do not need help from the court to hit winners - they can do ok on a slow court as well.
The other kind are players who use the opponents' pace, and basically redirect it - Bencic, Kerber, Leylah, Raducanu, Sloane fall in this category.. they need a fast court to help them hit winners precisely because they cannot generate their own pace. They are ok on a fast court because they have great reflexes and eyesight, good footwork, move well.
of course there are those who are in between - Halep, for instance, is quite versatile.

[ponchi101]

Serious here. If that is the relationship, why was Sampras less effective the slower the court? It is not as if the man was unable to generate power, especially on his serve and FH. Yet, his record there was not as excellent as on the (at the time) super fast courts at Wimbledon.
Becker too.
(Yes, their S&V style has to be taken into account).
If there were a single fast court still being used, S&V would still be a viable style. Instead, we have 25-shots rallies being played at Wimbledon. I am pretty sure that Rod Laver NEVER played a 15 shot rally there. I can guarantee it.

[meganfernandez]

Serious here. If that is the relationship, why was Sampras less effective the slower the court? It is not as if the man was unable to generate power, especially on his serve and FH. Yet, his record there was not as excellent as on the (at the time) super fast courts at Wimbledon.
Becker too.
(Yes, their S&V style has to be taken into account).
If there were a single fast court still being used, S&V would still be a viable style. Instead, we have 25-shots rallies being played at Wimbledon. I am pretty sure that Rod Laver NEVER played a 15 shot rally there. I can guarantee it.

I think it's just one dimension, maybe an important dimension, but other factors can offset or mitigate the rule. It seems logical that a big hitter could rip through a slow court if they like a lot of time to set up, and a counterpuncher with great movement and redirection might like the speed of a fast court to help them out. But also that a defender might like more time to reach the ball, and a big hitter could benefit from even more lethal shots, like Osaka and Serena. I dunno. So many factors.

If the dynamic is legit, maybe it's more pronounced among women because of the serve, which sets so much of the tone in the men's game.

Sampras wasn't banging away at the baseline, so I think he isn't subject to this theory. I assume the slow court dampened his S&V weapons more than it enhanced his baseline game.

[ashkor87]

Also, as you rightly say, there are other factors, Sampras may have simply been uncomfortable moving on clay...most Americans are. And he did win the Italian once, I think...

[meganfernandez]

Also, as you rightly say, there are other factors, Sampras may have simply been uncomfortable moving on clay...most Americans are. And he did win the Italian once, I think...

Also semi'd the French and had the great Davis Cup on indoor clay vs Russia. Wasn't like he was hopeless on clay. Just not his best surface.