It's time to speed things up, it really is

David Ferrer, the ironman of tennis who cycles 90 miles per day through winter as training gets cramp today after lung bursting ralleys where neither man could hit winners due to retrieval and ralleying qualities in a 2.5 hr match that was just 3 sets.

During the match, Roddick, Karlovic, Darren Cahill and others tweeted:

ARod: I've seen everything now.... David ferrer cramping. I thought they would find Hoffa first
ARod: Conditions too slow...Guys dying playing 3 sets. So slow. Makes it impossible to hit winners which results in messed up winners/errors ratio

Karlovic: Men and women play with different balls. Men much slower balls...
Karlovic: Court and balls in Miami are too slow to play entertaining tennis. There is no winners, just unforced errors.
Karlovic: Playing on clay this week. Finally some faster courts..

Cahill: I take that 5 set final idea back. 3 sets of that style of tennis on these slow hard-courts is plenty. Well done to Muzza

Gilbert: Great effort from the Muzzard to get it done Winning Ugly
Gilbert: I have never seen Little beast Ferrerrr cramp in a 3 set match

Sergiy Stakhovsky : Ferrer & Murray both 0 aces in 3 sets..does that says something about the speed of the court & balls???

How many more pros does it take to complain about low quality and grind-fests before something is done! What do you think? Its been often cited that the 90's Wimbledon matches between Ivanisevic and Sampras, particularly the 94 Final, jump started this whole process of slowing down conditions towards surface homogenization. ATP have sat back seeing racquets get bigger, strings stiffer, balls larger and surfaces slower...and done nothing whilst ralleys have got longer and longer. All they have done is to reign in the 25s rule when conditions ate getting interminable. It smacks of rearranging deck chairs on the proverbial...

Do low quality, grind-fest matches like Murray-Ferrer (and even Djokovic-Murray, Nadal-Djokovic) prove that the ITF/ATP/WTA need to seriously consider speeding up some of the ridiculously slow conditions on tour such as AO, IW, Miami, etc, to bring back some much needed surface variety and hence balance? If not we're just going to get even more counterpunch ping-pong grind-fest finals on slow-as-treacle hardcourts - on clay ok, it's a surface that is challenging for movement and point building, but not on hard court where sliding movement is restricted and conditions even slower and high bouncing. What gives...

BTW, it's the first time since Nov. 2003 that neither Nadal or Federer are in the top 2.
Glad it took a match of today's quality to show us the way forward...

Yet more pro tweets...

Bjorkman to Melzer on his Miami week: great job today! Keep it going!

Melzer to Bjorkman: thanks JB! We need faster courts! Do something!!!

Bjorkman to Melzer: I'm with you on that! Everyone plays the same, dangerous future.

The ATP and other relevant bodies have watched for a number of years whilst surfaces gradually become homogenised to the point whereby variations which were once stark could end up being close to indiscernible.

Personally I'm not particularly attracted to the sort of slugfest tennis that we're witnessing with rapidly increasing frequency, and I see this most recent final in Miami as a worrying omen of what lies ahead. It's not what the game's about for me. Sure, there were rallies that had the crowd on their feet, but I almost feel that at times they were caught up in the fascination of some sort of freakshow to determine who will be the last man standing rather than a display of talent, skill and shotmaking.

Nice article lydian, some of those tweets are really interesting. I do hope that it's not all financially motivated. Longer rallies = people spectating for longer...is there a link to increased revenue? It makes you wonder, given that each tournament is apparently given free reign to dictate surface speed - are they all opting for the choice that gives them the best financial return? If so, that's a worrying thought going forward.

I agree that it's a concern that should be addressed, both for the sake of variety and the safety of the players. When players are saying that clay (as an overall surface, not just one tournament) is faster than Miami, then surely it's a bad sign.

Strange that none of these 'greats' realised that one of the reasons for the slow conditions had nothing to do with the courts and everything to do with the unsual (even for Miami in March) spell of hot weather with little rain - hence oppressive humid slow condtions

Sorry, but for you Lydian I find this article lazy and predictable (i.e. I expected someone to moan about today's match and here it is) it's very easy to find ex-players who now carp from the sidelines - but I bet not one of them will have the gumption to get involved and demand some fast condtions for an event

I mean Karlovic moaning about slow conditons - I can laugh about, given that he has virtually nothing about his serve

But Karlovic with his one-dimensional game, which could be replicated by a robot, moaning about a lack of entertainment and then getting taken seriously by you - is just deeply depressing

Indeed Karlovic is the constant reminder for me, why I can't be 100% behind the quest for faster conditions

Give me an error strewn mediocre match like yesterday with players that can actually do something other than serve any day, rather than Karlo's stuff

I dont mind slow courts, just make faster ones as well. My issue is they are all far too similar thats why records are tumbling non stop. I don't care how good Novak, Roger, Rafa and Andy are the only reason they are consistently at the end of tournaments is because they are the best on slow-medium courts. Even Roger, who some say is full of himself has said he's only got his QF streak because its easier for him now that to was for past greats.

So if most are like then thats going to happen. Novak is the best player in the world, its conceivable he could win Roland Garros and Wimbledon this year, would that be as likely 20 years ago, no.

What I like about grass and clay is that the speeds are somewhat similar these days its the movement issue that can still cause players problems, but imagine if the speed gap was huge as well.

Have slow courts, but have fast one and medium ones, test these top guys see how good they really are. Because for me, seeing some capitulate at Madrid last year was quite surprising. Just mix it up a bit I think thats fair?

banbrotam wrote:Strange that none of these 'greats' realised that one of the reasons for the slow conditions had nothing to do with the courts and everything to do with the unsual (even for Miami in March) spell of hot weather with little rain - hence oppressive humid slow condtions

Sorry, but for you Lydian I find this article lazy and predictable (i.e. I expected someone to moan about today's match and here it is) it's very easy to find ex-players who now carp from the sidelines - but I bet not one of them will have the gumption to get involved and demand some fast condtions for an event

I mean Karlovic moaning about slow conditons - I can laugh about, given that he has virtually nothing about his serve

But Karlovic with his one-dimensional game, which could be replicated by a robot, moaning about a lack of entertainment and then getting taken seriously by you - is just deeply depressing

Indeed Karlovic is the constant reminder for me, why I can't be 100% behind the quest for faster conditions

Give me an error strewn mediocre match like yesterday with players that can actually do something other than serve any day, rather than Karlo's stuff

Nadal said it better than anyone I have never seen anyone give a standing ovation for an ace, ever, not in he history of tennis. Outside of the bizarro world of the ex-606 family no one is complaining about the tennis but a few grumpy old men who need their serve and volley tennis to feel like the tennis today has any value. With the taller players, stronger players, and the technology we have in place if you sped up the condtions you would get th most unwathchable ace fest tennis in history. I mean you could tweek it in a minor way, but all the tournaments didn't slow down for no reason. I can't wait for faster condtions and then watching Raonic and Isner at wimbeldon play to 102-100 and the suspension of the US open because they are still playing. Funny players are making 1.5 million for a single night of exhibition tennis further evidence by the ex-606 crowd that tennis is dying.

Banbrotam, there is nothing lazy about the research I did in gathering tweets from PROFESSIONAL tennis players. The thread is not based on my opinion but there's - are they boring and predictable too? So, what do you do - pick on the polar extreme of Karlovic's game to illustrate your lazy point that things are fine, nothing's a problem, lets maintain the status quo boys until the ratings drop. Did you know in the US they cut away from the final at 6-6 in the 3rd. Clearly it was that much of an epic they didn't want to stay with the match...if matches like those persist you'll have more networks switching off. Continue to dunk your head into the very slow sand whilst the game suffers.

The hot conditions are a complete red herring - no one talked about humidity as the reason for the conditions. I also don't see humidity slowing Cincinnati down and that's far worse than Miami. None of you pick on the point about about the men playing with heavier balls than the women. Another designed-to-slow-down tactic. You need to re-read what I wrote - surfaces are but one issue, it's slow conditions as a whole that will kill the golden goose if things don't change. If we keep getting these sorts of finals full of so called "epic" 30 ralley points then th audience will switch just the same vs ace fests of the 90s. Balls need to be made lighter again to counteract all the other changes.

Socal, change your "nostalgia" tune about my points...thats lazy and predictable. This is nothing to do with looking back - no-one wants acefests but no-one wants 30 shot ralleys between counterpunchers each match. Nostalgia? I coach kids of the future in the game, what do you do? What a future of conditions we're creating for kids to succeed, they need to be an ironman Schwarzenegger before they can even think about racquet skills. Look at how Andy and Novak have changed...they could have put all that extra effort into their games. Speaking of which, are you expecting Murray or Djokovic to tweet about the conditions? Well we saw Novak complain about low bounce so we know what he wants. They won't complain about conditions they've been busting a gut for.

You've been carping on all week about how the serve is moving up towards 100% holds so return will become important. In that match yesterday, we got 2 out of the 3 best extended ralleyers getting to the final - not 2 of the best servers. Neither man could hold serve, in those conditions the serve merely started the ralley-fest. I bet Roger and Rafael were pretty glad they skipped Miami.

The problem is this, once every tennis point becomes "special" or "epic"...no point does. If yesterday was meant to be a glowing advert for modern tennis they need to go back to the drawing board. No-one is saying speed up to glasslike conditions everywhere but something has to change. That is what the pros are clearly saying, and they know the game better than any of us.

Roddick overnight tweeted - sorry for the lazy research again - "As the great Kenny Powers once said "Im not interested in medals for exercise"".

lydian, those guys aren't professional tennis players, they're just a few grumpy old men who need their serve and volley tennis to feel like the tennis today has any value.
It's the posters on 606v2 who REALLY know what's best for tennis.

As it happens, both Djoko and Murray complained about slow courts last year - but what do they know? Grumpy young gits, I say!

Interesting-

Mid-week, everyone was raving about how different Miami was. I dont believe Ferrer collapsed purely because of the rallies/slow courts. Its not his first game at Miami, and definitely not his first dogfight. Asking me to believe that Ironman simply couldnt deal with the slowness is an assertion/lie I dont buy, unless you can give me evidence that Miami was slowed down extensively since the last match.

Miami is listed as a "2" by ITF, has been for a good few years. I think the low-pressure balls had a larger impact. I have the 1994-2000 finals on DVD, going back to that tennis is not an option!!

Lastly I find it interesting that Nadal was called self-serving when he called for more natural surfaces, yet when the former record-holder for the most Aces in a match calls for faster surfaces, you all think its a sign that tennis needs a change. Oh the hypocrisy!

lydian wrote:Banbrotam, there is nothing lazy about the research I did in gathering tweets from PROFESSIONAL tennis players. The thread is not based on my opinion but there's - are they boring and predictable too? So, what do you do - pick on the polar extreme of Karlovic's game to illustrate your lazy point that things are fine, nothing's a problem, lets maintain the status quo boys until the ratings drop. Did you know in the US they cut away from the final at 6-6 in the 3rd. Clearly it was that much of an epic they didn't want to stay with the match...if matches like those persist you'll have more networks switching off. Continue to dunk your head into the very slow sand whilst the game suffers.

The hot conditions are a complete red herring - no one talked about humidity as the reason for the conditions. I also don't see humidity slowing Cincinnati down and that's far worse than Miami. None of you pick on the point about about the men playing with heavier balls than the women. Another designed-to-slow-down tactic. You need to re-read what I wrote - surfaces are but one issue, it's slow conditions as a whole that will kill the golden goose if things don't change. If we keep getting these sorts of finals full of so called "epic" 30 ralley points then th audience will switch just the same vs ace fests of the 90s. Balls need to be made lighter again to counteract all the other changes.

Socal, change your "nostalgia" tune about my points...thats lazy and predictable. This is nothing to do with looking back - no-one wants acefests but no-one wants 30 shot ralleys between counterpunchers each match. Nostalgia? I coach kids of the future in the game, what do you do? What a future of conditions we're creating for kids to succeed, they need to be an ironman Schwarzenegger before they can even think about racquet skills. Look at how Andy and Novak have changed...they could have put all that extra effort into their games. Speaking of which, are you expecting Murray or Djokovic to tweet about the conditions? Well we saw Novak complain about low bounce so we know what he wants. They won't complain about conditions they've been busting a gut for.

You've been carping on all week about how the serve is moving up towards 100% holds so return will become important. In that match yesterday, we got 2 out of the 3 best extended ralleyers getting to the final - not 2 of the best servers. Neither man could hold serve, in those conditions the serve merely started the ralley-fest. I bet Roger and Rafael were pretty glad they skipped Miami.

The problem is this, once every tennis point becomes "special" or "epic"...no point does. If yesterday was meant to be a glowing advert for modern tennis they need to go back to the drawing board. No-one is saying speed up to glasslike conditions everywhere but something has to change. That is what the pros are clearly saying, and they know the game better than any of us.

Roddick overnight tweeted - sorry for the lazy research again - "As the great Kenny Powers once said "Im not interested in medals for exercise"".

even a member of OTF appreciates

Yeah exactly JHM. According to Kingraf, Federer must be self serving too when he said this at end of 2012:

"Having more tournaments played on faster surfaces could make it easier for other players to challenge the sport's "Big Four". Federer said - adding that he wasn't sure tournament directors would necessarily buy into that.

"I think some variety would be nice, some really slow stuff and then some really fast stuff, instead of trying to make everything sort of the same. You sort of protect the top guys really by doing that because you have the best possible chance to have them in the semis at this point, I think. But should that be the goal? I'm not sure. It's an easy fix. Just make quicker courts, then it's hard to defend. Attacking style is more important. It's only on this type of slow courts that you can defend the way we are all doing right now".

This why Djokovic, Murray and Nadal dont go on about it much (other than Nadal re: HCs) because Federer says slower conditions protect the Big Four but he's happy to speak out as he's into the winter of his career and looks ahead to the next generation.

In 2011 Federer commented on how he believes that the speeds of the surfaces at the four Grand Slam tournaments have become too similar. In particular, he liked the fact that the courts at US Open were significantly quicker than at the Australian Open, the only other Grand Slam tournament played on hard courts.

Mardy Fish agreed. "This was definitely the fastest Slam surface-wise that we've had. Now with it being much slower out here this year, it fits right in with Australia. There's a lot of really slow Grand Slams now surface-wise."

Federer added: "I think they should feel very different to the Australian Open, and now I don't feel they really do. The night session just feels like you can take huge cuts at the ball, you can run everything down. It's great for tennis, but I'm not sure if it's really what the game needs. The game needs different speed at Slams and so forth. I don't feel we quite have that at the moment, especially if the US Open is getting slower. That's the only concern I have. It's still going to be a great tournament. We'll see amazing points. It's going to be super-athletic, which I think is fun. So it's all good."

These self servers, what do they know about the game they play.

I don't know... Maybe all those old pro's and grumpy old men on 606v2 should have watched the women's final instead? Serena and Sharapova played on the very same court but managed to hit through it and produce a magnificent show. High quality, lots of winners and even the so called unforced errors looked forced to me.

https://www.606v2.com/t42554-i-hope-you-were-watching-gilles-and-janko

What do they say? A bad craftsman blames his tools. Didn't know they cut the end of the match and switched to basketball. Ha ha! The women should complain and ask that the men should take a cut in prize money if they can't hold onto an audience.

HE, you didn't read the bit that says women played with lighter balls than the men - they kind of fly through the air a bit more you know. Also, I'll let you into another secret, women aren't quite as fast or powerful around the court as men too, so they dont retrieve/ralley extend the same. You're comparing apples with oranges.

At Dubai this year, Federer was asked whether he would like to see other tournaments install quicker surfaces. He said: “Not all of them, but some of them. I just think it's good for the game. It allows a serve-and-volley player such as Llodra and other players to move forward. Maybe it would also make, let’s say, myself and [Andy] Murray and other players move forward too. If you know that it’s a surface you can play on more frequently, you get the habit and you [develop] more confidence moving forward. Ninety-five per cent of the time surfaces are rather slow. You get in the habit of playing so well off the baseline that you just feel it's better to stay back than to come in.”

Or in other words, slower, homogenous conditions make the players lazy and its reducing the range of tennis skills used. But hey, its just more self-serving from a 17 time slam winner. Geez these guys should just stop being lazy and nostalgic, and just get on with it. After all, what does Federer know....pfffft.

If anything, Lydian, homogenous conditions have done the opposite Re: skill set.

Of the top 10, only Ferrer has a serve which prohibits him from coasting a match.
Of the top 10, name me one player who doesnt have a wing that could stand up to any player in history.
The movement these guys are in possession of is purely on another level, including RFed.
But of course, they cant volley as well, thus they are worse tennis artisans. *yawn*.

Lydian I am very interested to see a comment in which anybody called Federer self-serving. You are on a tangent that makes no sense.

I don't think anyone really disagrees that conditions in IW and Miami are too slow, apart from clearly the tournament organisers. They've been the same for years and no one at the top seems keen to do anything about it.

That said, there were some cracking matches in this tournament. I didn't see anyone complaining when Gasquet was cracking winners past Berdych or when Murray/Gasquet were putting on a shot-making clinic in the semi-final.

The problem in the final was a combination of it being extremely windy (Murray, in particular, is a poor wind player), the schedulers deciding to play in the heat of the day and the slow conditions. Had they played the match in the evening I'm sure it would have been a much better spectacle.

Wing? I.e. groundstrokes? Well it's hardly surprising today's players are so strong either side when we have cemented to baseline conditions is it. The issue is variety, not skill set. The lack of variety is casing lazy application of skill set. Federer clearly states that. Over time, if the game is just played one way predominantly then that will eventually lead to a loss of skill.

The *yawn* you write is targeted at Federer and all the others who want more variety, more selective speed. I'm a fan of Nadal's but I'm not too myopic to see the game is heading into trouble. Trouble that a whole plethora of professionals can see better than you or I.

Things will change, a definite groundswell of opinion is starting to build - ATP/TDs ignore guys like Federer - the artisans - at their peril.

lydian. I thought the men could use all their speed and power to put on a more entertaining show than women. That's what Gilles and Janko said anyway. I also thought women were the ones playing the extended ralley, retrieval game. That's (I think) what the grumpy old men on 606v2 say. But Serena and Sharapova looked fast and powerful against each other yesterday. Scarily so! (Come out from behind the sofa Roger, Rafa and Novak. I think she's gone now. Ha ha!) I don't think the audience cared if they were apples or oranges they stayed until the end.

If it really is a question of just making the balls a bit lighter the men should do this quick. I've heard that Serena is going to make a press statement soon.

Kingraf, it's become staple that each time a player speaks out they only do so for their own interests. Nadal gets it, Karlovic above is labelled similar...so why not apply the irony to Federer as well. The point is that all these points need to be considered by ATP who continue to dunk their heads into the sand and lead us into WTA-type tennis in the future.

Good points BS, although it was taking unreal and not really sustainable winners from Gasquet to get the job done. He ended up physically folding in a 3 set match just the same though.

HE, I actually agree that lighter balls would even out the balance a lot more on the men's side. We can't do a lot about racquets/strings, even though they are culprits too, without draconian measures. TD want slower courts for so-called "epic" matches. Fine - then speed the balls up, or rather make them the same as they used to be. Every single factor in tennis has been changed towards more ralleys, more power, less variety, longer matches. The players are asking for this to change, seems reasonable to me.

My *yawn* is actually directed at fans who believe the volleying is the Holy Grail of tennis skills. I mean if it is so difficult then why could Novak and Rafa improve theirs so much? And yet Llodra still cant get a groundstroke that allows him to consistently compete, despite the notion that all you need to do to improve your groundstrokes now is clock some miles and get fitter.

From a financial point tennis is at an all-time high. I understand why people want some change, but the game wont fall on its sword if it doesnt happen.

Murray said after his quarter final match that it wasn't really the court that was slow, it was the balls and the fact the match was played in peak humidity that slowed the conditions down.

That could explain the difference between the Murray v Gasquet match and the final, which almost looked like seperate tournaments.

But in general there needs to be a bit more variety on the tour. The slowing down of conditions over the last 10 or so years has been a good thing for tennis I think, but we're now in a situation where a number of tournaments are just too slow.

I would like a few tournaments to be played in faster conditions, and I would like Wimbledon speeded up a bit. Not up to 90's 2 shot rallies speed, but certainly quicker. There's not a lot wrong with the sport nowadays. But speeding up 3 or 4 HC tournies would keep the punters happy so why not?!

HE- if Serena didnt once lose 1 & 1 to a male player, I would entertain your superiority complex

Lydian, I agree re: the balls though and I think its the one thing all pros agree on though. Even amateurs. Low pressure balls are the bane of a tennis players existence

Well, Marseille & Japan are the fastest courts on tour, and they dont attract too many big players, including Federer.
Marseille didnt get a top 4 player this year, while Japan only got Murray. So I dont think the players, including the ones crying for change are as desperate for change as you think

Are they? How do you know that?

Marseille attracted Tsonga, del Potro, Berdych, Tipsarevic, Simon and Gasquet as it's top 6 seeds. That's pretty strong for a 250 I imagine. Granted 3 are French and it's a French tournament.

Got my French cities wrong, meant Lyon.
Japan was regarded as the fastest until Nadal won there, make of that what you will

by who?

It's pretty obvious that you either want what's best for yourself and the player(s) you support, or you're some sort of bizarro weirdo, out of touch with reality, who wants to see more variety and a wider skill set to enjoy tennis more as a whole, not just following one player.
No-one's ever given a standing ovation to an ace. Fair enough, let's only allow one serve, that should get the rally going. Any point less than 10 shots long can't possibly be entertaining, so they should have to be replayed. Let's give the masses what they want, because they always know best. And they pay the money, which is what really matters.

lydian wrote:HE, I actually agree that lighter balls would even out the balance a lot more on the men's side. We can't do a lot about racquets/strings, even though they are culprits too, without draconian measures. TD want slower courts for so-called "epic" matches. Fine - then speed the balls up, or rather make them the same as they used to be. Every single factor in tennis has been changed towards more ralleys, more power, less variety, longer matches. The players are asking for this to change, seems reasonable to me.

You can tinker with the equipment or the courts or you can introduce rule changes or penalties but you can't make a player play exciting tennis. They can either do it or not. There are players who can produce jaw dropping tennis from the baseline and players that can hit amazing volleys. But there are other players that can't. For tennis to hold the attention of more than a few you need players at the top that can produce exciting tennis and have that extra something that enables them to look larger than life on a tennis court. Otherwise who wants to watch two people hitting a ball back and forth?

For an example of that extra something one only needs to look to the Womens final. It had exceptional tennis but also two players with personalities and a level of intensity that made a tennis match into something special. That is a rare and valuable commodity. That's what attracts crowds.

Of course extremes are bad but there was nothing wrong with the courts in Miami...

Courier and Lendl remarked about the 'orange juice' available to today's players vs . what was available to players of yesteryears after the AO 2012 final and AO 2013 SFs.

My proposal is simpler. You want to see 100 shot rallies, do it. Put an Oxygen tent and paramedics outside the tent and a few stretcher bearers outside, and perhaps a pall bearer or two should be available, just in case.

Start a new Beach Tennis or Ironman Tennis. Anyone who plays <10 hours to win a match, is not eligible for Beach Tennis. The match should last at least two days.

The Beach Volleyball girls are 10x fitter than any tennis player, male or female. Give them a racquet, I say.

hawkeye wrote:

lydian wrote:HE, I actually agree that lighter balls would even out the balance a lot more on the men's side. We can't do a lot about racquets/strings, even though they are culprits too, without draconian measures. TD want slower courts for so-called "epic" matches. Fine - then speed the balls up, or rather make them the same as they used to be. Every single factor in tennis has been changed towards more ralleys, more power, less variety, longer matches. The players are asking for this to change, seems reasonable to me.

You can tinker with the equipment or the courts or you can introduce rule changes or penalties but you can't make a player play exciting tennis. They can either do it or not. There are players who can produce jaw dropping tennis from the baseline and players that can hit amazing volleys. But there are other players that can't. For tennis to hold the attention of more than a few you need players at the top that can produce exciting tennis and have that extra something that enables them to look larger than life on a tennis court. Otherwise who wants to watch two people hitting a ball back and forth?

For an example of that extra something one only needs to look to the Womens final. It had exceptional tennis but also two players with personalities and a level of intensity that made a tennis match into something special. That is a rare and valuable commodity. That's what attracts crowds.

Of course extremes are bad but there was nothing wrong with the courts in Miami...

GASP! That means....it must have been Murray's fault! (Oh, and Ferrer's)

It is the low-pressure balls I tell you!! Didnt Ljubicic win Miami three years ago? To my knowledge, they havent re-layered the courts since then, no¿

Not really sure what HE is on about. In terms of long drawn out rallies there was not a lot of difference between the IW final and the Miami final. Only IW was played in far less humid conditions.

If the match had been played in the evening it probably would have been a higher quality rather than an elongated bleep test!

Though I would still like a few quicker tournaments, for the sake of variety.

The Beach Volleyball girls are 10x fitter than any tennis player.

you betya

HE, you can reduce what is special by encasing it in treacle or make what was ordinary before become seemingly special via ralley and match length. Putting 2 counterpunchers together is never going to create sparks. It's seems we more mistake quality through quantity these days.

I hear what you're saying about Williams vs Sharapova and trust me I watched the match. But I couldn't abide Maria's shrieking so had to turn the sound off. If you want truly great women's tennis then Navratilova vs Graf was always a great match up, even Hingis vs Graf. The women's game is devoid of too many interesting match-ups, and you need Williams to be part of the match for a start. Anyone for Azarenka vs Sharapova? I think the women's game is suffering even more than the men's for the conditions. It's devoid of interesting match-ups unless you can point to any not involving Williams?

Its all a question of what defines entertainment to us observers? But speeding courts up gets the guys moving around the court more and taking more risks - taking risks in tennis matches is what has us on the edge of our seats in those key moments. We want to see matches won through risk taking and skilled shots, not UEs borne out of fatigue, and that's the point many pros are making.

Fitness is such a sports specific duscussion, that its not even worth bringing up unless you are slagging golf! Next you will be suggesting Bradley Wiggins should enter Roland Garros to complete the seldom-mentioed TdF-RG double

Lydian- I remember watching a Robin Soderling match, I think it was vs Berdych, at Roland Garros. And the commentator mentioned how flat the match was, despite the fact that it was two hard-hitting risk-takers. And the basic consensus was that styles make fights. Two big hitters squaring off doesnt attract anybody.

Don't really agree there Danny. Delpo/Nadal is a much more interesting matchup than Ferrer/Murray and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone picking the latter over the former. Delpo plays so flat, Nadal is all weird spins...but both are more aggressive than either Murray or Ferrer. In my opinion.

Agree Kingraf and almost wrote it above. Contrasts make tennis interesting. Also, there is the personality of the guys and anyone would be hard pressed to call Robin or Tomas interesting guys with a strong persona. Some of the guys just have a quality about them that makes them interesting on court.

Can I ask - why is anyone opposed to more variety on tour? Just what is the problem here?

Lydian - if you prefer the match up fair enough. Subjective thing of course and I get that. But it was a long match full of long drawn out rallies and I don't remember any articles afterwards saying it was because the players aren't great.

I love how Murray plays normally. Not yesterday of course. I'm a big fan of Ferrer's character but not his game from an entertainment perspective. So in that sense I probably agree that Rafa Delpo is a more appealing match up.

But I completely refute that a match involving Murray lacks ability, magic, or excitement. That's just the words of someone who simply doesn't like him.

Oh, and I don't personally think aggressive automatically = entertaining.

If Murray did away with his spins, slices and variety for a Berdych style 'hit it all the time' approach then he'd lose most of his appeal to me.

Again, a subjective thing... But for me variety is what appeals.

lydian wrote:Banbrotam, there is nothing lazy about the research I did in gathering tweets from PROFESSIONAL tennis players. The thread is not based on my opinion but there's - are they boring and predictable too? So, what do you do - pick on the polar extreme of Karlovic's game to illustrate your lazy point that things are fine, nothing's a problem, lets maintain the status quo boys until the ratings drop. .

What's lazy is chosing to quote a group of ex / current players that have more of a vested interest in fast conditons than turkeys have in the banning of Xmas. If Courier, Agassi or Willander had stated this, three players who could play on all surfaces (more or less) then I'm interested

lydian wrote:Did you know in the US they cut away from the final at 6-6 in the 3rd. Clearly it was that much of an epic they didn't want to stay with the match...if matches like those persist you'll have more networks switching off. Continue to dunk your head into the very slow sand whilst the game suffers.

Yes. And they would have done if it had been Fed / Nadal, i.e. no US players means that they are more likely to switch to something that more Americans will watch. I can undertand you not liking the play - but how on earth can you think it was so undramatic that it was an easy decision for a broadcaster to switch from? Another strangely weak argument from you!!

lydian wrote:The hot conditions are a complete red herring - no one talked about humidity as the reason for the conditions. I also don't see humidity slowing Cincinnati down and that's far worse than Miami.

Murray did after his Gasquet game. Also, Miami is a more humid place than Cinci - it has a 'tropical monsoon' climate Cinci doesn't. It's fair to say that occasionly Cinci in August will be as humid as Miami in March - but August sun will be hotter than Miami March sun and hence conditions faster

lydian wrote:None of you pick on the point about about the men playing with heavier balls than the women. Another designed-to-slow-down tactic. You need to re-read what I wrote - surfaces are but one issue, it's slow conditions as a whole that will kill the golden goose if things don't change. If we keep getting these sorts of finals full of so called "epic" 30 ralley points then th audience will switch just the same vs ace fests of the 90s. Balls need to be made lighter again to counteract all the other changes.

At last the cerebral old Lydian makes an apperance Seriously, I agree with you - as I've stated before I've no issue with this argument but don't think it's as doomsday as you're stating. There used to be "30 ralley point" in finals 30+ years ago when Tracey Austin and Chris Evert were meeting and for me they were "epic" - far more than the brutal stuff Martina Nat served up, but what do I know I'm only a fan of 40 years

lydian wrote:Roddick overnight tweeted - sorry for the lazy research again - "As the great Kenny Powers once said "Im not interested in medals for exercise"".

Please!! Roddick had about two shots for the first 8 years of his career. It was only when he realised that to have any chance of a return to the top that he added some variety and hence we got the very good 2009/10 version - the only time he was more entertaining than "medals for exercise". Usual guff from an ex professional who will do 'diddly squat' about a situation they don't like, but could do something about. I also think it's highly disrespectful of such a recent ex-player to be so critical of a match involving two players he knows well.

Nothing to do with his losing 15-7 record against the two of course. And he might remember that he got fast conditions the last couple of times he played Murray (2011 - Paris and Queens) but only managed to take 8 games in total. What's that saying 'engage brain before speaking'?

Never mind it's made him more popular, everyone loves someone with a sense of humour

Basically, banbro, it sound like you will agree with any ex-pro, as long as they say something that matches your existing opinion, otherwise they're biased, talentless and stupid, and should be ignored. OK, we get it.

lydian wrote:At Dubai this year, Federer was asked whether he would like to see other tournaments install quicker surfaces. He said: “Not all of them, but some of them. I just think it's good for the game. It allows a serve-and-volley player such as Llodra and other players to move forward. Maybe it would also make, let’s say, myself and [Andy] Murray and other players move forward too.

And I don't know many that disagree. Paris normaly plays fast, i.e we already have two. We just need another two Masters (so we have three on 'fastish' conditions and of course the US Open

Murray is more enthusiastic than you give him credit for and why wouldn't he be - he's surely the most natural volleyer out there, but he's very wary of having any critical comments taken out of context

You're right banbro, Muzza does enjoy faster conditions. Not as much as Roger, but he does like a faster court more than Rafa and Novak certainly.

Basically, as long as its not clay Murray enjoys it.

lydian wrote:
The hot conditions are a complete red herring - no one talked about humidity as the reason for the conditions.

Actually Murray did after the match :

When asked for a comparison with his five-set duel with Novak Djokovic in the final of the US Open, Murray replied: “Conditions. We started at 7 p.m. in the evening in New York, and it was windy and cool. The conditions in Miami are extremely hard. It was very, very humid today."

As he lives and trains in Miami for around 3 months a year. I think I'll take his word for it.

banbrotam wrote:everyone loves someone with a sense of humour

Don't they just.