Did Federer Stop Winning Because of Slower Courts?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 тра 2024
- Many people believe that over the years the courts became slower - a change that would be detrimental to attacking-minded players like Federer, and beneficial to baseliners like Djokovic, Nadal, and Murray. Did this really happen?
All songs by Patrick Patrikios:
"Where We Wanna Go"
"Crazy"
"Know Myself"
Links:
www.firstpost.com/sports/the-...
www.ultimatetennisstatistics.... - Спорт
I cannot believe i get to watch this video for free 😂
The data, research, logic and application is invaluable for math nerds like me. Your objectivity is legendary.
It's no surprise that Nolefam are so well versed with numbers😂😂
Keep up the good work mate, already waiting for your next video😉
Are u from iit/nit
If were actually a math nerd you wouldve seen the data he showed on court homogenization actually did show courts became more homogenous. Every person with minimum statistical knowledge knows you should look at relative numbers instead of absolute numbers like he did
I'm a math nerd myself and this was a great presentation. The eyes may not see, the mind may be deceived but the numbers don't lie!
So Djokovic fan pulls stats from random site to justify his bias 😂 The court speed difference are obvious. Look at matches on hard court GSs in mid 2000s and mid 2010s. The latter is hell of a lot slower. Not to mention current tour players are also complaining about a “heavier” ball.
@@steviejohnson378 that's not court does stats, those are court speed estimates based on how dominant the serve was. Also there is no consistent cpi data, which the author clearly mentioned.
If serve dominance remained the same then it's highly likely that court speeds have not changed significantly
Bro stop killing fed fans
Nadal Fan Here But As A Tennis Fan I Accept All The True Facts In This Video Content.Well Done GOATKOVIC.
I am Japanese.
I am very grateful to you for posting this video.
I could not find this kind of information in Japan.
My understanding of English is still poor, but you have edited it in a way that is easy to understand.
Thank you.
2001 Wimbledon was when Federer beat Sampras.
He actually benefitted from slowing down the court to more effectively neutralize Sampras’ serve.
LMAO
Change of grass at Wimbledon happened in 2002.
@@josepmontesinos1994 2001 not 2002
Have you watched that match? Federer benefitted from Sampras playing poorly, plus a bit of luck here and there. I’m not saying Federer didn’t play well, he did, it’s just that the match could have gone either way. And, Federer serve and volleyed almost as much as Sampras did, so surely it would have benefitted both players?
Djokovic plays flatter than Federer.Slower courts are also not great for him
exact
Federer and Serve and Volley do not go together. He was always an aggressive baseliner who had the ability to come forward, and in his very early prime, qualified as an all court player with frequent (meaning approximately 30-40% of the time) ventures to the net. He was NEVER a serve and volley player like Petros for example. That is a myth that needs to fade.
Djokovic beat the era before him, after him and now after, after him. There is no debate guys.
Djokovic is lucky the current era is so garbage compared to before. Murray surgery, Roger retired, Nadal injury prone, Stan old. Only Alcarez poses a threat from the new gen. If Roger played in this era at the same age as Djokovic he would dominate just like he did in 2017 if not more
@@masudbillah6196😂 Philippusis,Baghdatis,Roddick Blake,Ljubicic,Gonzales,Mardy. 40:15
@@masudbillah6196if Novak had not been injured Federer never have won the gs titles in 2017 and 2018
2010/ 2020 only 4gs titles😂
@@borisbalta2542 all better than current players
I love your videos so much, and I appreciate the thought and work put into your videos. Your videos have really opened my eyes about the big three, and I will be a goatkovic fan for awhile☺️.
Here is an idea for next one
How many times Novak was switched from the court he was supposed to play against Nadal at RG in next round.
For example, we know Nadal will play in semifinal or final at Philip Chatrier, and Nadal would stay to play at least match before at same court (very often 2 or 3 matches in a row) and Novak would moved to Susan Lenglen to play match beofre his potential clash with Nadal.
Why is this important. Its because the bounce on 2 different clay courts can never be equally same, never. Its always at least slight difference, and when you move from court to court you are loosing a bit of momentum in hitting balls.
At their level of tennis every slight difference can make decisive moment. So if Nadal is used to same court and Novak is bouncing from one to another, Nadal is given unfair advantage over Novak.
Great point.
@@gautaml6891 No. It gave him slight advantage, I didnt say Novak would won, I was talking about equality. I have 3 tennis courts made of clay in my club, all built from the same company, equally maintaned, equally played throughout the year. Ball bounce different in every single of them, that difference is not huge, but it always needs frw days to switch from one to another to catch momentum
Both Nadal and Djokovic play on Susan Lenglen all the time. Nadal has never played a RG only at Philip Chatrier to date.
@@NLLeFa No they dont, it happened lot of times that Nadal before clash with Djokovic plays at the same court, while Djokovic was switching from Lenglen to Chatrier to Lenglen..
It is true that Nadal dont play every single match at Chatrier but in quarters, semi and finals almost always
@@milanvesovic1703I only remember once when Novak played on second court in QF and that was in 2018 when he was not among the favorites. Nadal played in 2014 on Susan Lendlen as well, but usually they play on main court past the 1/8 final.
I can't comment on court speeds because I don't know how the data is collected etc. But even if the speeds did change - so what? At the end of the day, all these players are adapting their games from one event to another, from one set of conditions to another (weather, courts, Covid etc.), and from one opponent to another. There is also the age factor that has caused players to change their games (intentionally or naturally). In short, these players have been and should always be adapting their games to the conditions (which always are changing).Djokovic has adapted better to changes than other players. To say Nadal would be miles ahead on slams if there were 2 clay court slams or Fed would be better on faster courts (which isn't true anyway) is hardly an argument for their greatness. It only argues that they are too one dimensional or reliant on certain conditions to win or dominate. Novak proved hands-down he is the best over all surfaces (he even has a better win % at Wimbledon than Federer). I think Novak even plays better on fast courts anyway.
It’s not a question about adapting. You think it is coincidence that two of the best players in the world after the courts slowed down are Djokovic and Nadal? They are both baseline grinders. When courts slow down, precision loses its value because anyone can just run down balls. Feds entire game is based on precision. I am not saying endurance is not important but it makes no sense to slow down other courts when there is already tournaments like the French Open that test endurance. You say this proves Djokovics well rounded because he plays good on the slow courts but you do not understand that the slower courts just complement his play style. There is no “adaptation” that took place. You talk about Djokovic’s record on Wimbledon but you fail to understand that even Wimbledon courts play significantly slower now. I guess they will just keep slowing down every court until they play like clay lol. Then it will just be mind numbing my boring rallies from players like Djokovic and people like you praising them.
@@ravic1754 yess modern play same on all surface. In 1980s,1990s players used to play serve and volley on grass and baseline tennis on clay
@@rishbahpandey8697 Exactly. Now it is just long and boring baseline rallies on every surface at every single tournament. Only advantageous to baseline grinders like Djokovic. They aren't unbeatable because they "adapted", it is because the slow courts just match their play styles. If the courts were made faster Fed could have very well had the most slams. I am not taking away from the achievements of the other two, and I think the argument of who is the greatest is subjective between the 3 regardless of how many slams they have.
@@ravic1754 So the video stats are completely wrong then? It's not my video, so I don't cae. But the video says that courts didn't slow down.
@@Mr.Edd3905 Yes the stats are either wrong or being cherry picked to suit the argument. The courts have been significantly slowed down over the years anyone who watches tennis and plats to a decent level knows this. This guys whole channel is about him biasedly arguing for Djokvoics case as he like many of his fans seem incredibly insecure when people have opinions or favourite players different to their own. There are literally pro players and ex pro players that say the courts have slowed down. Attacking play is not rewarded as it should be anymore juts look how pretty much nobody plays serve and volley as a whole game style its now more of a mix up tactic for a couple of points per match. If you combine the slowing of the courts with the racket technology there will just continue to be more and more baseline grinding robots.
Keep up the great work! 💪🍻
Huge Fed fan here; agree on this vid. TLDR for me...at the end of day the game is on your racket. The best players can adapt to the surface.
I hope Novak watches these videos
I am pretty sure someone will point them out to him.
He wouldn't have time to waste.
me too, all facts being revealed here, and he just won #LaDecima10AOOutOf10 #NovakDjokovic #TheGOAT
Boys wake up, goatkovic posted!!
Goatkovic 💪. A light within the youtube darkness.
That Federer was a serve and volley player is a myth. He was a baseliner. In the early 2000th Federer was regarded as the first baseliner to win Wimbledon after Agassi (1992) and pioneering the dominance of baseline grass tennis.
Hewitt was actually the first recognised baseliner to win Wimbledon since Agassi, doing so in 2002, the year before Federer's first title. I'm surprised Goatkovic didn't correct such an obvious untruth.
They slowed down the courts because the modern racquets made it easier for players to blast winners and aces on fast surfaces which led to many short rallies. Federer benefited from the courts slowing down which started in 2001 when gave him an advantage against big hitters and serve n volleyers like Henman, Tsonga, Roddick, Gonzalez, and Lubijcic. The US Open and Wimbledon courts went from fast to medium fast during the 2000s but they made them slower during the 2010s decide. Wimbledon courts have medium speed while the US Open courts are medium slow. The homogenization of the courts gave him an advantage during his prime but hurt him against Djokovic and Nadal. Contrary to what Fed fans believe, Djokovic is plays his best tennis in medium paced courts and he is dominant on indoor and fast surfaces when you consider the fact that he has won Shanghai, Paris, Cincy, and the ATP finals several times. The AO courts have been medium fast ever since 2016 and he has won it five times.
This is true, even Federer said that he felt he had more time during the rallies in 2006 compared to that in 2017.
How about 1998 compared to 2006? When RF turned pro, Pat Rafter was very successful with serve and volley. Talks about changes to favour baseliners started then. Wimbledon, for example, changed its grass, for a slower one, in 2002. They didn't want anyone to win Wimbledon again in Sampras, Krajicek, Stich or Ivanisevic's fashion.
@@josepmontesinos1994
In 1998 maybe the hard and grass courts were a bit faster
@@josepmontesinos1994 But Federer started winning after 2002
@@dfdxdfdydfdz Hard courts were always the most flexible to work with... On Wimbledon they really went with new technology to make grass different and more managable for players, because it started becoming a problem with playera hurting themselves, then every year different conditions etc....
Because he was younger. Djokovic fans are funny.😂😂😂😂
I read that the data on ultimate tennis statistics is actually based on stats i.e. Ace % ,Service Game win % etc for the respective surface/tournament. So there's no direct measurement of speed and bounce here (which is done while calculating CPI by ITF). I'm not picking any sides,just saying that the data on Ultimate tennis statistics may be questionable .
It is wrong. All tennis players said AO 2021 is fastest AO of last 15 years and this data is showing AO 2019 > AO 2021
@@rishbahpandey8697 you are wrong my peasant because I said so!
@@rishbahpandey8697 As a pro player you can FEEL the court speeds. Also as a pro we can watch on TV and visually see the court speed differences
2009 AOpen final - ua-cam.com/video/zZO7saJQRxw/v-deo.html&ab_channel=AustralianOpenTV
2018 AOpen final - ua-cam.com/video/FBVi4wLxotU/v-deo.html&ab_channel=AustralianOpenTV
Put the two videos side by side. The court speed is beyond obvious. 2009 was a fucking glacier Had Federer won that match I would still be saying the same thing. This is obvious to all pros
@@Wodz30 AO was way faster in 17 and 18 for some reason, which is how Fed won them. Everyone agreed at the time that those two in particular were very fast.
Interesting. I wonder if the statistic from UTS is correct.
Cuz I joined Wimbledon tour last month and asked the tour guide (sorry that I forget her name) if the speed of the court had been slowing down since early 20s. She answered Yes, by stating the fact that the length of the grass had changed since early 20s and hence Hewitt won his first Wimbledon title because of that. But according to UTS, the court speed in fact increased after 20s, which is the opposite of what my tour guide said. So I wonder if the statistic from UTS is correct. Just speaking as a person who loves doing research and analysis. Many Thanks.
Has anybody mentioned the type of balls being used? That can also have an effect on how it reacts to the surface when determining speed.
It makes all the difference, people can’t seem to understand that
What about YOU make a video that discusses and differentiates, with scientific measures, the speed of different types of balls?
Where did you get your stats for court speeds? How accurate is the data you are using to measure court speeds?
Ultimate tennis statistics
@@VladaBB He literally said this at the beginning! How did dude miss that lol
@@takodanobaba I'm being objective and asking about the validity of the stats presented. Stop being a biased fanboy
@@CopycatNinja875 fanboy? I'm a casual tennis fan that doesn't care about the goat race. If you were paying attention the narrator literally made it a point to answer your question.
@@CopycatNinja875 What about you stop being a blind boy?
This channel is a treasure trove of tennis info and good sense.
This analysis is just amazing. Great job man! Keep it up.
Some question
What points mean?
Shouldn't there be a standard unit.
How are they even calculating the points?
And since it's not official data, how authentic it is?
Your analysis is just so good. Thanks for another killer video.
Goatkovic - regarding your video on grand slam draw fixing, I was surprised you didn't mention that Djokovic in French Open career when seeded 1 or 2 & earning a possible good draw, got the 100% worst draws with regard to Nadal & Federer thru 2015 when Federer stopped playing & thereafter against Nadal. NEVER got half of draw without either when possibility & stuck with quarterfinal match vs lower ranked Nadal both times possible That includes 2011 - 2017, 2021, & 2022 at odds well over 2000 to 1 (2018-2020 do not apply). Also the USO draws throughout his career.
Good info. I was planning to make another video about draw fixing anyway, so I'll look into this.
Great insight
@@goatkovic That would be amazing. Your videos are very informative
@@goatkovichave you had the time to make the video on if Novak got the most difficult draws? Not sure i see that on your channel.
@@Whatreally123 First video I ever made: ua-cam.com/video/50ZXa-u-mCQ/v-deo.html
Also this: ua-cam.com/video/B6UPa4l4Xns/v-deo.html
I believe the name Goatkovic is for you my friend , what a goat , amazing hard work , amazing presentation and stats . Well done my friend
Federer might be an offensive player, but he is also a baseliner and in fact it's his style of play which benefitted first with slower courts. He is not the standard baseliner like Ferrer or Nadal, but he is a baseliner with serve and volley tools, not a pure serve and volleyer.
Incorrect he had to change to more of a baseliner to adapt to the slowing courts and even then he was much more of an all court player than just a baseliner. His first Wimbledon title he was playing mostly serve and volley and the years before that coming up the ranks
@@R3L1KZ Yeah I know what you mean. What I'm saying is that classic Roger is more of a baseliner than the standard pre 2000s era players. He is actually the one who progressed the game thus when he exploded Roddick and the bunch couldn't outplay him. He was the first great example of a player who successfully adapted his game to the modern surfaces. After him came a lot of other great baseliners, including the other 2.
@@R3L1KZ When courts were faster. Wimbledon slowed them down in 2002. RF had to adapt.
@@josepmontesinos1994 Yes, but his biggest achievements came after the slowing down of courts
@@josepmontesinos1994 he had to adapt, really? He was a 0 time grand slam winner in 2002. While Djokovic and Nadal as teenagers were already top 3 players Federer was not even a top 10. He did not have to adapt to anything, he was nobody before 2002
Obrnuo si "igricu" *Brate*
Ne postoji ni jedan jedini argument kojim ih nisi rasturio.
Ovaj kanal,osim toga što je najbolji teniski kanal, bavi se takvom statistikom i takvim činjenicama koje bi *morale* da ostanu u istoriji tenisa.
Iskreno se nadam da će se jednom otkriti sve onako kako je bilo i kako jeste.
Skidam kapu gospodine!
#No1e 💪
Јел’ ово наш човек, нагласак ми не личи на нашег али опет можда грешим?
@@user-fc2fh1ir8v Mislim da je naš, ali svakako nije bitno jer svoj posao radi nepogrešivo.
Profesionalno.
Живим 35 година преко, наши немају тај нагласак када причају енглески, можда несвесно бих волео да није наш јер то још више даје тежину чињеница са којима одлично барата.
@@user-fc2fh1ir8v Bravo 🤝
A evo i sad vidim da se kanal vodi na USA
EDIT: naravno da to ne znači ništa posebno odakle potiče kanal, ali bi dobro bilo da nije "naš čovek" jer dobija na težini i ne izgleda pristrasno
@@nikolamicunovic1966 Ni Teslu nisu "voleli", ali svojatali, eksplatisali, krali... jesu. Zivimo Teslijansku eru i Srbima je drago da je Tesla "nas". Mi smo genijalan narod i ne vidim problem da mozemo biti objektivni. Sreca nasa ako je Goatkovic "nas".
Us open and ao open court slowing is so blatantly visible to naked eye.. Also suspiciously there was no mention on the metric used to measure court speeds used in this video.. Why i wonder? Maybe it was a bs method?!
Watch the video with Monitor on and Sound on. There is no good method of doing it and the ITF didnt say how or what metric they use to measure court speeds.
@@VladaBB this data is not legit like ITF data. Ultimate statistics data is a fraud .
Djokovic dominates on fast courts. Wimbledon and Australian Open are faster than the US Open. Monte Carlo is the slowest and Djokovic's worst tournament
Regardless of court speed, that’s a lame excuse from Federer fans (of which I belong), you have to win in the courts that exist. Not in some theoretical court that favors your player the most.
Some very interesting points made here. However, to truly examine changes in courts speed I think the video focuses on too narrower a time period. Really, for proper and more rounded analysis, court speeds from the 1970s, '80s and '90s should have been included. The big criticism at the time was that the speed of grass courts had become too fast during the Sampras era of the 1990s when in many matches there were few exchanges beyond 3-4 shots The same was also said of indoor carpet back then. It's also often cited that it was around this time (i.e. the '90s) that the speed of clay courts started to be increased in order to try to reduce the length of rallies on that surface, since the preceding twenty years especially had brought interminably long points extending up to or even beyond a hundred shots.
The point here is to counter Federer fans' point about how court speed slowed down and how that hurt Federer. No one else is history has been using that excuse for their idol's inferiority other than Federer fans, and that's why this video was even made.
@@keithwatson7434 Yeah I think he missed that point
Didnt the major slowing down of courts happen before 2003? And what is this speed metric? How is it measured?
At the end , courts are slower for every player!
Surface harmonization took place in the late 90s and early 00s…before the Big 3 era.
Basically teen Fed copied Sampras game, which was devastating in the 1990s before the harmonization.
Seems like that this video needs a part 2. Since 2018's fastest Wimbledon (at 82) the surface is 76, 69 and 70 in respective years, Roland Garros is again below 40 (no data for 2023 though, yet), Australian Open is down from 83 in 2019 to 67 in 2022 (no data for 2023 also) as well as US open being helluva faster the year Dkojovic was aiming calendar slam (72) and slowing just in one season to 62 with Alcaraz being the favourite in 2022. Also, numerous players like Medvedev and Djokovic himself said, that the tour changed the balls to heavier ones this year, which results in more pressure on elbow (no wonder Djokovic had issues with elbow and his wrist), bounce and speed. And also there was McEnroe quote, when he called Wimbledon a clay tournament with grass on first week or something like that. AO surface speed helped Nadal winning his slam as well as it helps now to Nadal 2.0 and puts injury worries on Djokovic
could you provide a source for the numbers you're presenting? Also I dont get what the numbers mean, like what does a "36" clay court signify?
He mentions in 1,07 the numbers come from Ultimate Tennis Statistics
Now it's gonna be: Federer started losing because of Faster Courts :')
B wym beside 2017 AO and 2018 AO every other court was slow down in majors and only Shanghai and Cincy were fast courts for the longest time now USO is fast but that didn’t start til 2020 man and Fed was pretty retired because he never play on the faster USO courts that’s why Nadal will never win USO again
Amazing analysis.
Question: How much importance can we attach, to the method, which has been used, to measure court speeds?
How were the surface speeds for each year measured?
Amazing statistics, insight, truth in showing who the real GOAT is. Djokovic is the undisputed GOAT and has impeccable character. Thank you for your amazing work and analysis on Djokovic and rivals.
Robert I think you are completely wrong about Novak's character. He is only interested in winning and is not a sportsman.
Knocking Djokovic for sportsmanship of all things is just amusingly ironic to someone who actually watches post-match interviews and follows what the players do in terms of advocacy for other players & for fans. I don't expect someone that committed to hating whoever comes along and dethrones their fave. Some fans are loyal like that, to the end. I'm just saying those sorts of criticisms don't land. All it gets is a wry smirk and a knowing wink among real tennis fans. I guess having your favourites bested by someone with such class stings that much more. Well, the salty tears are tasty.
@@annewalden3795 What is a sportsman that is not only interested in winning? Is Federer interested in losing? Well he certainly does a very good job doing that lmfao
@@keithwatson7434 Roger Federer was interested in becoming a better sportsman but Novak is interested only in prizes and primarily money.
@@annewalden3795 Becoming a better sportsman by how? By losing? That's certainly a new approach to be a sportsman lol
Wimbledon changed grass in 2002. The key should be comparing 1990s court speed and bouncing (low bouncing is key for a one-hand backhand; e.g. carpet tournements). If as a child/teen you model your game to Sampras, but when you become pro they change the conditions (to prevent Sampras style domination on fast courts), that has an impact. I miss Pat Rafter's brand of tennis. Tim Henman never reached a Wimbledon semifinal after 2002, as the change was design to favour baseliners.
ur really reaching now
Let's assume all of this is true, but it doesn't have to do anything with the video.... Since the video breaks the narrative about Djokovic being dominant over Federer just because courts are slower post 2010.... And actually Federer was the one who played after modernisation of the courts in early 2000s... Also it didn't prevent Sampras style domination on fast courts, since Federer did almost the same exact thing when he was winning consecutive titles at Wimbledon...
What's the name of the video?
A terrible change. An abomination to tennis.
Agreed. Never thought the courts had slowed even more in the last ten years. But I guess some people believe this is the case. Also, if you look at Federer's play style after 2003, you can see the courts were already slow in the 2000s. Definitely though if the courts were like in the 90s, Federer would have the upper hand.
As a die hard fed fan since 2008 i would never concede that anyone else is the goat but federer... But if i ever had to give anyone the goat title, it has to be novak because of his records against federer on grass an nadal on clay
Lol nadal on HC > nole on clay. Rafa defeated both roger and novak in HC slam finals
@@rishbahpandey8697 I wish I could defeat Novak in AO hardcourts but couldn't. My anabolic steroids don't work there as they used to when I rub my feet on clay
@@rishbahpandey8697 Nadal would never be able to play a match on HC like Novak did in 2021 FO Semis without steroids
@@rishbahpandey8697 Nadal bigger on hard than Novak on clay hahahahahahaha.
Nadal career is 22 years now, and he had 203 big tournaments on hard court as a chance to win. (9 per year + 5 olympics): Nadal has won 19 big titles at hardcourt which gives him 9,35 percent of success there.
Novak career is 20 years long and Novak had 80 chances to win big title at clay (4 per year). Novak has won 13 which gives him 16,25 percent of success.
Novak has won all clay big titles twice, Nadal never won ATP Finals, Miami, Paris and Shanghai.
Novak managed to face Nadal 27 times at clay (4 chance per year at big tournament), Nadal equally managed to face Novak at hard (9 times per year chance). Nadal should managed to face Novak 2 more times at hard if he was equally good as Novak on clay, so they should meet 6o times at hardcourts which they didnt.
Just dont push injurie escuse here cause Nadal was alwaaaaaays fit at physically most demanding surface clay, and won mindblowing 45 percent of big titles in his career (40/88)
His spin style which he made for clay simply is not good for hard court.
@@milanvesovic1703 nadal HC slams = 6
Djokovic CC slam = 2. Ask djoker to win more french open. Slam >> other tournaments
Growing up during early/mid 2000's AO and FO were always the "slower courts" and Wimby and USO the "faster courts". I know that recent changes have swapped AO and USO so that AO is now med/fast and USO is med/slow. But grass and clay have pretty much stayed the same. Faster courts definitely favor Federer's game winning Wimbledon from '03-'17 and then playing well in AO during 2017-2018 when they were significantly faster than before. Nadal pretty much dominating clay and Djokovic being the most versatile capable of winning on any surface in his prime.
P for the last 3 years USO has been the fastest major post pandemic
@@colethomas903 no the opposite actually. 2020 is when they changed the surface of USO. It’s now categorized as med/slow with high bounce and AO is categorized as med/fast with low bounce
Courts are definitely quicker than they were towards the end of the 2000's less sand used in top coat for hard courts, lighter balls on clay. But courts definitely were slower at the end of 2000's .
The AO switched from deco turf to plexicushion in 2008 and more grit in top coat made it slower.
Till Craig Tilley made it a point to speed up the courts. the US open followed suit. Some courts play slower because of conditions .Miami courts were also sped up but humidity makes the balls absorb moisture slowing them down so its medium paced.Also some places used heavier balls
No aren't. CULT TENNIS's video on the banning of carpet surfaces debunks this ENTIRE video. True CPI stats are not known, which is why goatkovic went with the FAKE CPI from the stats website, which doesn't measure the speed of the court at all but rather calculates a FAKE CPI by just taking the number of service games and points won. How stupid is that? It's such a stupid way to measure court speed. CULT TENNIS had a much better graph on his video, which approximates court speed by looking at average rally length, and since the 2000's not only did average rally length go up for all surfaces, they all HOMOGENIZED. Goatkovic should have dug into his stats some more, for someone that loves his stats so much, he only uses them shallowly to tell his story, but anyone looking at for instance the AO 2005 SF between Marat Safin and Fed vs AO 2023 can just see how much slower the courts have become. Fed and Safin may as well have been playing ping pong given how fast the rallies were compared to the slugfest today. This is just common sense.
The terrible statistical work GOATkovic does in this video calls his entire channel's thesis into question.
With respect if Johnny Mac and other professional pros and actually played as on the courts are telling you that Wimbledon got slowed down, then it got slowed Russia down.
Nice video! Djokovic is gonna be happy this channel existed
Nah he wouldn't care. He would know himself what he's capable of.
I am going to tell him when I see him in Paris this November no. Oh wait, I think the schedule Carlos and I made says withdraw on Paris Masters when Novak is going to play there. So maybe I'll tell him in Turin. Oh wait again, I think I'll also gonna pass on Turin , I mean what's the point of playing indoors if I suck in those courts no. So I'm going to tell him when I see him maybe next year at the Madrid Masters because that is a clay surface no.
@@rafaelnadal454 😂
So what is used to measure court speed in this data?
Is it also not true that they changed the type of grass used in Wimbledon at around 2001? What did that change to the pace?
That is true but I think it was 2002. All the data in this starts in 2003 so it's not addressing whether surfaces were homogenized from the 90s to 2000s which they were. They were just homogenized before federers prime
Where do you get your info and stats from?
www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/
Quite simple what happened
Federer slammed Djokovic for 5 or 6 years
Djokovic slammed Federer for 7 or 8 years
Federer couldn’t win against Djokovic after 2011 therefore Djokovic won and has dominated for ages now
Grovery in GS yes but Fed still beat Djokovic 5/6 times
I absolutely love your videos!!
I think the Federer fan argument might also be looking at the fact the nature of the game became more baseline orientated over the years. This may be due to racket technology than court speed. I haven’t done any analysis into it myself but it does seem there was a gradual die out of serve and volley game even at Wimbledon (though not completely).
It is always interesting to see claims that Federer and/or Djokovic benefited from weak era, or slow courts, but my question is, how come Nadal never benefited from slow courts , or from the " fact" that Federer fans keep talking about that Federer was 'already old' and out of his prime when Djokovic started to beat him in GS tournaments.Where was Nadal during that time, in which era did he play, if Federer/ Djokovic had " easy" opponents, who did Nadal have to face in GS finals?How come Nadal could note taken advantage of ' old" Federer, only Djokovic?
D I say both Nadal and Djokovic benefited I won’t just say 1 if AO and USO was faster HC Nadal never win those 2 majors tournament I guarantee it
I doubt anyone is going to look back in fifty years and discuss court speed. They are going to look back and remember Federers tennis. Djokovic is the most complete tennis player. He will get the records and will deserve them. Though when people look back Federer will be the one who is remembered most. Its his style of tennis. Muhammed Ali does not have the greatest heavyweight record. But to most he is the greatest heavyweight of all time. Its the same with Federer. When people watch highlight reels of Ali its like it was magic. Federer has that same magic. Djokovic is a stunning player. Nadal also. I wish we could all just embrace it. Rather than this UA-cam tit for tat. He beat Federer because he was younger and had greater mental strength in the big moments. He won all the 5 set encounters. But he also did not face one World class player who was younger than him, since his arrival at the top. He went through his career chasing Nadal and federer. Never been chased himself. The old lion being displaced by a younger rival. Was never something Djokovic faced. Alcaraz is the first truly world class player since Djokovic. This has aided Djokovic assent massively. If a younger all attacking Federer arrived after Novak it would be very different for him. Doubt creeps in. The one time he had the crowds in NYC. He chocked much like Federer. Disproving the myth that being against the crowd is always far harder. The support brought a pressure he could not handle. It's about variables and looking at different perspectives. Let's all just try and get along people. Peace and love.
Lol rafa will end up with most slams. Rafa is also more popular than federer
Mr. Goatkovic, please stop it! You're destroying Fedals dreams and legacy. Another great video. Thank you!
U know I'm gonna say it once again u r my hero on utube ...love u man keep the great work ♥️♥️
As a total noob, I've heard court speed being the reason for the end of the serve and volley style in the 90s. Does the data support that? (if there is such data from back then).
They slowed down Wimbledon because serving had gotten out of control in the 90s. But the S&V style was gonna die out anyway with Nadal/Djokovic type players (stylistically) becoming the norm (ex: 2001 US Open final).
I feel bad for you. You post such quality content and your data analysis is top notch but you have very less subs. I can bet if you would have been a fed/nadal/fedal fan and posted videos related to them, then you would have much more subs. You are a true Novak fan just doing your stuff. God bless you
Don't feel bad. This is a hobby 😉
I get goosebumps when you say Djokovic era. An unbeatable champion of champions. I am blessed to witness every single slam won by Novak. I do have my greatest admiration for Rafa, Roger, & Andy as well of course.
😂😂 goosebumps? Cmon man Djokovic is amazing but the comments here are almost a cult 😂
@Goatkovic But i have to say that your videos are good. What are the other questions regarding court-speed?
Yeah absolutely courts are so much slower. It’s still surprising Djokovic won more Wimbledons than US Opens considering that grass is supposed to be the fastest.
Regardless of court speed and court harmonization, there is no excuse that can explain player success other than skill. All players are exposed to the same conditions, and it is up to them to adapts and adjust accordingly.
They why does nearly every active online Djoker fan blame wind for Djoker losing USO 2012 to Murray?
@@flyingsaucer8199 It means that Djokovic was worse at adapting to the conditions on that day to Murray; just as he was to Thiem in the RG SF too, and other times. Djokovic has his weaknesses, like any of the greats. I think what Alex is saying is the same as a point I already made, which is that, overall, the stats favour Djokovic over all the surfaces, court speeds and other conditions. Yes, he does lose and fails to adapt on occasions, and wind might be one of his bigger weaknesses, but overall he will probably come out on top. All fans like to come up with excuses for why their fave player lost. But these excuses don't really help because they highlight a weakness in the player. So, when Fed fans blame court speeds or Rafa fans blame lack of clay court events (or whatever), then this is just highlighting that their own players are not good enough at adapting to other conditions.
@@flyingsaucer8199 yeah that windy conditions cost him to play 3 days on a row 🙂🙂
@@flyingsaucer8199 I am an active online Djokovic fan, and I do not blame the loss to Murray on the wind. Nor do any Djokovic fan that I know. Andy just played better than Novak on the day.
@@Mr.Edd3905 Yes, it does mean that he handled (and handles) wind worse than Murray, but Djokovic fans are the kings of revised narratives, so I don't take y'all seriously. I find that most of you also reside in binaries. Discussions about how certain conditions favour certain players over others due to style, skillset and strengths and weaknesses are not excuses. Isn't that why Nadal is ahead in the slam H2H, something that Djokovic fans post about daily?
Win % does not trump overall achievements. I see Djokovic fans getting very impatient where Wimbledon concerned. He only needs two titles to be the outright record holder. Should be no problem at all.
This video data is absolutely ridiculous and false, courts did get slow down… but the racquet technology has improved, balls changed and that is compensating the slower court speed and of course age plays a big role too.
The most ridiculous thing is that these peasants do not recognize me as the real GOAT!
Lol
Change in surface is the reason Fed beat Sampras that year in 2001. Even so, it took a contentious call in the first set tiebreak and 5 sets for that to happen
I am a Djokovic fan but this isn't entirely accurate , there are more things than just court speed when it comes to the conditions .
Racquet technology has improved a lot since the early 2000s so you are naturally going to be getting more pace easier with more modern racquets .
The court speeds were definitively slowed the most in like 2008-2013 but especially 2011-2013 , US open and AO were so slow in those years after that they definitively started speeding the courts up again , these days the courts are pretty fast and much more enjoyable to watch matches than a decade ago . But there is also one more thing missing here and that is the bounce height , that is also a very important factor , I remember them comparing the bounce height from Wimbledon 2003 and 2008 and the difference was night and day , despite court speeds not being that much different the bounce height was and it favored players with better defense than it would have compared to 2003 .
Just watch some USO and AO matches 10 years ago and now and see the difference in not just the speed but the height as well , it is staggering how much of a difference it is .
Fed's attacking style definitively took a hit in that like 5 year period , he had trouble hitting trough Djokovic and especially Nadal and while the court speed was a factor it was the height that was a bigger factor .
Nadal was the biggest beneficiary of slowing the courts down but even more importantly making the ball bounce higher .
Look at for example The AO 2009 and 2012 final and the finals in 2017 and 2019 the speed and height difference is massive . Federer would not have beaten Nadal in 2017 if the court was like in 2009 and 2012 .
Djokovic also wouldn't have crushed Nadal in 2019 if the court was like 2012 , I believe he would still have won don't get me wrong but it would have been a lot harder .
Look at the USO now it is very fast but compare to 10 years ago and it is night and day .
One of the reasons why the Wimbledon in 2019 was so close was not just because it was a fast court but because the bounce was lower than compared to 2015 for example when Novak after the first set crushed Federer . Federer's backhand and slice are a lot more effective and harder to punish on a lower bouncing surface . Federer was the better player that day , most of the stats were in his favor but Novak won mostly because he is so mentally strong , he was so clutch when it mattered and that is ultimately more important .
I don't think that slowing the courts and having a higher bounce is the only reason why Federer didn't dominate then of course Djokovic and Nadal are legends as well and there is a reason they were stopping him but if the courts were faster and lower bouncing in that period I do believe that Federer would have won 2-3 more majors .
I still believe that both Nadal and Djokovic will win more majors but how many ? Hard to say .
If Novak is allowed to play all slams next year I believe he will end up with the most slams but if not I don't see him getting the better of Nadal by playing 2/4 slams while Nadal gets to play all 4 .
The way things are in Australia and how much hatred they are throwing Novak's way I doubt he will play there until his ban is lifted .
The FO is still Nadal's backyard and while Novak can definitively compete with Nadal there and beat him he is still not favored to win it .
Wimbledon is Novak's best choice but how long can he keep winning there in a row , hard to say , due to the nature of the surface it is just a matter of time before he loses , hopefully not but it will happen sooner or later .
The USO is very fast now so it feels like a gamble who will take it .
they changed the court of wimbledon in 2002. What was the court speed of wimbledon in 2001?
Federer stopped winning because Djokovic defeated him in most of the finals they played and stopped him from reaching finals by beating him in the semi finals most of the time, Federer has never been able to even challenge nadal at the french open, djokovic is a much better athlete than federer, hits a much heavier ball is mentally stronger and can match him in shot making ability.
For me Djokovic seems a lot more intimidating to face on a Tennis court almost like the aura Sampras had.
Of course. Federer is an older player. Meaning he is slower and less fast. Which means he can’t generate as heavy a ball.
S bingo
Amazing video. Congrats
Great stats 👍 always thought Nadal had better chances against Novak on slower courts .
Best content creator 👏
Thanks!
Slow terrain is slow for everyone. Faster also. This is so stupid comparation.
Why does every player say the grass plays way way slower now then?
Cause they are haters of nole the goat of this galaxy.
@@VishalSingh-st5xd I don’t think they are lol, and they talked about the speed difference before Nole started dominating
I am the best on grass! Roger and Novak are both trash no.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I'm joking.
The Wimbledon Courts were deliberately slowed down to encourage Spanish players to return to the Tournament. It was not a Secretary was widely publicised at the time.
Is this considering the balls? Because even Djokovic says that balls are getting slower year by year in AO
You should compare court speed using direct speed measurements like CPI(measured from hawkeye) rather than some indexes calculated from indirect statistics. Statistics like serve points/speed are influenced heavily from other factors like improvements in racquet tech and change in tennis ball. And from what I see court speed calculated on Ultimate Tennis Statistics doesn't correlate well with official CPI data.
Hawkeye also shows faster speeds.
@@goatkovic Not really. In 15/16 season CPI are quite slow, and that's the year the complaints about the slow court speed reaching peak. Only after that some tournaments started to speed up their court (AO in 2017, USO in 2020, Canada/Paris in 2019). This doesn't mean the court speed keeps getting faster through out the year. Overally my opinion on UTS's court speed index is that it's inaccurate and shouldn't be used to analyze court speed where CPI data isn't available. Another example on UTS being inaccurate mentioned by other comments is AO 2021, where many players believed this was the fastest court they had ever played due to terrible court condition. CPI data of AO 2021 is indeed quite fast(50), but this is not indicated in UTS's court speed at all.
@@charliezh4947 Source?
@@goatkoviclmao dude disappeared from the face of the earth when you asked him to back up his claims hahahaha
@@heIIbIazer Every time.
Modern rackets and players being more talented these days plays a big role in why we see longer rallies. The court speed myth is fallacy that federer fans and older generation of tennis players/fans use to bash the modern Era of tennis. A good way to measure court speeds is to compare the difference in winners off the ground, aces, and unforced errors between both players.
It's high bouncing, not speed, the key factor. Grass and indoor tournements favoured shot making players. Current conditions in most tournements favour grinders. I like variety. I rather have a 3 hour-5 setter between RF, Tsonga, Rafter or Fernando González, than the current 5 to 6 hours wars of attrition with the same sort of rally and timewasting throughout.
Congratulations for this video 👏👏👏
Love Data analysis on your channel
Goatkovic is 🐐 but so as you
Lol djoker himself said AO 2021 was fastest AO in last 15 years and ur data is showing 2019 AO is fastest than 2021 AO. Its completely wrong stat. Other players also said AO 2021 was fastest AO. Ultimate tennis statistics data are not reliable. We simply dont have data for court speed before 2010 because technology was not that devoloped. CPI is only way to measure speed and AO 2021 > AO 2019 by CPI
AO 2019 was faster. That is why I was destroyed so fast in the finals no.
@@rafaelnadal454 djokovic said AO 2021 was fastest
@@rishbahpandey8697 Novak is trash! My loyal peasant, you should always believe me no matter what I say. I am the GOAT!
@@rafaelnadal454 yess rafa is the goat. But rafa lies a lot.
"According to Hawk-Eye statistics, in 2017, the Australian Open CPI was 42, which was faster than Wimbledon (37) and the US Open (35.4). "
P yea that was 2017 I bet USO is the fastest major now
Po akcentu uopšte ne mogu da provalim odakle si?
Great analysis as usual but I have to dislike the video for including 40-15 from 2019 Wimbledon xD.
Finally a video on this so i dont need to keep repeating it to people
- typical fedtard(before watching this) : roger stop winning because of slower courts
- typical fedtard(after watching this) : roger stop winning because of flaster courts
ok you answered the speed of court question, but they changed the type of grass used, so even though the courts were faster the ball bounced higher. So in a way it played like a clay court which helped Nadal and Djokovic. Whereas the old grass ie before 2002.The ball stayed lower and skidded more on the grass. Any comments or video about the type of grass used before and after 2001?
You are incorrect. It's all explained in the article (link in the description).
@@goatkovic ok I thought the article mentioned this "Thus, the switch to 100 percent ryegrass has effectively made the Wimbledon courts slower and bouncier, even though the new grass doesn’t alter speed or bounce in isolation" what does the statement in the article mean? First it said new grass made courts slower and bouncier then it said it did not alter speed or bounce in isolation. I don't understand the isolation part.
@@derrickc1353 The point is that the courts were bumpy, so the bounce was unpredictable. Because of the unpredictability of the bounce it didn't make sense to play from the baseline, so the players rushed to the net every time. Basically, it was more risky to try to rally than to rush to the net. As result the game was faster, not because the surface was faster, but because that's how the game was played.
Once the grass was changed, the courts were sturdier and the bounce was more consistent, which allowed for more baseline play. So, the players started picking and choosing when to come to net, rather than rushing every time.
@@goatkovic If you google has there been changes in the type of balls being used at wimbledon over the years there is an article from bleacher report talking about the type 3 ball. So, if you could look at article and give me your thoughts, that would be appreciated.
@@goatkovic Have you had a chance to research using a different type of ball which would make the courts seem to play slower.
If courts slowed down would affect Roger's winning rate, he should have beaten Nole in AO more. But he didn't.
Great video as always. However I do think the speed of the game has slowed down a bit because of the balls. The balls have become a lot fluffier thus slowing down the game and some of the players have mentioned it. Balls probably make a bigger difference than the courts in my experience.
LOL
It doesn't pertain to the Federer-Djokovic debate, but is there more surface homogenization in the 21st century compared to the 1990s? In other words, was the disparity between clay, hard courts, and grass greater in Sampras's era than in Federer's?
Federer Main opponent in his prime by his grandslam titles in the ultimate tennis ranking
20- Hewiit
21-Roddick
37- Safin
Djokovic Main opponent in his second prime since 2018 by his grandslam titles in the ultimate tennis ranking
32-Zverev
39-Medvedew
46-Thiem
Djokovic Main opponent in his first prime 2011-2016 by his grandslam titles in the ultimate tennis ranking
2-Nadal
13-Murray
35-Wawrinka
Well, recently there was another thread with the same narrative, so I simply shut the guys mouth by saying this: if the courts were made to these speeds to disrupt Federer's game, and if the courts were slower than what's his liking, then he would be susceptible to losing to players who like to play longer rallies, get the ball back over and keep running, essentially to the clay court specialists. While that is correct for Nadal (although we can discuss about the reasons why he loses to Nadal, but that's another story), it is not correct for anyone else. However, even when he was in his "primer", he was defeated by: Tsonga in Wimbledon, Berdych in Wimbledon and US open and to Anderson again in Wimbledon. This last one is very interesting because it happened on the court one (and we know that Federer doesn't play on court one except when he leaves Nike). Court one is faster than the center court, and usually it's reserved for Nole in R16, because it's basically a land mine. You play all your matches on the center court , then they move you to the One, which plays faster, then you meet someone like Anderson. Nole solved it in 2015, Federer failed in 2018. So, I am convinced that the court speeds on the main courts of grand slams are actually fine tuned to either Federer or Nadal, whoever Nike favoured in a given tournament. Their bad luck is that Nole is a better player on any given surface and its speed. The only exception being the super slow and bouncy clay. But the clay should be banned as a surface anyway.
PS. I forgot Del Potro in 2009. Prime Federer.
You cannot ban the clay surface! That is the only surface where I do not withdraw when I play against Novak!
Meddy couldn't have said it better - "if you like to roll around in the dirt like a dog, be my guest!"
@@rafaelnadal454 🤣
@@user-jz9kz1ud8m I'm just being honest no. Carlos and my team already planned a very good strategy from the start. Only play vs Novak when the match is on clay. On other surfaces, withdrawal is the key! Vamos!
@@rafaelnadal454 leyenda 😂
I agree with you man in every word. The only thing that diminishes your arguments is the fact that you are Slavic . Am I right? I assume you are Serbian too? That doesn’t mean you are wrong at all. I am rooting for you
Why would his nationality have anything to do with his arguments. He presents his arguments logically and with facts. If someone thinks he is wrong, there is a comment section so go ahead, dispute him.
@@djoleluk he can't dispute, not enough iq.
As a Serbian living overseas for more than 35 years I am nou sure his accent is actually Serbian, possibly Eastern European or even (less likely) Southern European.
Neither of this should interfere with factual argument with him, if you have one?
@@user-fc2fh1ir8v he is from Balkan, so he understands Serbian language, at least.
if any one likes to argue, do it by comparing the hall of famers from each era. in Roger's era, how many of them after Pete Sampras & Aggasi? and how many in big 3 era during which Nole won most his majors? is it reasonable to conclude it's been way harder for Nole to win majors than Roger could in his time? Nole was number 1 through most big 3 era. think Roger or Rafa did not want to be the number 1? go ask both of them and see how they're going to lie about it.
federer's prime years is 2003-2013 while djokovic started to ascend in 2011. by that time federer was going down and nadal had always been injured since 2010. only nadal could really challenge djokovic given they're only 1 year apart in age. in fact they have a tied h2h record. the last 10 years actually is the weakest era in tennis because everyone plays the same style, the courts are almost the same, and the younger generation are mentally weak due to social media and smartphone distractions. sure they might be stonger but tennis is a mental game. look at djokovic's last 8 slam wins it's mostly against the young gens. it suits his style of play when everyone just camps at the baseline and tries to outhit him. no variety there and too easy and predictable for him. then until alcaraz came and showed how to beat him by mixing it up. if AO was still on rebound ace, he would never have 10 titles on that surface because it's gummy which will eliminate his sliding defensive shots. the era where the 4 grandslams have their own characteristics was the best era.
Wimbledon slowed down in 2002. Since then, the surface has not changed much at all.
So Federer was benefited by a slower grass court.
@@emiliodelcanto4179 I am not suggesting that anybody benefited. Every player faces the same conditions. I think Wimbledon slowed the courts down a little in 2002 to compensate for the increased for service speed. Spectators wanted longer, more competitive matches, and given the increased service speed was shortening rallies, it made sense to slow down the surface.
@@alextabet9247 wimby slowed in 2001
@@rishbahpandey8697 I knew it was right around that period...certainly before the era of the Big 3.
This is just false. I have seen comparisons of Fed's serves 2003 vs 2008 and it shows clearly, for a practically identical serve, how much slower and higher the bounce had become. The video just happened to use Federer but the main point is to compare the same player over a time period.
Having attended Paris Bercy numerous times I can assure you almost no other tournament has been slowed down as much as this one. The 2016 Aus Open Final was the slowest thing in history and you only have to see the 2017 final back to back to see the difference in speed.
Analyzing court speeds in isolation would be grossly incorrect. What needs to be seen is court speed in relativity to changes in racquet technology. In other words, we have to look at the change in playing experiences for lawn tennis professionals on account of technological advancements being made in the size and power of racquets. As per this video, court speeds have increased marginally. Let me take the example of Wimbledon which is played on Grass and is considered to be Federer's favourite surface. The court speed has increased from 76 to 80 ie less than 6% speed increase. What about racquet weight and power generation. The racquets started becoming lighter and lighter while the power generated was becoming greater and greater. It is generally estimated that today's racquets generate more spin and generate 23% more power than racquets that were in use a decade ago. To buttress my point, It may be noted that in 2009, Novak was using Wilson and changed to Head and immediately started seeing better results. To conclude, I wish to state that if we were to remove variables such as rate of racquet technology improvements vis-a-vis court speed changes and the 6 years age difference and take into consideration Roger's 2004 to 2007 peak primetime record of reaching 2 French Open Finals and winning 11 of 12 grand slams outside of the French Open, consecutive weeks as number one, his versatile playing style and game influence, Roger Federer is indisputably the GOAT.
Oh really ? How accurate from a fed fan 🌚🌚
…and what exactly stopped The Arrogant one of using all of those “technical” advantages?!
First of this court speed stat is incorrect. He doesnt tell his sources
@@rishbahpandey8697 He does! Ultimate tennis statistics
@@anafranjic4646 ultimate tennis stats is not proper source. Its just doesnt have CPI data . ITF started to test CPI from 2012. Djoker and other players themselves said 2021 AO is fastest AO in last 15 years and ultimate tennis data is showing 2019 AO faster than 2021 AO
You are going to make the Federer fans retreat by only saying that Federer is the best because he is so smooth and loved because you would have a hard time disproving those qualities.
@Goatkovic another excellent stat based video. Just proves why everyone is afraid of Novak 😊thanks for the video
I am not afraid of Novak!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Only on clay
I am neutral in a Big 3 debate. But, what about the argument that Federer won against great players like Roddick, Hewitt, Safin and it was more competitive era..whereas in the recent years Djokovic and Nadal are winning against players like Tsitsipas, Berrettini, Zverev and this is a weaker era..
Do u even realize that a player like Zverev could eat roddick and hewiit alive if he played in that era? Do u even realize that Nole peaked in the toughest era in the history of tennis and that's packed with facts not lame excuses like u do sir ? Btw there is a video where Goatovic made a comparison between the two eras and u will be shocked 4 sure
Never heard that one before. Federer's prime coincided with a weak era not a strong one. Only guy that had the talent to be another all time great then was Safin and he wasn't dedicated to the sport.
That is absolutely true. We are facing weakest tennis era in last 5 years. Players like tsitsipas, ruud, berretini had no chance to be in top-10 10-20 years ago.
@@ivc185 Tsitsipas has a tremendous game and could win majors if he wasnt mentally weak. Berretini is not meaningfully different than Roddick as a player...serve and a forehand. Sinner shows tremendous progress and promise. Alcaraz is already a great player. Also, in the last couple years...this is very subtle, but true....you're starting to see players understand that coming into net is important, so you're starting to see a very small amount of variety re-introduced into the game. 2002-2007 was as weak an era as you'll see with Roddick really the next best guy after Federer and only a very young Nadal who hadnt yet translated his game to other surfaces.
Tsitsipas - guy without backhand made a top 3. Easily. By beating other wooden soldiers. I m looking at current top-20 and cannot understand what it is, is this a joke...15 years ago we have had there davydenko, roddick, gonzalez, ferrer, berdych, haas, moya, ljubicic, nalbandian, hewitt, gasquet. None of them i suppose has lost his first 8 ATP finals like current 10th guy. These periods are just uncomparable...
The courts DID slow down but your timeline is not showing that. You need to look at 1980 until 2004. The slowdown happened in the early 2000's and there was SIGNIFICANT surface issues through the years and events adjusted
Just look at the 2003 Wimbledon court speed of 62 compared to the 2014 court speed of 89. These are not marginal court speed differences, these are gigantic.
The court speeds dropped in the early 2000's COMPARED TO the 80's and 90's - which are missing from your graphs. THEN during Djokovic's era the courts sped up again... which your graphs show. Starting your graph in 2003 is hiding reality.
Many ATP players were on record complaining about court speeds during various years. The slowing down of courts created far more rallies and longer matches. Each tournament played with court speeds to keep high ratings but shorter matches - hence the massive disparities shown.
The slowdown began BEFORE Federer's dominant run and then continued and was then adjusted. Courts are absolutely playing faster now than 2003 HOWEVER I would wager than even 2021 court speeds are still slower than 1980 or 1995 and that is the real story.
Look at the US Open court speeds - 2011 is 49 compared to 2021 72. Federer CLEARLY would have benefited from a 72 rating court speed at the US Open. Look at the 2009 US open where Federer lost to Del Potro - the court speed dropped by 8 points in a single year.
My favorite is the 2009 Australian Open final. The court speed was 53 compared to the 2019 court speed of 83. Go watch highlights. The ball is moving at GLACIAL pace during the match. Federer would hit clean inside out winners and Nadal still has plenty of time to get to the ball. THAT is a direct result of the court speed.
ua-cam.com/video/zZO7saJQRxw/v-deo.html&ab_channel=AustralianOpenTV
Then watch Federer vs Nadal in the 2017 final with a court speed of 68. You can put both videos side by side and watch Federer hitting THE SAME INSIDE OUT FOREHANDS - in 2009 Nadal gets all of them back - in 2017 they are clean winners
ua-cam.com/video/FBVi4wLxotU/v-deo.html&ab_channel=AustralianOpenTV
You can LITERALLY SEE THE DIFFERENCE in the ball speed as it skips through the court. It is so fucking obvious.
I am a 13.0 UTR, USTA 6.0 pro players and understand court speeds very well. Anyone at this level can "feel" the court speeds and we understand how the ball moves on different courts. The 2009 Australian Open court was GLACIAL slow and that fact is proven by the listed 2019 83 rating court speed
Federer lost a lot of grand slams due to court speeds being slowed down. Made no difference at the French. Djokovic is great o quick conditions and these faster and faster conditions during Djokovic's prime played to his advantage. By the time these courts were fast again Federer was already old.
Go watch the highlights of 2017 Federer vs Nadal Indian Wells and Miami. Federer OBLITERATED Nadal in this matches due to the court speeds. Back in 2006 those same courts were playing as glaciers and Nadal had a chance and won matchups.
ua-cam.com/video/4_2sWkwkUdg/v-deo.html&ab_channel=AllAboutTennis
I am not debating Federer vs Djokovic. Look at charts from 1980 to 2021 and you can see the trend happen and then reverse
Nadal has ZERO WTF championships. Blazing fast indoor hard courts. No surprise then that both Federer and Djokovic dominated the surface - which means faster surfaces means more victories for them. Slowing down the courts robbed Federer of grand slams.