Was the grass at Wimbledon unusually slow this year?

Question

Or is it just my imagination?

No I meant slow. The ball was not skidding as fast as it used to, and it was bouncing much higher than in previous years.

Answer 1

i really don't think it was your imagination. i don't ever remember seeing so many 20-30 stroke rallies at wimbledon as there were this year. i remember back in the early 90s people made a huge deal over a 10-12 stroke rally.

also, look at the wear on the court. did you notice that the baseline looked pretty chewed in the second week (like it always did by that time) but the service line and up to the net were almost untouched? that has a ton to do with the length of points and the speed of the game; if the pace is slow, the harder it is to get up to the net and the easier it is for your opponent to pass you. i saw alot of passing shots this year and even the serve speed was a little lower than i expected on grass. roddick's fastest serve was 144 mph and venus williams 127 mph serve was actually one mph slower than her fastest serve at the french open (128 mph).

the dampness may have had something to due with that, but i think that there's been a change made with the ball, the grass, something to slow the game down at wimbledon.

Answer 2

I think it could have been and I also felt the same. But many times, the uneven bounce was more than before.
Probably I may be wrong and looking at the rallies in the finals
and other matches, sometimes they looked like they were
playing on clay. I also think, with the grass died around the
baselines it could have been a factor.
Nothing to take away from Nadal (Clay King) nor Federer,
but their rallies were too long for grass court tennis. I loved
their game and it was worth watching again.

Answer 3

I have noticed a general trend toward it appearing to be slower. It could just be my imagination too I'm not sure. But I've been watching Wimbledon since back when Boris Becker first won against Kevin Kurren and it seemed to play much faster then. But it could just be that we aren't seeing any big server/serve-n-volley types like Sampras anymore. All of the current crop of players are heavy ground strokers that put massive spins on the ball, and so it could just look like it plays slower than in earlier years. I can't think of any real reason that it would actually play slower.

Answer 4

They changed the grass to make it more durable, and the new grass is slower and gives a higher bounce. Also, the grass court season has all but disappeared so there are no more serve and volleyers. This means that there is almost no wear on the grass except for the baseline, so you get better bounces.

Answer 5

the glaring answer to that query is confident. Sampras does not have gained as many championships on immediately's Wimbledon floor. Federer/Nadal does not have a huge gamble against a huge serve & volleyer on the faster Wimbledon surfaces of the Nineties.

Answer 6

It was about the same as in recent years,the only reason it may have been a bit slower is because of the moisture in the air and on the grass, but roddick and others were delivering a pretty stable speed on the ball.

Answer 7

Do you mean low?
Yeah and not as interesting as other years. To me Wimbledon is not as interesting as it used to bewhen Ivan Lendl, John MAcNroe, Boris Becker etc were players.
I also liked the time when Pete Sampras was the top player. Do you agree?

Answer 8

they say it could be the player are better so they can with stand the low balls then the years b4 but officials also think its because of there new soil that keeps the long rallies

Answer 9

Its not your imagination, even Bjorn Borg thought so.

Answer 10

it was same