So Princess Lleyton Hewitt came out and said today that he endorses the new surface for the Australian Open. Considering he's done nothing for the last million years but whinge about it, this is, like, big news. Truth is, though, I'm not sure if I like it.
_
My reasons for this are extremely superficial. I'm sure there's detailed criticism floating around about the new 'True Blue' surface that I should probably read, but I haven't as of writing this post. (I never said this was a well-informed blog.) No, my issue is with the colour.
_
WHY did they have to make the court blue?
_
Okay, so I sound childish. Hell, it's a childish reaction. But why oh why oh why did they have to make it blue? The Australian Open is played on green courts. Green! The US Open is played on those weird bluey-purple courts. So why do we have to be blue now too?
_
Tantrum aside, I am actually interested in how the new surface will influence play. I don't actually know how different the new surface is from Rebound Ace, though I have heard that it plays slowly and that the bounce can be a bit uneven and unpredictable. I wonder why they thought it was necessary to change? Sure, there's been some debate and discussion of Rebound Ace in the past, but that's the challenge, yeah? The four Grand Slams are played on four different surfaces - clay, grass, cement and synthetic. I suppose synthetic can cover a myriad of things... under that label, they could probably switch to carpet if they wanted.
_
I think what I'm trying to get at is that I really, REALLY hope they didn't change the court surface just because Princess Lleyton whinged long and hard enough. I've always thought it was vaguely ridiculous the way he always whinged about he could never win on Rebound Ace because it doesn't suit his playing style. From Tennis Australia's perspective, I'm sure it would be nice for an Australian to win the Open, but I hope that wasn't a factor in them changing the court surface, because that would just be STUPID.
_
Not that it would matter. Federer can win on any surface. And versatility maketh the tennis player.
_
My reasons for this are extremely superficial. I'm sure there's detailed criticism floating around about the new 'True Blue' surface that I should probably read, but I haven't as of writing this post. (I never said this was a well-informed blog.) No, my issue is with the colour.
_
WHY did they have to make the court blue?
_
Okay, so I sound childish. Hell, it's a childish reaction. But why oh why oh why did they have to make it blue? The Australian Open is played on green courts. Green! The US Open is played on those weird bluey-purple courts. So why do we have to be blue now too?
_
Tantrum aside, I am actually interested in how the new surface will influence play. I don't actually know how different the new surface is from Rebound Ace, though I have heard that it plays slowly and that the bounce can be a bit uneven and unpredictable. I wonder why they thought it was necessary to change? Sure, there's been some debate and discussion of Rebound Ace in the past, but that's the challenge, yeah? The four Grand Slams are played on four different surfaces - clay, grass, cement and synthetic. I suppose synthetic can cover a myriad of things... under that label, they could probably switch to carpet if they wanted.
_
I think what I'm trying to get at is that I really, REALLY hope they didn't change the court surface just because Princess Lleyton whinged long and hard enough. I've always thought it was vaguely ridiculous the way he always whinged about he could never win on Rebound Ace because it doesn't suit his playing style. From Tennis Australia's perspective, I'm sure it would be nice for an Australian to win the Open, but I hope that wasn't a factor in them changing the court surface, because that would just be STUPID.
_
Not that it would matter. Federer can win on any surface. And versatility maketh the tennis player.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment