Today's players finish their points from way back

Aren't basically all athletes hugely better than previous generations as well though? Advances in things like nutritional and sport sciences mean it can't just be the racket tech, surely?

yeah it's probably both, and also could be cultural like strategy and technique evolving

Is it the racket , the ball or playing style that changed?

Yes

Exactly. The baseline game has become the dominant form (which imo is rather unfortunate and makes it much more one-dimensional)

Or the grass is more resilient

Looks like 1970 would've been more interesting to watch.

For a while I thought racket technology was something used to improve grass resilience, then I understood.

Not hugely better, no. Marginally better, yes.

The racquet technology impact in tennis has been enormous, with the largest difference being size and weight. Traditional wood tennis racquets maxed out at around 65 sq in of string area but weighed up to 400 grams (mixed units, I know). A modern graphite tennis racquet can achieve 100 sq in of string area while decreasing the weight to 300 grams!

Lighter weights allow a player to generate a lot more racquet acceleration without killing their wrist. At the same time, the larger string area gives a lot more margin for error when striking the ball. Players in turn responded by changing their swing planes to a higher vertical angle, coming up over the back of the ball to generate a lot of topspin (and string technology helps with this too). The topspin further increases margin for error by making the ball dive down into the court instead of sailing long (see Magnus effect).

All of this has combined to allow tennis players to hit the ball far harder than they had in the past, with the increase far exceeding what you’d expect from physical training alone. Give modern players a traditional wood racquet and they’ll spray the ball all over the place, making huge numbers of errors, until they force themselves to not swing so hard.

Have you ever seen Nadal’s arm? Dude can serve from a different stadium.

The grass is in on the racket, it's all the kickbacks that makes it grow better.

Ya there are several things that go into this change. Shoes tech, grass type, how short was the grass cut, style of play has changed. If day racket tech is the biggest factor but it's imagine there's more that goes into it.

C/tennis@lemmy.world is currently open for the tournament...

Oh to be clear, the "hugely better" aspect I was referring to is the one observable across basically all sports at the top level (not specifically just tennis), particularly the last 40-50 years or so. One easy to observe side effect is how most world records have been set in the past couple of decades, I think the oldest standing one is from the mid-80s.

Though thanks for the extra context around the racquet, it does seem like it's likely the main factor.

And many people who are elite athletes today have been training hard in their sport since they were young children

C:\tennis

Yes, like the racquet technology isn’t going to help Joe Sixpack weekend warrior. It takes all that training to be able to fully utilize the technology. The racquet size increase has led to so much more consistency with striking the ball that rallies last way longer now. Longer rallies require way more conditioning to survive!

Playing style changed to keep up with faster shots.

1970 = Mario Tennis

You sure court isn't different?

So now they know where to pave with concrete

I never knew tennis was played on grass anywhere, let alone an actual stadium. Is this normal?

No, tennis players are never normal

never normal

So it's normal, then?

This is also largely due to technology. Less about sport-specific technology, and more about technology in general.

The biggest reason why top-level standards in sport have risen over the past few decades in disciplines as diverse as distance running to powerlifting to ski jumping has less to do with improved training for top end athletes, and more to do with the increased standard of living for the world's population. You can't have Kenyans dominating every marathon if they are all starving in famines with no knowledge of the outside world. You can't become a world champion swimmer if there are no swimming pools. And you can't get on the figure skating national team if you have to help with farm chores every morning instead of going to the ice rink to practice. Essentially, we have opened the door to those people who are simply preternaturally good at their sport to become top-end athletes. Someone is simply a genetic freak who was designed to dominate at curling, but they might be living in a rural villiage in Pakistan. Drop an ice rink (that gives out free lunches and plays curling highlight reels on the jumbotron) in that villiage, and Muhammad will soon be the talk of every bar in Canada.

As an average person, advances in sports science are more likely to get you lost in the sauce than push your performance to elite levels. Often, a 20 page training pamphlet from the 1950s is the best training advice someone can get, because it tells them the fundamentals of improving at their sport, rather than getting lost in the minutiae.

The big scientific improvements that have raised the standards in sports are things like:

• Improvements in sport-specific equipment, like tennis raquets.
• Anabolic steroids.
• The psycho-social effect of a new standard being set (see: the 4 minute mile).
• The invenion of new, superior techniques for performing the sport (see: the Fosbury Flop in the high jump)
• The invention of high-intensity, sport specific training modalities (eg, futsal for soccer).
• The invention of convenient salty sugar water for long, hot, hard training sessions.
• Acceptance of reasonable amounts, of strength training as a base-building performance enhancer.
• Acceptance of reasonable amounts, of steady state cardio as a base-building performance enhancer.

Everything else was either already known to the athletes of decades past, or else is a marginal performance boost that elite athletes are experimenting with to get an edge on their opponents. Things like supplement stacks, nutrient timing, planning mesocycles, or performance hypnosis techniques are, at best, marginal improvements. They are popular among elite athletes because elite athletes are already maxing out at the fundamentals of their sport and are looking for any edge they can get. And they are popular and talked about among the lay population because it is easier and more interesting than focusing on the fundamentals. Eg, the 37 year old tennis player who wants to improve their game who starts periodizing their tennis training and tracking their macros, rather than simply accepting that they need to make more time in their schedule and widen their social circle so they can play more tennis with people who are just at or above their current skil level.

Of the four big tournaments, Wimbledon is the only one on grass. The French open is played on clay. The US and Australian Open are played on your typical hard court.

Better raquet tech allows players to hit harder. When you hit harder, the ball goes faster. The faster the ball goes, the further away from the net you need to be to hit it back.

If you try to play close to the net, your opponent will slam the ball to your left or right faster than you can run. So you will lose, and your playing style will be eliminated from top end tennis. If you try to draw your opponent close to the net with a soft shot, they will take the opportinity to line up on a slow target, and then power it to the part of the court where you are not, while you have even less time to react. So you will lose, and your playing style will be eliminated from top end tennis.

The technology drives the playing style

You think at some point they would get closer to the bet to deflect it into the ground

most world records have been set in the past couple of decades

Afaik this was true a few decades ago too

General Knowledge wants to have a word with you

Racket, racket is a war.

I see, is there a big learning curve or difference when it comes to playing on grass vs a hard court? Like if a professional athlete has a tournament at Wimbledon, and they've only ever played on hard courts, would they be at a significant disadvantage to someone who played on grass? Or is it likely that both players will either have no experience with grass, or decent training in both?

Tell him to shove it, I already talked to Captain Obvious.

Yes some players play better on a specific surface. Like Nadal was a clay expert, since he is from Spain and Spain doesn't have many grass courts, most outdoor courts there are clay courts. He has won 14 French Open titles while only 2 Wimbledon titles.

Though to be fair grass courts are rare everywhere since they are expensive to maintain but they are even rarer in warm and dry countries like Spain

There are differences that lead to advantages. If I remember correctly then Nadal was especially good in Paris while Murray was good in Wimbledon.

Not so much evolution of grass, but differing wear patterns indicating differing playing styles.

Grass is pretty much the same.

They play on actual grass? They gotta be cutting that shorter than a golf green lol

Become pong.

The title calls calls out the evolution of racket technology, not grass technology.

Survivorship bias, the courts with wear in other areas never made the flight home

By Bedley Smutler.

Everyone generally knows about tennis courts?

Learn something new every day.

I have read multiple comment threads on here and I still don’t get it… they used to hit the ball in the middle of the field now they are edging the court?

Yes, probably because the new rackets allow faster balls, so it has become too difficult to try to surprise the opponent with a short return at the net.

Which is a lot more interesting than baseline-to-baseline tennis.

Are most outdoor courts clay courts? Or just the ones at a high enough level? It seems to me like hard courts are probably cheaper and require little to no maintenance. I would assume that the majority of courts are probably the low-maintenance variety.

Tennis apparently used to be grass everywhere, but when tennis players in southern France tried to maintain grass courts the climate made it too difficult. So, instead they switched to clay.

What's interesting to me is the length of the grass. Apparently Wimbledon grass is 8mm long, whereas the Premier League uses grass that's up to 30mm long, but typically 20-22mm.

I would guess short grass probably plays similarly to clay and "hard surface". It would be interesting to see tennis on long grass.

It takes a child to raze a village.

Yeah. Lots of sports regulate what kind of equipment is allowed. Maybe professional tennis should impose restrictions on rackets to encourage more varied play.

But General Knowledge outranks Captain Obvious.