Across The Net: Twenty Years of Hard Court Tennis in Oz plus Australian Open Picks

Posted by ikabod Crane on 01.15.2007

Next week will see the kickoff of the twentieth Australian Open held on a hard court. What impact has the surface switch from grass to hard court had on tennis?

The Australian Open was a dying major in 1986. Top players rarely entered the event and it was a Grand Slam in name only. The tournament decided to move from December to January in an attempt to make the Australian Open relevant again. This meant the 1986 Aussie Open was not held. In 1987, the event was held for its final time on grass and Stefan Edberg and Hanna Mandlikova opened the year with a Grand Slam title. Moving to the beginning of the calendar got the Aussie Open away from the holidays and also made it a must for even considering winning The Grand Slam – winning all four majors in one calendar year. The change in dates no doubt helped the Australian Open by making it an early springboard for rankings success.

In 1988, the Australian Open moved from Sydney to Melbourne and changed surfaces from grass to Rebound Ace hard courts made in part from ground up used tires. This incredibly rubberized hard court plays much slower than the Deco Turf II hard courts used in North America. What impact has moving from low bouncing grass courts to high bouncing slow Rebound Ace courts had on tennis in general and tennis in Australia? I will give my thoughts on what the surface changes have meant.

First, Rebound Ace is very hard on the body. In the extreme Australian heat, the court can become sticky, and nasty ankle sprains are an annual occurrence in Melbourne. Kim Clijsters was the last victim of the sticky court in the 2006 women's semifinal. Sadly, one can expect several male and female players to be injured in a similar fashion this year.

Second, Steffi Graf winning the Grand Slam in 1988 helped the Australian Open's move to January capture the imagination of players seeking a calendar year Grand Slam sweep. Winning the Grand Slam, once considered unlikely, occurred in the first year of the revamped Australian Open. Since that time Monica Seles, Steffi Graf, Martina Hingis and Serena Williams have all had serious runs at the single year sweep. Mats Wilander and Roger Federer have also come close to completing this Herculean task.

Third, while the usual suspects tend to dominate women's tennis regardless of surface, Rebound Ace favors counter punchers and grinders on the men's side. I have divided the past 19 men's champions into three categories:

Counter Puncher/ Grinder w/ Year of title:
Mats Wilander 1988
Ivan Lendl 1989, 1990
Jim Courier 1992, 1993
Andre Agassi 1995, 2000, 2001, 2003
Yevgeny Kafelnikov 1999
Thomas Johanson 2002

Serve and Volley Players:
Boris Becker 1991, 1996
Pete Sampras 1994, 1997

Big Hitters Who Tend to Stay at the Baseline:*
Petr Korda 1998 – Not really sure where else to put him
Roger Federer 2004, 2006
Marat Safin 2005

* Lendl, Courier and Agassi could all be placed in this category, but their respective net play is far worse than Safin or Federer's. Korda is hard to categorize, but he certainly was not a grinder or counter puncher.

So the Australian Open has had 15 of its 19 hard court champions prefer to spend a match around the baseline. This is a major shift from what one would expect to have seen had the Australian Open remained a grass court event. When one considers that Wilander, Lendl, Courier, Agassi and Kafelnikov have combined for ten of these nineteen hard court Australian Open titles and also won a combined 10 French Open crowns, one can see that the Australian Open requires skill sets that translate well to clay court tennis.

I have had a very interesting email discussion with a British tennis fan about Federer and Sampras' greatness. He is right to point out that today's tennis players tend to be almost completely baseline centered whether retriever a la Lleyton Hewitt or basher a la Andy Roddick. Aside from Mario Ancic, there is not a serve and volley player ranked in the top twenty-five today. I think having a second Grand Slam event that heavily favors baseline play has undoubtedly contributed to tilting the tour in this direction.

Australia has a rich tennis history. It is a history steeped in attacking serve and volley tennis. Sadly, switching to a slow surface has undercut Aussie aspirations of winning the home town Grand Slam event. Pat Cash was runner-up at the first Rebound Ace event in 1988. Patrick Rafter reached the semifinals in 2001. Lleyton Hewitt is a baseline player who in theory would benefit from this surface. However, Hewitt who won the 2001 U.S. Open and 2002 Wimbledon titles actually plays better on faster surfaces. Hewitt's serve is very neutral. On a faster surface he tends to hold serve more easily, but in Melbourne his serve sits up for opponents to punish. Hewitt was runner-up at the 2005 Australian Open, but that is his only trip beyond the round of 16. Rafter similarly only had one trip beyond the round of 16 despite winning the U.S. Open in 1997 and 1998 and finishing as a runner-up at Wimbledon twice. ESPN reports that the surface is playing faster than last year. This may be good news for Hewitt, but it is hard for me to understand why a nation that produced all court players with great net play such as Laver, Newcombe, Stolle, Rosewell, Roach, Cash and Rafter is playing its home Grand Slam on a surface that is hostile to net rushers. Becker and Sampras both had heavy ground strokes and serves that allowed them to hit through the slow surface.

Serve and volley players with lesser ground strokes have virtually no chance of winning the Australian Open these days. Consider that Stefan Edberg who played a very Aussie style game despite being Swedish completely dominated the grinding Jim Courier 6-2, 6-4, 6-0 in the 1991 U.S. Open final only to lose to Courier 6-3, 3-6, 6-4, 6-2 five months later in the 1992 Australian Open final. A pure serve volley player such as Edberg had the edge on a backcourt player such as Courier on a fast surface. Why would a serve and volley nation have a slow hard court for its flagship tournament? I do not know, but for nineteen years this has been the reality. Do not be shocked to see backcourt rallies dominate the 2007 event.

Men's Draw:

Federer has an easy path to the third round and then some potentially tricky matches to reach the semifinals. He can certainly navigate the draw in front of him and I would expect to see Roger in the semifinals.

Andy Roddick and Marat Safin may face off in a 3rd round blockbuster.

Nadal has a good draw to the round of 16, but his nemesis James Blake or rival Thomas Berdych each possibly await Nadal in the quarterfinals and semifinals.

World #3 Davydenko has a game that suits this surface and has a draw that ought to see him go far.

I am hesitant to pick the favorites because Nadal seems less than confident, less than healthy and has to face a faster surface than last year. Federer has issued a quote or two that make me wonder if he has mentally recuperated from 2006. Roddick may have the "win one for Jimbo" motivation after Jimmy Connors recently lost his mother. Still Federer is hard to pick against.

Semifinals: Federer d. Roddick in 4 sets, James Blake d. David Nalbandian in 4 sets
Final: Federer d. Blake in 3 or 4 sets.

Women's Draw:

World #1 JHH is not playing this year and defending champion Mauersmo has not looked great in the tune-ups. I must say I have no idea who will win, but here goes. I will take a long shot or two.

Semifinals: Clijsters d. Sharapova in 3 sets, Jelena Jankovic d. Nicole Vaidisova in 3 sets
Final: Clijsters d. Jankovic in 2 sets