Chapter 1191 Each Has Its Own Strengths
"30:0".
Bend your knees and push off the ground.
Toss the ball and swing the racket.
Zone 1, middle road, inner corner.
The first serve went into the zone smoothly. This was not a difficult serve/receive. Nadal slightly adjusted his steps and prepared to attack with his forehand.
Huh? Wait!
Nadal paused for a moment, waiting to hit the ball again, but the hitting point was a little wrong. He forced force but failed to control the arc of the swing. He realized the situation was not good just after touching the ball, and then watched the return ball go out of bounds.
The serve was wrong, so Gao Wen served directly and won—
"40:0".
Nadal looked up at the sky in annoyance. Obviously, this point was not right.
What's going on?
Simply put, Gawain sneaked in a reduced-power serve with a speed of about 165 kilometers per hour, and squeezed Nadal's swing space by landing at a close distance.
Finally, he successfully caused Nadal to make a mistake in his return serve.
Of course, it is not that simple to explain in detail.
On hard courts, top players will also try the reduced-force serve tactic, but the tactical objectives and serve strategies on hard courts and clay courts are completely different.
On hard courts, serving with reduced power often controls the landing point, which affects the opponent's movement, causing them to lose position, reduce the quality of the return ball, and even cause a return error.
Therefore, on hard courts, the serve with reduced force often chooses a larger angle, the outside angle or the inside angle, to tear the angle apart.
On clay, because the ball speed drops and the serve power is reduced, the receiver may stand deep in the baseline to improve his or her serve success rate. This trend can be seen among all professional players, but Nadal has taken this tactic to a whole new level.
Generally speaking, players stand about three meters away from the baseline to receive the serve, but Nadal will retreat to four or even five meters away.
Positioning the ball farther apart gives the receiver more time and space to return the ball, but it also means that while waiting for the tennis ball to reach the receiving position, the power and rotation are weakened, requiring the receiver to actively exert force, otherwise it will be difficult for the tennis ball to fly over the net.
Therefore, on clay, the reduced-force serve often takes advantage of the opponent's position when receiving the serve, further limiting the opponent's ability to use the force to hit the ball, and forcing the opponent to make mistakes when exerting force.
If the force is too light, the return serve will go directly into the net; if the force is too heavy, the arc cannot be controlled and the serve may go out of bounds.
Therefore, on clay court, the serve with reduced power is often served closer to the body, that is, close squeeze, and it is necessary to avoid creating an angle and letting the opponent run. Once running, the inertia of the running start can bring power and speed, which can also win a certain amount of help in leveraging the opponent's force.
However, nothing is absolute, and the arrangement and combination of tactics are always relative.
The same is true for reduced-force serves, close compression on hard courts, and tearing angles on red clay, which also occur occasionally. There is no absolutely correct tactic, only relatively correct timing.
Moreover, whether it is hard court or clay, the reduced-force serve cannot be used frequently, because reducing the speed of your serve is equivalent to giving up the advantage of serving and waiting to be beaten passively.
Like Nadal, who dominated the clay court from 2005 to 2014 entirely by relying on second serves, this is also an incredible miracle that cannot be replicated.
It can be seen from the side that in the past ten years, Nadal has reached the pinnacle of baseline holding ability and unparalleled defensive counterattack ability.
Just now, Gao Wen sneaked in with a weak serve, and it was a close-range forehand, directly challenging Nadal's strongest weapon, but because of the suddenness, it worked wonders, easily earning a point, and then got three consecutive game points -
In this inning, three points, three ways to score.
This also proves Graf's point: in fact, people have always had a wrong impression of clay, as if any game on clay will turn into a long tug-of-war, which is not only difficult but also boring.
In fact, the fast courts, such as grass, indoor carpet, and fast hard court, are the ones that are most likely to fall into the "boring" rut.
These fast courts do not leave players much reaction time. "Serve plus forehand" does not even require three moves, two moves are enough, and the score is decided within three shots throughout the game. There is not even a round of ball, and it eventually turns into a serve practice match with no confrontation at all.
It is also because of this that Karlovic's games are often very... "boring". I don't mean to attack or belittle him, but his games are basically serve, serve, serve, and most of the time they go into a tiebreak. Occasionally, one or two mistakes will determine the outcome of the game.
But it is different on clay courts. When the ball speed slows down, it gives the players more time for the stalemate on the one hand, and more room to play on the other hand. The game can be completed through different tactical combinations, different hitting methods, and different unexpected situations, which is a double test of physical strength and energy.
Of course, there is an objective point of view that the clay court is too long and too arduous. A game often takes three hours, which is also a torture for the audience. They may become distracted while watching, especially in the wave of modern TV sports live broadcasts.
From volleyball to badminton to table tennis, the reforms in different sports are actually shortening the game time for the sake of ratings.
The latest novel is published first on Liu9shuba!
This is an objective fact. According to unofficial statistics, the average duration of hard court tournaments is generally around 100 minutes, while the average duration of clay court tournaments is around 150 minutes.
Interestingly, according to official ATP data, the venue with the longest matches in the history of the Open Era was not clay.
Among the top five longest matches in the Grand Slam, three took place at Wimbledon, one at the Australian Open, and only one at the French Open.
If all tournaments are included, among the top ten, there are three each on hard courts and clay, and two each on grass and indoor carpet, almost all of which are fast courts.
The reason is simple. On a fast court, although there are not many rounds of balls, the power of the serve increases. Even a serve cannon like Karlovic who only has one weapon can easily hold his serve. The difficulty of breaking the serve increases sharply, so that the chance of each set entering a tiebreak increases greatly.
As you can imagine, the duration of the game cannot be reduced. In the end, fast venues such as grass and indoor carpets are more likely to result in extremely long games.
In other words, discussing the difference between clay and hard courts simply based on the length of the match is one-sided, narrow-minded and unnecessary.
Different venues have their own style and characteristics.
Now, Gawain reads the color of the red earth bit by bit.
For the fourth consecutive point, Gao Wen once again chose a different tactic.
This time, it was a bottom-line stalemate.
In clay court matches, not only when facing Nadal, but also when facing most opponents, baseline rounds are a compulsory course, which is the main body of the game.
What's more, Gao Wen is no stranger to this. This is the key to his success on hard courts, so he needs to make adjustments to match the clay courts.
Rebuild your own tactical system and layout step by step.
(End of this chapter)