The grass is always greener

By Tom Kosinski Sports Central Columnist

Cheers, everyone, from merry, old England! Actually, it's hello from Virgin Atlantic row 5, aisle seat. As I wing my way back to, as my new friends here in SW19 say it, "the colonies," I'm writing this darn column.

I just finished a week at the oldest, most famous of all tennis tournaments, The Championships at Wimbledon. I spent quite a bit of time on the grounds, especially the practice courts. As I sat and watched a host of players from American Andy Roddick to French cutie Tatiana Golovin practice, it dawned on me that the rest of the tennis world has it wrong. Grass court tennis is the best tennis, and grass is the best surface, period.

Now I will have my detractors. Grass can be very slick when wet, the bounce is low, powerful serves seem to have an unfair advantage and the ground is usually uneven so you get some very tricky bounces. Clay is the surface of choice for most of the world's tennis population, followed closely by hard courts (asphalt, cement, and concrete.) Both give predictable bounces, are smooth, can be tailored to be slow or slower and traction is rarely an issue.

To all that, I say, "so what?" Clay court players, heretofore known as dirt-ballers, are usually one-dimensional. Check out the games of Gaston Gaudio, Alberto Costa, Juan Carlos Ferraro, Guillermo Coria, etc. and you will see players who basically sit on or behind the baseline and hit big, loopy, spinning forehands and backhands.

If you can just be one shot more consistent than your opponent, you can win. Not so on grass. The same holds true for hard courts, where the surface can be tailored so discretely that big ground-stroke hitters have an unfair advantage. Just think about the Rebound Ace courts at Melbourne Park. I once heard a player say that you can get hurt more easily on grass, but I have never experienced that, nor do the injury statistics over the years prove that out.

Grass requires you to stay low. Bending at the knees is supposed to be a tennis fundamental. On grass, you better have your fundamentals down pat. Grass requires you to have a well-rounded game. Look at all the champions and you will see the list of grass court winners is almost identical to the list of all-time greats.

Bjorn Borg won five Wimbledons, but not until he learned to serve and volley with proficiency.

Pete Sampras won seven Wimbledons. I don't think anyone can argue here that his game was not complete and well-rounded.

Roger Federer has maybe the most complete, all-court game any of us have seen since the days of Bill Tilden. Grass rewards hard work and sound tennis technique. Grass punishes incomplete games and training.

So, grass, at least to me, is the penultimate surface. Forget the cries that big servers with no other game dominate, since that is not exactly true. Roscoe Tanner never won the Big W. Neither did Colin Dibley, Sjeng Schalken, Scott Davis, and a whole lot of other great tennis players with huge serves.

Grass is the surface that truly tests what you have and how much you can give it. Any sports court, facility, or building that forces you to play the way it a sport was truly meant to be played, that requires you to have a complete set of skills and rewards hard work and sacrifice, has to be recognized and honored.

The grass court season is less then six weeks long. In tennis terms, that's like the sweeping second hand on the clock. The lords and ladies of tennis need to bring back the green stuff to its once prominent place in our game. Or at least build me one in my backyard.

'Till next time...

Article courtesy of Sports Central.