Andy Roddick Breaks Down the Key Differences Between Clay and Grass Courts
Andy Roddick Reveals the Biggest Challenges of Switching from Clay to Grass: Movement, Defense, and Footwear
During his podcast Served, Andy Roddick discussed the transition between clay and grass in tennis. He answered listeners' questions about the main differences between these two surfaces.
"The way you defend is completely different"
He said: "Movement is without a doubt paramount. On grass, you almost always have to get out of defensive situations by hitting or slicing the ball. On clay, on the other hand, sliding is a fundamental defensive tool.
You often try to gain height on the next shot to buy time, which is not the case on grass. Even when running at full speed and hitting a good shot, the court itself gives you an advantage.
The way you defend is completely different, as is the way you move. On grass, you almost have to run to hit the ball and continue your motion; on clay, you synchronize the shot by sliding toward the ball. These are totally different mechanics.
"Spikes would damage the surface"
On grass, you can't use spikes because they would damage the surface and make it unplayable. If a spike digs a deep mark and the ball lands right there, the bounce becomes unpredictable; it's simply impossible.
My old Puma soccer shoes had small rubber studs, but they weren't very aggressive. It's the same for tennis. There are small rubber nubs, but they are not pointy spikes; it's acceptable.
You can't play high-level tennis with shoes designed for hard courts because you would slip constantly; you need grip. Players use specific tennis shoes that allow them to adhere slightly to the surface without damaging it.
What you can't do is use real spikes and tear pieces off the surface."
