Tennis fans engaged in a heated debate when prominent journalist Ben Rothenberg opined that there was a distinct lack of creativity from players while playing on clay courts and that stamina and grit were the major factors of success on the surface.

Clay is one of the most dominant surfaces used on the ATP calendar after the hard courts. 21 events are scheduled to take place on clay courts in the 2024 calendar. This includes a 12-tournament stretch of clay-court tournaments that starts with the Monte-Carlo Masters in early April and ends in the first week of June with the French Open.

Tennis journalist Ben Rothenberg stated on X (formerly Twitter) that clay courts were all about stamina and the willingness to grind and that clay courts gave no opportunity for the players to be creative.

“Hard disagree, honestly! Clay is all about endurance and grinding and this is not what I most savor about tennis. Give me a fast court where a player like Hsieh, Radwanska or Mannarino can chop it up every day with their own unique styles of low-power aggression and creativity.”

Fans were quick to jump in and criticize Rothenberg’s opinions. One fan expressed that for a journalist of Rothenberg’s stature, the comment was ill-informed.

“This is an astonishingly bad take from a tennis journalist. Clay tennis shows so much more variety and point construction, forcing players to use their full arsenal and the full width of the court. It’s where you can’t disguise bad technique the way you can on fast courts,” said a fan on X.

Fans also pointed out that playing on clay required technical nuances. One fan wrote:

“If all you see during a good clay match is grinding and endurance then you’re stuck in the 80s-90s and should probably not call yourself a tennis journalist. You’ll never get the variety of shots, pace and tactics on a fast hc. The serve +1 game can at times be a snooze fest.”

Here are a few more similar reactions from fans online:

“Disagree with you there. Clay is a better test of all of a players attributes. On any other service just get a 6ft 5 plus guy banging down aces or 1-2 punching and it gets a little boring. Harder to do on clay,” opined a fan.

“To each his/her own, I guess. Personally, I see some of the most entertaining and creative matches played on clay, at the pro level, for both men’s and women’s matches,” stated a fan

“Hard disagree. Tennis on clay is always better to watch and leads to better matches. Players construct points here. A bit like chess. Great to watch,” said another fan

Some fans agreed with Rothenberg’s perspective as well.

“Same. Clay season is noise pollution season as well, particularly men’s. Offputting as a tennis enthusiast, so imagine what it’s like for general sports fans,” a fan wrote.

“Am I ….. agreeing with Ben Rothenberg??? This must be a dream,” said another fan

Tennis greats have often found clay to be an elusive surface

Several top players have found it difficult to achieve considerable success on clay. Former players like Pete Sampras, Jimmy Connors, and Boris Becker did not win a French Open title in their respective careers. Even Roger Federer could only capture the Roland Garros title once in 2009.

All the aforementioned players are bonafide legends of the game and performed exceptionally on grass and hard courts. All of Sampras’s Slams came on either grass or hard courts.

Rafael Nadal and Bjorn Borg are the distinctions as far as performances on the clay surface are considered. Both of them have won 20 French Open titles between them across eras.

One key area of commonality between the playing styles of the two players was their application of topspin shots. Borg pioneered the use of topspin and Nadal used topspin to great success.