Casper Ruud has taken a strong stance against the recent wave of complaints from fellow tennis stars over the issue of different tennis balls being used at various events on the ATP and WTA tours. Ranked No. 8 in the world, the Norwegian expressed frustration with players who repeatedly bring up the topic, accusing them of “creating drama out of nothing.” This issue has been a growing point of contention among top players, with Novak Djokovic, Iga Swiatek, Daniil Medvedev, Taylor Fritz, and Emma Raducanu all voicing dissatisfaction with the lack of consistency in ball types across tournaments.
Medvedev, in particular, has been one of the most outspoken critics. He initially raised concerns last year, voicing fears about the potential long-term effects on his body, notably mentioning that he worried he might develop “shoulder pain for the rest of my life” due to the varying ball types. The Russian’s frustration was visible again earlier this month at the Shanghai Masters when he clashed with the tournament supervisor during his second-round match against Thiago Seyboth Wild, complaining that the balls weren’t up to professional standards.
“These balls are not good enough for professional tennis,” Medvedev argued, referring to what he described as rapidly deteriorating balls. “This is one of the biggest tournaments in the world, and the balls are destroyed after five games. No pressure at all.”
Following his match, Medvedev went on to claim that these types of balls favor certain players, such as Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz, whose aggressive styles benefit from what he called “dead balls.”
“I think it basically favours people who can benefit power from dead balls. Some have better quality with this, some don’t,” Medvedev commented. “The two best players at doing this, they’re already the best players in the world, and I’m sure they would be without the balls, but with these balls, they’re the only players who can generate crazy power. It’s Jannik and Carlos. It gives them an extra edge.”
For Ruud, however, such complaints are unwarranted. Speaking on the *Nothing Major* podcast, he was vocal about his irritation, indirectly referencing Medvedev’s recent actions in Shanghai.
“You see players complain about the balls all the time,” Ruud remarked. “I’m getting so tired of it. Come on. Just play.”
Ruud pointed out the irony he sees in players coming to events well-prepared, only to then start complaining once they’re deep into the tournament. “For me, what’s funny is some players come like five days in advance to practice. They string like 28 rackets to get the right tension. Then they come to the fourth round and start complaining about the balls,” he observed. “But it’s been the same balls for the past nine days. What’s the point of bringing it up now to the umpire? Like what is he gonna change? What’s the point? Just to make drama out of nothing.”
Ruud’s comments underline his stance that tennis players should focus on adapting to conditions rather than complaining about them, especially mid-tournament when, as he points out, the ball conditions have already been established and can’t be changed.
Novak Djokovic, one of Ruud’s more prominent critics on the issue, has also addressed the topic at length, seeing it as not just an annoyance but a serious issue for players’ physical health. The Serbian legend has previously criticized tennis authorities for their apparent inaction, urging the ATP to adopt a single type of ball for all tournaments to prevent frequent injuries.
“There is certainly a connection between frequent injuries of the wrist, elbow, and shoulder with ball changes,” Djokovic said last October in an interview with *Sportal*. “I am absolutely in favour of choosing one ball with which we will play all ATP tournaments.”
Djokovic’s perspective goes beyond personal preference; he’s concerned with the potential impact on players’ health. He noted that the frequent switching of balls between tournaments can lead to increased wear and tear on players’ joints, particularly on the shoulder, wrist, and elbow. The Serbian explained that while the Grand Slam events tend to negotiate their own contracts with ball sponsors, the situation on the ATP Tour itself could be standardized. His proposal centers on introducing a single type of ball for each surface category to ensure more consistency.
“Every tournament has the right to negotiate. However, we simply have to find a way to unify, so that in each category on the ATP tour we have one ball to play with, depending on the surface,” Djokovic argued. “Sometimes that change of balls happens three times in three weeks depending on where we play, and it affects the health of the players and the joints themselves.”
While Djokovic has called for a unified approach to mitigate potential injuries, Ruud’s stance illustrates a different view of player responsibilities. The Norwegian’s remarks suggest that, from his perspective, the issue may be less about ball changes and more about certain players’ attitudes towards adapting to the varied conditions that are part of professional tennis.
Medvedev’s complaints, though, raise a more nuanced debate on whether ball differences give an advantage to certain playing styles. The Russian’s theory that Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz benefit from the “dead” balls underscores his belief that the inconsistency doesn’t just affect player comfort—it may also influence competition outcomes. Alcaraz and Sinner, known for their powerful groundstrokes and aggressive play, likely benefit from balls that become less pressurized and easier to hit with force as matches progress, Medvedev argues.
However, Ruud’s call for players to “just play” suggests he believes the focus should remain on adaptability rather than debate. His stance resonates with those who see tennis as a sport that requires versatility; players have to adjust not only to different balls but to varied surfaces, climates, and even altitudes throughout the season.
The ball debate, then, divides players between those like Djokovic and Medvedev, who see a need for consistency to protect players’ health and level the playing field, and those like Ruud, who view the controversy as needless. Ruud’s perspective challenges other players to look beyond equipment nuances and focus on personal adaptability. Whether or not the ATP ultimately addresses this ongoing debate with any significant changes remains to be seen, but for now, the ball issue appears to be a point of contention that has polarized some of the sport’s top stars.
