PDA

View Full Version : Only 55 minutes of tennis was played in the Nadal/Djokovic Madrid Marathon!


JennyS
10-09-2009, 02:47 PM
(Tennis Channel just re aired it so I timed it!)

When I recorded it, I simply pressed the pause version after every serve and it took up 55 minutes. However, my finger wasn't accurate as I though (I tended to have 2-3 seconds of extra stuff at the end of each point).

So this time I stop watch timed it and it came out to 43 minutes. Amazing!

mikro112
10-09-2009, 02:51 PM
That means Nadal and Djokovic are extremely exploiting the 20 seconds rule.

Thanks for confirming!

Ridiculous.

Cesc Fabregas
10-09-2009, 02:51 PM
Jenny could you please tell me how much tennis was played in the 08 French Open final?

Blinkism
10-09-2009, 02:54 PM
So what you're saying is that, basically, Federer is GOAT?

Thanks, I think we got that point with your 300+ other threads, JennyS.

Can we look forward to your next thread somehow proving that Nadal's Wimbledon 2008 victory was an illusion?

bdawg
10-09-2009, 03:08 PM
So what you're saying is that, basically, Federer is GOAT?

Thanks, I think we got that point with your 300+ other threads, JennyS.

Can we look forward to your next thread somehow proving that Nadal's Wimbledon 2008 victory was an illusion?

How did you come to this conclusion?

bolo
10-09-2009, 03:09 PM
So what you're saying is that, basically, Federer is GOAT?

Thanks, I think we got that point with your 300+ other threads, JennyS.

Can we look forward to your next thread somehow proving that Nadal's Wimbledon 2008 victory was an illusion?


THIS JUST IN! NADAL 2008 WIMBLEDON WIN A SHAM! STORY AT 9!
JennyS

lol. :)

P_Agony
10-09-2009, 03:09 PM
So what you're saying is that, basically, Federer is GOAT?

Thanks, I think we got that point with your 300+ other threads, JennyS.

Can we look forward to your next thread somehow proving that Nadal's Wimbledon 2008 victory was an illusion?

Huh? What does this thread has to do with Federer being or not being the GOAT? Jenny was stating what we all knew all along, Nadal and Djokovic abused the time limit in Madrid in a new way, and people used this match as an excuse for Nadal's loss in the final, yet Nadal didn't really play tennis for 4 hours. Jenny was just providing the exact time.

It wasn't fun to read many Nadal fans not giving any credit to Fed for his Madrid win against Nadal, claiming Nadal was tired, injured, etc. I'm sure you remember those threads.

P_Agony
10-09-2009, 03:10 PM
Jenny could you please tell me how much tennis was played in the 08 French Open final?

Sadly too much.

Serendipitous
10-09-2009, 03:10 PM
Huh? What does this thread has to do with Federer being or not being the GOAT? Jenny was stating what we all knew all along, Nadal and Djokovic abused the time limit in Madrid in a new way, and people used this match as an excuse for Nadal's loss in the final, yet Nadal didn't really play tennis for 4 hours. Jenny was just providing the exact time.

It wasn't fun to read many Nadal fans not giving any credit to Fed for his Madrid win against Nadal, claiming Nadal was tired, injured, etc. I'm sure you remember those threads.

+1


:):):):)

Cup8489
10-09-2009, 03:11 PM
So what you're saying is that, basically, Federer is GOAT?

Thanks, I think we got that point with your 300+ other threads, JennyS.

Can we look forward to your next thread somehow proving that Nadal's Wimbledon 2008 victory was an illusion?

paranoid, anyone?

what a *******.

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-09-2009, 03:15 PM
So, 3-set match lasted 55 mins.

And, 5-set match lasted 63 mins (about 14% longer than the 3-setter).

Well, that only proves that Madrid 09 was one LOOOOOOOONG 3-setter.

And, by the way, Roddick seemed pretty exhausted after the 63 minute match (he couldn't hit the ball right in the last game), and had to withdraw from Davis Cup afterwards.

JennyS
10-09-2009, 03:19 PM
Jenny could you please tell me how much tennis was played in the 08 French Open final?


I don't have that one, but I'd guess it was 10 minutes tops:D

flyinghippos101
10-09-2009, 03:20 PM
So what you're saying is that, basically, Federer is GOAT?

Thanks, I think we got that point with your 300+ other threads, JennyS.

Can we look forward to your next thread somehow proving that Nadal's Wimbledon 2008 victory was an illusion?

Kinda an overreaction don't you think?

ubermeyer
10-09-2009, 03:22 PM
So what you're saying is that, basically, Federer is GOAT?

Thanks, I think we got that point with your 300+ other threads, JennyS.

Can we look forward to your next thread somehow proving that Nadal's Wimbledon 2008 victory was an illusion?

edit: sorry I thought you were being a troll... you never know
to JennyS: Wow! so matches are actually really short, why do they take so much time for other things then???

JennyS
10-09-2009, 03:22 PM
Huh? What does this thread has to do with Federer being or not being the GOAT? Jenny was stating what we all knew all along, Nadal and Djokovic abused the time limit in Madrid in a new way, and people used this match as an excuse for Nadal's loss in the final, yet Nadal didn't really play tennis for 4 hours. Jenny was just providing the exact time.

It wasn't fun to read many Nadal fans not giving any credit to Fed for his Madrid win against Nadal, claiming Nadal was tired, injured, etc. I'm sure you remember those threads.

I'm actually thinking of making a video of showing just the excess time. Then Jack Bauer could use it to torture people with:D

JennyS
10-09-2009, 03:28 PM
what's wrong with you??? stop being a troll

to JennyS: Wow! so matches are actually really short, why do they take so much time for other things then???

The changeovers add to the time. It's over a minute every time, I believe. Plus, even if players are playing quickly, there's still going to be 15-20 seconds before every single point.

bolo
10-09-2009, 03:29 PM
This Just In! New Confusing Post! Not Sure What the Numbers Mean! But Am Sure Numbers Will Make Federer Look Good and Nadal Look Bad! Story at 9! :)
Jenny S

BTW isn't 34-15=19?

Blinkism
10-09-2009, 03:36 PM
Huh? What does this thread has to do with Federer being or not being the GOAT? Jenny was stating what we all knew all along, Nadal and Djokovic abused the time limit in Madrid in a new way, and people used this match as an excuse for Nadal's loss in the final, yet Nadal didn't really play tennis for 4 hours. Jenny was just providing the exact time.

It wasn't fun to read many Nadal fans not giving any credit to Fed for his Madrid win against Nadal, claiming Nadal was tired, injured, etc. I'm sure you remember those threads.

I was being sarcastic.

Totally agree agree with your last point, though, P_Agony. *******s are just as annoying as *******s. Nadal was not injured or tired in Madrid. You have to be quite biased to see that Federer comprehensively beat him.

Whether or not Nadal played at his very best is another debate, but it was his own fault for not bringing his best, right?

Anyways, this thread is all fine and dandy if it was posted back in May, but it's just another thread in a line of many by JennyS that somehow knocks Nadal down a peg and/or props up Federer. It's just rehashed arguments, though. So it's all been heard before.

LOL, I can see a lot of people didn't appreciate my post, though. So, I'll apologize! Sorry, JennyS!

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-09-2009, 03:40 PM
OK, the thread is fine.

Federer outplayed Nadal in Madrid, and deserved the title.

But, some people refered to Madrid semi as time-wasting contest and similar bullcr@p, and that's very unkind, since many commentators have said that it's one of the best clay matches in recent times.

PhatChineseDude
10-09-2009, 03:41 PM
(Tennis Channel just re aired it so I timed it!)

Nadal/Djoker Madrid 09:
tennis played: 55 minutes
length of match: 243 minutes
number of changeovers: 15 (includes ends of sets)

Federer/Roddick Wimbledon 09:
tennis: 63 minutes
length of match: 256 minutes
number of changeovers: 34 (includes ends of sets)

So despite being 8 more minutes of tennis, and having 34 more commercial breaks than the other match, the Wimbledon match wound up being only 13 minutes longer!



Doesn't this post pretty much contridict what you're trying to prove?
Essentially what you're saying, is that Nadal only played 8 minutes less than that extrodinarily long wimbledon final and had only a day/less than a days rest before his next match.

P_Agony
10-09-2009, 03:44 PM
I was being sarcastic.

Totally agree agree with your last point, though, P_Agony. *******s are just as annoying as *******s. Nadal was not injured or tired in Madrid. You have to be quite biased to see that Federer comprehensively beat him.

Whether or not Nadal played at his very best is another debate, but it was his own fault for not bringing his best, right?

Anyways, this thread is all fine and dandy if it was posted back in May, but it's just another thread in a line of many by JennyS that somehow knocks Nadal down a peg and/or props up Federer. It's just rehashed arguments, though. So it's all been heard before.

LOL, I can see a lot of people didn't appreciate my post, though. So, I'll apologize! Sorry, JennyS!

Nadal wasn't at his best, but he wasn't playing badly either. If I recall correctly his 1st serve % was really high as well. Plus, I can name quite a few matches Nadal won when Federer didn't play at his best - doesn't make Nadal's win any less sweet, now does it?

I like JennyS. Sure, I may be biased, as both of as are Fed fans, but I really think her threads are interesting. She writes facts, numbers, which sometimes make for a good debate, even if you disagree with her.

Plus, I don't see how this thread knokw down Nadal in a way we didn't know already. We know Nadal's time wasting problem. Not the biggest Nadal fan in the world can deny it. Fed has his own problems, as is Djokovic, Murray, and all the others, none of them is perfect.

P_Agony
10-09-2009, 03:46 PM
OK, the thread is fine.

Federer outplayed Nadal in Madrid, and deserved the title.

But, some people refered to Madrid semi as time-wasting contest and similar bullcr@p, and that's very unkind, since many commentators have said that it's one of the best clay matches in recent times.

It was a tough match, nobody can deny it. Not my cup of tea all those long clay rallies, but a very intense match nonetheless. Still, it did have a lot of time wasting, from both men.

P_Agony
10-09-2009, 03:48 PM
what's wrong with you??? stop being a troll

to JennyS: Wow! so matches are actually really short, why do they take so much time for other things then???

Seriously dude, take it easy.

Blinkism is hardly a troll. He's one of the most respected posters around here.

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-09-2009, 03:48 PM
Nadal wasn't at his best, but he wasn't playing badly either. If I recall correctly his 1st serve % was really high as well. Plus, I can name quite a few matches Nadal won when Federer didn't play at his best - doesn't make Nadal's win any less sweet, now does it?

I like JennyS. Sure, I may be biased, as both of as are Fed fans, but I really think her threads are interesting. She writes facts, numbers, which sometimes make for a good debate, even if you disagree with her.

Plus, I don't see how this thread knokw down Nadal in a way we didn't know already. We know Nadal's time wasting problem. Not the biggest Nadal fan in the world can deny it. Fed has his own problems, as is Djokovic, Murray, and all the others, none of them is perfect.

OK. That's all true.

But, 55 mins is very close to 63 mins, considering one was a 3-setter and the other was a 5-setter.

The only thing I can pick up from her stats is that Madrid was very, very long match for a 3-setter.

-----------------------------------------

See, if points are the same, then length of 5-setter = 1.66 * length of 3-setter. That;'s not the proportion of these 2 matches. Proportion is 63/55 = 1.13.

paulorenzo
10-09-2009, 03:50 PM
(Tennis Channel just re aired it so I timed it!)

Nadal/Djoker Madrid 09:
tennis played: 55 minutes
length of match: 243 minutes
number of changeovers: 15 (includes ends of sets)

Federer/Roddick Wimbledon 09:
tennis: 63 minutes
length of match: 256 minutes
number of changeovers: 34 (includes ends of sets)

So despite being 8 more minutes of tennis, and having 34 more commercial breaks than the other match, the Wimbledon match wound up being only 13 minutes longer!

it's like saying, essentially, that they were doing 55/63 minutes worth of sprints/suicides.

Blinkism
10-09-2009, 03:52 PM
Nadal wasn't at his best, but he wasn't playing badly either. If I recall correctly his 1st serve % was really high as well. Plus, I can name quite a few matches Nadal won when Federer didn't play at his best - doesn't make Nadal's win any less sweet, now does it?



No it doesn't.

And Nadal wasn't playing badly. He was playing as well as he had been all season. That was good enough to beat Djokovic in two tight finals before, but not enough for Federer.


I like JennyS. Sure, I may be biased, as both of as are Fed fans, but I really think her threads are interesting. She writes facts, numbers, which sometimes make for a good debate, even if you disagree with her.


Yeah, JennyS's threads are (or rather, used to be) good for discussion and are interesting. Recently, though, they've been repetitive and negative towards Rafa. I was just letting her know that we've been over this already like 30 times this year. We need something new to discuss..


Plus, I don't see how this thread knokw down Nadal in a way we didn't know already. We know Nadal's time wasting problem. Not the biggest Nadal fan in the world can deny it. Fed has his own problems, as is Djokovic, Murray, and all the others, none of them is perfect.

Well, I don't deny that Nadal is quite slow in his pace between points... I just thought that this topic has been over-discussed back in the spring.

But, hey! If people wanna talk about it again, then sure.

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-09-2009, 03:56 PM
Wimby 09 final was a serving contest most of the time, so that may be why it was so short.

Do you have the effective times for Wimby 08 or 07 finals? They may even be longer than 09 one.

JennyS
10-09-2009, 04:31 PM
Doesn't this post pretty much contridict what you're trying to prove?
Essentially what you're saying, is that Nadal only played 8 minutes less than that extrodinarily long wimbledon final and had only a day/less than a days rest before his next match.

I wasn't going at this for the "Nadal really didn't exhaust himself like some think" angle, but more the "Djoker and Nadal" added a ton of time to the match angle.

JennyS
10-09-2009, 04:33 PM
Wimby 09 final was a serving contest most of the time, so that may be why it was so short.

Do you have the effective times for Wimby 08 or 07 finals? They may even be longer than 09 one.

I don't have those numbers. I do have the 08 match so maybe I'll time it sometime soon.

svijk
10-09-2009, 04:44 PM
Its an interesting post but that's about it....it doesn't prove-disprove anything. In most sports the actual individual playing time is far less....a baseball player probably 'plays' for like 2 minutes if you don't count the standing around to hit or pitch.

jenny, did you actually stopwatch each match??

JennyS
10-09-2009, 05:07 PM
The full breakdown....

Wimbledon final
tennis: 63 minutes
changeovers: 52.5 minutes
remaining time: 140.5 minutes
(remaining time includes time between serves and time between service games that aren't separated by changeovers)

Madrid semi:
tennis: 55 minutes
changeovers: 22.5 minutes
remaining time: 165.5 minutes

JeMar
10-09-2009, 05:08 PM
What should be done here is time another three-set match so we can see an accurate comparison.

Comparing a long three-setter to a five-setter is dumb.

JennyS
10-09-2009, 05:11 PM
Its an interesting post but that's about it....it doesn't prove-disprove anything. In most sports the actual individual playing time is far less....a baseball player probably 'plays' for like 2 minutes if you don't count the standing around to hit or pitch.

jenny, did you actually stopwatch each match??

No, what I did was record just the tennis to a DVD. And that's how long each one was. It's actually quite entertaining the to watch the tennis that way.

But perhaps the numbers would come out a little different if I stopwatched it.

JennyS
10-09-2009, 05:18 PM
I'd be really curious to see how much time is played in a blow out match such as Serena/Maria AO 07:D

P_Agony
10-09-2009, 05:22 PM
Yeah, JennyS's threads are (or rather, used to be) good for discussion and are interesting. Recently, though, they've been repetitive and negative towards Rafa. I was just letting her know that we've been over this already like 30 times this year. We need something new to discuss..

Well, I don't deny that Nadal is quite slow in his pace between points... I just thought that this topic has been over-discussed back in the spring.

But, hey! If people wanna talk about it again, then sure.

Fair enough, though I didn't feel hatred from JennyS, but that might be because I'm a Fed fan (so it's only natural). I also agree this has been discussed to death already, nothing new to bring to the table execpt those numbers in the OP. Plus, even if we do discuss it, it's important to note Nadal wasn't the only time waster on court. There's this guy called Novak...

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-09-2009, 05:48 PM
I don't have those numbers. I do have the 08 match so maybe I'll time it sometime soon.

How did you come up with numbers exactly? Did you just use stopwatch yourself? If someone serves an ace, how long is that?

-----------------------------------------------------

I'm sorry if I'm nitpicking, but the only thing I can see in you stats is that a 3-setter in Madrid was very close (in the actual time played) to a 5-setter at Wimby Final(55 and 63 mins). And that final was an epic match itself. I wonder how would Federer and Roddick have performed the next day.

DarthFed
10-09-2009, 06:43 PM
I like her threads...puts a whole new perspective on things. But i can agree with blinkism..this would have been more appropriate in may.

Toxicmilk
10-09-2009, 06:55 PM
How arrogant

Steffi-forever
10-09-2009, 07:53 PM
What should be done here is time another three-set match so we can see an accurate comparison.

Comparing a long three-setter to a five-setter is dumb.

And comparing CLAY to GRASS it is too.

sp00q
10-09-2009, 08:23 PM
Nice stats. Thanks.

Knightmace
10-10-2009, 01:29 AM
What about Nadal/Verdasco

Polvorin
10-10-2009, 02:33 AM
And comparing CLAY to GRASS it is too.

Bingo. As Federer said, Wimby '09 final was pretty much a serving contest. In other words, a lot of walking back and forth. Of course that match was like 7 sets worth of tennis rather than 5, but still clay to grass is not going to prove much.

Credit to Blinkism and P_Agony for discussing things reasonably and somewhat objectively. What a rarity.

Blinkism
10-10-2009, 03:10 AM
^^ thanks, Polvorin, we try to keep discussion as troll-free and flame-free as possible.

Murray threads are fair game, though :)

oh, and
Totally agree agree with your last point, though, P_Agony. *******s are just as annoying as *******s. Nadal was not injured or tired in Madrid. You have to be quite biased to see that Federer comprehensively beat him.

That should be "You have to be quite biased NOT to see that Federer comprehensively beat him".

total opposite of what I meant to say. :oops:

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-10-2009, 03:51 AM
Wimby 09 is a bad example. It was probably quite short because of so many aces and service winners.

One thing I will not give up is that Madrid was a very long and exhausting match, and it's not just because of time-wasting. It was a very long 3-setter period.

But there was a lot of time-wasting. By the end of the match, both Novak and Rafa were taking over a minute on some points.

kOaMaster
10-10-2009, 04:14 AM
what jennys wanted to point out is, that despite of a 3-setter and a clay game, djokovic and nadal had EVEN MORE "wasted" time where the ball was not in play. and this compared to a match that was mainly a service contest on grass...

people, please think before you're posting.

@blinksm: haha. almost thought you behave sarcastic in that first posting.


and well, that is why I play badminton. when you have 1h of playing time, the time where the shuttle is in is about 45 minutes. not that sissy-stupid-tennis-waiting thing.

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-10-2009, 05:39 AM
Actually, JennyS, do what someone here said.

Time another 3-setter between guys who waste almost no time. Preferably on clay and with equal number of aces, so that short points don't mess up the calculations.

If it's similar to Madrid semi in terms of actual time of tennis being played, then I will admit that Madrid was a long match because of time-wasting and not because there was a lot of tennis.

Jason Vorhees
10-10-2009, 06:02 AM
At the wimbledon final, the changeover breaks were longer than the games.

BTW OP, what was the purpose of the thread because everyone knows that nadal and djokovic screw the timeout system.

DarthFed
10-10-2009, 06:32 AM
Murray threads are fair game, though :)


LMFAO

At the wimbledon final, the changeover breaks were longer than the games.

BTW OP, what was the purpose of the thread because everyone knows that nadal and djokovic screw the timeout system.

You'd be surprised how many people were using the length of Madrid to excuse Nadals loss to Federer.

SuperFly
10-10-2009, 07:01 AM
I'd rather have an official time it rather than a stranger on the internets for accuracy's sake.

DarthFed
10-10-2009, 07:02 AM
I'd rather have an official time it rather than a stranger on the internets for accuracy's sake.

The official time is like 4 hours...and we all know that that's a bunch of bull*****.

JeMar
10-10-2009, 07:53 AM
Actually, JennyS, do what someone here said.

Time another 3-setter between guys who waste almost no time. Preferably on clay and with equal number of aces, so that short points don't mess up the calculations.

If it's similar to Madrid semi in terms of actual time of tennis being played, then I will admit that Madrid was a long match because of time-wasting and not because there was a lot of tennis.

Federer vs. Roddick in Madrid would be a good choice. Roddick kinda pushes, so they had extended rallies.

Jason Vorhees
10-10-2009, 09:10 AM
Federer vs. Roddick would be a good choice. Roddick kinda pushes, so they had extended rallies.

Actually roddick didn't push at wimbledon. He's been pushing like simon since

JeMar
10-10-2009, 09:20 AM
Actually roddick didn't push at wimbledon. He's been pushing like simon since

Oh, sorry. I meant their match in Madrid. they played in the QF and the match went three sets.

SuperDuy
10-10-2009, 10:21 AM
Roddick jsut goes for hsi towel, steps to line then serves. Unlike da joke

Jason Vorhees
10-10-2009, 10:36 AM
Oh, sorry. I meant their match in Madrid. they played in the QF and the match went three sets.

Yes, i watched it, great match. Both players played aggressive, even roddick was crankin' forehands around 110mph, no joke.

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-10-2009, 01:20 PM
Oh, sorry. I meant their match in Madrid. they played in the QF and the match went three sets.

Yeah, that would be the best example. It's on clay in 3 sets and they serve pretty quickly.

JennyS
10-10-2009, 01:23 PM
Actually, JennyS, do what someone here said.

Time another 3-setter between guys who waste almost no time. Preferably on clay and with equal number of aces, so that short points don't mess up the calculations.

If it's similar to Madrid semi in terms of actual time of tennis being played, then I will admit that Madrid was a long match because of time-wasting and not because there was a lot of tennis.

I only have one three set claycourt match in my possession: the French Open final from this year. Maybe I'll time it later.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
10-10-2009, 01:28 PM
Let me break it down too you... Tennis played: 55 minutes
Butt-picking: 1 h 57 minutes
Ball-bouncing: 1 hour
Towelling off/time-delaying: 1 h 23 minutes

Jason Vorhees
10-10-2009, 01:29 PM
Let me break it down too you... Tennis played: 55 minutes
Butt-picking: 1 h 57 minutes
Ball-bouncing: 1 hour
Towelling off/time-delaying: 1 h 23 minutes

plus 10000 minutes bouncing the ****ing ball!!!!!!!!!!!

JennyS
10-10-2009, 01:33 PM
Let me break it down too you... Tennis played: 55 minutes
Butt-picking: 1 h 57 minutes
Ball-bouncing: 1 hour
Towelling off/time-delaying: 1 h 23 minutes

LOL!

I'm glad he picks his butt and not his nose though:D

JeMar
10-10-2009, 01:35 PM
I only have one three set claycourt match in my possession: the French Open final from this year. But that's not a great comparison. I do have one long three setter and it's a women's match with a ton of rallies (Henin/Capriati US Open 2003). I think I'll time that one since the match took 3 hours to play and Capriati took like 5 seconds between points:D

Thanks for taking the time to do this. I'm looking forward to seeing your results.

Jason Vorhees
10-10-2009, 01:36 PM
LOL!

I'm glad he picks his butt and not his nose though:D

Only gay ppl and ******s pick stuff like that.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
10-10-2009, 01:37 PM
LOL!

I'm glad he picks his butt and not his nose though:D
I personally would rather see him picking his nose, disrespectful to thank his opponents after the match with the butt-picker hand!:shock:

JennyS
10-10-2009, 02:51 PM
Okay, I just did the French Open final from this year. It was 23:47.

That match had 170 points, versus 245 points in the Madrid semi. The FO final took just under 2 hours to play.

Now I'm going to do the Capriati/Henin one, which should be really interesting.

JeMar
10-10-2009, 05:31 PM
Okay, I just did the French Open final from this year. It was 23:47.

That match had 170 points, versus 245 points in the Madrid semi. The FO final took just under 2 hours to play.

Now I'm going to do the Capriati/Henin one, which should be really interesting.

The time of this year's FO final might be skewed because Soderling had a huge problem just keeping the ball in play for the first two sets.

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-10-2009, 05:37 PM
Okay, I just did the French Open final from this year. It was 23:47.

That match had 170 points, versus 245 points in the Madrid semi. The FO final took just under 2 hours to play.

Now I'm going to do the Capriati/Henin one, which should be really interesting.

That's quite short, less than 1/2 Madrid. There were 18 aces in that match, too, so that may shorten the time.

Thanks for taking the time. Now, download a few other matches and do the same, and then come back, mwahahahahaha!!!

(If you can do this with Borg-Lendl 1981 French Open, you will have my everlasting respect :) .)

JennyS
10-10-2009, 05:39 PM
That's quite short, less than 1/2 Madrid. There were 18 aces in that match, too, so that may shorten the time.

Thanks for taking the time. Now, download a few other matches and do the same, and then come back, mwahahahahaha!!!

(If you can do this with Borg-Lendl 1981 French Open, you will have my everlasting respect :) .)

Is that match on You Tube? BTW, I am THISCLOSE to being done timing J-Cap/Henin!

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-10-2009, 05:41 PM
Is that match on You Tube? BTW, I am THISCLOSE to being done timing J-Cap/Henin!

You mean the one that puts you to sleep after 30 secs? Yeah, that one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kW4z0FnUz4o

JennyS
10-10-2009, 05:50 PM
Henin/Capriati: 46:38. The match took 3 hours to play (Capriati took a 10 minute bathroom break to change her outfit, so that added some time).

JennyS
10-10-2009, 05:54 PM
Thanks for taking the time to do this. I'm looking forward to seeing your results.

You're welcome.

I think I'm going to time the Federer/Djoker US Open semi from this year since it was a three setter.

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-10-2009, 06:02 PM
Madrid: 243/55 = 4.4

Henin-Cap: 180/46 = 3.9

So Djokovic and Nadal multiply the actual time by 4.4, and Henin and Capriati by 3.9, whatever that means. What do you make of this?

djones
10-10-2009, 07:07 PM
The full breakdown....

Wimbledon final
tennis: 63 minutes
changeovers: 52.5 minutes
remaining time: 140.5 minutes
(remaining time includes time between serves and time between service games that aren't separated by changeovers)

Madrid semi:
tennis: 55 minutes
changeovers: 22.5 minutes
remaining time: 165.5 minutes


As far as I know the changeovers aren't included in match time.

kOaMaster
10-11-2009, 01:38 AM
As far as I know the changeovers aren't included in match time.

lol, sure they are? you think they just stop the clock for 2min?
if a game started at 3 and ends at 6, the match time is 3 hours.

Jason Vorhees
10-11-2009, 03:09 AM
This just goes to show how sad the minority of this forum are. We have the OP who actually works out the amount of time taken for changeovers, and everything else (timeouts ect) on two seperate matches with 4 different player. Secondly, we have other posters requesting how long matches were in other tournament. WHY!!!.

JennyS
10-11-2009, 02:58 PM
Federer/Djokovic US Open 09: 31:13. Total match time was 2:34.

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-11-2009, 03:56 PM
Federer/Djokovic US Open 09: 31:13. Total match time was 2:34.

You should invent a new stat measure in tennis.

Time-wasting coefficient = Total-time/effective-time = 154/31 = 4.9

Interesting, in Madrid it was 4.4 (=243/55). US Open match is more inflated than Djokovic-Nadal, even though Federer doesn't usually waste a lot of time.

JennyS
10-11-2009, 04:02 PM
You should invent a new stat measure in tennis.

Time-wasting coefficient = Total-time/effective-time = 154/31 = 4.9

Interesting, in Madrid it was 4.4 (=243/55). US Open match is more inflated than Djokovic-Nadal, even though Federer doesn't usually waste a lot of time.

There were about 100 challenges in the match.

I need to stopwatch time the Nadal/Djokovic match though. I got the 55 minutes from just pausing during the non tennis parts, but I may have included some extra time. I will have the stop watched version either later tonight or tomorrow!

JennyS
10-11-2009, 04:05 PM
Madrid: 243/55 = 4.4

Henin-Cap: 180/46 = 3.9

So Djokovic and Nadal multiply the actual time by 4.4, and Henin and Capriati by 3.9, whatever that means. What do you make of this?

I'm not really sure, because it doesn't take into consideration how long the rallies are.

Maybe the real way to measure it would be to time the amount of time taken between points!

SerbWhoLovesDelPo
10-11-2009, 04:12 PM
I'm not really sure, because it doesn't take into consideration how long the rallies are.

Yeah,probably, HC has shorter points, and therefore more inflation.


Maybe the real way to measure it would be to time the amount of time taken between points!

if you wanna do that...

Wow, how many hours have you spent watching tennis the last 3 days?

JennyS
10-11-2009, 04:26 PM
Yeah,probably, HC has shorter points, and therefore more inflation.



if you wanna do that...

Wow, how many hours have you spent watching tennis the last 3 days?

A lot! Luckily I've been hitting the fast forward button between every point!

JennyS
10-11-2009, 07:46 PM
I'm bumping this because I decided to do a more accurate stop watch timing of the the Nadal/Djokovic match. It was actually only 43 minutes of tennis! I figured I should actually time it on my watch and not just base it on my DVD recording.

(When I watched it, I pressed pause between points, but it didn't pause instantly, so a few seconds were added on for each point)

kOaMaster
10-12-2009, 01:18 PM
a three setter with long ralleys ending 6:4 has the same amount of changeovers as a serving-contest ending 6:4. matchtime in the second still will be around 25-30min but already those 5 short breaks give away 10 minutes...

sunnyIce
10-12-2009, 04:00 PM
why nobody is talking abt # of games. interesting thread btw.

in madrid semi it was 35 games, and in the wimby final it was 77 games.

JennyS
10-12-2009, 04:15 PM
So now I know why it showed up as 55 minutes in my original edit: I accidentally recorded some of the in between stuff for a few minutes. Hehe.

sunnyIce
10-12-2009, 04:23 PM
something else that is misleading with this stat. we tend to look at only the stat, in this case, the minutes. and it seems like not a whole lot. but we need to keep in mind that its 'x' mins of continuous activity at a world class level. lets take the fe-rod match of 63 mins, thats 63 mins of constant activity physical and mental using all parts of body. off the top of my mind the only thing that comes to mind right away, would be that it pretty damn close to the world record time on a half marathon. so these guys basically ran a half marathon in world record time with their arms flailing and their hips/torsos twisting all the time! amazing.