N
Navdeep Srivastava
Guest
lol with your demand of RG being demoted to 250 , you literally took goathood from Rafa, now beware of Rafa fans
Wimbledon introduces Tiebreaks in the Fifth
- Thread starter MasterZeb
- Start date
The Green Mile
Bionic Poster
Lol, thanks John.
Zara
G.O.A.T.
For the final, we can reserve this but for other rounds, it's not quite ideal. Not only it's such a waste of time (I frankly don't have so much time in hand to watch matches that go beyond 3.5 hours so we need to be mindful of everyone's needs as much as possible) to watch players unable to close a match but also, it diminishes the quality of the whole tournament because it's likely that the winner won't have much left in tank, if at all, for the next match.
In other words, if a SF final settles at 18-16 and the other semi settles in 3 easy sets then you can see who the winner will most likely be (goes for any round and compromises the whole tournament as part of ripple effect) in the final and that's not ideal. But if it happens in the final then we don't run the similar risk.
Ann
Hall of Fame
Risky assumption Hero, I can see it going both ways. He's very subtle.
Zara
G.O.A.T.
Have a drink. Your choice. And I will give you my shoulder to drink on. Good mate that I am.
Don't know but out of 184 matches the players with most 5th set matches played at Wimbledon 6 were past 12:12 (ie 1 out of 30 5th set matches). Ivanisevic has two such a matches (Krajicek and Norman) and Hennman (Haarhuis), Federer (Roddick), Nadal (Muller) and Cilic (Querrey) each one. Well, no more...
Mr.Lob
G.O.A.T.
Wimbledon didn't care after the Isner/Mahut first round 70-68 fifth set. Instead of being proactive, they wait till the Anderson/Isner 26-24 fifth set, which RUINED the finals.
The age of the serve-bots are upon us. They are not going away. As Chico would say, we must "Deal with it!".
The age of the serve-bots are upon us. They are not going away. As Chico would say, we must "Deal with it!".
FEDERERNADAL13
Legend
Oh I completely agree with you! That’s why I think it’s a fantastic idea, but would love it if the finals didn’t have that cap. Just the finals!
Mr.Lob
G.O.A.T.
What's 'snobbery' got to do with it?
New #108
Wimbledon didn't care after the Isner/Mahut first round 70-68 fifth set. Instead of being proactive, they wait till the Anderson/Isner 26-24 fifth set, which RUINED the finals.
The age of the serve-bots are upon us. They are not going away. As Chico would say, we must "Deal with it!".
byealmeens
Semi-Pro
I can see you're very passionate about this one. That being said, I have to admit I agree with you. This is rarely an issue ... another thread mentioned 10 times in the last 20 years ... so it seems silly to shorten matches at one slam due to a few exceptions. And yes, players who cannot break serve should not be given a reprieve.
King No1e
G.O.A.T.
Nitpick: Raonic was an excellent returner in his prime, a rarity for his netrusher type. Just watch some of his matches from 2016. It's what made him so dangerous and set him apart from the average grasscourter
Federev
Legend
Glad they got to play it out.
Anderson-Isner not so much.
Especially a bummer for the guy who has to play again.
Federev
Legend
Should have made the men’s final an exception.
Could have gone TB on everything before the mens final and kept the Epicness.
Nothing left for the winner to recover for and in a final odds are better you’ve got more than Serve-bots.
Federev
Legend
Should have made the men’s final an exception.
Could have gone TB on everything before Thebes final and kept the Epicness.
Nothing left for the winner of the final to recover for and in a final odds are better you’ve got more than Servebots.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Yeah, they could've left the final alone, but then again how many finals will get to 12-12. Apart from 2009 has there ever been another?
Yet more proof that Fedr is a servebot.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
You mean "the guy who lacks the ability to return and break serve"?
I am glad that the Wimbledon organisers are concerned about the players with lacking skills.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Sysyphus
Talk Tennis Guru
Sixpointone
Professional
Very interesting. I can't say that I am opposed to it.
Federev
Legend
No servebot.
Yes, Fed has had a great serve. And historically - a great pretty much everything.
Thus ... greatesterer oferer allerer timerer.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
That article only confirms what was already suggested: that the change is made for the convenience of the broadcasters.
Money.
Does anyone know how many matches in open era have gone beyond 12-12. I bet it can't be more than 50?
Thank God for WImbledon having some sense and not being a soulless commercial sellout like USO, Wimby at least didn't do it at 6-6 or 8-8. They actually want better tennis.
This should not be allowed in the SF/Final though. A player who cannot break serve should not be allowed to win.
Thank God for WImbledon having some sense and not being a soulless commercial sellout like USO, Wimby at least didn't do it at 6-6 or 8-8. They actually want better tennis.
This should not be allowed in the SF/Final though. A player who cannot break serve should not be allowed to win.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
I quite like it, but would prefer it if the finals was left alone.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
Edit: 10 matches and 0.39% in the past 20 years according to another thread.
MatsPhilander
Legend
For the final I can see no reason why they cannot at least extend it-although realistically it is not going to affect the finals-looking back at every Wimbledon final I can only see one final set that 12-12 would not suffice & that was the 2009 final, a simple extension up to 20-20 should cover that easily. After all there aren't too many servebots getting to slam finals & not against each other-the more talented player always finds a way to break.
MugOpponent
Hall of Fame
I like the tiebreak at 12-12. Generally compromise leaves everyone unhappy but I don't see how anyone can have a problem with this.
Milehigh5280
Professional
It seems like a good compromise. I just wish they kept things the same for the final
Pro tennis historian
Rookie
I am fully in favour of fifth set tiebreaks for mens matches. There is nothing entertaining, fair or logical about having extended fifth sets. A five set men's match has plenty of ebbs and flows and a fitting conclusion to a great match is a fifth tie break (Sampras Corretja was a prime example of a great fifth set tie break conclusion to the match, there are many others, Nadal Thiem being the most recent). A fitting conclusion is not to watch a fifth set go on and on where both players increasingly conserve energy, hold serve easily and wait for the other player to get tired (in Isner's case it may take 3 days for this tedium to end). I have witnessed a number of tiresome tedious fifth set stalemates (particularly at Wimbledon, where the serve is a more dominant factor). At least a tie-break at 12-12 will eradicate the worst of these. I would prefer a tie-break at 6-6, but 12-12 is a big improvement on no tie break at all. I applaud Wimbledon for finally introducing a final set tie break.
Im(moral) Winner
G.O.A.T.
You can win the whole tournament by winning just in TBs...
tacou
G.O.A.T.
it was not a demand, it was clairvoyance, and Rafa is my favorite player
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
Unfortunate. I do feel like Anderson is just as responsible as Isner though.
Doesn't make me like Wimbledon any less or anything.
Doesn't make me like Wimbledon any less or anything.
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
Players over 6’4” except Del Potro should be banned from ATP.
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
Isnr
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
So you had to shrink Isner to respond. Thanks for understanding the concept.
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
You're welcome
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
Then Wimbledon would be admitting they were wrong all the time, whereas this way they can argue they have done their best to reconcile tradition with pragmatism.
tennisNoob78
New User
Good rule change, but should not apply to the final in my opinion.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Not a fan, I watch tennis for blood and tradition.
Beacon Hill
Hall of Fame
I think if they are going to do this, then your suggestion is a good one. Things can happen so quickly in a set tie break, but in a match tie break there is time for ebbs and flows.
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
If you cant break the other guy, you deserve to fight it out until someone can to win the match. Final set tie breaks are for the weak and ultimately reward mediocrity.
One of the staples of slams is B05 and fight it out till the end. I thought USO had it wrong.
If a change HAD to be made, one idea I always had was having tiebreaks (whether at 12-12 or whatever) up to the final. In the final, play it out.
The idea of a final set tiebreak in a grand slam final is very unappealing to me.
One of the staples of slams is B05 and fight it out till the end. I thought USO had it wrong.
If a change HAD to be made, one idea I always had was having tiebreaks (whether at 12-12 or whatever) up to the final. In the final, play it out.
The idea of a final set tiebreak in a grand slam final is very unappealing to me.
Similar threads
