How much of a tennis match is actually play?

Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
While watching the 2nd and 3rd sets of the USO final, which I missed last night but recorded, I stopped to check times for ads and for blank space between points.

I focused on Nadal as the slowest, and here is what I found:

30 seconds between service points because the clock is started at about 5 seconds. So for a love game there is a minimum of 2 minutes time watching him set up. For a deuce game we wait for him at least 4 minutes. But that's if he makes every 1st serve.

If he hits a let, he resets for 20 seconds. Then for the second serve, another 10 seconds.

Commercials last 90 seconds, so that's baked into the cake. With a 75 set there will be 6 ads, so add to that another 9 minutes.

At 1/0 Rafa took around 75 seconds to finally get to the other end of the court and serve. At one point Shriver interviewed Laver between the end of one game and the next.

I'm sure Rafa takes more time than anyone else, but there are other guys who are not exactly speedy. So there is a huge amount of waiting around. Maybe it is not so noticeable live because there is more going on, but I can hardly watch tennis live on TV now. It is so slow.

Set 2 and set 3 took about 15 minutes each for me to see every shot in every point simply by fast forwarding through TV breaks and breaks between points. I'd estimate a 5 hour marathon match like the one years ago between Rafa and Novak probably takes little more than an hour if you fast forward between all the delays.

If I didn't love tennis, I'd never be able to watch a match on TV. It's so slow.

Each shot in a point takes about a second. Next time you see a 40 shot rally, time it. It won't even last 50 seconds. Since the average point is really not many shots, probably the average point takes about 5 or 6 seconds. Certainly 10 seconds at the max, and that is probably way too long. Any game that lasts more than a minute, for the actual play, is probably unusual.

For the most part I can no longer watch a live match on TV. Am I the only one here like that?
 
T

Tennis_Hands

Banned
The corrections of the rules of tennis will be a direct result of the actual rules not being enforced on top of the additional rules that are in place for the advertisers to slip in their ads between games/sets. Tennis will be downgraded to a cheap entertainment, because the new rules will feature even less tennis, but the time for the ads will remain the same or will even increase. It will all be for the good of the game. No wonder no one is after the cheaters that break the time rules, they are driving the sport in that direction to the satisfaction of the advertisers and the TV channels.

:cool:
 
weakera

weakera

Talk Tennis Guru
The problem with the shot clock is that its rigidity is inherently flawed. The idea that the same 25 seconds is appropriate following both an ace and a 25 shot rally + applause is just inexplicable. So in my opinion Rafael is correct to expect extra time after such points, because it not only builds the spectacle but allows the players precious more seconds to recover. A more dynamic system in which the serve clock is based on the preceding point (0-1 shots = 20 seconds, 2-10 shots = 25 seconds, 11-20 shots = 30 seconds, 21+ shots = 35 seconds) would make much more sense for tennis.
 
Last edited:
selesian

selesian

Rookie
Gary Duane said:
While watching the 2nd and 3rd sets of the USO final, which I missed last night but recorded, I stopped to check times for ads and for blank space between points.

I focused on Nadal as the slowest, and here is what I found:

30 seconds between service points because the clock is started at about 5 seconds. So for a love game there is a minimum of 2 minutes time watching him set up. For a deuce game we wait for him at least 4 minutes. But that's if he makes every 1st serve.

If he hits a let, he resets for 20 seconds. Then for the second serve, another 10 seconds.

Commercials last 90 seconds, so that's baked into the cake. With a 75 set there will be 6 ads, so add to that another 9 minutes.

At 1/0 Rafa took around 75 seconds to finally get to the other end of the court and serve. At one point Shriver interviewed Laver between the end of one game and the next.

I'm sure Rafa takes more time than anyone else, but there are other guys who are not exactly speedy. So there is a huge amount of waiting around. Maybe it is not so noticeable live because there is more going on, but I can hardly watch tennis live on TV now. It is so slow.

Set 2 and set 3 took about 15 minutes each for me to see every shot in every point simply by fast forwarding through TV breaks and breaks between points. I'd estimate a 5 hour marathon match like the one years ago between Rafa and Novak probably takes little more than an hour if you fast forward between all the delays.

If I didn't love tennis, I'd never be able to watch a match on TV. It's so slow.

Each shot in a point takes about a second. Next time you see a 40 shot rally, time it. It won't even last 50 seconds. Since the average point is really not many shots, probably the average point takes about 5 or 6 seconds. Certainly 10 seconds at the max, and that is probably way too long. Any game that lasts more than a minute, for the actual play, is probably unusual.

For the most part I can no longer watch a live match on TV. Am I the only one here like that?
Click to expand...
Maybe you've become too impatient in your old age.
 
Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
Tennis_Hands said:
The corrections of the rules of tennis will be a direct result of the actual rules not being enforced on top of the additional rules that are in place for the advertisers to slip in their ads between games/sets. Tennis will be downgraded to a cheap entertainment, because the new rules will feature even less tennis, but the time for the ads will remain the same or will even increase. It will all be for the good of the game. No wonder no one is after the cheaters that break the time rules, they are driving the sport in that direction to the satisfaction of the advertisers and the TV channels.

:cool:
Click to expand...
Your points are cynical and depressing. They are also probably right.

Once a year I have to suffer through a full football game. The reason? My wife loves the Super Bowl commercials. She has no interest in football. So grit my teeth and do it. It is endless boredom. I loathe it.

Nothing to do with football itself. I just can't stand the waiting. Anything I watch for myself I record. I have to zip the commercials and time outs. My way of viewing a football game is fine for me. I need the FF button for any sport.

Any game that is televised is like that for me. You would think a game like basketball, which is so fast, would be the exception, but with all the time outs and stops it's about the same.

I probably have undiagnosed ADD, but I need to be either physically in motion or mentally busy. TV sports don't allow that for me. If someone transported me back to the 50s, I'd have to kill myself from boredom!!!
 
Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
weakera said:
The problem with the shot clock is that its rigidity is inherently flawed. The idea that the same 25 seconds is appropriate following both an ace and a 25 shot rally + applause is just inexplicable. So in my opinion Rafael is correct to expect extra time after such points, because it not only builds the spectacle but allows the players precious more seconds to recover. A more dynamic system in which the serve clock is based on the preceding point (0-1 shots = 20 seconds, 3-10 shots = 25 seconds, 11-20 shots = 30 seconds, 21+ shots = 35 seconds) would make much more sense for tennis.
Click to expand...
I like the idea, but it's not going to happen in this universe. But I don't see a reason for 20 seconds after an ace. And you have not addressed the problem of time wasted after a let or a fault. Or why a world class athlete needs 75 second to walk from one side of the court to the other.
 
T

Tennis_Hands

Banned
Gary Duane said:
Your points are cynical and depressing. They are also probably right.

Once a year I have to suffer through a full football game. The reason? My wife loves the Super Bowl commercials. She has no interest in football. So grit my teeth and do it. It is endless boredom. I loathe it.

Nothing to do with football itself. I just can't stand the waiting. Anything I watch for myself I record. I have to zip the commercials and time outs. My way of viewing a football game is fine for me. I need the FF button for any sport.

Any game that is televised is like that for me. You would think a game like basketball, which is so fast, would be the exception, but with all the time outs and stops it's about the same.

I probably have undiagnosed ADD, but I need to be either physically in motion or mentally busy. TV sports don't allow that for me. If someone transported me back to the 50s, I'd have to kill myself from boredom!!!
Click to expand...

When I was living in the USA, many moons ago, I tried to watch a movie once. I don't remember exactly the ratio between actual movie and ads, but it must have been somewhere around 1:1. Never again did I do that. They can keep their ads, and their broadcast.

If I was to watch tennis in such a way I probably woudn't at all. Luckily, I don't have to put up with that BS.

:D
 
weakera

weakera

Talk Tennis Guru
Gary Duane said:
I like the idea, but it's not going to happen in this universe. But I don't see a reason for 20 seconds after an ace. And you have not addressed the problem of time wasted after a let or a fault. Or why a world class athlete needs 75 second to walk from one side of the court to the other.
Click to expand...

Ultimately there is only so much you can do to control the pace. You're never going to be timing every element of the match. But the shot clock is already in place, so why not optimize it.
 
junior74

junior74

Talk Tennis Guru
I think it's boring, too. 20 seconds was a lot better.

I like Feliciano; one bounce - hit it!

And I think using some noise in the crowd to just stand there and wait is very strange. Like the whole world has to be quiet for a player to be able to prepare for a serve. Everyone knows the moment you toss the ball, the crowd silences.
 
Last edited:
Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
weakera said:
Ultimately there is only so much you can do to control the pace. You're never going to be timing every element of the match. But the shot clock is already in place, so why not optimize it.
Click to expand...
You were probably not around a few years back when there were angry debates. You have to remember some people think the clock - any clock - is a bad idea.

I'm not sure it has sped up play at all. It may in the future, if younger players get used to playing faster due to rules. The nature of the game itself has slowed things down. Decades ago you just did not see so many insanely long points, and you certainly did not see so much movement. The equipment has changed things. The best players in the world, the best conditioned, are going to be winded at times. But you can't deny that players are now so used to going to the towel after every point that even this one factor is going to be impossible to change unless they outlaw towels. And that just is not going to happen. Then there is the ritual of always grabbing at least 3 balls, examining them, discarding one, putting the other in a pocket, rinse and repeat.

A few guys always play fast. Fed is one. I don't know how much of that is part of his personality and play style. Maybe if he delayed more, sometimes he'd think things through better and win more points. I honestly don't know.
 
Spencer Gore

Spencer Gore

Legend
The 100m sprints at the Olympics is even worse. There's a massive waste of time with athletes coming out, stretching, doing practice starts, prepping the blocks, settling into the blocks etc, focusing their minds and all that garbage.

The actual running only takes less than ten seconds. They should have all the heats, semis, finals in ten minutes to give people more bang for their buck so they can change channels and watch the X-Factor.
 
NatF

NatF

Bionic Poster
More important than the shotclock for me is playing to the servers pace. I think 25 seconds or just over is fine, sometimes the crowd is loud or the point was brutal and I don't have a problem with players taking a bit longer to gather themselves...However what annoys me is when a "reasonable" service routine is interrupted because the other player is trying to slow the pace of play - that's not on IMO. I also find excessive time between first and second serves a bit irritating as well...
 
Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
junior74 said:
I think it's boring, too. 20 seconds was a lot better.

I like Feliciano; one bounce - hit it!

And I think using some noise in the crowd to just stand there and wait is very strange. Like the whole world has to be quiet for a player to be able to prepare for a serve. Everyone knows the moment you toss the ball, the crowd silences.
Click to expand...
Playing faster also quiets the crowd. It's possible that noise is more of an advantage for the server since the returner probably reacts to sound. Supposedly deaf people have a huge disadvantage by not being able to hear the sound of the ball.

The one bounce thing is old school and goes back to the days of old grass. No one could bounce the ball 20 times on that grass! Feliciano was born several decades too late. He was made to be an old school grass player with his aggressive style and mostly slice backhand. ;)
 
junior74

junior74

Talk Tennis Guru
Gary Duane said:
Playing faster also quiets the crowd. It's possible that noise is more of an advantage for the server since the returner probably reacts to sound. Supposedly deaf people have a huge disadvantage by not being able to hear the sound of the ball.

The one bounce thing is old school and goes back to the days of old grass. No one could bounce the ball 20 times on that grass! Feliciano was born several decades too late. He was made to be an old school grass player with his aggressive style and mostly slice backhand. ;)
Click to expand...

Yes, taking too much time between points somewhat encourages the crowd to get involved.

I've played on grass. Not easy to bounce there. As on natural clay. An unpredictable bounce makes me more unfocused than anything. Perhaps there is some ADD in me, too ;)
 
Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
NatF said:
More important than the shotclock for me is playing to the servers pace. I think 25 seconds or just over is fine, sometimes the crowd is loud or the point was brutal and I don't have a problem with players taking a bit longer to gather themselves...However what annoys me is when a "reasonable" service routine is interrupted because the other player is trying to slow the pace of play - that's not on IMO. I also find excessive time between first and second serves a bit irritating as well...
Click to expand...
Well, playing to the pace of Nadal, Djokovic, Cilic and a few others means waiting for a long time for every serve, and I would think that must be annoying as hell. The last time I watched Cilic he was bouncing the ball as many as 20+ times, and you know about Novak. Nadal does not bounce the ball that many times, but he has his 10 step routine that takes that much time and all the other things.

But yes, delaying the server is just wrong.
 
NatF

NatF

Bionic Poster
Gary Duane said:
Well, playing to the pace of Nadal, Djokovic, Cilic and a few others means waiting for a long time for every serve, and I would think that must be annoying as hell. The last time I watched Cilic he was bouncing the ball as many as 20+ times, and you know about Novak. Nadal does not bounce the ball that many times, but he has his 10 step routine that takes that much time and all the other things.

But yes, delaying the server is just wrong.
Click to expand...

Yeah I think the server should be kept to a reasonable pace, IMO 25 seconds should be enough in most situations. The umpire should be able to discern when there's a pattern of slowing down the play and enforce the rules when it's apparent.

And yes Cilic is the most annoying server for me by faaaaaar.
 
junior74

junior74

Talk Tennis Guru
Gary Duane said:
Well, playing to the pace of Nadal, Djokovic, Cilic and a few others means waiting for a long time for every serve, and I would think that must be annoying as hell. The last time I watched Cilic he was bouncing the ball as many as 20+ times, and you know about Novak. Nadal does not bounce the ball that many times, but he has his 10 step routine that takes that much time and all the other things.

But yes, delaying the server is just wrong.
Click to expand...

When Nadal held up his racquet 7 times in one game to disturb Medvedev, I really couldn't belive my eyes...

Sometimes the umpire reacts - in reverse - when the server waits for the returner, and then gets time violation :oops:
 
acintya

acintya

Legend
good topic. we need a countdown voice just like at new year. starting at 20 secs right when the point is over and the balls are received and last 10 seconds it should be muted,and if he doesnt serve-automatic warning.
towels should be banned too. player would have be allowed to ask for a towel once in a game, not every point.
 
TimHenmanATG

TimHenmanATG

Hall of Fame
You don't want to go there, mate.

A football match is supposed to be 90 minutes, but research shows that the ball out is only in play between 22-28 minutes.
 
junior74

junior74

Talk Tennis Guru
acintya said:
good topic. we need a countdown voice just like at new year. starting at 20 secs right when the point is over and the balls are received and last 10 seconds it should be muted,and if he doesnt serve-automatic warning.
towels should be banned too. player would have be allowed to ask for a towel once in a game, not every point.
Click to expand...

Yes, or preferably, get the towel themselves - then they wouldn't use it unless they really needed it.

Our thoughts go to the poor ballboys and -girls who have to carry that towel around for their masters.
 
Last edited:
T

Tennis_Hands

Banned
junior74 said:
When Nadal held up his racquet 7 times in one game to disturb Medvedev, I really couldn't belive my eyes...

Sometimes the umpire reacts - in reverse - when the server waits for the returner, and then gets time violation :oops:
Click to expand...

That was actually the case in one of the matches between Nadal and Cilic in recent times, where Cilic got a time violation after Nadal was actively stalling him and also was taking his usual disproportionate amount of time on his own serve. Cilic couldn't believe his eyes (although obviously he is also quite slow himself) that he got a time violation instead of Nadal. It is also the case as to why when playing Nadal the opponents clock higher numbers than usual for them. In one such example a vamosalaplayan actually argued that it is because the players have more problems to deal with the Nadal .... until I showed him how many times the server was waiting for Nadal to finish with his routine.

:cool:
 
TimHenmanATG

TimHenmanATG

Hall of Fame
TheIntrovert said:
I hope you’re talking about American football cause otherwise that ‘fact’ is pure codswallop
Click to expand...

I'm British, so I'm obviously not referring to yankistani gridiron when I talk about "football".

There was some research which suggested that the ball is only in play for an average of 50 minutes during the 90 minutes of play.

When you further classify the concept of "in play", then it's only around 22-28 minutes of action.
 
TheIntrovert

TheIntrovert

Hall of Fame
TimHenmanATG said:
I'm British, so I'm obviously not referring to yankistani gridiron when I talk about "football".

There was some research which suggested that the ball is only in play for an average of 50 minutes during the 90 minutes of play.

When you further classify the concept of "in play", then it's only around 22-28 minutes of action.
Click to expand...
I would love to see that research. Cause I mean watching the football every single week, I can definitely say it’s far closer to the 90 than that. There’s even stoppage time at the end of each half to compensate for some of the time lost through the ball not being in play...
 
Mr.Lob

Mr.Lob

G.O.A.T.
Gary Duane said:
While watching the 2nd and 3rd sets of the USO final, which I missed last night but recorded, I stopped to check times for ads and for blank space between points.

I focused on Nadal as the slowest, and here is what I found:

30 seconds between service points because the clock is started at about 5 seconds. So for a love game there is a minimum of 2 minutes time watching him set up. For a deuce game we wait for him at least 4 minutes. But that's if he makes every 1st serve.

If he hits a let, he resets for 20 seconds. Then for the second serve, another 10 seconds.

Commercials last 90 seconds, so that's baked into the cake. With a 75 set there will be 6 ads, so add to that another 9 minutes.

At 1/0 Rafa took around 75 seconds to finally get to the other end of the court and serve. At one point Shriver interviewed Laver between the end of one game and the next.

I'm sure Rafa takes more time than anyone else, but there are other guys who are not exactly speedy. So there is a huge amount of waiting around. Maybe it is not so noticeable live because there is more going on, but I can hardly watch tennis live on TV now. It is so slow.

Set 2 and set 3 took about 15 minutes each for me to see every shot in every point simply by fast forwarding through TV breaks and breaks between points. I'd estimate a 5 hour marathon match like the one years ago between Rafa and Novak probably takes little more than an hour if you fast forward between all the delays.

If I didn't love tennis, I'd never be able to watch a match on TV. It's so slow.

Each shot in a point takes about a second. Next time you see a 40 shot rally, time it. It won't even last 50 seconds. Since the average point is really not many shots, probably the average point takes about 5 or 6 seconds. Certainly 10 seconds at the max, and that is probably way too long. Any game that lasts more than a minute, for the actual play, is probably unusual.

For the most part I can no longer watch a live match on TV. Am I the only one here like that?
Click to expand...

To answer your question, as far as I know you're the only person here who routinely watches recorded matches, instead of live t.v. I'll watch a recorded match just to see Serena losing a slam final again. LOL.
Otherwise it's live for me.

Televisions annoying filler, to keep the casual fans interest during this slow down time between points, is to zoom in at 100 magnification for close up of fans, players boxes, and washed up celebrities. All of which is no interest to me. I'd rather see a player blowing his nose into his towel and handing to ball boy than to see some fan hamming it up to get on camera. Keep the camera on the players and speed up the game!
 
Spencer Gore

Spencer Gore

Legend
TheIntrovert said:
I would love to see that research. Cause I mean watching the football every single week, I can definitely say it’s far closer to the 90 than that. There’s even stoppage time at the end of each half to compensate for some of the time lost through the ball not being in play...
Click to expand...
The ball is in play in football/soccer between 44mins and 66mins -averaging out at 55 mins.

So the figure of 50 minutes was an acceptable claim.
 
A

ABCD

Hall of Fame
Gary Duane said:
While watching the 2nd and 3rd sets of the USO final, which I missed last night but recorded, I stopped to check times for ads and for blank space between points.

I focused on Nadal as the slowest, and here is what I found:

30 seconds between service points because the clock is started at about 5 seconds. So for a love game there is a minimum of 2 minutes time watching him set up. For a deuce game we wait for him at least 4 minutes. But that's if he makes every 1st serve.

If he hits a let, he resets for 20 seconds. Then for the second serve, another 10 seconds.

Commercials last 90 seconds, so that's baked into the cake. With a 75 set there will be 6 ads, so add to that another 9 minutes.

At 1/0 Rafa took around 75 seconds to finally get to the other end of the court and serve. At one point Shriver interviewed Laver between the end of one game and the next.

I'm sure Rafa takes more time than anyone else, but there are other guys who are not exactly speedy. So there is a huge amount of waiting around. Maybe it is not so noticeable live because there is more going on, but I can hardly watch tennis live on TV now. It is so slow.

Set 2 and set 3 took about 15 minutes each for me to see every shot in every point simply by fast forwarding through TV breaks and breaks between points. I'd estimate a 5 hour marathon match like the one years ago between Rafa and Novak probably takes little more than an hour if you fast forward between all the delays.

If I didn't love tennis, I'd never be able to watch a match on TV. It's so slow.

Each shot in a point takes about a second. Next time you see a 40 shot rally, time it. It won't even last 50 seconds. Since the average point is really not many shots, probably the average point takes about 5 or 6 seconds. Certainly 10 seconds at the max, and that is probably way too long. Any game that lasts more than a minute, for the actual play, is probably unusual.

For the most part I can no longer watch a live match on TV. Am I the only one here like that?
Click to expand...

I am the opposite case. I like to see human drama unfolding slowly. Facial expressions, thinking under pressure, faces in the crowd (Mirka at 40:15; Srdan at 6:3, etc.). Playing without time between points and all the drama is like sex without foreplay.

TheIntrovert said:
I would love to see that research. Cause I mean watching the football every single week, I can definitely say it’s far closer to the 90 than that. There’s even stoppage time at the end of each half to compensate for some of the time lost through the ball not being in play...
Click to expand...

talksport.com

The Premier League club that has provided best value for money this season

Tottenham manager Mauricio Pochettino complained about West Brom’s time-wasting in their 1-1 draw at Wembley. Baggies keeper Ben Foster was even spotted kicking the ball away from a ballboy i…
talksport.com talksport.com
 
TimHenmanATG

TimHenmanATG

Hall of Fame
Tennis_Hands said:
So ..... you made that up?

BTW, considering that that is over 50% of the time, tennis is worse even if the players stick to the rules.

:cool:
Click to expand...

No I didn't "make it up", my Austrian friend.

One of the matches studied was the Premier League match between Burnley and Manchester City. The ball was "in play" for only around 45 minutes (half the actual playing time).

When you further break down what is technically constituted as "in play", then you are left with between 22-28 minutes of contested action.
 
ForumMember

ForumMember

Hall of Fame
100 meter race is 10 seconds but telecast of that lasts minimum of 20 mins. Tennis ratio you would see is much better than that.
 
B

Benoit Kyrgios

Rookie
Tennis is not tennis without breaks and time to think. Breaks when switching sides are necessarry. Breaks between points are necessarry. They replay the points during the breaks, and in slow motion too. They should show court level player perspective play on replays more, that would be really insightful. I don't see them do it at all.
 
TimHenmanATG

TimHenmanATG

Hall of Fame
TheIntrovert said:
I would love to see that research. Cause I mean watching the football every single week, I can definitely say it’s far closer to the 90 than that. There’s even stoppage time at the end of each half to compensate for some of the time lost through the ball not being in play...
Click to expand...

If you watch your team every week, then you don't notice the inaction because you are caught up in the moment.

That's one of the many beauties of football. It's known as "o jogo bonito" for a reason.

However, if you look at it objectively, the ball is out of play for an average of between 35-45 minutes during a 90-minute match.

Also, who is your team? I support Nottingham Forest.
 
Russeljones

Russeljones

Talk Tennis Guru
Gary Duane said:
While watching the 2nd and 3rd sets of the USO final, which I missed last night but recorded, I stopped to check times for ads and for blank space between points.

I focused on Nadal as the slowest, and here is what I found:

30 seconds between service points because the clock is started at about 5 seconds. So for a love game there is a minimum of 2 minutes time watching him set up. For a deuce game we wait for him at least 4 minutes. But that's if he makes every 1st serve.

If he hits a let, he resets for 20 seconds. Then for the second serve, another 10 seconds.

Commercials last 90 seconds, so that's baked into the cake. With a 75 set there will be 6 ads, so add to that another 9 minutes.

At 1/0 Rafa took around 75 seconds to finally get to the other end of the court and serve. At one point Shriver interviewed Laver between the end of one game and the next.

I'm sure Rafa takes more time than anyone else, but there are other guys who are not exactly speedy. So there is a huge amount of waiting around. Maybe it is not so noticeable live because there is more going on, but I can hardly watch tennis live on TV now. It is so slow.

Set 2 and set 3 took about 15 minutes each for me to see every shot in every point simply by fast forwarding through TV breaks and breaks between points. I'd estimate a 5 hour marathon match like the one years ago between Rafa and Novak probably takes little more than an hour if you fast forward between all the delays.

If I didn't love tennis, I'd never be able to watch a match on TV. It's so slow.

Each shot in a point takes about a second. Next time you see a 40 shot rally, time it. It won't even last 50 seconds. Since the average point is really not many shots, probably the average point takes about 5 or 6 seconds. Certainly 10 seconds at the max, and that is probably way too long. Any game that lasts more than a minute, for the actual play, is probably unusual.

For the most part I can no longer watch a live match on TV. Am I the only one here like that?
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Spot on, Gary.
 
Spencer Gore

Spencer Gore

Legend
Gary Duane said:
While watching the 2nd and 3rd sets of the USO final, which I missed last night but recorded, I stopped to check times for ads and for blank space between points.

I focused on Nadal as the slowest, and here is what I found:

30 seconds between service points because the clock is started at about 5 seconds. So for a love game there is a minimum of 2 minutes time watching him set up. For a deuce game we wait for him at least 4 minutes. But that's if he makes every 1st serve.

If he hits a let, he resets for 20 seconds. Then for the second serve, another 10 seconds.

Commercials last 90 seconds, so that's baked into the cake. With a 75 set there will be 6 ads, so add to that another 9 minutes.

At 1/0 Rafa took around 75 seconds to finally get to the other end of the court and serve. At one point Shriver interviewed Laver between the end of one game and the next.

I'm sure Rafa takes more time than anyone else, but there are other guys who are not exactly speedy. So there is a huge amount of waiting around. Maybe it is not so noticeable live because there is more going on, but I can hardly watch tennis live on TV now. It is so slow.

Set 2 and set 3 took about 15 minutes each for me to see every shot in every point simply by fast forwarding through TV breaks and breaks between points. I'd estimate a 5 hour marathon match like the one years ago between Rafa and Novak probably takes little more than an hour if you fast forward between all the delays.

If I didn't love tennis, I'd never be able to watch a match on TV. It's so slow.

Each shot in a point takes about a second. Next time you see a 40 shot rally, time it. It won't even last 50 seconds. Since the average point is really not many shots, probably the average point takes about 5 or 6 seconds. Certainly 10 seconds at the max, and that is probably way too long. Any game that lasts more than a minute, for the actual play, is probably unusual.

For the most part I can no longer watch a live match on TV. Am I the only one here like that?
Click to expand...
It really is damning to see people admit that their attention span has become so atrophied by the modern world that they are reduced to taping matches and fast forwarding through them.

Talk about not living and enjoying life in the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ninman
A good argument for a shot clock
Replies
11
Views
1K
Nashvegas
N
cluckcluck
Was Nadal cheating during Dimitriov Match?
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
Bartelby
Bartelby
U
Rafa and the 20 seconds rule
Replies
21
Views
2K
MagicMT
MagicMT
iamgoat
Nadal needs to be called out for his incessant time wasting.
Replies
8
Views
788
P_Agony
P_Agony
Breaker
  • Poll
Allowed time between points should be shortened
Replies
41
Views
3K
TheTruth
TheTruth
Top