Absurd day of tennis has negative repercussions for the women's final which will now be delayed

Aussie Darcy

Talk Tennis Guru
#1
Gotta admit that this is pretty poor.

Because of the annoying Wimbledon rule of no play after 11PM and the crazy long Anderson/Isner match, Djokovic v Nadal had to be suspended at the start of the 4th set. The organizers have decided to schedule the match to resume at 1PM tomorrow which is BEFORE the women's final at 2PM. Considering how long the sets have been between these two players, it is highly likely that the women's final will now be delayed. Not only will it be delayed, the women will have to wait around, potentially for hours for the men to finish playing which is definitely unprecedented in recent years for a slam final.

Say what you want about women's tennis (i'm sure there'll be a lot of negative comments here), but can you imagine how you would feel if the men's final was to be indefinitely delayed because of a women's match? People would go crazy.

To make matters worse, earlier in the tournament, organizers were adamant that the timing of the men's final wouldn't be changed if England made the World Cup final so many are asking why the women's time slot is ok to be amended but not the men's.

Kerber and Serena are set to play one of their biggest matches of their career (Kerber going for slam #3 and Serena looking to equal Court's record of 24 slams). But instead of knowing when their match will start, they potentially could sit around for hours (if the match is anything like the Anderson/Isner match, they could be waiting for a long, long time).
 
#4
Gotta admit that this is pretty poor.

Because of the annoying Wimbledon rule of no play after 11PM and the crazy long Anderson/Isner match, Djokovic v Nadal had to be suspended at the start of the 4th set. The organizers have decided to schedule the match to resume at 1PM tomorrow which is BEFORE the women's final at 2PM. Considering how long the sets have been between these two players, it is highly likely that the women's final will now be delayed. Not only will it be delayed, the women will have to wait around, potentially for hours for the men to finish playing which is definitely unprecedented in recent years for a slam final.

Say what you want about women's tennis (i'm sure there'll be a lot of negative comments here), but can you imagine how you would feel if the men's final was to be indefinitely delayed because of a women's match? People would go crazy.

To make matters worse, earlier in the tournament, organizers were adamant that the timing of the men's final wouldn't be changed if England made the World Cup final so many are asking why the women's time slot is ok to be amended but not the men's.

Kerber and Serena are set to play one of their biggest matches of their career (Kerber going for slam #3 and Serena looking to equal Court's record of 24 slams). But instead of knowing when their match will start, they potentially could sit around for hours (if the match is anything like the Anderson/Isner match, they could be waiting for a long, long time).
This is because the winner still has another match to play on Sunday.

It doesn't make sense for the men to finish their semi after the women's final, which has the same potential to last a very long time with no final set TB
 

vex

Hall of Fame
#5
Gotta admit that this is pretty poor.

Because of the annoying Wimbledon rule of no play after 11PM and the crazy long Anderson/Isner match, Djokovic v Nadal had to be suspended at the start of the 4th set. The organizers have decided to schedule the match to resume at 1PM tomorrow which is BEFORE the women's final at 2PM. Considering how long the sets have been between these two players, it is highly likely that the women's final will now be delayed. Not only will it be delayed, the women will have to wait around, potentially for hours for the men to finish playing which is definitely unprecedented in recent years for a slam final.

Say what you want about women's tennis (i'm sure there'll be a lot of negative comments here), but can you imagine how you would feel if the men's final was to be indefinitely delayed because of a women's match? People would go crazy.

To make matters worse, earlier in the tournament, organizers were adamant that the timing of the men's final wouldn't be changed if England made the World Cup final so many are asking why the women's time slot is ok to be amended but not the men's.

Kerber and Serena are set to play one of their biggest matches of their career (Kerber going for slam #3 and Serena looking to equal Court's record of 24 slams). But instead of knowing when their match will start, they potentially could sit around for hours (if the match is anything like the Anderson/Isner match, they could be waiting for a long, long time).
Maybe, just maybe this “Uber prestigious” tournament which 1) has been scheduled by morons all the way thru; 2) caters to servebot play styles on a surface with no season to support it and 3) has this dumb no 5th set TB nonsense... maybe it’s just an overrated tourney

AO knows how to run a tourney
 

Aussie Darcy

Talk Tennis Guru
#7
This is because the winner still has another match to play on Sunday.

It doesn't make sense for the men to finish their semi after the women's final, which could potentially last a very long time with no final set TB
That's not the ladies fault that Anderson v Isner were unable to break eachothers serve. Instead the women have to wait around on one of the biggest matches of their career for a match that could also go a very long time with no final set TB.
 
#9
That's not the ladies fault that Anderson v Isner were unable to break eachothers serve.
Neither is it Djokovic or Nadal's fault

Instead the women have to wait around on one of the biggest matches of their career for a match that could also go a very long time with no final set TB.
They have already played 3 sets. Barring something exceptional, they should be finished in another 90 minutes at the most.
 
Last edited:

Aussie Darcy

Talk Tennis Guru
#12
Neither is it Djokovic or Nadal's fault


They have already played 3 sets. Barring something exceptional, they should be finished in another 90 minutes at the most
I didn't say it was their fault, but it's their tour. The organizers refused to move the men's final if England made the World Cup final but the women's final can easily be delayed because of something that has nothing to do with them?
Also 90 minutes would still see them delayed and besides, I think it'd be longer then that as:
Set 1 was 48 minutes
Set 2 was 53 minutes
Set 3 was an 1 hour and 15 minutes.

Likely to go 5 sets and let's say an hour each, that's 2 hours already. Then there's still more delays for the winner to do an on court interviews, head off court and the women to come out.. It's not exactly great.
 
#13
I didn't say it was their fault, but it's their tour. The organizers refused to move the men's final if England made the World Cup final but the women's final can easily be delayed because of something that has nothing to do with them?
Also 90 minutes would still see them delayed and besides, I think it'd be longer then that as:
Set 1 was 48 minutes
Set 2 was 53 minutes
Set 3 was an 1 hour and 15 minutes.

Likely to go 5 sets and let's say an hour each, that's 2 hours already. Then there's still more delays for the winner to do an on court interviews, head off court and the women to come out.. It's not exactly great.
Well, that's a moot point because England did not make the final

The bottom line is, someone would be inconvenienced here. I think doing it this way is better, because the ladies don't have to worry about having to play another match, like Nadal and Djokovic did today.
 

sredna42

Professional
#14
For starters, is it djoker/nada's fault that their match was delayed? And now they're having to endure this?
And also, it is standard procedure to finish a match that has already started.
Going by historical tickets sales, the ATP final generally makes more money than the WTA final.
Grigor Dimitrov's 1st round loss probably had more interest even, LOL.
Only a biased fanboy wold think otherwise.
The real bias is against the men, being forced to play 5 set marathons then back it up.
 

Aussie Darcy

Talk Tennis Guru
#17
For starters, is it djoker/nada's fault that their match was delayed? And now they're having to endure this?
And also, it is standard procedure to finish a match that has already started.
Going by historical tickets sales, the ATP final generally makes more money than the WTA final.
Grigor Dimitrov's 1st round loss probably had more interest even, LOL.
Only a biased fanboy wold think otherwise.
The real bias is against the men, being forced to play 5 set marathons then back it up.
Actually, throughout this tournament standard procedure has been mixed. Some continuing matches were scheduled after other matches (which hadn't started) were to play. Note how Seppi v Anderson was suspended on Court 2 on day 3 and resumed SECOND on court 2 on day 4 after Boulter v Osaka. Fabbiano v Stan was suspended on court 3 on day 3 and resumed SECOND on court 3 on day 4 after Bouchard v Barty.

And super cute trying to act like 23x slam champ Serena Williams v 2x slam champ Angelique Kerber won't have much interest. Probably will be more interesting than the men's final will end up being with a dead tired Anderson v Nadal/Djokovic. Not like the ATP is getting a Fedal final or Murray v Djokovic. It's the 'almighty' Anderson in the final. :rolleyes:
 

Meles

Bionic Poster
#20
This problem could've been easily solved by organizing the men to play after the ladies final which also would've given them more time to rest..

It's not the women's fault that Isner/Anderson play such boring servebot tennis.
Good thread. Well this time they could have put it after the ladies final because Anderson is likely a dead duck in the final given how much he's played in his last two matches.

But that's not how things are done. If weather had delayed the matches and Fed was awaiting fresh in the final, well then its pretty obvious the ladies final should face some delay. If the match goes into a fifth they'll push the start back an hour or so. Now if we have another long fifth then it makes the problem worse.

The way to fix this is put the Men's final on Saturday and reverse the situation. And of course Men's final on Saturday is a crazy idea because of best of 5 vs best of 3.
 

Mack-2

Professional
#21
They should have put on the ladies final first so Djoko or Nadal won’t get that much rest for the final. Anderson may actually have a chance of winning more than 4 games in one set if they scheduled it that way.
 

Aussie Darcy

Talk Tennis Guru
#22
To be fair it's the guys carrying this tournament so far. There is something worse than 7-6 6-7 6-7 6-4 26-24. That's 6-3 6-3.
I disagree. I watched 3 sets of that Isner/Anderson nonsense and was bored out of my brain and the majority of comments i've read said that "just cause a match is long does not make it high quality". 6-3 6-3 can still be very good with exceptional points and rallies. Anderson/Isner had like, 1 break of serve all match? lmao.
 

Mack-2

Professional
#23
I disagree. I watched 3 sets of that Isner/Anderson nonsense and was bored out of my brain and the majority of comments i've read said that "just cause a match is long does not make it high quality". 6-3 6-3 can still be very good with exceptional points and rallies. Anderson/Isner had like, 1 break of serve all match? lmao.
It was actually like 6 breaks of serve I believe. 2 to Isner and 4 to Anderson.
 

Aussie Darcy

Talk Tennis Guru
#25
Good thread. Well this time they could have put it after the ladies final because Anderson is likely a dead duck in the final given how much he's played in his last two matches.

But that's not how things are done. If weather had delayed the matches and Fed was awaiting fresh in the final, well then its pretty obvious the ladies final should face some delay. If the match goes into a fifth they'll push the start back an hour or so. Now if we have another long fifth then it makes the problem worse.

The way to fix this is put the Men's final on Saturday and reverse the situation. And of course Men's final on Saturday is a crazy idea because of best of 5 vs best of 3.
The way to fix this would be to edit a whole bunch of Wimbledon's stupid traditions such as: no play after 11PM, no play on middle Sunday, etc.
 

Aussie Darcy

Talk Tennis Guru
#27
Wonder if OP remembers how Vesnina and Kuznetsova played a boring 3.5 hour match and pushed Fed-Stan match at IW 2017

Also there have been instances at majors where men's matches have got delayed to account for delayed women's matches

Nothing to see here
Wonder if you can read because my original post said:
Not only will it be delayed, the women will have to wait around, potentially for hours for the men to finish playing which is definitely unprecedented in recent years for a slam final.
Slam final. Not Masters 1000 and not early round of a slam. Please reread my posts next time, thanks.
 
#28
I disgaree. I watched 3 sets of that Isner/Anderson nonsense and was bored out of my brains and the majority of comments i've read said that "just cause a match is long does not make it quality". 6-3 6-3 can still be very good with exceptional points and rallies. Anderson/Isner had like, 1 break of serve all match? lmao.
Anderson/Isner had 5 breaks in a set and a half from halfway through the 3rd to the end of the 4th. In the 3rd set tie break 9 of 20 points went against the server. It was one of the great tie breaks ever played. The first 3 sets took an hour each, which doesn't happen on grass if they're just servebotting. I can't vouch for the 5th, but the rest of that match was fine. I'm not a particular critic of women's tennis, but all the boosterism in the world can't change how tame their semis have been.
 
#30
I can tell everybody real quick how to solve this problem. PLAY A DAMN TIEBREAKER AT 6-6 IN THE DAMN FIFTH FRICKING SET!!!!!!!!!!! STUPID IDIOT RULE MUST BE FRICKING CHANGED!!!!
 
#31
I can tell everybody real quick how to solve this problem. PLAY A DAMN TIEBREAKER AT 6-6 IN THE DAMN FIFTH FRICKING SET!!!!!!!!!!! STUPID IDIOT RULE MUST BE FRICKING CHANGED!!!!
They'll change the rule, but hopefully not to 6-6. The Federer/Anderson match was better for being an advantage set in the 5th, but there does come a time when it's too long. They should keep the principle of advantage set but with a limit, either 12-12 or 15-15.
 

clout

Hall of Fame
#34
Lol Serena's gonna win even if she plays her C/D game (she's been doing that against her swiss cheese competition since 2010). Plus if you ask several tennis fans whether they'd watch a semifinals match between two of the greatest players we've ever seen and will ever get to see continue their epic match or a predictable and likely dry WTA finals with Serena once again winning with her eyes closed. I'm sure 99.9% of fans will pick the first option.
 
Last edited:
#35
As irritating as it is may be for the women, I don't understand why people are crying foul. How unfair would it be for Djokovic or Nadal to have to play the final on Sunday after ending a late match on Saturday AFTER a long women's final? It's bad enough for them that they don't get a full day's rest, while Anderson does. Why exacerbate the issue? Serena and Kerber are at least on equal footing, though they may be sitting around for a bit. But that's true for many matches, unless you're the first match of the day, so it's not out of the ordinary for a big match. How frickin long were Djokovic and Nadal sitting around today waiting to get on the court for their big semifinal encounter? I guess they could let the women play on Centre court at the scheduled time and let the men finish on Court 1, but I don't think that would be so nice for the attendance of the women's final, nor would it be that fair to the fans.

And as far as people bringing up the World Cup, sorry but that's just plain ridiculous. You're comparing scheduling two matches that are occurring in the SAME sport in the SAME tournament, to scheduling a tennis match around a completely unrelated football game. Let's please speak out about real injustices in the world, not the "sexism" that is occurring in Wimbledon. Sure, the scheduling may be crap, but it's shafting Djokovic and Nadal, more than it is Serena and Kerber. Let's keep things in perspective.
 
C

Chadillac

Guest
#36
The womens final wont be easy on the eye after watching two of the greatest men finish the most important match on that day. The quality of tennis will be like 1/10th.

I agree with op, they should put it on after the womens final, its the main event
 

70後

Hall of Fame
#38
This problem could've been easily solved by organizing the men to play after the ladies final which also would've given them more time to rest..

It's not the women's fault that Isner/Anderson play such boring servebot tennis.
This is the obvious reasonable solution. That way we can reduce the damage as far as possible. If we put the sf after the wf, then at least the wf is not affected.

But in any case, everybody and everything is screwed, Angie and Serena are screwed, Kevin is screwed, Rafa and Novak are screwed, the spectators are screwed, the women's final, the mens semi final, the mens final, everything.
 
Last edited:

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
#40
It doesn't make sense for the men to finish their semi after the women's final, which has the same potential to last a very long time with no final set TB
So you mean it makes sense for the women to wait interminably ?
Not getting your logic. I felt the women should be first.

I understand your part that the men will get 2 hours more to rest for the final, but apart from that the W final could get delayed a lot, although i don;t think these 2 will go into a long 5th set.

But yeah, if the W final is first then the semi doesn't start straight away, there will be the ceremonies and speeches and what not. You don't want to hurry that up for another big match, I guess. But on the other hand, the royalty now don't know when the final starts. Duke and Duchess of Kent I mean. The younger ones will probably be happy to sit through the men's semi.
 
#42
So you mean it makes sense for the women to wait interminably ?
Not getting your logic. I felt the women should be first.

I understand your part that the men will get 2 hours more to rest for the final, but apart from that the W final could get delayed a lot, although i don;t think these 2 will go into a long 5th set.

But yeah, if the W final is first then the semi doesn't start straight away, there will be the ceremonies and speeches and what not. You don't want to hurry that up for another big match, I guess. But on the other hand, the royalty now don't know when the final starts. Duke and Duchess of Kent I mean. The younger ones will probably be happy to sit through the men's semi.
The women's match is considered the main match so is played last. The Djokovic/Nadal semi was considered the main match yesterday so was the later match. Tennis players have spent their entire lives sitting around waiting on uncertain start times so you'd think it's a non issue for the players...at least in terms of affecting their performance.
 

Aussie Darcy

Talk Tennis Guru
#43
Nobody cares. Who even knows who is in the women's final? It's not like Martina playing Chrissie or Graf playing Sabatini or Seles. Let these women wait. We all had to wait 26 hours before Andergiraffe and Big John were done with their tedious serve-fest. And that will be 100 times more palatable than any women's match.
Just one of the most recognizable names in tennis, Serena Williams vs a player who got to #1 2 years ago by beating Serena in the Australian Open final as well as winning the US Open and losing the Wimbledon final to Serena. Seriously, how ignorant do you have to be to not know that? :rolleyes:
It's not like it's Giorgi v Goerges. This is an epic final.
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
#44
I can tell everybody real quick how to solve this problem. PLAY A DAMN TIEBREAKER AT 6-6 IN THE DAMN FIFTH FRICKING SET!!!!!!!!!!! STUPID IDIOT RULE MUST BE FRICKING CHANGED!!!!
A tiebreak often just comes down to one point. Happened in the first semi a couple times if i recall. Not good enough for a final set.
 
#46
Actually, throughout this tournament standard procedure has been mixed. Some continuing matches were scheduled after other matches (which hadn't started) were to play. Note how Seppi v Anderson was suspended on Court 2 on day 3 and resumed SECOND on court 2 on day 4 after Boulter v Osaka. Fabbiano v Stan was suspended on court 3 on day 3 and resumed SECOND on court 3 on day 4 after Bouchard v Barty.

And super cute trying to act like 23x slam champ Serena Williams v 2x slam champ Angelique Kerber won't have much interest. Probably will be more interesting than the men's final will end up being with a dead tired Anderson v Nadal/Djokovic. Not like the ATP is getting a Fedal final or Murray v Djokovic. It's the 'almighty' Anderson in the final. :rolleyes:
Your first paragraph is the norm: they try to schedule a holdover match second (presumably to allow the players to rest from the night before). All the more reason to do this when the match was held over at 11 p.m. I think it was fine to give Nadal/Djokovic the choice, but they should have told them it was between starting at 11 a.m. and being after the women. Not 1 p.m. The least they could now do is delay the official women's start time and make it "not before 4 p.m."

By the way, you didn't mention this, but there is also a good chance that the women's doubles final will now be shunted to court 1. Not the men's doubles final, though.
 
#47
Gotta admit that this is pretty poor.

Because of the annoying Wimbledon rule of no play after 11PM and the crazy long Anderson/Isner match, Djokovic v Nadal had to be suspended at the start of the 4th set. The organizers have decided to schedule the match to resume at 1PM tomorrow which is BEFORE the women's final at 2PM. Considering how long the sets have been between these two players, it is highly likely that the women's final will now be delayed. Not only will it be delayed, the women will have to wait around, potentially for hours for the men to finish playing which is definitely unprecedented in recent years for a slam final.

Say what you want about women's tennis (i'm sure there'll be a lot of negative comments here), but can you imagine how you would feel if the men's final was to be indefinitely delayed because of a women's match? People would go crazy.

To make matters worse, earlier in the tournament, organizers were adamant that the timing of the men's final wouldn't be changed if England made the World Cup final so many are asking why the women's time slot is ok to be amended but not the men's.

Kerber and Serena are set to play one of their biggest matches of their career (Kerber going for slam #3 and Serena looking to equal Court's record of 24 slams). But instead of knowing when their match will start, they potentially could sit around for hours (if the match is anything like the Anderson/Isner match, they could be waiting for a long, long time).
Wouldn’t the easier solution be to simply resume the men’s match at 11, 1130 or noon? Not a perfect solution but I see the unfairness. Don’t think you can make the men finish Saturday night and turn around for a Sunday final given how physical the match has been, however.
 
#48
He really is, isn't he? Well, at the least, he says some really stupid things, because he's so insular, narrow-minded, and uninterested in anything to which he is unaccustomed. My guess is he leads a very narrow life and everything outside it scares him so his reaction is to force himself to think there must be something wrong with it as a coping mechanism to hide his deep fear of it.
 
#49
I disagree. I watched 3 sets of that Isner/Anderson nonsense and was bored out of my brain and the majority of comments i've read said that "just cause a match is long does not make it high quality". 6-3 6-3 can still be very good with exceptional points and rallies. Anderson/Isner had like, 1 break of serve all match? lmao.
Six breaks of serve: four to Anderson, two to Isner. Two breaks in set three, three breaks (!) in set four, and one in set five. On the first two occasions Anderson broke, he got a bit tight and handed the break straight back. To be fair to Anderson, I don't think he's nearly as much of a serve bot as is Isner. It's just that Isner's serve is really, really hard to break. Had Anderson not got nervous at inopportune moments - remember that he'd lost five straight times to Isner, including two losses of two tiebreak sets to one - I think he was generally playing significantly enough better to make a four-set win the likely outcome.
 
Top