D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
Yeah it’s gonna be very hard to shout “MOOONNNNNNNNNN” at my TV knowing that Mury would get rid of my favorite part of the sport if he could.
No offense Andy but no one cares about your dinner.
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
Also, to be fair.
We are way better connaisseurs of watching tennis. Murray has other stuff to do, like, playing tennis.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
lol
hoodjem
G.O.A.T.
Ah. Every good Scot wants to head to the pub for a few after work.
Atennisone
Hall of Fame
Lol, Tennis if GS cahnges to BO3, tennis is closer to dying, I mean the level of all, the under 30 years players, are at a scary low level, and I mean, if this is the level, and GS matches are as easy to win as ATP 250 matches, this sport should be renamed, or I don't know, but seriously this is wrong (imo)
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
I agree with this analysis.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
I been dreaming of that lo mein all the way over here! Now 5 set matches wanna come in and starve me. Get outta here.
GoldenSwing
Rookie
It’s weird that guys known for their stamina, like Murray and Djokovic, seem to advocate best of three..
They clearly have less chance to be upsetted in a best of five format.
While Federer who is a dinosaur at this point advocates for best of five. I’d really be interested in Nadals opinion
They clearly have less chance to be upsetted in a best of five format.
While Federer who is a dinosaur at this point advocates for best of five. I’d really be interested in Nadals opinion
ibbi
G.O.A.T.
I mean if you have somewhere to go you can get up and live your life. The ITF don't force you to sit through a match all the way to the end if you have more important things to do. How did tennis ever make it all this way with best of 5 tennis if it's so god damn hard for people to stomach? I think the format of matches is not the problem here, but it's easy to make it the scapegoat.
Nadal would be 100% in favor of BO5 in slams. He always talks up long epic matches, there's no way he would choose BO3 over those.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
I am interested too.
But ultimately fans should decide these things, or former pros. Active players will often place their own best interests above those of the sport.
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
sad to see a(nother?) former top player say such a lame thing... 
that being said, maybe the giant-jawed muzzette of dunblane is also bored, as many spectators, by his own matches ?
EDIT
oh... just realized he was bored during a match of the nadal..... it's just natural, andy, don't worry about it
... but don't blame all 5-setters because of the rusty peak injured golden bull
that being said, maybe the giant-jawed muzzette of dunblane is also bored, as many spectators, by his own matches ?
EDIT
oh... just realized he was bored during a match of the nadal..... it's just natural, andy, don't worry about it
... but don't blame all 5-setters because of the rusty peak injured golden bull
Last edited:
TimHenmanATG
Hall of Fame
These are strange comments from Murray. For him to make such an out of touch comment is disappointing.
Playing up to 9 pm (and even beyond) is hardly unusual at Wimbledon. If you've got 4 matches scheduled on a show-court with a 1 pm start time, then you'd be a fool not to consider the possibility that it could be a late finish. Even if the two ladies' matches are only one hour apiece, that only leaves around 5 hours for the two men's matches to be completed, considering that there's going to be nearly an hour's worth of knocking-up and faffing around in-between matches.
Add into the equation that the notoriously unpredictable British weather conditions will often be a factor.
The vast majority of the paying fans are well aware that they have committed their full day to the tennis, an make other plans accordingly.
Over the years, I've seen matches at Wimbledon occasionally going on until 9.30 pm. And when the umpire suspends it for bad light, the crowd don't breathe a sigh of relief and think: ''Thank God for that. Now I can finally go out for dinner!''. They always boo the decision because they don't want the match to stop.
Playing up to 9 pm (and even beyond) is hardly unusual at Wimbledon. If you've got 4 matches scheduled on a show-court with a 1 pm start time, then you'd be a fool not to consider the possibility that it could be a late finish. Even if the two ladies' matches are only one hour apiece, that only leaves around 5 hours for the two men's matches to be completed, considering that there's going to be nearly an hour's worth of knocking-up and faffing around in-between matches.
Add into the equation that the notoriously unpredictable British weather conditions will often be a factor.
The vast majority of the paying fans are well aware that they have committed their full day to the tennis, an make other plans accordingly.
Over the years, I've seen matches at Wimbledon occasionally going on until 9.30 pm. And when the umpire suspends it for bad light, the crowd don't breathe a sigh of relief and think: ''Thank God for that. Now I can finally go out for dinner!''. They always boo the decision because they don't want the match to stop.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Sorry Andy. You're my fav player (as everybody on here knows by now) but I have to take strong issue with you on this. Forget the fancy dinner you missed and your impressions of commentating for the first time at Wimbledon. You admit how much you enjoy playing Bo5 and how much it rewards all the training you put in so go with your gut instincts on this and defend what makes Slams, Davis Cup and other Bo5 events so special. Don't be misled into thinking that fans would prefer shorter matches. True tennis fans will always stay with the game and Bo5 has produced too many wonderful matches down the years to be lightly discarded just because some millennials have the attention span of a gnat and can't sit still for more than 5 minutes.
Respectfully advise that you (and Djokovic) really think through what you say about this very carefully. Hopefully when you have done this you (both) will take a more sensible and rational view about this!
Respectfully advise that you (and Djokovic) really think through what you say about this very carefully. Hopefully when you have done this you (both) will take a more sensible and rational view about this!
Krish872007
Talk Tennis Guru
Have to disagree with Andy here unfortunately. What's the point of Slams if they're not BO5? Removes some of the excitement. They'll basically be no different to the rest of the tour.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Look at it this way. If Murray wanted that dinner so badly, then why did he agree to become a pundit and commentator during the 2018 Wimbledon tournament? And I think Nadal vs. Del Potro was the best match of the tournament, an example of tennis at its best, and why we all love the sport. Why anyone would prefer England vs. Croatia, or a dinner, is beyond me.
Krish872007
Talk Tennis Guru
Djokovic's comment on BO5 was particularly funny though - he was basically trashing millennials by pointing to their extremely short attention spans
He needs to think more about himself rather than about just the fans
He needs to think more about himself rather than about just the fans
TimHenmanATG
Hall of Fame
Maybe I've got a pessimistic outlook on this matter, but I would argue that because the majority of tennis viewership are more ''casual'' fans who only watch one or more Grand Slams per year, then they are much more likely to accept a change like this.
It's only really the dedicated fans of the sport who consider the BO5 format to be sacrosanct.
I thought the missing dinner bit was ridiculous. I thoroughly enjoyed Murray's commentary in the Del Potro Nadal match and according to him the 5th set was one of the best sets of tennis he had ever seen. He said it himself on air. Why would he want to change it lol?
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
If you told me a male player said this without telling me who it was I would've gone with Murray no doubt.
Krish872007
Talk Tennis Guru
I think it's a hindsight opinion, now that he's gone through the whole injury and recovery process the elongated BO5 format is suddenly no longer an attractive or beneficial proposition for him.
Hopefully he realises this and reverses his stance at some point when he's had time to reflect on his successes. If not for BO5 he wouldn't have won Wimbledon 2013 (2 sets down against Verdasco)
Mustard
Bionic Poster
So drag the whole sport down because your career is in decline?
Krish872007
Talk Tennis Guru
I was disappointed to read that to be honest. Though he did say he likes the format as a player, from the spectator's view it appears as though he couldn't make his mind up as to whether the Nadal-Del Potro match was exciting or boring. Again, thinking too much from the apparent perspective of fans. Most real tennis fans love 5 setters.
If he's right about the people leaving long matches early due to boredom, then the whole world, not just tennis, is in trouble.
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
Pro tennis historian
Rookie
The only thing boring about watching that Nadal v. Del Potro match on TV was listening to Murray's monotone voice commentating on it.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
It sounds like he has a really bad lisp and keeps saying "Melzer".
or "melt her" but that wouldn't be Murray
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Djokovic has said something similar though.
I Am Finnish
Bionic Poster
Murray is also against it interesting i wanna hear Nadal opinion
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Fabresque
Legend
I think it’s important to preserve five set matches at the GS level now more than ever because of what happened to the Davis Cup. But a fifth set tiebreak needs to be introduced to 1. Keep interest in the sport and 2. To allow players proper rest and prevent a beatdown in a later match (example: Djokovic-Anderson 2018 Wimbledon final).
But I disagree with Federer in introducing five set matches in ATP Finals.
But I disagree with Federer in introducing five set matches in ATP Finals.
oldmanfan
Legend
If the ATP/ITF want tennis to crash, make slams Bo3.
Bo3 in slams is so flawed, it's shocking. It's like winning IW as an unseeded player (6 matches), but was given 7 EXTRA days of rest to win one more match with that opponent's ranking no higher than #65 (upto #1000+ bc WC). Wow, so hard to win this Bo3 slam no?
Ridiculous!
Bo3 in slams is so flawed, it's shocking. It's like winning IW as an unseeded player (6 matches), but was given 7 EXTRA days of rest to win one more match with that opponent's ranking no higher than #65 (upto #1000+ bc WC). Wow, so hard to win this Bo3 slam no?
Ridiculous!
Actually an unseeded players would have to win 7 matches to win IW, same as at slams. The draw size is 96, the seeded players get first round bye.
Good catch!
Which makes what Djokovic/Murray said even more ridiculous.
Yeah it's the same in Miami too. If slams became BO3 then there would be no difference between IW/Miami and a slam. Ridiculous idea!
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Djokovic's comment on BO5 was particularly funny though - he was basically trashing millennials by pointing to their extremely short attention spans
He needs to think more about himself rather than about just the fans
I assume that you're talking about the fact that Djokovic himself is technically a millennial.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
On the contrary I think. Let's say your typical casual fan watches/follows 5 tournaments a year. All the slams and the WTF's. Some may replace the AO or WTF for their hometown tournament, but again this is just said generally.
I have a hard time believing they'd want to watch less tennis if they only watch 5 a year. It's my belief that most people watch slams because they're the "ultimate test." Because they're BO5. It isn't just because RG, Wimbledon, and the USO are old and have the most history on tour (and now the AO is a slam and so it's BO5). If you take away BO5 there's nothing special about the slams anymore besides that they're the oldest, and that doesn't fly with casual fans in my experience. It's usually only people on tennis forums like this one that argue about prestige. Casual fans don't really care how old tournaments are.
MatsPhilander
Legend
It would be like making cricket tests 3 days instead of 5-would take away so much drama.
Zeref
Professional
With BCCI making trashy square turning pitches ( from Session1 ) in India..it's already becoming a 3 day trash...atleast in India, and shame fanboys support it because even though Cricket is dying but India is winning.
MatsPhilander
Legend
I know many teams are collapsing these days because batting time seems to be a thing of the past, but even so most make it to day four. We are still seeing some exciting games that go to the last day or end up in a draw.
heninfan99
Talk Tennis Guru
I'm starting to lean towards only slam quarters onwards should best of five
Maybe hard to believe but they’re genuinely expressing what they think is best for the sport, as opposed to what is best for them. Crazy, I know.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Similar threads
