Murrays watch Nadal v Federer Rome 2006

Wasn't until the following year that the ATP moved from Bo5 to Bo3 in Masters. Djokovic and Canas actually played the last Bo5 set Masters final at 2007 Miami.
But it was the 2006 Rome final that started the ATP tennis bureaucracy to that end, or rather because of Nadal and Federer both pulling out of 2006 Hamburg as a result.

In the 1990s, the ATP would have just shrugged their shoulders in that situation and said "Well, other players have a chance in Hamburg", whereas in 2006 they seemed really bothered by Nadal and Federer not being there.
 
Wonderful to hear Andy's insights.

"The pirate pants? I'm not feeling them" :laughing:
Poor taste as usual :p

2006-u-s-open-tennis-day-4.jpg

u-s-open-day-9.jpg
 
I understand masters, but don't see why they had to apply that change to the YEC too. 2007 WTF was the last edition that featured a BO5 final (as well as Federer and Ferrer's only BO5 match).
Even worse the DC. The general trend unfortunately goes into that direction. Things like champions tie-break etc. I fear very soon we will have at least partially Bo3 at slams as well.
 
But it was the 2006 Rome final that started the ATP tennis bureaucracy to that end, or rather because of Nadal and Federer both pulling out of 2006 Hamburg as a result.

In the 1990s, the ATP would have just shrugged their shoulders in that situation and said "Well, other players have a chance in Hamburg", whereas in 2006 they seemed really bothered by Nadal and Federer not being there.
They didn’t like GOATredo winning s master over Stepanek
 
We did have BO3 partially in the past in the early rounds of slams.
For the record, they did that at the US Open from 1975-1978 (i.e. 1977 was best of 3 sets in the first 4 rounds, and 1975, 1976 and 1978 were best of 3 sets in the first 3 rounds). It was thankfully ended.

The French Open also had best of 3 sets in the first 2 rounds in 1973, 1974 and 1975.

The majors should be best of 5 sets in every round.
 
But it was the 2006 Rome final that started the ATP tennis bureaucracy to that end, or rather because of Nadal and Federer both pulling out of 2006 Hamburg as a result.

In the 1990s, the ATP would have just shrugged their shoulders in that situation and said "Well, other players have a chance in Hamburg", whereas in 2006 they seemed really bothered by Nadal and Federer not being there.
It was so good, it deserved to be in RG!
 
fed might as well used a wooden racket trying to win points against nadal from the back court on clay
give yourself a chance at least
also why is murrays voice so creaky?
 
I really liked this vid and have watched it multiple times already. Liked all the comments and reactions to Fed's FH. :love: Bit surprised they omitted the missed MPs by Fed, though. Also really enjoyed A.Murray talking about every point being different and all the variety on display. Good stuff. I'd be interested in hearing them on some other matches from that era. Nalbandian v Davydenko indoors, for one.
 
Back
Top