abmk
Bionic Poster
But of course clueless vile forgets that federer won 4 out of his 6 YECs when the finals were supposed to be Bo5 .....
Self-pwnage at its finest. Go ahead. You are a gem at those :lol:
Last edited:
VOLLEY KING
Banned
Against whom did he win it?
For much of Feds career his opponents were sub par.
Besides if that's true then you should be all for a best of 5.
D
Deleted member 21996
Guest
abmk
Bionic Poster
For much of Feds career his opponents were sub par.
Federer has beaten everyone of significance that he faced at the YEC more than once ... your competition argument is garbage ......
if it is true ? Jeez, you don't have much clue about the times when fed dominated, do you ? And yet you pretend to by saying his opponents were sub-par
I already mentioned about my view on the Bo5 for the YEC finals ...
Biscuitmcgriddleson
Professional
Nadal played on sub par surfaces. They were so homogenized and ever so blah. No variety like the 90s right?
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
That's precisely what puzzled me when I read Lol's post. I thought jacko knew his tennis -- surely by now he would have learned a thing or two from Zagor.
It's a shame Zagor has been focusing so much on the majestic 2011 season of Rafa that he's neglected tennis history completely.
VOLLEY KING
Banned
It's funny ....when Fed won in 2007 or 2006 no one complained about "subpar" or slow surfaces. Why do you think that is ?? Hmmmmm???
Polaris
Hall of Fame
Supposing that this does not have to do with ticket sales and TV rights, I wonder what would happen to the courts as a result of doing what Laurie suggests. I mean, if the finals are best of 5, then the matches will be far longer, making it that much more difficult on the players' bodies. Thus, the two players who contest a best-of-5 final may not be in the best shape for the next tournament. It may, albeit marginally, increase the number of injuries and hasten the decline of players that are physically fragile, or play a more demanding style.
It's a backwards way of thinking, I realize, but would the above consequences actually result in the ATP speeding up the courts? That way rallies would be shorter, and the player's bodies would take a lesser pounding. This may definitely make tennis more interesting by increasing the likelihood that a big hitter in zone can sneak out a tournament or two, and it will reduce the number of players with defensive, baseline-oriented styles that abound today. Viewed in that light, Laurie's suggestion may actually be a good one.
It's a backwards way of thinking, I realize, but would the above consequences actually result in the ATP speeding up the courts? That way rallies would be shorter, and the player's bodies would take a lesser pounding. This may definitely make tennis more interesting by increasing the likelihood that a big hitter in zone can sneak out a tournament or two, and it will reduce the number of players with defensive, baseline-oriented styles that abound today. Viewed in that light, Laurie's suggestion may actually be a good one.
kiki
Banned
The following events played semis and finals best of 5 in the 70´s and 80´s:
WCT Finals ( even the quarterfinals)
Philadelphia
Rome
Hamburg
Montecarlo,Barcelona,Wembley,Sidney Indoors played best of 5 just the finals
The Masters was very erratic, some years they´d play best of five semid and finals, some other years, just the finals, and some other years not even the finals.
WCT Finals ( even the quarterfinals)
Philadelphia
Rome
Hamburg
Montecarlo,Barcelona,Wembley,Sidney Indoors played best of 5 just the finals
The Masters was very erratic, some years they´d play best of five semid and finals, some other years, just the finals, and some other years not even the finals.
kiki
Banned
Sorry, I forgot the Southam Open at Buenos Aires and the Soutaf at Johannesburg, they had best of five finals and, for some years, even best of five semifinals.
In conclusion, non US events were more positioned into playing best of five
TheCanadian
Semi-Pro
Stupid idea. A player's career is already quit short and injury-prone, making them play five sets almost everywhere can only shorten their short careers and increase injuries. We would see more injuries and defaults. Additionally, watching 5-hour matches is poor tv and only tennis fanatics could do it on a regular basis.
Making players play grand slams with nerf balls and ping pong racquets is less ludicrous. I guess that outlet will publish anything.
Making players play grand slams with nerf balls and ping pong racquets is less ludicrous. I guess that outlet will publish anything.
woodrow1029
Hall of Fame
It use to be in the ATP rules until about five years ago, or whenever they changer to match tiebreak that if a best of three set singles final took less than an hour, the tournament director could opt to make the doubles final best of five.
In those years tournaments's prize money and ATP points were related, so don't be surprised if some years (in the 80s and 70s) winning the Australian Open could give you LESS ATP-points than winning Miami (in the 80s), Philadelphia (in the 70s) or any other big non-GS-tournament.
Besides, the ranking ATP ( before 1990 ) was computed by means of an average (all the points you got in punctuable tournaments, divided by nº of tournaments played, with a mininum of 12 tournaments), that's why Connors was nº1 in 1977 and 1978 (he had better average points than Vilas and Borg) and again that's why Connors himself was NOT nº1 in 1982.
The players knew exactly well how the ATP-ranking was computed, so it is absurd to try to know how the ranking in those years would be if it were computed as it is today (today is the total sum, not the average points).
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
That's interesting to know, thanks.
ranking system have definitely changed for the better
zagor
Bionic Poster
It's fortunate then that Fed won 4 of his 6 WTF titles in a best of five format final, right?
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
I think he only won three of the six in a best of five.
2003, 2006, 2007.
2004 was best of three, because of the rain issues that happened in Houston that year, when he beat Hewitt in straight sets in the final.
He lost a best of five in 2005 to Nalbandian.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
It's wasn't nicknamed 'The Winter Wimbledon' for nothing.
abmk
Bionic Poster
That's precisely what puzzled me when I read Lol's post. I thought jacko knew his tennis -- surely by now he would have learned a thing or two from Zagor.
It's a shame Zagor has been focusing so much on the majestic 2011 season of Rafa that he's neglected tennis history completely.
LOL, indeed
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
kiki
Banned
what is a joke ?
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
Nole is taking care of that.
Bobby Jr
G.O.A.T.
They really do need to make the best of 5 sets again.
If they don't we need to put an asterisk next to most of Djokovic, Murray and Nadal's MS1000 titles to let future generations know they were racked up in easier circumstances than most of Federer's or player's earlier on. :twisted:
If they don't we need to put an asterisk next to most of Djokovic, Murray and Nadal's MS1000 titles to let future generations know they were racked up in easier circumstances than most of Federer's or player's earlier on. :twisted:
merlinpinpin
Hall of Fame
Basically, yes, Bo3 M1000 finals are meh at best (and don't get me started on WTF). They should *all* be Bo5 imho, but this definitely goes against the current trend. In the past, the tennis season was definitely survival of the fittest, now it's protect your investment (ie the more bankable players) at all cost, which is a shame. I say bring back faster surfaces for more variety, Bo5 finals for all tournaments that fancy themselves "important" (ie Masters and WTF), and let's get the ball rolling.
Fat chance of that, though...
More likely, the way things are going, we'll soon get to see Bo1 tournaments played on molasses with extra glue that sticks to the soles, maybe even Bo1TB (best-of-one tie-break) with MTO's every two points. Oh dear...
Fat chance of that, though...
More likely, the way things are going, we'll soon get to see Bo1 tournaments played on molasses with extra glue that sticks to the soles, maybe even Bo1TB (best-of-one tie-break) with MTO's every two points. Oh dear...
Last edited:
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
The last BO5 final i remember was Fed vs Ferrer which was a boring 3 3 3 affair.
Given how slow the courts are today, I don't know how the finalists will recover for the next event if the final goes to 5 sets. Players are already suffering and carrying enough injuries, you really want to force the top players into five sets (almost) each weekend.
Not sure Murray, Nole and Rafa would like to be playing 5 set finals 2-3 times a month.
bluetrain4
G.O.A.T.
I sort of agree. Given the physicality of the game, I can understand reducing the Masters that are leading up to a Slam to best of 3.
But, Indian Wells and Miami, or at least Miami (since it's the second of two Masters in a row) could be best of 5. They're sort of "freestanding" Master since the come after the AO and are not clay events leading up to the French.
And, certainly the indoor Masters in the fall could be best of 5.
But, Indian Wells and Miami, or at least Miami (since it's the second of two Masters in a row) could be best of 5. They're sort of "freestanding" Master since the come after the AO and are not clay events leading up to the French.
And, certainly the indoor Masters in the fall could be best of 5.
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
Which one ? Bercy? But that's just before the WTF. No rest in between.
Similar threads
