John Isner's epic Wimbledon match against Nicolas Mahut in 2010 will live in tennis history for a number of reasons. There was its length, of course, and that incredible 70-68 fifth set that will make it last for all-time.
Isner was involved in another all-time match at Wimbledon this past summer, when he lost to Kevin Anderson 26-24 in the fifth after six-and-a-half hours. That was the third-longest match in tennis history, and it pushed the start of the Novak Djokovic-Rafa Nadal semifinal back to 8:00 local time. The one ended up taking more than five hours over two days (for context, the total time of those two matches was only about 45 minutes longer than Isner-Mahut).
And that was evidently the last straw for the powers that be at Wimbledon. Because the All-England Club announced in October that starting in 2019, there will be a final set tiebreaker at Wimbledon, which pretty much guarantees those two Inser matches will remain Nos. 1 & 2 as the longest in Wimbledon history. It also means we'll no longer have finals like that Roger Federer-Andy Roddick classic in 2009 that went 16-14 in the fifth.
They won't immediately go to the tiebreaker at 6-6 like they would in any other set (and they do at the US Open). Instead the players will have an opportunity to play it out until 12-12. If it gets to 12-12, however, they'll go to the tiebreaker.
Personally, I never thought tradition-rich Wimbledon would ever take this step, which is something players, fans and TV broadcasters have been pushing for a long time. And the 11-hour men's semifinals (which pushed the final two sets of Djokovic-Nadal into Saturday before the women's final) seems to have been the impetus for change. Just like that year it rained the entire second week of the US Open, prompting the USTA to finally do away with its Saturday-Sunday schedule for the semifinals and final.
As it turns out, Wimbledon isn't the only Grand Slam doing away with its long-standing tradition of not having a tiebreaker in the decisive set. The Australian Open just announced that they, too, will start having a final set tiebreaker when the tournament begins next month. They'll also put their own variation on it. They'll go to the tiebreaker at 6-6 like normal, but instead of the standard 7-point tiebreaker, they'll play to 10 points (the 10-point tiebreaker has been used in doubles for several years).
So, after years where the US Open was the only Grand Slam that had final set tiebreakers, starting in 2019, the French Open will be the only Grand Slam without them. It also means that the four Grand Slam tournaments will have four different formats for the decisive set.
Both tournaments had their own reasons for making the change, which did seem inevitable. Long Wimbledon matches were, in a way, like long extra inning games. Extra inning games often end up going longer than they probably should because everybody's trying to hit a home run. At Wimbledon, it's usually because they're both serving at such a high level that neither one even has a chance to get a break. And, as painful as it gets as the hours go on, you can't look away from either.
At the Australian Open, the real concern is the heat. January is the middle of the summer in Australia, and temperatures for daytime matches often break 100. The extreme heat policy that's now utilized across the board started in Australia, and rare is the Australian Open match that doesn't feature a mandatory 10-minute break between sets. And, unlike Wimbledon, which sometimes uses the roof for light, and the US Open, which does it because of rain, most of the time when the roof is closed in Australia, it's because of the heat.
There are also the injury concerns. Isner's 11-hour, three-day match against Mahut was in the first round. He had to play his second round match the next day and lost in straight sets after little more than an hour. He was at least able to walk out on the court (barely) for that match. A lot of players, though, end up having to retire in the next round or later in the tournament because of the toll that the extra-long match took on their bodies. (These issues are mainly related to men's players. The women only play best-of-three, so even a long third set isn't nearly as taxing.)
Regardless, things have been shifting in this direction for a while. It's what the players wanted, which was the clearest sign it was going to happen eventually. Likewise, I'm sure the tournament organizers weren't overly pleased with the number of retirements and withdrawals that are a direct result of extended matches. Not to mention the havoc they wreak on the schedules (the Wimbledon women's final didn't start at its traditional time of 2:00 because the end of Djokovic-Nadal took longer than they expected). And that's where it starts to affect the worldwide TV partners, too.
Still, to have two Grand Slam tournaments change themselves so fundamentally in the same year is pretty shocking. It makes you wonder when the French are going to follow suit. Especially since matches on clay tend to be longer in the first place because of the style of play. I have a feeling it won't be too long. Perhaps when the retractable roof at Court Phillipe Chatrier is completed in time for Clay Boy's 35th consecutive French Open title in 2021.
In a way, it's nice to know that the tournament organizers have listened to everybody's concerns and instituted the final set tiebreaker. And it's nice to know that there'll be a finish line. It'll let everyone know that a resolution is coming. And, as the US Open has proven, that conclusion won't be any less dramatic. In fact, I'd argue that the final set tiebreaker is more dramatic. It's certainly more exciting.
Although, I'll admit it, I'll miss the long five-setters. Those matches weren't as frequent as you're led to believe. They're just the ones people talk about. And the reason people talk about them is because of how memorable they are. I'll never forget watching John Isner's three-day match in 2010 or that crazy semifinal Friday last July.
Days like that are now a thing of the past, however. Just like wood rackets and long pants/skirts. But, change isn't always a bad thing. The introduction of the tiebreak and instant replay both changed the sport in incredible ways.
There will still be plenty of epic Wimbledon and Australian Open matches, too. They just won't last as long as they used to. We won't have Wimbledon matches taking three days or Australian Open finals that last until the next morning. And maybe that'll make for a better tournament, which would certainly make the whole thing worthwhile.
No comments:
Post a Comment