The establishment of a super tie-break at 6-6 in the fifth set in all tournaments of the Grand Slam surprised everyone a bit on Wednesday. Yes Roland-Garros was the last resister to preserve the absence of a decisive game in the fifth set for the men and the third for the women, the others proposed different rules, but with a final decision always on a tie-break, at 6 all for theUS Open and theOpen d’Australieand at 12-12 for Wimbledon. It will now be a super tie-break (in 10 points) at 6-6 for these four. The goal ? Standardize for more readability for fans and actors, and above all facilitate programming (tournaments and television) by establishing a more predictable end. A divisive reform: on the one hand, observers and some fans who are fans of the incredible suspense that decisive sets can generate, on the other, fans who are supporters of “money time” under high tension as well as tournaments and many players who sees it as a chance to be better organized and facilitate recovery.
Gilles Moretton this Wednesday at Roland-Garros
The end of historic matches at Roland Garros
Indeed some will be nostalgic for the extended matches that end with an unusual score in 5th. Everyone thinks about the semi-final Nadal-Djokovic in 2013 won with a score of 9-7 in the last set, but also in the longest match played in 2004 by Fabrice Santoro and Arnaud Clementfinished at 16-14, John Isner vs Paul-Henri Mathieu finished at 18-16 for the tricolor, Lorenzo Giustino which beats Corentin Moutet 18-16 also in 2020. Obviously this only represents a small fraction of the matches: 2.8% of the matches exceeded the score 8/6 in the final set at Roland-Garros since 1990 if we are to believe the twitter account Jeu set et maths. So what’s the point of reforming some say, since it doesn’t happen often, it will have little impact on the organization, but leaves the door open for a few rare historical moments. Who says rare, says precious…
The huge 2013 semi-final had a hell of a fight, but what a treat. It’s over now pic.twitter.com/1QZ2QtWEci
— Eric Salliot (@ericsalliot) March 16, 2022
How sad
— Jonathan Eysseric (@joneysseric) March 16, 2022
I can’t get over it. We prostitute ourselves to fit into the boxes of cathodic clients. And they pay well, as long as it doesn’t take hours. To 🤮, but such is the world. Let’s do this quickly and move on. And the legend in there? The what? We don’t care. Circulate. pic.twitter.com/4y6LlTiSv3
— Benoit Maylin (@BenoitMaylin) March 16, 2022
📊 Percentage of matches ending 8/6 or better in the fifth set since 1990:
🇦🇺 Open d’Australie* : 2,9%
Roland Garros: 2.8%
🇬🇧 Wimbledon: 4.2%* Until 2018, last edition without 6/6 tie-break.
— Game, Set and Maths (@JeuSetMaths) March 16, 2022
How should Grand Slam tennis matches end?
— Christopher Clarey 🇺�’ 🇫🇷 🇪�’ (@christophclarey) March 17, 2022
“It’s more exciting for the fans to see this decisive play” – Taylor Fritz
And Taylor Fritzinterviewed at Indian Wells for the Tennis.com site was undecided, he shares the point of view ofAmelie Mauresmothe money-time will become more exciting with a super emotionally intense tie-break: “I think it’s probably more exciting for the fans to be able to see this decisive game. But I’m gonna miss seeing people at 20-20 or like 14-14 in the fifth, and go watch that. It’s like an absolute battle. I think it sucks for these players because there’s, like, you’re so fed up for your next game if you have one. But it’s tradition and I will miss these crazy battles. But it’s probably good for the fans and good for the players if they want to advance in the tournament. I think if I end up in one of these in the future, I’ll be quite happy that they have this rule now.“And he is joined by other tennis players for whom the tournaments will be easier to manage in terms of recovery. This is the case of Grigor Dimitrov, Dean Goldfinethe trainer of Sebastian Kordawho finds that this restores some fairness. Martina Navratilova also share this opinion.
Me the super tie break in the 5th set I strongly validate the tension will be too crazy
— ð—© (@vicxco) March 16, 2022
“I don’t care” – Rafael Nadal
On his side Rafael Nadal does not worry too much about it: “I don’t care”, he even declared. For him the impact Roland-Garros will only be very limited: “Honestly, I don’t have a clear opinion. I am neither for nor against. I think that’s what they decided. Happy or not? I do not care. Honestly, I don’t think it will make a big difference. I read that everyone will be the same. In a way, it’s positive. I don’t think Roland Garros has a big impact. In my opinion, the biggest impact is going to be at Wimbledon. Sometimes it’s so hard to break, then matches get really long. But I don’t think Roland Garros changes much. Ok, yes, maybe a few more games, but I don’t think at Roland Garros, you’re normally going to go 22-20. At Wimbledon it can happen.“. Wouldn’t he have summed up the situation perfectly? This announcement should not revolutionize tennis as we know it, given the rarity of cases. On the other hand, it greatly minimizes the chances of entering the game again. history by beating duration records and for fans to experience atypical endgames.
“Happy with it or not? I don’t care.”
Rafael Nadal, who beat Federer 9-7 in the 5th to win 2008 Wimbledon, was Switzerland on the ITF’s decision to implement 10-point tiebreakers in major final sets.@joeldrucker rounds up reactions from Indian Wells:
– TENNIS (@Tennis) March 17, 2022
