Wimbledon 5th set tiebreakers

[Jelenafan]

http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/25022563/wimbledon-introduce-final-set-tiebreaks-2019

 

[atttomole]

Good idea. I heard that on BBC. Logically, the tie break will be played at 12 all in the fifth.

 

[Fiero425]

Good idea. I heard that on BBC. Logically, the tie break will be played at 12 all in the fifth.

I was perfectly satisfied with TB at 8 all back in the 70's! I wonder what happened to that way back when??? :whistle:

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I like the Wimbledon decision. I fully support it.

It would be interesting to see whether AO and RG follow suit. Of course, breaks are more difficult to come by on grass and so Wimbledon had to take the lead here (and also this means AO and RG might want to wait until Isner does his job there).

Also, it would be interesting to see whether USO would want to move from TB at 6-6 in the final set and go to 12-12.

 

[britbox]

I like the Wimbledon decision. I fully support it.

It would be interesting to see whether AO and RG follow suit. Of course, breaks are more difficult to come by on grass and so Wimbledon had to take the lead here (and also this means AO and RG might want to wait until Isner does his job there).

Also, it would be interesting to see whether USO would want to move from TB at 6-6 in the final set and go to 12-12.

I'm in favour of a standard too. Don' t really like 5th set breakers as it's a lottery but 12-12 seems fine to trigger one. Nobody wants to sit through one Isner/Mahut again.

 

[Moxie]

I think this is a smart move, and I agree with the 12-12 notion, which I think USO should adopt...or at least something beyond 6-6. I wonder if anyone supports no TB in the final? Anyway, I also hope that the other Majors follow suit. I think a standard between the 4 is preferable.

 

[Fiero425]

I think this is a smart move, and I agree with the 12-12 notion, which I think USO should adopt...or at least something beyond 6-6. I wonder if anyone supports no TB in the final? Anyway, I also hope that the other Majors follow suit. I think a standard between the 4 is preferable.

But that's what sets each MAJOR apart from one another besides location and surface! Wimbledon has it's "seeding rule" spanning 2 seasons of grass play! The FO & AO have the option to flip their seedings due to how players have fared over the years, but it doesn't happen anyway! Then the USO just uses the rankings as of a week before the tournament! Going back decades, certain players, esp. the Spaniards didn't appreciate Wimbledon adjusting the seeds, pushing them down when clay courters! With the homogenized courts there's no need to do that anymore! Rafa probably should be marked down even though he actually made a SF after several years of being upset early! :whistle:

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I'm in favour of a standard too. Don' t really like 5th set breakers as it's a lottery but 12-12 seems fine to trigger one. Nobody wants to sit through one Isner/Mahut again.

Standardization will never happen. Part of the reason would be that the Slams would want to maintain some distinctive feature that sets them apart from others.

I actually don't expect RG and USO not to make any move at all. AO might jump in and call for TB at 9-9 in the final set may be.

If that happens, the configuration will be as follows.

Wimbledon - TB at 12-12
AO - TB at 9-9
USO - TB at 6-6
RG - No TB.

That would kind of make sense too, considering the difference in the court speeds and the easiness with which breaks come by on different surfaces.

 

[Moxie]

Standardization will never happen. Part of the reason would be that the Slams would want to maintain some distinctive feature that sets them apart from others.

I actually don't expect RG and USO not to make any move at all. AO might jump in and call for TB at 9-9 in the final set may be.

If that happens, the configuration will be as follows.

Wimbledon - TB at 12-12
AO - TB at 9-9
USO - TB at 6-6
RG - No TB.

That would kind of make sense too, considering the difference in the court speeds and the easiness with which breaks come by on different surfaces.

We don't actually need them to be "standardized," because there are also differences that make up for that. Do I need to remind people that there really aren't that many sports that play on such different kinds of surfaces? (Maybe ultra-Marathons and random road racing?) I don't really care how they divvy it out, but I do think that they shouldn't force players, especially in rounds before the final, to play w/o TBs. I understand why you might say no TB at RG...during the Isner/Mahut match, the commies said, "If this were clay, they'd be dead," so I suppose it's its own governor. But still, even on clay, I'd go with TBs before the final, at some round.

 

[Moxie]

But that's what sets each MAJOR apart from one another besides location and surface! Wimbledon has it's "seeding rule" spanning 2 seasons of grass play! The FO & AO have the option to flip their seedings due to how players have fared over the years, but it doesn't happen anyway! Then the USO just uses the rankings as of a week before the tournament! Going back decades, certain players, esp. the Spaniards didn't appreciate Wimbledon adjusting the seeds, pushing them down when clay courters! With the homogenized courts there's no need to do that anymore! Rafa probably should be marked down even though he actually made a SF after several years of being upset early! :whistle:

I think only Wimbledon adjusts the seedings based on past performance. Am I wrong?

 

[Fiero425]

I think only Wimbledon adjusts the seedings based on past performance. Am I wrong?

I'm just saying the ITF gives them leave to make changes to seedings; most don't I guess! Wimbledon and FO should both consider it!

 

[Moxie]

I'm just saying the ITF gives them leave to make changes to seedings; most don't I guess! Wimbledon and FO should both consider it!

Wimbledon has it. They're the only ones, and I agree with that, as the grass season is short and particular. With the rest, I'd say go with seedings.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

We don't actually need them to be "standardized," .

Huh, in the post just before mine you were calling for standardization.

 

[Moxie]

Huh, in the post just before mine you were calling for standardization.

I was just saying I thought it would be "preferable," but I'm not really fussed either way. I'm not "calling for it."

 

[Chris Koziarz]

Standardization will never happen. Part of the reason would be that the Slams would want to maintain some distinctive feature that sets them apart from others.

I actually don't expect RG and USO not to make any move at all. AO might jump in and call for TB at 9-9 in the final set may be.

If that happens, the configuration will be as follows.

Wimbledon - TB at 12-12
AO - TB at 9-9
USO - TB at 6-6
RG - No TB.

That would kind of make sense too, considering the difference in the court speeds and the easiness with which breaks come by on different surfaces.

Your 9-9 at AO does not make sense wrt challenges.
6-6 in wimby decider triggers 3 extra challenges, and one more challenge in the final TB, AFA I understand it.
But how many extra challenges in your AO 9-9 set are triggered after 6-6? One and half?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Your 9-9 at AO does not make sense wrt challenges.
6-6 in wimby decider triggers 3 extra challenges, and one more challenge in the final TB, AFA I understand it.
But how many extra challenges in your AO 9-9 set are triggered after 6-6? One and half?

That is a minor issue.

I was trying to say that AO is in between USO and Wimbledon, speed wise. Hence, they probably go somewhere between 6-6 of USO and 12-12 of Wimbledon.

If you want perfect arithmetic for extra challenges go for 8-8 with one extra challenge or 10-10 with two extra challenges.