There's no more than 30 minutes of high quality tennis in these 5 hour matches. Now, ask yourself this...How much better would a match be, as experienced by the viewer, if those 30 minutes were condensed into 3:30 rather than played out over the course of +5:00?
"A lot better" is the correct answer.
Speaking of 3:30. From the player's perspective:
...It ended Murray's winning run in Shanghai and gave Djokovic his fifth title of the year.
"It was a thrilling match [and] very long," said the Serb. "Three and a half hours for best of three is quite long. But I have got used to it.
"Whenever I play Andy, I know it's going to be a gruelling fight with a lot of long rallies. It could have gone either way.
They can't finish 3 sets in 3:30. Come on, boys. Stop restarting points and waiting for the opponent to error like a couple of chickes**ts.
You know, I have to credit Roger for not playing long, gutless rallies. Explains why he'll outlast them all.
Tennis is a lower teir sport in the States and one of the few untimed sports in our sport culture. If these guys can't get the job done in a reasonable amount of time, the networks -- who've never
choosen to cover men's matches in their entirety unless there are no other options (because they're too long for network TV) -- are going to move the end of their matches to one of their cable outlets (smaller audience) so that they can get to their regularly scheduled programming.Having said all of the above, I'll go this far. As your videos show, they are capable of producing great tennis. But there's nothing great about 5-6 hour matches. That's just ridiculous. You know what they're indicative of? Missed opportunities, either not taken or choked away. Shorten them up, and I have no problem.