Author Topic: final set tie-breaker vs playing it out  (Read 2153 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tennis4you

  • Administrator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 24878
  • Gender: Male
    • Tennis4you
final set tie-breaker vs playing it out
« on: January 31, 2005, 09:10:42 AM »
What do you guys prefer when it comes down to the last set in a match.  A tei-breaker or playing it out?

If I am playing i would prefer the tie-breaker, I have a good record in them.  But on TV I kinda like seeing it played out at the slams.
Good Luck on the Court!!!
Scott Baker
http://www.tennis4you.com

Offline gary2414

  • Tennis Pro
  • *****
  • Posts: 371
final set tie-breaker vs playing it out
« Reply #1 on: January 31, 2005, 11:50:41 AM »
I think all matches should have tiebreakers in the final set.  They play out the final set in Davis and Fed Cup, the Olympics, as well as the Slams except the US Open.  When you play it out it can make matches too long and that can be a problem when you don't have lights such as the French Open and Wimbledon.  Also when you play it out it does not work for TV because you get matches running to long into other programs.  If you had tiebreakers in the Davis Cup ESPN would tend to carry more of the matches live.  The Fed Cup all went to the tennis channel and they are better prepared to have match that run long so for them it really doesn't matter.  Maybe in the French Open and Wimbledon where they don't have lights when it is about to get dark could order a tiebreak to start in the final set anytime after the score gets six all or later.  However  the tiebreak could start later if that is when it got too dark for play  so you could have tiebreak that starts after 20 all.  As far as ordereing a tiebreak to start when rain starts to all after six fall that could also be done but would probably only be done in the French Open when play is stillpossible for awhile when rain starts to fall if it is not too hard.  At Wimbledon on grass when the rain starts you seem to have to stop right away or the grass may become so wet that you cannot play even when the rain stops if the tarps are not put on soon enough.  That would mean that a tiebreak would have to be ordered when the officials could see rain approaching.

Offline rhubarb

  • Tennis Addict
  • ****
  • Posts: 304
final set tie-breaker vs playing it out
« Reply #2 on: January 31, 2005, 12:12:54 PM »
We should never change the tennis scoring just to suit TV (especially if it's for a stupid reason such as pulling in a potential audience that has a short attention span).   Unfortunately some tournaments have probably done this already - you can probably guess which ones.

I'm quite glad that they don't have final set tie-breaks in singles at the AO, RG and Wimbledon.  Can you imagine the Hewitt/Nalbandian and Federer/Safin matches being decided by a tie-break?  Maybe, but not quite the same.

BTW I was furious when I realised in 2003 that they had not only reduced men's doubles at the USO to the best of three sets, but decided the third set with a tie-break only!  What the heck is going on there?

Offline gary2414

  • Tennis Pro
  • *****
  • Posts: 371
final set tie-breaker vs playing it out
« Reply #3 on: January 31, 2005, 12:42:52 PM »
First of all the men's doubles were reduced to best of three sets at the US open.  However it is only the mixed doubles that are decieded by a tiebreak only in third set at the AO and US Open.  That is a superset tiebreak that goes to ten with a margin of two.  The only Slam with tiebreaks is the US Open and I suspect that CBS wanted it that way and pushed for the change.  The Masters series have five set finals when played in Europe unless rain delays the final too much.  The US and Canada Masters series can be either way and seem to go back and forth between years on best of three or best of five set finals.  It seems to be what the TV network that has the final want.  ESPN should have the finals of all the US Masters series so they can be best of five unless rain delays the finals too much.  They should allocate three hours for the final and then schedule poker or Worlds Strongest Man reruns for the next two hours in case the tennis runs long and ESPN could stay long.  No live sports should be should occur.

Offline Tennis Freak

  • Tennis Enthusiast
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
final set tie-breaker vs playing it out
« Reply #4 on: February 01, 2005, 10:05:22 AM »
I like the tie-breakers because every point can mean so much.  Just look at the Year End Championships between Safin and Federer.  20-18, wow!

Offline gary2414

  • Tennis Pro
  • *****
  • Posts: 371
final set tie-breaker vs playing it out
« Reply #5 on: February 01, 2005, 11:13:35 AM »
I remember the Safin/Federer tiebreak at the year end championships that was 20-18 which was a night match.  It was not live because ESPN wanted other sports first and I can understand why.  They would not want a long tennis match cutting half a basketball game off.  I also figured correctly that who had won the first set would win the tiebreak becuase the alloted time was about up.  If you wanted other sports first and the match live it would have alomost had to be done from the Pacific time zone.  One of the night matches of the year in championships was live because of rain delays.

Offline rhubarb

  • Tennis Addict
  • ****
  • Posts: 304
final set tie-breaker vs playing it out
« Reply #6 on: February 01, 2005, 11:32:39 AM »
Yes, that tb was rather exciting.  Nevermind ESPN's scheduling gary, it was live on Eurosport and there I was hiding in the bedroom as I was too nervous to watch it  ;;)

It was a second set tie-break though, not final set.  I don't think it's fair to decide a match that's gone all the way on a single-point break of serve, if it can be avoided.  Whilst I recognise that many matches do actually come down to only one or two points (the Safin/Federer match at the AO last week is a very good example), a final set tie-break makes that outcome more likely.

Offline Tennis4you

  • Administrator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 24878
  • Gender: Male
    • Tennis4you
final set tie-breaker vs playing it out
« Reply #7 on: February 01, 2005, 11:35:24 AM »
lol @ rhubarb...  I have been there dude.  It was when Sampras was down a set and down in the tie-breaker to Rafter in the Wimbledon finals.  I couldn't watch, I went and hid in my Den.  30 minutes later I turn the tube on and there is Sampras 1 set all and up a break in the third set.  I couldn't believe what I was seeing!
Good Luck on the Court!!!
Scott Baker
http://www.tennis4you.com

Offline gary2414

  • Tennis Pro
  • *****
  • Posts: 371
final set tie-breaker vs playing it out
« Reply #8 on: February 01, 2005, 11:46:59 AM »
First of all no tiebreaks are now decided by a single point becuase you have to win the tiebreak by two.  The first ones had a sudden death point in which is was the first person to reach five by a margin of one.   However you could have a match point in the tiebreker and your opponent wins the next three points in which case you would lot the set and if the tiebreak in in the final set lose the match.  How would you like the idea at Wimbledon or the French Open that when it is about to get dark in the final set in which there are not normally tiebreakers you would the go to one so the match would end that day rather than carry over to the next day?  Maybe not all the time but it would happen on the final Sunday so the tournament would not have to carry over to Monday.  ALso it might be in the doubles final that follows the singles final when rain has delayed things until it gets dark.  Also maybe both players would have to agree and many times that might agree so they don't have to double up.

Offline rhubarb

  • Tennis Addict
  • ****
  • Posts: 304
final set tie-breaker vs playing it out
« Reply #9 on: February 01, 2005, 11:59:33 AM »
Gary, I was talking about the current tb system: a tb can still be decided on a player dropping a single serve point.  I just don't think it's fair to decide a whole match on that, especially after the players have fought over 5 sets at a slam.  

Really, I don't mind when a match ends (well, it's not me playing, is it?).  If they have to carry over matches until the next day (and they often do), then fair enough.  If it was getting dark they would just play out the tb; they make these kind of decisions all the time.  The chance of it happening on the final day is very small: we hardly ever get seem to get 5 set finals, let alone more than 6-6 in the fifth set.

Scott, Wimbledon finals are so nerve-wracking for tbs.  At least I didn't have to suffer that particular one, I was on cycling somewhere above the Arctic Circle at the time ;)

Offline gary2414

  • Tennis Pro
  • *****
  • Posts: 371
final set tie-breaker vs playing it out
« Reply #10 on: February 01, 2005, 12:32:41 PM »
Do you know at what times that have decided to play a tiebreaker at a time one would normally not be played and the set played out?  I do remember through 1988 they have no tiebreakers in any set in Davis Cup tennis and finally starting in 1989 they had tiebreakers except in the final set to join the Olympics, AO Open, French Open, and Wimbledon rules.  That made too many matches have to carry over to the next day under the old rules.  Then if a player in the singles also played the doubles they would have to give him an hour rest when the match carried over to the next day and if he had to play too many games he could ask the match to be played the next day.  That made to many tournaments carry over to Monday.

Offline rhubarb

  • Tennis Addict
  • ****
  • Posts: 304
final set tie-breaker vs playing it out
« Reply #11 on: February 01, 2005, 12:41:11 PM »
Quote from: "gary2414"
Do you know at what times that have decided to play a tiebreaker at a time one would normally not be played and the set played out?  I do remember through 1988 they have no tiebreakers in any set in Davis Cup tennis and finally starting in 1989 they had tiebreakers except in the final set to join the Olympics, AO Open, French Open, and Wimbledon rules.  That made too many matches have to carry over to the next day under the old rules.  Then if a player in the singles also played the doubles they would have to give him an hour rest when the match carried over to the next day and if he had to play too many games he could ask the match to be played the next day.  That made to many tournaments carry over to Monday.


Nope, no idea, not sure whether they have any hard and fast rules.  Bad light / rain can happen at any time during Wimbledon ;)  

The DC still has problems of not completing ties on time, occasionally, when bad weather/long matches and player rest issues combine. The Austria/GB World Group relegation tie in 2004 was one of these, although they did get it finished on time in the end.

My position is that I don't see any good reason for fifth set tie-breaks, and the USO should do away with them at once!  (Not that they will, they're slaves to the TV networks.)

Offline gary2414

  • Tennis Pro
  • *****
  • Posts: 371
final set tie-breaker vs playing it out
« Reply #12 on: February 01, 2005, 01:11:09 PM »
I have never seen any match where they decided to go to a tiebreak at a time they would not normally have one but it might happen if both players agree to the change if one of the players were going to play the next day such as Davis Cup if one of the singles players is in the doubles.  This has never happened with the US team.  The problem has been most accute when you play at a site with no lights.  The old AO site does not have any lights and the US at Australia played there in 1986 and 1993.  This was on grass.  Rain halted the second singles on Friday in 1986 and delayed the start of the doubles an hour because of rest issues for the players.  The doubles had to be stopped after three sets because they could see it would get too dark but to me it seems that could have played some more and maybe got the fourth set in which might have ended the match.  That was early October and it was 12:25 AM MST in Arizona which was 5:25 PM Melbourn standard time and the sun was still up.  Two more sets had to be played on Sunday and that pushed the finals to Monday.  Then in 1993 in late March when the sun would have set just about the same time they seemed to play later and get a fourth set in for the second singles and the match ended at 1:20 MST in Arizona which was 6:25 in Melbourne standard time or perhpas it was 7:25 daylight time because they may by then had extended daylight saving time from the first Sunday in March to the last Sunday in March.   Those were both live on ESPN so I know when they ended.  That made a rather short night of sleep for me in 1993 since I was up again at 5:40 AM MST. However if they have lights they can play much later until a midnight local time curfew can take effect.   If it is midnigh or will soon be midnight either player can ask the match be carried over to the next day.  They don't seem to stop in the middle of the set with the curfews but only between sets.  However the US at Paraguay 1987  played on the final day until 2:30 local time which was 10:30 MST and since ESPN had to leave for other programs I went on to bed.  This was still in the no tiebreaker set rule.  If the US had won the third and fourth sets in that match Parguary might have called for the curfew rule I think to stop the US momentum.  The US complained about the crowds taunting officials and Paraguay was fined and that cause the big push in the change of rules.