4 – Uniformity for the fifth set of Slams
This is actually being talked about extensively, since the Australian Open and Wimbledon also abandoned the concept of the fifth set to the bitter end to be won with two games of advantage; very likely soon even Roland Garros, the last tournament in the world where ad libitum takes place, will be forced to revise its clauses. Small insignificant note, the writer was and is a fan of the past. It is true that a marathon match may affect the winner’s performance in the next round, but it is still a result of the field. Nothing irregular, knowing how to beat your opponent saving as much energy as possible is part of the game.
The excess has given us epic pages of this sport. Just think of the London Olympics with Jo-Wilfried Tsonga. He defeated Feliciano Lopez in two sets after outlasting Milos Raonic 25-23 in the previous round. Then the semifinal between Federer and Del Potro, which the Argentine lost 19-17 before beating beat Djokovic in the bronze medal play-off. Speaking of the meeting that everyone thinks about, or the famous 70-68 between Isner and Mahut, it will certainly have been a struggle. But in 100 years, the two of them will still be remembered for that game, while only the web will keep memory of other tennis players with similar careers.
Returning to the main point, in any case it must be admitted that the direction taken is now the tie-break even on the fifth set. Notwithstanding that there is nothing irregular in the fact that each Slam does as it pleases, it would be nice if the ITF mediated to have a common rule among all. In that case the most acceptable compromise, which no one has yet adopted, would be the Super tie-break on the 12-12. Going up to twelve games in the fifth set is more correct. He does not tire the players too much, however, he gives fans of the bitter end a contentment, and keeps the spectators careful in front of the television screens. Last year’s now iconic Wimbledon final would have lost a good chunk of its epic with a tie break on 6 even. And who knows how many good tennis moments we could have enjoyed with a few more games at the US Open in the last few decades.
In the same way, the Super tie-break, if it really must be a unique game to decide a match, is less random than a normal tie-break and leaves more space to rollovers. Provided, I recommend, you change field every nine points.
