Wimbledon - John Isner is done, after 3 days, results inside [spoilers]

[MartinD]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

Suspended at 10-all after Isner holds from 0-30 with two aces and an unreturnable.

The players in the later games scheduled for Court 1 tomorrow should be a bit worried at this point - Isner-Cilic is likely to be second game on the schedule, and could take anything from 5 minutes (2 games) or a good chunk of the rest of the day...

[Brian Swartz]

Or well into next week ...

[whomario]

Cilic is no stranger to this btw, as he participated in the 2nd longest match in Wimbledon history. Do it guys !

[Brian Swartz]

Rather anticlimactic, Isner double-faults in his first time serving on match point today. 12-10 Cilic in the fifth, and he should make at least the quarterfinals now. Isner now 0-5 vs. Cilic despite this match and a 9-7 5th-set loss at last year's Australian Open.

[miami_fan]

I guess I can put this here.

Serena Williams has as many career major titles as the rest of the WTA combined. That WTA number includes the seven that Venus has won.

[britrock88]

Ey, 6-4, 6-4. Glad to see Muguruza put up an apparent fight.

[whomario]

At it again, this time on the loosing end: Kevin Anderson defeats John Isner, in second-longest Wimbledon match of all time to reach final

[Ksyrup]

Had to see it coming - two near 7-footers with crazy serving abilities.

[Thomkal]

Anderson has to be completely wiped out after two long five setters in a row. Would not surprise me to see him pull out of the finals. Too bad for Isner-was pulling for him since his career seems to have rebounded of late. Maybe his only chance to win a major.

[Ksyrup]

Isner looked like he was going to lose all 5th set. Surprised he kept it going that long. He barely challenged on Anderson's serve most of the set.

[PilotMan]

I watched nearly the entire match. Isner had heart today that's for sure. He rarely had Anderson in trouble and served his way out of trouble so many times. He was completely exhausted by the end. You could see it, things were just slowly deteriorating at the end.

[CrimsonFox]

Fuck

[JonInMiddleGA]

I can't help but wonder how much the two marathon matches might literally shave off Isner's career.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I can't help but wonder how much the two marathon matches might literally shave off Isner's career.

Well he's in his 30's now and having one of best seasons in his career, and that took a long time after that first marathon match-I think he may struggle for the rest of this season for sure.

[stevew]

The Championships, Wimbledon 2018 - Official Site by IBM

[stevew]

12-12 5th set now triggers a tiebreaker

[Thomkal]

Better than nothing I guess.

[MIJB#19]

If he ends up winning nothing noteworthy in his career (ok, he actually won the Miami Open this year), John Isner at least will have the achievement of getting a rule change at Wimbledon. They didn't listen the first time around, but the second time was the "enough is enough already!"

[Thomkal]

Some tennis news_Andy Murray is being forced to retire from tennis because of his ongoing hip injury. He's going to try to make it to Wimbledon, but his body might say otherwise:


Andy Murray announces he plans to retire from tennis in near future

[Groundhog]

I'm not a huge tennis fan, but are the current crop of aging superstars like Murray a golden generation, or is there a lack of young talent coming through the ranks? As a very casual fan who watches the odd late-stage matches here and there, it seems like there are very few new names I see enough times to register outside of the usual crowd of Murray/Nadal/Federer/etc.

[Brian Swartz]

Some of each. Federer/Murray/Djokovic/Nadal are generally regarded as a golden era by not just their contemporaries but also their forebears; i.e. Sampras, Agassi, etc. Asked what his strategy would be against Federer, Ivan Lendl - who made a record eight consecutive US Open finals - said a number years ago that he would 'pack his bags and go home'.

I also think the generation after them was somewhat weaker than usual, though not as bad as it's been made out to be. A lot of guys who had peaks at times but couldn't put it together for a career, whether it be health issues, consistency, mental fortitude, etc. I'd put Nishikori, Del Potro, Cilic, Dimitrov and some lesser lights in that general category. There's nobody I've seen approach that same transcendent class and take control of the competition. Tennis could be in for a lot of turmoil over the next few years as Murray sure looks like he's done soon, Federer and Nadal have already played longer than they originally planned, and even Djokovic won't last forever. There might be someone else emerging at any time, but it hasn't happened yet.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

I'm not a huge tennis fan, but are the current crop of aging superstars like Murray a golden generation, or is there a lack of young talent coming through the ranks? As a very casual fan who watches the odd late-stage matches here and there, it seems like there are very few new names I see enough times to register outside of the usual crowd of Murray/Nadal/Federer/etc.

Yeah what Brian said. It takes a lof of strength mentally and physically just to get to #1, and then an even stronger desire to stay there or at least close, and with the money these guys are getting these days, even desire loses out some times. There are some young guys and women who show potential to be that kind of player, but not the consistency to show that they are there. Its been far too long for an American male to reach that level of player, not sure how long that will take.



Injuries are a huge factor-its taking out Murray, and Nadal might not be too far behind.

[AlexB]

The press conference was raw. Hard to watch. A man who loves clearly loves playing tennis, training, and doesn’t want to stop.

In a perverse way it’s “nice” to see a sportsman be so obviously real in a press conference.

[MIJB#19]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Injuries are a huge factor-its taking out Murray, and Nadal might not be too far behind.

It's been said about Nadal several times and he came back stronger than before every single time. Djokovic and Federer have had their extended absences too recently and returned to become the #1 in the world and win grand slam tournaments. But it's pretty clear the big three isn't just at the top 3 spots in the world again (they were for the first time in July 9th 2007, 11 1/2 years ago, Murray then was 13th in the world), they have also been exposed as being human after all.

It's surprising (to me) to read that Murray is now likely to be the one going out first. For about a decade he looked like the unbreakable guy in the top four (although he had a long injury period early in his career). I think most in the tennis world expected Murray to still be around by the time the big three is retired.

Murray will not just be the kid that came closest to the big three (tennis fans can be passionate about there being a big three or a big four). Usually being the 4th guy deep in the tournament, with many titles, just not a truckload at the biggest stages. Yet, Murray has won on all major stages: (year end) #1 in the world, Wimbledon titles (US Open as well and played finals at the other two slams), Olympic gold medals, Davis Cup victory, ATP Finals victory. And to me it seems the big three see him as one of their own, they already did before Murray won those major titles. But maybe they don't even think in terms of big three and four, just in terms of Murray was an extremely hard opponent to beat, pushing them to the limits of their ability.

[miami_fan]

Man, this Murray v. Bautista Agut is painfull to watch. Not that anyone is playing badly, it is painful watching Murray hobble around.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Yeah what Brian said. It takes a lof of strength mentally and physically just to get to #1, and then an even stronger desire to stay there or at least close, and with the money these guys are getting these days, even desire loses out some times. There are some young guys and women who show potential to be that kind of player, but not the consistency to show that they are there. Its been far too long for an American male to reach that level of player, not sure how long that will take.

Actually, the mention of money reminds me - I've heard that tennis tourneys have some of the most unbalanced winnings in pro sports, with the top getting the vast majority of the pool and the rest getting (relative) peanuts. I know it's been mentioned as one of the issues mentioned in recent years locally re: the lack of young up-and-comers.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Actually, the mention of money reminds me - I've heard that tennis tourneys have some of the most unbalanced winnings in pro sports, with the top getting the vast majority of the pool and the rest getting (relative) peanuts. I know it's been mentioned as one of the issues mentioned in recent years locally re: the lack of young up-and-comers.

I would certainly think it plays a role at the junior level or in the early stages of a pro career, but i somehow doubt that money alone is what is keeping the No30 from getting on the Top Level. Everybody reaching the Top32 at a Grand Slam gets 6 figures, best i could find on google 42 players earned more than 1 mio US$ in 2017 (for the life of me couldn't find any 2018 figures. There is a running ranking on multiple sites for 2019, sor some weird reason no 'archived' ranking for 2018). And that doesn't include any sponsorship money or other stuf/funding they might get from their federation for example. It's certainly a bigger gap than some sports (a common comparison i saw was Golf), but doesn't seem such a prohibitive factor, even when you factor in the costs (coaches, travel mostly).

I mean, the gap between the Big 3 and everybody else is obviously staggering, but does it really matter past a certain point ? Equipment isn't really that much of a difference maker i think (again, past a certain level) and training/coaching/medical care is certainly giving some advantage but it's not like there are only 10 great options in each of those fields to pick from.

There's plenty of sports (most winter sports, many track and field disciplines or swimming) with decent profile where you have Top20 athletes essentially having to rely on institutional funding and/or not actually being pure professionals versus the Top stars making big money from sponsorship.

To me it seems like Tennis has a comparatively low 'randomness' factor with how the game is played, the way scoring works, with the way seeding works at tournaments and how the season is structured. Doesn't really seem all that conducive to upsets/turnover.

[Brian Swartz]

On topic of the discussion vis a vis the next generation, Greece's Stefanos Tsitsipas just became the youngest Slam semifinalist since '07. On its own that doesn't really mean all that much, and it'll probably be a couple years till we know what he's got to offer this age. JMac has prounounced it a changing of the guard in his usual sensationalist jump-to-conclusions fashion, but he's definitely got a chance. Doesn't appear to be a total fruit loop a la Kyrgios.

[MIJB#19]

Not much of a change of guard when Nadal and Djokovic are playing their best tennis. Tsitsipas vs Federer was a coin flip. Somebody has to make the semifinals, a second guy has to when one of the Big3 loses in the 4th round... Tsitsipas is on the rise (along with Khachanov, Medvedev, Shapovalov and already established A. Zverev) and takes advantage of the downward swing for many second-tier players. We've discussed A. Murray (whom we'd have to call a first-tier player), but Wawrinka, Tsonga and Berdych are also returning from a long absence. Ferrer is about to retire, Goffin got a goofy injury, Del Potro is still ranked 4th, but has been up and down battling injuries for years. Raonic has missed some time. The bodies of Gasquet and Monfils can't play back to back weeks anymore. And then there's unpredictable guys like Dimitrov and Kyrgios.

[Young Drachma]

Collins is having a hell of a tournament. Last time someone this unheralded got this far in a grand slam as an American is maybe Zina Garrison at Wimbledon. Tennis is funny this way, sometimes you have a huge tournament and just can't miss and she grinded last night.

Will be fascinating if she can get to the final, but I'm gonna look at video from her old tournaments and see how she's played the Open different, though she was already Top 100 before this thing, so that's huge.

[PilotMan]

The Serena match is going to be a huge discussion tomorrow.



She was down a break in the 2nd set, after losing the first set, fights back to win, then goes up 5-1 in the 3rd. Has a foot fault called on TRIPLE match point. Sprains her ankle on the next match point, then loses every point after and loses 3 straight to 5-4 after not being able to get a serve in or really move all that well.



Gets to double match point again on a break in game #10, but Pliskova fights back to deuce again. If she can't close this out, she's gonna have to dig deep. Either way, this is a huge story tomorrow.

[PilotMan]

And now it's all tied up, on serve in the 3rd. Oooof.

[PilotMan]

Announcers are practically speechless in between points.

[PilotMan]

Spoiler

It's over. Wow. This is one for the ages. Incredible. One of the greatest comebacks ever. Has to be.

[Young Drachma]

Some folks on my feed were complaining about the foot fault call, but damnit you can't be up 5-1 in the third set and choke that bad. All the credit to Pilskova though, she grinded hard and her serve was jumping. Serena did well to get out of that 2nd set. That said, Osaka will win in straight set, she's not taking any prisoners right now.

[BishopMVP]

People seem very mad online that the umpires called a foot fault on match point, but I haven't seen any video and assume she actually was over the line. (Haven't watched enough tennis lately, but I assume that would be reviewable just like all the shots on the line.) At least Serena avoided telling the line judge she'd kill them this time, so that's nice.

[Brian Swartz]

A lot of that is because foot faults are like lane violations in basketball. It is against the rules, and IMO as a self-described purist it should be called. At the same time it's one of those things where there are unwritten rules (depending on the official) that no, you don't call that on match point just like a lane violation probably isn't getting called on LeBron, Durant, Jordan, whoever if there's three seconds to go in the NBA Finals. I don't think there's much room for debate on whether it was the right call, but it's not something that's called consistently - much like the time delay rules - so it does leave open the 'fair treatment' argument.

[BishopMVP]

I don't think lane violation is quite the correct analogy. It'd be more like if the free throw shooter was standing over the line, which I've never seen and assume would be called. (Or maybe if the inbounder stepped over the line before releasing the ball after a made basket?) The idea that it shouldn't be called vs Serena, or it shouldn't be called on match point is crazy to me (though if you want to say it shouldn't be called unless it's blatant I would agree, and I would like a better angle - it looks like a foot fault here albeit not an egregious one, but the ball looked like it touched Edelman's fingers on that punt Sunday from a couple different angles, so a shot right down the baseline would help)

This was a crucial call when Serena was serving for the match. Was it a foot fault? #AusOpen #9WWOS #Tennis pic.twitter.com/NzIQLJIspL

— Wide World of Sports (@wwos) January 23, 2019

[Butter]

She had 3 more match points later and blew them all. I watched that 3rd set, and once she lost the game with all those match points at like 5-4 I think it was, it was over. She got broken at love at 5-5, and kinda tried to fight back down 5-6, but it was over. Remarkable, but she looked really sluggish for about 2/3 of the match.

[spleen1015]

I went to bed when she was up 4-1 in the 3rd set and she was cruising. Surprised she lost when I got up this morning.

[miked]

I think the silly thing is she seems to be the only one that gets these called on her (maybe there were 500 others this tourney that we do not know about). But this one seemed like it was pretty legal.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by miked

I think the silly thing is she seems to be the only one that gets these called on her (maybe there were 500 others this tourney that we do not know about). But this one seemed like it was pretty legal.

I'm certainly not watching any matches involving both people outside the top 50, and from a quick googling the only numbers I can find are from a 2011 article about the US Open (when you'd had Serena's previous foot fault blow up, but also ones involving Marat Safin, Lleyton Hewitt and Andy Roddick in the previous couple tournaments) Foot Faults and the Rage They Can Cause - The New York Times

A few years ago, the Open asked umpires to record foot faults with devices installed on their chairs. Neither the WTA nor the ATP World Tour records such statistics. Two years ago, roughly 500 foot faults were called throughout the tournament. Last year, after Earley said he issued a gentle reminder, 822 foot faults were recorded. This included 83 in men’s singles and 22 in women’s singles, with a high of 199 in women’s qualifying singles. Countless others, of course, were not called.
...
The serve-and-volley types, a number of professionals that seems to shrink each season, are more prone to foot faults than baseliners. Stefan Edberg was known for foot faults, for dragging his feet forward as he rushed the net. In years past, pros said the number of such calls seemed higher at Wimbledon, in large part because more players served and volleyed.

“You’re trying to win time with your feet,” said Michael Llodra, a French serve-and-volley specialist. “When it’s windy or you’re rushed, it happens.”

A little amusingly I see things haven't changed in 8 years in at least one context "Others disagree. Patrick McEnroe, the general manager of the United States Tennis Association’s development program, said: “My brother was saying you don’t call it there. That’s ridiculous. Of course you call it. Even if there’s no advantage, a foot fault is a foot fault.”

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

I don't think lane violation is quite the correct analogy. It'd be more like if the free throw shooter was standing over the line, which I've never seen and assume would be called. (Or maybe if the inbounder stepped over the line before releasing the ball after a made basket?)

I think it's exactly like a FT shooter crossing the line before the ball hits the rim, which a lot of stars have done. Shaq in particular had a really hard time not doing it. Nobody lines up with their foot over the line in tennis, they just sometimes go on/over it - as in the linked video - when they shift their feet/jump as part of the service motion. But really, I was just more talking about it as something that's not called nearly as much as the rule is broken. YMMV, I consider it quite comparable in both ways.

[MIJB#19]

If you're ever going to call foot fault, on match point is exactly the right moment to do it. Despite all previous points leading up to it, any point played with the implication of ending the match then and there, it doesn't just demand most of the players, but the umpire and linesmen should up their game as well. Looking away for the enjoyment of the fans is somewhat acceptable throughout the majority of the match (actually, in volleyball, we demand our referees to always call it), but at the end of the day, the players have rules to play by. There's a rule against crossing the line before the serve is hit, trying to get away with it is cheating. So yeah, call it, especially on match point.

[Brian Swartz]

Fun fact: Isner is in the final of the Miami Masters and has won all 10 sets he's played so far. Only one of them wasn't a tiebreak.

[Butter]

Coco Gauff and her parents are the best.

[larrymcg421]

That was a fantastic match. I thought she was done.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

That was a fantastic match. I thought she was done.

Me too, I thought it was over with what happened at the end of the 1st set.

[Ryche]

Very impressive fight back. Haven't watched that much of a tennis match in a long time.

[miami_fan]

Who gets the loudest cheers at the All England Club?

Roger Federer or Andy Murray?