Tiebreak with tradition: Wimbledon changes rules to help reduce marathon matches

Tradition has a hard time at Wimbledon, the most esteemed and serious of the four Grand Slam tennis tournaments.

It was therefore remarkable and somewhat surprising that the officials of the All England Club, which hosts every summer the grass turf classic, announced Friday that they would adopt a tiebreaker for the men's fifth set and a corresponding for the third set decisive. – if the score is deadlocked at 12-12.

In doing so, Wimbledon becomes the second major sport to legislate to end the endless games that do not resist the decisive confrontation of the traditional advantage of the two matches. The US Open uses as breakage the fifth set at 6-6. The Australians have refused to play a decisive game in the final, at least for the moment.

The change at Wimbledon is not without reason, and the main argument is in favor of competitors, broadcasters and viewers.

South Africa's Kevin Anderson had little to do in the July 15 men's final against Novak Djokovic after resisting American John Isner in a 6-hour, 36-minute semifinal set by a fifth set of 26-24. Barely 48 hours later, Anderson succumbed to Djokovic, 6-2, 6-2, 7-6, in a two-set final, and conceded later that he simply could not call his best tennis.

"Of course, my body did not feel well," Anderson said. "I mean, I do not think you expected it to feel good in a tournament where you played so much tennis."

[Novak Djokovic triumphs at Wimbledon, over two-year drought and depleted Kevin Anderson]

The Anderson-Isner semi-final, however, was an effective performance against Isner's first-round match against Wimbledon against Nicolas Mahut in 2010, which lasted three days before the American's win in the 1970s. 68.

In announcing the change, Philip Brook, president of the All England Club, said: "Our view was that it was time to introduce a tie-breaker method for matches that did not come to their conclusion at a reasonable moment of the decisive match. "

The move was immediately applauded by Patrick McEnroe, former captain of the Davis Cup in the United States, who speaks from the perspective of a former tour professional, coach and analyst ESPN.

"I love it!" Writes McEnroe in an email exchange, calling the new Wimbledon policy a "good compromise" that "makes sense for the grass because there are fewer breaks in services on budding courts ".

"It's a light at the end of the tunnel for players, fans, television and [tournament officials]McEnroe wrote.

The never-ending quarter-finals are more likely at Wimbledon because turf pitches further accentuate the power of large-scale services than French Open Clay or hard courts in Australia and the United States do not open . If a dominant server such as the 6 foot 10 inch Isner or 6-8 Anderson simply can not be broken, and that a resilient opponent also refuses to be broken, his match will unfold as he does. sporty equivalent of Pi, without any to get the benefit of two games required to end it.

To the question of whether most players would support a decisive game in the fifth set after losing to Wimbledon final, Anderson, 32, recalled that it was a hot topic after the 2010 Isner-Mahut Marathon, which he described as "ridiculous" and "crazy."

Anderson, a long-time member of the Players Council who advises the Tennis Professionals Association on the concerns of competitors, has once again proposed this solution: "I think if I asked most players, they would not go back to the game. Would not oppose incorporating a fifth set breaker. I'm sure some people embrace the story – that you play long sets. he is a single point. But I think that, just as tennis continues to evolve and play sports in general, I think the incredibly long games may have had their place and their time. "