Final set Tie-Break: Makes sense? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Final set Tie-Break: Makes sense?

Andre♥
03-17-2007, 05:09 AM
I am a Murray fan, so I think this is a good time to ask this. Does it make sense to see such match ending on a tie-break lottery?

Snowwy
03-17-2007, 05:11 AM
I would like the 2 game advantage.

Action Jackson
03-17-2007, 05:12 AM
Actually the 5th set tiebreaker of the US Open is more irritating than at a QF stage of a regular event.

Before finals it's OK, but all final sets in finals should be advantage.

Andre♥
03-17-2007, 05:13 AM
I think tie-break makes sense in all sets but the final one (we don't want to go backwards 30 years), but in the final set, it's just stupid. It's like a penalty shootout. It's horrible and it's a lottery.

danton
03-17-2007, 05:18 AM
Final set I want to see the two game advantage. I feel it is unfair when the match has been that tight. The drama of watching Roddick and Tursunov in the DAvis Cup semis last year was fantastic and i'm British. It ended 17-15 to Tursunov but I was gripped throughout.

bluefork
03-17-2007, 05:18 AM
The tiebreak makes sense in a non-Slam event like this. The players don't have a day to rest, and had this match gone 12-10 in the fifth, the winner certainly wouldn't have been up to standard tomorrow.

BlakeorHenman
03-17-2007, 05:19 AM
it should be different for different tournaments, cant go wrong with variety.

my0118
03-17-2007, 05:31 AM
Actually the 5th set tiebreaker of the US Open is more irritating than at a QF stage of a regular event.

Before finals it's OK, but all final sets in finals should be advantage.

yeah really annoying.

Jimnik
03-17-2007, 05:34 AM
I think it's fine the way it is now. Today's match could have lasted much longer.

Voo de Mar
03-17-2007, 05:41 AM
It's like a penalty shootout. It's horrible and it's a lottery.

I disagree with this opinion. The tie-break usually wins a player who is better mentally. Very often someone loses 2:5 and then wins 8-6 or 9-7. In football the team who loses 0:3 finishes the match as a loser in the most cases. In tie-break you have a lot of time to recover if you are strong mentally. It isn't coincidence that the best players in history like Sampras or Federer have a very good TB record.
BTW I agree with opinion that 5th set TB at US Open wasn't the best idea...

TMJordan
03-17-2007, 05:45 AM
I really really hate Tie Breaks.

Strangelove
03-17-2007, 06:34 AM
Personally, I love a good tie-breaker.

Plus I think having no breaker at the end of the final sets of a major gives it that little extra edge over the regular tournaments. If you're going to implement the 2-game advantage thing everywhere it loses its significance.
And also, I don't think tournament directors would be too pleased with such a move. OK, there's the added excitement, maybe. But the scheduling would be a disaster...depending on the amount of matches going to a third set climax that is.

sodman12
03-17-2007, 06:48 AM
The tiebreak makes sense in a non-Slam event like this. The players don't have a day to rest, and had this match gone 12-10 in the fifth, the winner certainly wouldn't have been up to standard tomorrow.


This is true but we are only talking about 3rd set TB not adding on more sets.

jenanun
03-17-2007, 06:58 AM
TB is much much more exciting i think! tells you who can hold their nerve better.... and you know the match is not going to last forever....

so yeah, TIE BREAK!

jazar
03-17-2007, 08:11 AM
2 clear is so much better and can turn a match from normal to a classic

stebs
03-17-2007, 12:14 PM
At a GS there should be no fifth set breaker anywhere. At a AMS there should be breakers everywhere but in the final set of the final. At other events there should be final set breakers throughout.

Oh, and tie-breaks aren't lotteries. It is first to seven points, if you consider a tie-break a lottery then you may as well consider every game of a match a lottery. The better player wins the breaker most of the time, luck is not a factor in it. I never understood where this belief came from, the players play points exactly as normal and whoever wins the most points wins the match, what is lucky about that?

Kolya
03-17-2007, 01:08 PM
2 game advantage all the way.

I feel tie breaks in the final set gives the advantage to the better, powerful server.

Mateya
03-17-2007, 02:41 PM
Yeah, match in my signature had it all :rocker:

Final set breaker is not good and can be a lottery (the better player can always have a really bad luck at 3-2 :explode: or even several times and the match quickly turns around at that point :retard: ) so its not quite fair...
Should be two game difference, thats it.
:yeah:

kundalini
03-17-2007, 05:20 PM
At a GS there should be no fifth set breaker anywhere. At a AMS there should be breakers everywhere but in the final set of the final. At other events there should be final set breakers throughout.



Agree. Already we have the situation where matches are lost because one player cannot recover in time for his next match. Take away the third set tiebreak and the winner of the match would have very little chance of surviving their next match the following day.

The grand slams are complicated because sometimes players have to play the following day. Ideally, I'd prefer to eliminate the final set tiebreak. And to even consider having one in the final is just ridiculous.

Tiebreaks are great. The only problem I have is on the faster surfaces where you might have just a single point won against the serve in a tiebreak.

Viken01
03-17-2007, 05:28 PM
Two games advantage because as you said, TB in the final set is like a lottery

Burrow
03-17-2007, 05:30 PM
2 clear is better, I hate tie breaks and hate playing them although I have a strong serve...a few points here and there will decide it, perhaps a lucky net cord (miami 06 final)

bluefork
03-17-2007, 05:39 PM
This is true but we are only talking about 3rd set TB not adding on more sets.

Sorry, I meant third set.

MaryWalsh
03-17-2007, 06:40 PM
prefer 2 clear. interestingly, this makes it 24 votes to 24 votes at present. spooky.:scared:

Kitty de Sade
03-17-2007, 06:44 PM
I'm not a big fan of tie breaks, especially in the 5th set. At GS's, anything other than a two set advantage is not a good idea. Earlier in a tournament I could deal with, but not in the final ever.

Melvins
03-17-2007, 09:58 PM
I think final set should be in tie-break, but not finish at 7th point. Maybe a tie-break with 10 or 13 points. It's just an crazy idea, I don't know if change it much, but I think players will have less pressure than actually.

Regenbogen
03-17-2007, 10:13 PM
I prefer tiebreaks, mostly because I just want to be put out of my misery by 6 all in the final set :p

I don't mind the 2 game advantage here and there though.