[Neely]

That's a good question, I think we just don't know exactly because the time stats on the official ATP site are so unreliable and many many values entered are errors.

If you're just going by ATP numbers, there are about 100 completed five set matches on clay which are below 100 minutes.


I'll give you a few which are over 100 minutes. It's up to you to decide what is an error and where it could start to be plausible.

RG 1995, R64, Steven def. Goellner 7-6(5) 6-2 5-7 4-6 7-5 (102 minutes)
RG 1994, R128, Reneberg def. Stoltenberg 1-6 3-6 6-3 6-3 7-5 (111 minutes)
RG 1996, R128, Woodbridge def. Kulti 0-6 6-2 2-6 6-4 6-1 (123 minutes)
RG 1992, R64, Korda def. Matsuoka 1-6 4-6 6-4 6-4 6-4 (128 minutes)
RG 1996, R128, Novak def. Pereira 2-6 4-6 6-2 6-1 6-1 (133 minutes)
RG 1996, R32, Sampras def. Martin 3-6 6-4 7-5 4-6 6-2 (141 minutes)
RG 2000, R128, Balcells def. Bruguera 6-3 5-7 6-2 1-6 6-0 (143 minutes)
RG 1999, R128, Safin def. Kroslak 6-2 4-6 6-3 3-6 6-2 (148 minutes)

Then at about 150 minutes there seems to be a kind of break and the frequency of matches lasting 150 minutes and above increases rapidly.


Shortest 5 set matches not being played at Roland Garros:

Kitzbühel 1998, F, Costa def. Gaudenzi 6-2 1-6 6-2 3-6 6-1 (161 minutes)
Gstaad 2003, F, Novak def. Federer 5-7 6-3 6-3 1-6 6-3 (169 minutes)
Stuttgart 1992, F, Medvedev def. Ferreira 6-1 6-4 6-7(5) 2-6 6-1 (170 minutes)


.

[Voo de Mar]

Originally Posted by Neely

That's a good, I think we just don't know exactly because the time stats on the official ATP site are so unreliable.

If you're just going by ATP numbers, there are about 100 completed five set matches on clay which are below 100 minutes.


I'll give you a few which are over 100 minutes. It's up to you to decide what is an error and where it could start to be plausible.

RG 1995, R64, Steven def. Goellner 7-6(5) 6-2 5-7 4-6 7-5 (102 minutes)
RG 1994, R128, Reneberg def. Stoltenberg 1-6 3-6 6-3 6-3 7-5 (111 minutes)
RG 1996, R128, Woodbridge def. Kulti 0-6 6-2 2-6 6-4 6-1 (123 minutes)
RG 1992, R64, Korda def. Matsuoka 1-6 4-6 6-4 6-4 6-4 (128 minutes)
RG 1996, R128, Novak def. Pereira 2-6 4-6 6-2 6-1 6-1 (133 minutes)
RG 1996, R32, Sampras def. Martin 3-6 6-4 7-5 4-6 6-2 (141 minutes)
RG 2000, R128, Balcells def. Bruguera 6-3 5-7 6-2 1-6 6-0 (143 minutes)
RG 1999, R128, Safin def. Kroslak 6-2 4-6 6-3 3-6 6-2 (148 minutes)

Then at about 150 minutes there seems to be a kind of break and the frequency of matches lasting 150 minutes and above increases rapidly.

Very interesting stats Neely The Steven-Goellner match looks completely unreliable. Goellner had powerful serve, Steven used to play serve-and-volley so there weren't many long rallies but the amount of games suggest that it couldn't be only 1 hour 42 minutes

[Neely]

Exactly, it's almost impossible that so many games happened in such a short amount of time. Without tiebreak, 54 normal games in 102 minutes. Alone the changeovers would take about 40 minutes of the match time.


Woodbridge vs Kulti and Novak vs Pereira have many fewer games and lasted longer, so maybe they are closer to the truth to say it could have happened somewhere within that time.

[Voo de Mar]

Originally Posted by Neely

Woodbridge vs Kulti and Novak vs Pereira have many fewer games and lasted longer, so maybe they are closer to the truth to say it could have happened somewhere within that time.

I agree. Woodbridge and Pereira also used to play S&V, Kulti didn't like to play long rallies, so we can accept it could have happened.

[Rafa = Fed Killa]

Originally Posted by Burrow

Coming from a Nadal fan...

How is Safin doing.

What is he like number 140.

[Beta2k]

Fognini vs Bautista AO 2013: 0-6, 6-2, 4-6, 6-3, 1-6 => 2h 32min => 152min.

rather short hu? and yes i know, it's not on clay, but could not find a better fitting thread

[StatRacket]

Originally Posted by Beta2k

Fognini vs Bautista AO 2013: 0-6, 6-2, 4-6, 6-3, 1-6 => 2h 32min => 152min.

rather short hu? and yes i know, it's not on clay, but could not find a better fitting thread

Come on, you're not adverse to starting new threads.