Forum Umpire:, Gaston Gaudio,
Actually in a Slam it is cheap to win a 5th set breaker, it shouldn't be just done for TV purposes which this clearly is, have to keep as many unique things about the Slams as possible, the last set should be advantage and yes I understand why they changed them from 5 advantage sets to the current format and it makes sense.federer express said:in that case what about someone winning 7-6 7-6 4-6 3-6 7-5. is that less cheap because the final set wasn't a tie-break? if winning a match with a fifth set tie-break is cheap then isn't it cheap to win any set in that manner? i dont have strong views on this and would not like to see it spread to the other slams, but i can accept it for one of the four majors.
7-5 is not losing a set in a breaker that's the difference, at least takes 4 points to break, whereas in tiebreaker it just could be a lucky net cord, shouldn't just come down to chance.