I suspect that, like the US tennis officials, I am in the minority here, but I think the other 3 Slam Tournaments ought to scrap the "no tiebreakers in the last set" rule. I don't see that the greater good of the game is served having a player who had the misfortune to have a marathon decisive set play a day or two later. It doesn't exactly make television scheduling easier, either: maybe one of the reasons that ESPN won't commit to live coverage is that they can't say with any degree of certainty how much time to set aside to the match(although whether the match goes 3,4, or 5 sets is obviously unavoidable). |