- Djokovic defeats Sinner at Monte-Carlo Tennis • Rafa Nadal Also Advances
- Photo Gallery Rolex Monte-Carlo Masters Starring Djokovic, Nadal, Fognini and More!
- Rolex Monte-Carlo Masters Draws and Order Of Play for 4/15/21
- Rafael Nadal Wears Nike’s Newest “Kit” Clothes • Check Rafa Out From Monte-Carlo Tennis
- Monte-Carlo Tennis Musings: Medvedev Out, the Felix-Uncle Toni Duo, and Hurkacz’s “Press Conference”
- Photo Gallery Rolex Monte-Carlo Masters Starring Dimitrov, Tsitsipas, Garin and More!
- Tennis News – Uncle Toni’s magic is yet to work on Felix Auger-Aliassime
- Kenin Signs with KT Tape
- Rolex Monte-Carlo Masters Draws and Order Of Play for 4/14/21
- World No. 2 Daniil Medvedev Out of Monte Carlo Due to Covid After Hit With Rafa Nadal
- Is it Better to Choose a Partner Who Compliments You or Compliments Your Game?
- Rolex Monte-Carlo Masters Draws and Order Of Play for 4/13/21
- Photo Gallery Rolex Monte-Carlo Masters Starring de Minaur, Hurkacz, Musetti and More!
- Pablo Carreno Busta beats Munar at home in Spain, Sonego triumphs at 250 in Italy
- French Tennis Star Gael Monfils Pulls out of Monte-Carlo
AO 2018 • Are Tennis Slams Last Set Rule Needed? Wanted? • Tennis Players Are Warriors But….
- Updated: January 28, 2018

General view of the Melbourne skyline as Simona Halep of Romania plays Caroline Wozniacki of Denmark in the women’s final at the Australian Open tennis tournament in Melbourne, Australia, 27 January 2018. EPA-EFE/JULIAN SMITH
This is an interesting subject.
The no tiebreak rule in the final set of the first 3 majors. (Slams)
• Melbourne • Paris • London •
We just finished watching the Wozniacki-Halep final. Now we are not saying that Halep’s extended matches with Davis (15-13 in the 3rd) & Kerber (9-7 in the 3rd) were the reason she lost in the finals.
We do question the purpose of turning a match into a potential marathon •
to the detriment of the players health, the fans stamina or (interest) for staying long & late, the TV broadcast which overruns, the players in the matches that follow potentially waiting interminably for the extended match to end among other reasons. But what is the purpose of the rule?
Has anyone asked the players what they think? Shouldn’t what’s good and great and exciting about dramatic tiebreakers in the sets leading up to the final set be just the same for the final set?
The gold standard of the absurdity of the rule is the most “celebrated” extended final set of all time, the 2010 Wimby 1st round Isner-Mahut 70-68 debacle. Eleven hours, 3 days & Isner did not win another match the rest of the year! And what are we celebrating? That neither player had the goods to break serve until the 138th game? Is that nothing but the height of mediocrity we are celebrating?
•We celebrated that both players didn’t get sick, hurt or worse out there •LJ
•We celebrated that WIMBLEDON celebrated the most unusual situation in tennis history • LJ