Isner defeats Mahut 6-4 3-6 6-7 7-6 70-68

• Ironman92

  

  Folks it was 11 hours and 5 minutes long...I hope you watched some of it...goodness
  
  Isner has a doubles event in 30 miutes...how cruel
  
  Nearly every match and set and game and point record has been shattered
  
  The final SET was 8 hrs and 11 minutes long
• Fab1b

  

  Incredible!!
• Thunder70

  

  Freakin amazing...
• Fab4Runner

  

  Woo hoo! USAAAAAA!
  
  I caught about an hour of it yesterday. Poor guy is going to be whooped for the next week.
• THE4RINGZ

  

  Isn't the winner scheduled to play his next match later this afternoon ?
• Speedofsand

  

  I saw all of today's play on ESPNU. There is no loser in a match like this. Kudos to Wimbledon for presenting both with a special gift.
  Instant Classic in 11 hours and 5 minutes.
  
  
  http://johnisnertennis.com/
• Hulk Smash

  THE4RINGZ;399877 wrote:Isn't the winner scheduled to play his next match later this afternoon ?

  
  I think his singles match was moved to tomorrow.
• Strapping Young Lad

  

  Wonder if there is any chance he wins his next match or if he will be just totally drained?!?!?!?!
• darbypitcher22

  

  i think he's pretty much screwed. he won probably one of the most historic matches for longevity's sake in tennis history, but I think he makes a 2nd round exit
• ts1227

  

  Strapping Young Lad;400151 wrote:Wonder if there is any chance he wins his next match or if he will be just totally drained?!?!?!?!

  
  He may have had a doubles match in there too somewhere.
• Strapping Young Lad

  

  He's gone. Straight sets. Shortest match this Wimbledon no less.
• CinciX12

  

  Am I the only one that kinda found this incredibly boring? I mean I realize the historic implications of it and everything, but it kinda strikes me as 2 guys who just kept making mistakes and were dead tired so it lasted forever.
• Laley23

  

  CinciX12;401344 wrote:Am I the only one that kinda found this incredibly boring? I mean I realize the historic implications of it and everything, but it kinda strikes me as 2 guys who just kept making mistakes and were dead tired so it lasted forever.

  
  Im with you. I am amazed at the match for sure, but the actual tennis played was absolutely horrid. Not their fault as those players were just too tired...but nonetheless, it was pretty shitty tennis.
• ts1227

  

  It wasn't exactly riveting TV, because as mentioned it was pretty bad tennis, but it was still hard to pull away from once you started watching because of the situation.
• Ironman92

  

  agree....Isner did have some great shots when he could get to it....but when it was in the 40's he could barely move over 1 step either way....but his 2nd serves under those situations were some of the best 2nd serves I've ever seen......and Mahut all out diving when it was in the 50's......that's pretty good stuff
  
  One of Isner's serves was just 88 mph (a first serve)...he was hitting near 140 to start teh day....could barely get his arm over his head
  
  I'd say about the same as a 12-15 OT basketball game, 35-40 inning baseball game, 15-20 OT college football...or a 54 hole playoff after the final 18 hole round on Sunday (but moreso for the caddies)
  
  
  Slice it how you want it....in my near 30 years of watching sports.....I've never witnessed anything 1/2 as insane as that match
• Laley23

  

  Ironman92;401478 wrote:agree....Isner did have some great shots when he could get to it....but when it was in the 40's he could barely move over 1 step either way....but his 2nd serves under those situations were some of the best 2nd serves I've ever seen......and Mahut all out diving when it was in the 50's......that's pretty good stuff
  
  One of Isner's serves was just 88 mph (a first serve)...he was hitting near 140 to start teh day....could barely get his arm over his head
  
  I'd say about the same as a 12-15 OT basketball game, 35-40 inning baseball game, 15-20 OT college football...or a 54 hole playoff after the final 18 hole round on Sunday (but moreso for the caddies)
  
  
  Slice it how you want it....in my near 30 years of watching sports.....I've never witnessed anything 1/2 as insane as that match

  
  Ill give you that, but I still think that the Younes El Anoui vs Andy Roddick Quarterfinal match in the Aussie Open in 2003 was better: 4–6, 7–6, 4–6, 6–4, 21–19. It had MUCH more meaning based on where it was in the tournament. It had much better players. It had much better tennis being played. Now, 21-19 is not close to 70-68. But as far as good tennis goes, it was way better. I think this match was almost as high quality tennis (but the match was still a first round, vs quarterfinal) early on in the 5th. But around the time it was 21-19 the quality started to fade. If I recall correctly, El Anoui and Roddick were playing longer games/points. Even had to save some break/match points. Isner and Mahut was just 40-15, 40-0 every game.
• Footwedge

  Laley23;401485 wrote:Ill give you that, but I still think that the Younes El Anoui vs Andy Roddick Quarterfinal match in the Aussie Open in 2003 was better: 4–6, 7–6, 4–6, 6–4, 21–19. It had MUCH more meaning based on where it was in the tournament. It had much better players. It had much better tennis being played. Now, 21-19 is not close to 70-68. But as far as good tennis goes, it was way better. I think this match was almost as high quality tennis (but the match was still a first round, vs quarterfinal) early on in the 5th. But around the time it was 21-19 the quality started to fade. If I recall correctly, El Anoui and Roddick were playing longer games/points. Even had to save some break/match points. Isner and Mahut was just 40-15, 40-0 every game.

  
  
  70-68 is << than 21-19? You cannot be serious.
• Laley23

  

  Footwedge;401577 wrote:70-68 is << than 21-19? You cannot be serious.

  
  For quality of tennis, it isnt even a discussion.
• Ironman92

  

  when has the longest game of anything ever been the best quality?
  
  Exhaustion and effort...way beyond ability to focus
  
  laley....the overall quality of many of the games was not great....but how much did you actually watch? Your Cup extravaganza had to keep you from seeing most of the 5th set
• Laley23

  

  Ironman92;401595 wrote:when has the longest game of anything ever been the best quality?
  
  Exhaustion and effort...way beyond ability to focus
  
  laley....the overall quality of many of the games was not great....but how much did you actually watch? Your Cup extravaganza had to keep you from seeing most of the 5th set

  
  I watched a good 50 total games on ESPNU (DVR'd it when it shifted to ESPNU and the Cup started).
  
  I appreciated it for what it was. It was probably the 6th best tennis match I have ever seen. But I personally thought the quality was pretty shitty. I have watched more tennis in my life than any other sport other than college bball in my life. It was great drama, and a lot of good tennis. But the match I listed between EL Anoui and Roddick was great tennis the whole way. It didnt have long periods of obvious results (servous games held at love or 15). The best matches off the top of my head right now that I have personally watched over 70% of.
  
  1. Federer vs Nadal Wimbledon Final
  2. Roddick vs Federer Wimbledon Final
  3. Roddick vs El Anoui Aussie Quarter
  4. Sampras vs Agassi US Open Final
  5. Safin vs Federer Aussie Semifinal
  6. Isner vs Mahut Wimbledon First Round
  
  I am not bashing this match at all, hell its 6th on my all time matches list. But close and long doesnt always mean great tennis. I found this to be the case. The shot making was great at times, but pretty lacking at others (especially end of the second day). I mean, its fun to watch a guy return a serve when he can barely lift his arms, but when the opponent just has to put the ball back over the net and (Isner) wont be able to get to it, it doesnt exactly scream "Wow, what a point!" Thats all Im getting at.
• Laley23

  

  BTW, the 3rd and 4th sets were great tennis. The fact that this match went so long actually brought down the quality imo. They simply were never gonna be able to keep up the play the exhibited early on.
• Footwedge

  Laley23;401586 wrote:For quality of tennis, it isnt even a discussion.

  My dad played in the longest finals match ever in Cleveland junior tennis history. It made the front page of the Plain Dealer. I'm sure that match had shit quality as well.
  
  Laley...you are clueless on this subject.
• Laley23

  

  Footwedge;401718 wrote:My dad played in the longest finals match ever in Cleveland junior tennis history. It made the front page of the Plain Dealer. I'm sure that match had shit quality as well.
  
  Laley...you are clueless on this subject.

  
  dude, that doesnt even make sense. That match probably did have great tennis played. This match, compared to the matches I listed ahead of it, did not.
• mhs95_06

  The thing that makes it is that it was compelling rather than the play being "great". Just like the no hitter thrown tonight. I wouldn't say that 36 batters faced in a 9 inning game was great pitching with 149 pitches, even though there were no hits, but it was compelling.
• Ironman92

  

  You listed 5 better in your opinion.....most probalby couldn't list 5 period that didn't inlcude the big names or each era....good enough for me
  
  again..not debating...but what was the score when you were watching? Sadly I watched from 30-29 all the way to 59-59......electricity out next morning til 11:15....watched from 62-62 to 70-68.....some was definately boring.....but I've never been so excited about a love 15 with Isner up 1 game lol (he's got a chance! lol)
  
  Quality won't be rememebered as great.....but non-tennis fans will rememeber this thing for a long time I bet