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

• Laley23

  

  Ironman92;401730 wrote: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

  
  I couldnt tell you score when I started. It was in the end of the 3rd set and then I watched all of the 4th set. Then I stopped until late in the 5th (normal late, like 4-4, lol) and watched til the WC started. It was like late 20s at that point I think, I dont recall). Then I stopped and kept checking in for a game when Mahut was serving cause I knew it could end. But I DVR'd it so at about 35-35 I stopped completely knowing I could watch it later. When I heard it ended at 70-68 I FastForwarded to 60-60 and watched the last 18 games. From fastforwarding I could see most games werent competitive (in terms of deuces, break points, 0-30, etc). To me, that is compelling tennis, but not great tennis, especially considering the reason the games werent close is because one player was just too tired to do anything.
  
  I was in AWE that Isner and Mahut were serving as well as they were, but again, that didnt create great points or games. The matches I listed had more importance given the time in the tourney and had better points overall. The serving in this game is what made it so great, but after the serve, the points were lacking in whole.
  
  Again, you need to realize I dont think it was a bad match, AT ALL. I just dont think its the greatest, and I listed the 5 that I remember vividly watching almost all of as the ones better. I will go so far as to say, had this match ended at like 15-13, it mightve been the best, because up until that point the quality was still there throughout every aspect of the game. But shortly after that they were simply just too tired to do anything.
• Footwedge

  Laley23;401720 wrote: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.

  What doesn't make sense? You think playing in an 11 hour match is somehow boring or "bad tennis" About ten years ago, I watched a marathoner practically in convulsion, as he finished the last mile in about a half hour before he collapsed across the finish kine. It was not "bad running" trust me.
  
  Your comments denigrate an unbelievable effort by both players...shame on you.
• Hulk Smash

  I agree with Laley23.
  Exciting because of the situation but nothing close to the best match I''ve seen.
  
  Better matches off the top of my head:
  Edberg/Chang 92 US Open semis
  The Agassi/Rafter semis two years in a row at Wimbledon
  Rafter/Sampras 98 US Open semis
  The last three Wimbledon finals were all better
  Edberg/Becker Wimbledon final in 1990
  Becker/Sampras German indoor final 1996 and the tour championship final a few weeks later
  Rafter/Ivanisevic 2001 Wimbledon final
  
  I could keep going but I'll start missing the years and tournaments if I don't take the time to look them up and I don't feel like doing that right now.
• Laley23

  

  Footwedge;401878 wrote:What doesn't make sense? You think playing in an 11 hour match is somehow boring or "bad tennis" About ten years ago, I watched a marathoner practically in convulsion, as he finished the last mile in about a half hour before he collapsed across the finish kine. It was not "bad running" trust me.
  
  Your comments denigrate an unbelievable effort by both players...shame on you.

  
  Did I call it boring? I dont think so. It was extremely dramatic and exciting. Your putting words in my mouth with that one. Bad tennis? Yes. The last part of the match was bad tennis. If the points played at the end had been played throughout and the match ended 6-4, 4-6, 6-7, 7-6, 7-5 or something it wouldve been considered a close 5 setter, but not great tennis.
  
  Lastly, how am I denigrating anything? I mean, are you gonna tell me Isner played a great match in the second round because he was giving it his all and was dead tired? I would surly hope not, cause he got spanked. Just cause people lay it all on the line doesnt mean it is great (insert sport).
• Ironman92

  

  I thought maybe the most interesting thing was how DEAD Isner was iin the 40's and 50's...I honestly thought he was going to puke....Mahut diving like Ryan Freel around 55-54....I loved it.
• Hulk Smash

  puking in the fifth set...
  
  reminds of another great five-setter...........................................Sampras/Correjta US Open round of 16.
  Pete was struggling in the fifth set tie-break and threw up between points, twice if I remember right. He ended winning on an 80-something mph second-serve out wide when Correjta had over-committed to a serve up the middle.