I just finished watching Roger Federer defeat Andy Roddick. Definitely one of the greatest tennis matches ever played, at very many levels. I thought Andy played better for most of the match, and until the last game, he was the only one to have held his serve every time.
But if anything, I am very glad Wimbledon has a “no tie breaker in the 5th set” rule. In fact, this match shows why no Grand Slam tennis tournament should ever have a 5th set tie-break. It would have been very unfair if Roger had won the 5th set also on a tie-break, without breaking Andy’s serve even once.
ak
Syahir
Preeti
shyam
I have the same argument...
Agree with you. Totally.
Agree Agree. and ofcourse, there are those that paid a grand centre court ticket to get a 5 set fare. And got 2 more sets for free !!
Talk of freebies !
What an awesome match! Total paisa vasool:)
Yes, I agree with you on the tie-breaker business.
I totally agree with you. In fact, I think there should never be tiebreaks in the in between sets as well. But then that would make the matches too lengthy and don’t know whether they would ever get over!
Lekhni, it’s clear that you didn’t check in with the TV execs first before writing this post.
(j/k)
Andy still deserved to win. Sob. wait till Rafa gets better
As a die-hard Federer fan, I’m thrilled that he won. Yes, that last set was a nail-biter. It was one of those matches where one truly felt that there was no “loser”.
If only he had not worn that idiotic blazer with the 15 emblazoned on it!