Isner-Mahut recap, Not as special as we thought!

There has been some time now to really reflect on Isner-Mahut match that occurred at Wimbledon's grounds in 2010. People were captivated at this 11 hour contest, 183 game match, and a AWFUL display of tennis!

I know people out there are saying "how can you say that? It was a battle of mental fortitude! A match that gave tennis two players that never gave up!" I'm sorry, but that's not the case. Maybe to the casual fan that came in at the end of that match and saw the last historic games, it looked as these two tired warriors were giving it their all. But how about that person that watched the match?! I was bored! That wasn't the tennis we are now accustomed to seeing. It was a match were two players were willing to let the other serve away, if they ace the whole time, great, if not, great. These attitude limited the number of QUALITY points and gave us a match that was historic for its length but never for its quality of play.

The match we saw was nothing more than a boxing match that goes the distance with both fighters jabbing the whole time. They are both too scared to come in and get into an exchange allowing the judges to come up with their own conclusion. Matches that are quality are those that we remember for yes the score, but most importantly the points that were played. Ask yourself, can you remember one point in that entire 11 hour match besides the last one? How about the Nadal forehand pass at 8-8 in the 4th set tiebreak at Wimbledon Final against Fed to give him set point? Now that was a point we will always remember bc of the number of points that were quality. How about at 6-2 2nd set breaker when Roddick should have let a Fed pass go long, hits it, and misses it. That point changed the match and will always be remembered. Lastly, the tweener that Federer hit against Djoko in the semifinals at the US Open to give him match point? Those are matches with quality points not that marathon with no flair we witnessed.

Later on I will discuss the changes that tennis needs to make with its scoring. Hint: the US Open has mastered it! This discussion will use the argument that the Isner-Mahut match should be a turning point not something we would like to see repeat itself.