why does the fact that it was predicted to last long matter? If it ended in 3 sets no one would be complaining. If Nadal/Djok was the first match and lasted 7 hours no one would be complaining about that either.
Only caught the last couple hours of the fifth set (lol). Was the crowd pulling for Anderson the whole match, or only towards the end when they realized he was their only hope in ending it?
Isner may never make nor win a grand slam final, but presumably he’ll leave a legacy by virtue of a rule change after breaking Wimbledon twice. Too bad, I can’t stand the idea of a final set tiebreak and these matches of his are outliers, not norms. Although I did find it super tedious, particularly when compared to Del Potro - Nadal, where service games were actually tightly contested and tense.
Looked at the betting lines for the over in this match and was like "holy **** o49 games is a lot. Nevermind." in retrospect I should've bet my life savings.
Best part is that the fifth set alone would have covered the over.
Can anyone logically explain why Rafa hasn't gone to an underwear company where you don't have to pick it out your ass every point? As men in here we all know how annoying uncomfortable underwear can be, riding up, etc. etc.
Is he seriously that crazy superstitious? Otherwise it makes no damn sense.