70-68 in the fifth set

[The Exploding Vole]

The most protracted result in the history of competitive sport.

Unless I'm mistaken, of course.

[Ek weet nie]

70-68 in the fifth set

The days of unlimited days test cricket must win the most protracted result. Unless you count one of those round the world sailing races as a sport.

[Tubby Isaacs]

70-68 in the fifth set

Or some of the snooker finals from years ago?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_snooker_champions

None of the long ones were that close. Still, how did they decide upon "first to 94"?

[jefe]

70-68 in the fifth set

The Guardian MBM of that day of Wimbledon is hysterical.

[Gerontophile]

70-68 in the fifth set

Mahut made a big mistake by asking for the match to be stopped on Wednesday night. A half-fit Isner was always going to beat him.

McEnroe nailed it: they should have taken it on to the Centre Court and let them slug it out with the roof and lights.

[Alderman Barnes]

70-68 in the fifth set

Tubby Isaacs wrote:

Or some of the snooker finals from years ago?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_snooker_champions

None of the long ones were that close. Still, how did they decide upon "first to 94"?

I heard that the reason the games were so long was because they had no sponsorship and had to rely on gate money. That still doesn't answer the question whether they decided on first to 94 beforehand or carried on playing until no more spectators turned up.

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

70-68 in the fifth set

I think they must have just kept playing, in the old snooker finals, to fill all the sessions tickets had been sold for. If you look at that list of finals from 1946 onwards, they all lasted for 145 frames each, even though the winners scored anything from 78 to 90-odd. The post-war public were clearly that starved for entertainment that they'd turn up to watch snooker being played, even when the competitive part of the match had been concluded. In all likelihood, the players probably put on a bit of an exhibition during the remaining frames.

[The Exploding Vole]

70-68 in the fifth set

But this 70-68 thing, though, is surely the greatest deviation from the mean any sport has ever produced, yes?

[Ek weet nie]

70-68 in the fifth set

What's the deal with 1965 John Pulman 25–22 (matches) Rex Williams? Did they play 47 multi-frame matches to decide the title?

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

70-68 in the fifth set

Almost certainly. I mean penalty shoot-outs in football are designed to finish at around 5-4, and while I've seen one or two go over 10-10, I've never seen one reach 70-69. Although it could happen, I suppose. Similarly extra innings in baseball, I'm by no means an expert on that score, but you don't often hear of one ending after much more than 5 or 6 extra innings, even though (again in theory) they could go on forever, too. Golf once had a US Open where the normal 18-hole playoff was then itself tied, they did it again and it was almost tied (again), but in recent years after 18 extra holes they go to sudden death, which again in theory could go on forever but never seems to. I think there was once a sudden-death playoff in a tour event between Seve Ballesteros and Johnny Miller that lasted 11 holes, I think that's the longest one's ever gone.

I don't know, though, why so many in tennis are rushing today to say "don't change the rules", in terms of introducing 5th set tie-breaks (which they already do, in fact, at the US Open).

If anything, the tie-break format (two serves each, back and forward, until someone gets to 7 points and goes two up) is a far better format for all games in tennis, from the start, than the routine "bang-bang-bang-bang-game, new balls please" of the normal games served up (geddit) by the traditional format. I'd prefer to see tennis completely revitalised so that all matches were, I don't know, best of 5 sets where each set was in turn composed of best of 5 tie-break format games.

[Gerontophile]

70-68 in the fifth set

Ek weet nie wrote:

What's the deal with 1965 John Pulman 25–22 (matches) Rex Williams? Did they play 47 multi-frame matches to decide the title?

The snooker thing is a misnomer (whatever that means). They had finals that were first to 35... and I think that Joe Davis won one in the 40's, played over very many days.

But, then, you had to be the best, and it was (slightly) winner stays on...