Loki

I think that got away from Norrie, Novak went into non error mode and just waited for the errors. Couldn’t keep his level up and some of the breaks he gave Novak were gifts. A tremendous run to the semis for Norrie, and just a shame there’s no ranking points to show for it. He’ll be looking forward to the US Open. On that showing from Novak, Kyrgios will have a chance for sure. Should be an interesting final.

Wow. Norrie about to serve for the first set.

Superb from Cammy. Now just needs to keep this up for the next three hours

I can’t see anyone agreeing to that. You may as well just make it best if three if you’re doing that. I agree, I thought they had a good compromise with the tie break at 12-12. Although I do like that all the Slams now end in the same way. The drama in that 5th set in 2019 wouldn’t happen today.

At least Binos is on the case to fact check my made up facts. Yes - Andrei is not officially Danil's father. Although if it was best out of three I am sure Sergey would have been a slam champion instead of a software engineer!

That could happen in the future, although your mercy rule should go straight in the bin. The epic final between Edberg and Becker would have been stopped. Gaston Gaudio would not be a slam champion. Danil Medvedev's father Andrei would be a Slam champion, and Andre Agassi would still be waiting for that Career Slam. You either play best of five or you don't. We could see the earlier rounds in Men's going to best of three and fourth round onwards being best of five in both men's and women's. The main issue with it is a logistical one rather than any unequal treatment. There would be 112 matches on the women's side in the first three rounds needing extra court time to implement that. Wimbledon is likely the only one to be available to fit it all in, but it would mean putting ,matches on the practice courts.

When it comes to Novak Djokovic, yes they are. The man is quite possibly the fittest sports person in history, certainly the fittest tennis has ever seen. He has proven time after time that he can fully recover from long matches to win in his next match. A 4.5 hour match on grass isn't going to leave him spent now, never mind when he was 25. I can't recall commentators claiming that Novak was over played or is tired. Possibly the only time would have been last year's US Open. But he was 34 and his powers of recuperation should be on the wane by now. Now I am not saying that other players by being on court for longer than their opponent will not have an affect on their abilities to perform at the highest level manageable from a fitness perspective. What I am saying is that it doesn't affect Novak in the slightest, especially when he was in his peak years 2011-2016 and even more recently he has shown that he can still recover from long matches to win. So, no he wasn't spent physically in 2013.

100% it had no effect. He was on court for an extra hour and a half in the semi final. Murray's match didn't finish until near 10pm. He had an extra five hours to prepare, and Murray wasn't likely in bed until way after midnight. Plus it is grass court tennis, far more forgiving on the body than hard or clay. He has recovered from two sets down in the semi vs Federer to win 2011 US Open against Nadal. Went the five hours and six hours to win the 2012 Aus Open. Went five sets with Stan in the semi before winning against Murray in Aus 2015. Went an absolute four+ hour epic with Nadal before recovering from two sets down to beat Tsitsipas in the French Open final in 2021. He is never spent for playing 4.5 hours the match before.

No he wasn't. This guy beat Murray in five hours in Australia and then went six hours against Nadal. You think the fittest athlete on the planet is spent after 4.5 hours on the court? It is just an excuse used to try and explain Murray's better overall play on the day. Kyrgios beat Djokovic twice in the year he got beat by Istomin, Cechinato and Berdych in the slams. The year with the elbow issues before finally opting for the surgery. Kyrgios will get chopped up similarly to the way Murray dismantled him in 2016. Kyrgios' only chance is if Norrie beats Novak tomorrow. Murray would beat Kyrgios on Sunday never mind Novak. It's just a shame Nadal picked up that injury as he would have had a great chance against Novak.

Magnificent away top, absolutely disgusting home top.

Murray’s grass court season will continue as he is going to play the Hall of Fame Open next week in Rhode Island.

It’s Feli Lopez.

Not necessarily. If you hit a line judge etc as part of a shot that was legal yes - i.e Isner hits a line judge with an ace, Kyrgios hitting a child in Australia using excessive force. Both of these were winning shots that bounced in the court. That isn't deemed deliberate. But if you deliberately shank a shot that you have no control over, that doesn't land in the court and that then hits a line judge, the match referee could default you. The point penalty Tsitsipas got yesterday, if that had hit anyone, he could have been defaulted. So definitely not the same as deliberately hitting your opponent. It would be the match referee's decision if it was worthy of a default even if the shot was technically live.

Ivan Lendl would deliberately hit his opponents as it would immediately win him the point. You can do it as often as you like. Hence Andy Murray doing a victory celebration when he did it in the charity match at Queens. If you do so after the ball is dead, same penalties can apply for hitting umpires etc. While the ball is alive you can fill your boots. Fabio Fognini loves to hit an opponent that annoys him.

I should clarify that you could be defaulted for ball abuse but it would be your final punishment for accumulating warnings throughout the match.

No one has ever been defaulted for hitting a ball into the crowd. It’s a warning only. Ball abuse. No one else would have got anything different. In fact Nick Kyrgios hit a child in Australia this year. If you hit a permanent fixture inside the court, such as the umpire, a lines judge or a ball boy and it’s deemed to have excessive force you will be defaulted. Djokovic @ US Open, Shapovalov @ Davis Cup, Nalbandian @ Queens. Henman @ Wimbledon. Zverev got defaulted in doubles this year too. Are the defaults I can remember on the mens side. The shot that Tsitsipas got a penalty point for could have been a default if it hit someone inside the court.

Yeah I retract that. You are correct. The backstop and sidestop (fences), spectators, ballboys and officials are considered permanent fixtures. The point ends when the ball hits them.

That proves nothing. The ball isn't dead until it bounces twice.

Yes but it is a slam final on clay. Ruud has barely won a match on grass in his career. Murray would have loved to take his number 3 seeding.

If Andy is to win it will be his 11th from 2-0 down. The others: Andy Murray Comebacks from 2-0 Down 2006 Davis Cup: Andy Murray def. Andy Ram (2-6, 4-6, 7-5, 6-2, 6-3) 2008 Wimbledon R16: Andy Murray def. Richard Gasquet (5-7, 3-6, 7-6, 6-2, 6-4) 2008 US Open R32: Andy Murray def. Jurgen Melzer (6-7, 4-6, 7-6, 6-1, 6-3) 2010 French Open R128: Andy Murray def. Richard Gasquet (4-6, 6-7, 6-4, 6-2, 6-1) 2011 French Open R16: Andy Murray def. Viktor Troicki (4-6, 4-6, 6-3, 6-2, 7-5) 2011 US Open R64: Andy Murray def. Robin Haase (6-7, 2-6, 6-2, 6-0, 6-4) 2013 Wimbledon: Andy Murray def Fernando Verdasco (4-6, 3-6, 6-1, 6-4, 7-5) 2015 US Open: Andy Murray def Adrian Mannarino (5-7, 4-6, 6-1, 6-3, 6-1) 2016 French Open: Andy Murray def Radek Stepanek (3-6, 3-6, 6-0, 6-3, 7-5) 2020 US Open: Andy Murray def Yoshihito Nishioka (4-6, 4-6, 7-6, 7-6, 6-4)

Will you go look it up, and tell us what you find

Nope. It should be a let and replayed point. If a player touches it before it bounces it would be the opponents point.

Now the roof is likely to close which will further neuter the Isner serve.

Absolutely he’d rather play Ruud than Isner. Proof of it is Ruud is already out and he can’t get near Isner’s serve. If he wins he will overtake the record for most wins from two sets down.