In the third round of Roland Garros 2018, Alexander Zverev knew exactly what he was up to: at 5: 5 in the fifth set against Damir Dzumhur, there was no prospect of a savage tie-break, in doubt the two opponents should have continued to play until the end. The fact that Zverev won the next two games and fought their way into the round of 16 after the five-set affair against Dusan Lajovic was, of course, gladly accepted by the native of Hamburg.

In fact, this was the only match situation in 2018 in which Alexandra Zverev will have to think about the rules in the future: Tiebreak at 12:12 as in Wimbledon? Super tie-break like at the Australian Open? The classic quick decision that has long been established at the US Open? In the past season it was still 3: 1 for the conventional procedure for determining a winner (and in the best-of-three format for the women of a winner), everything is different now.

Dominic Thiem sees more fairness

Which annoys the German number one. "I don't like the change so much because I think it's special when it ends in the fifth sentence, for example 12:10," Zverev told The Australian daily. I really enjoyed these situations and games, even if they're physically tough. "We play for that, and now every Grand Slam tournament except Roland Garros has a tie-break that I'm not a fan of."

Dominic Thiem sees things differently. "A tie-break at the Australian Open up to ten is actually very, very funny," said the Austrian number one after his second appearance at the Mubadala World Championships in Abu Dhabi. “And at the French Open there are usually not so many tight decisions because there are more breaks. For me, this regulation is just fairer. Because a Kevin Anderson beats two unbelievable players in Wimbledon, once with 26:24, once with 16:14, and then has no fair chance to play a final. "

Unlike Zverev, Dominic Thiem once enjoyed a critical quick decision last year: in the quarter-finals of the US Open against Rafael Nadal.