Federer's Houdini number and the big mess of the Grand Slams
In a thrilling game, Roger Federer beat John Millman in five sets in Friday's night session . The tiebreak rule of the Australian Open was used, which differs from all other three Grand Slams.
by Jörg Allmeroth
last edit: Jan 24, 2020, 08:12 pm
Roger Federer was actually beaten when it was twenty minutes to one in the Melbourne hour of ghosting. In the Supertiebreak to ten he was already 4: 8 behind on the center court against the relentless Australian fighter John Millman, Millman had the goal, the sensation close in front of his eyes.
And Federer the end. "I was already thinking of how to explain that in the press conference," Federer said later. However, he was still on the Center Court, during the mandatory winner interview, together with interviewer Jim Courier.
Somehow, the maestro had "turned the thing and bent it over," as he himself said. He didn't really know how it happened either - his six points until 10: 8 and the 100th victory in Melbourne, up to an astonishing 4: 6, 7: 6 (7: 2), 6: 4, 4: 6, 7: 6 success against Millman.
Against the man who had catapulted him out of the tournament on the big stage at the US Open a year and a half ago in the round of 16. Exactly at 0.49 a.m., Federer's latest act of unleashing, this Houdini number, was written down in the tournament records, an effort that had required the Swiss to have all the psychological and physical reserves: "It was a game of chance, a point here or there. One has to win and one is then outside, Federer says, "I'm happy, but also really broken."
However: For the not so stubborn, dedicated tennis watchers, there was a little confusion that night in Melbourne. Hadn't Federer lost in Wimbledon's fifth final set last year, but a bit later - and at what score exactly?
In fact, there is a lot of confusion in the Grand Slam rules, instead of uniform procedures, everyone cooks their own soup when it comes to determining a winner. In Australia, the so-called super tie break is played at 6: 6 in the final set, i.e. the fifth for the men and the third for the women. Instead of the regular tie-break to seven, the point hunt goes to ten - provided the winner is two points ahead, just like in the regular tie-break.
At the French Open, in late May and early June in Paris, the traditional decision-making pattern applies, tie-breaks up to the final sentence. Afterwards, the struggle for attrition in red sand can theoretically continue indefinitely, a tiebreak is not planned, so a 20:18 or 26:24 would also be possible.
After a few endless games, Wimbledon decided to limit this patience to marathon level. In the decision set, the regular tie break follows at 12:12, not the match tie break. Just like last year's final, which Djokovic won against Federer, with 7: 4 in the final lottery.
The US Open was the first of the four Grand Slam tournaments to introduce a limit, a shoot-out to match the character of the tournament at the end, a duel like in the Western on the High Street. The regular has been fixed like this for a long time: Tiebreak in the fifth set, at a score of 6: 6 and then only up to the seventh point. In New York, Millman would have been declared the winner at 7: 4 in the tie-break of set 5 - in the midst of the terrible muddle of rules at the four largest tournaments in the world.