Jun/10
23
Mahut vs. Isner: Who will win the Mahutathon?
19 Comments · Posted by Scoop Malinowski in Articles, Scoop
44-44 in the fifth. No man has ever had to fight so long to win a tennis match. No man may have ever wanted to win a match as much as Isner and Mahut.
Two tennis warriors at different points in their careers, desperate – determined – dead set on winning this match – to move on to round two at Wimbledon. This could only happen at Wimbledon.
This might be the longest one on one battle in sports history.
Isner looks the more fatigued. Mahut has more spring and energy. But they both keep on making tough shots look easy, over and over and over. Who wants it more?
I say…
(long pause)
Isner.
64-62.
Dan Markowitz · June 23, 2010 at 7:15 pm
It is quite simply the greatest match I’ve ever seen. Not because the tennis is so scintillating. Rarely does a rally last more than 5 hits, but the guts of both players is so compelling to watch. It’s 52-51, and you know whoever wins will be fried for their match tomorrow. And you know what, I like that there’s no shot spot because it makes the contest a true test of human skills. Who is going to wilt, get so annoyed he just gives up the match? Will a lines call set either one off? That’s another compelling aspect of the match.
And listening to Gilbert is a pleasure to me. He’s a fount of tennis knowledge and I love his phraseology: the fear hand, the back hand (pronounced bock hand after the way Vic Braden said it), serving a “bunny,” “roping” a return.” His enthusiasm is contagious, but I feel he lets the match breathe just enough. And his voice is clear and full.
Isner’s serve is amazing and his return, especially on the grass, and his lack of movement, is being exposed. But his fear hand is sweet.
Scoop Malinowski · June 23, 2010 at 7:27 pm
This match is something else. Wertheim just texted me, he just started writing his next book which will be on this match. He’s done with chapter one. I mean what can you say, this is match upstaged the greatest player of all time, did not care to watch any of that match. If the Queen was there today, she would be at this match. Gilbert, McEnroe and Storm and Pam are calling this wonderfully. Mahut just looks like IRON he wants this so much.
vinko · June 24, 2010 at 12:58 am
I like the tradition of having them play it out. The tie break after five sets is ridiculous. It’s like that gimmicky shoot out they used one year at the World Cup. The US Open has to use the tie break because the suits over at CBS are afraid that Sixty Minutes will start late as if the world can’t miss yet another story of some goober in an used car dealership who turned an odometer back.
Scoop Malinowski · June 24, 2010 at 1:34 am
Yep, it’s so good that Wimbledon had the vision to let them play it out, this was the way it was supposed to be. Someday this was gonna happen and now it happened, and then some. It’s going to be one of the miracle moments in the sports history, like Borg-McEnroe, Jimbo in ’89, Federer-Nadal Wimbledon final, Roddick-El Aynoui. It doesn’t matter if Mahut or Isner ever come close to winning a slam. This is more incredible than winning two three or four slams. They will forever be respected as legends of the sport no matter what happens tomorrow.
This most likely is the longest one on one sporting event in the history of sports, never to be surpassed. Can’t think of any other to rival this, maybe a chess match.
Richard Pagliaro · June 24, 2010 at 2:20 am
Absolutely love this match, love the guts, the desire and the fact this guys don’t dawdle. Think about it: these guys have played almost 10 hours, more than 700 points, but there’s no dilly dallying. No going to the towel for 47 seconds, no ball bouncing 20 times before serving, no stalling.
It’s like “let’s get down to business” And I love that it’s a hard-fought match – Isner drilling Mahut into the body with a passing shot – but both are so fair, they don’t bitch and moan or whine, they just play their hearts out. Honestly, I could not sit down for the last 15 games. Was standing, pacing, it’s like the go so hard they force you to get into it.
Agree with Red: Brad Gilbert tremendous. One of Gilbert’s finest matches. Like when Hannah Storm said something like “What have these guys shown us?” And Gilbert replies “What haven’t they shown us?”
You’re 100 percent right: that “fear hand” reference or when he reference Vic Braden with “back Hond” – just classic that the guy gets these cool references in and doesn’t over do it but is very sharp and witty.
I thikn Hannah Storm is very pretty and has a very good voice but man oh man I wish she could have just hit the mute button (or that the director whispered in her ear to tone it down) as she was rambling too mcuh and sometimes talking over Patrick, Brad or Pam who had a great comment when she said she was actually in tears at one point. I realize it’s Hannah’s first big Wimbledon but she’s got to show a bit of restraint as Gilbert and McEnroe did – they spoke when they had something to say.
Incredible match – as Red said, not a lot of rallies, but the sheer guts and seeing Mahut dive across the court like that – you gotta love tennis when you see guys give it up like that.
Before the tournament I truly thought ISner had a shot vs. Rafa now though even if he wins tomorrow he will be so shot he will have nothing left for round two let alone Rafa, but what the hell you only live once.
sid bachrach · June 24, 2010 at 5:44 am
Didn’t Pancho Gonzalez have a similar match at Wimbledon when he was in his 40s?
Dan Markowitz · June 24, 2010 at 9:59 am
1969 Wimbledon, Pancho was 41 and his opponent, Charlie Passarel, was 25. The scores were 22-24, 1–6, 16-14, 6–3, 11-9, Gonzalez won. He wanted the match postponed for the day after he lost the first set, threw away the second, and then came back after the postponement and won the next three sets, serve n volleying. Lost to Ashe in the 4th rd that year. Was rated one of the 10 Greatest Matches of all time.
But, of course, this was child’s play compared to what we have going on with Isner-Mahut. 112 games in the Gonzo match is exceeded by the fifth set already of 58-58. This match is hampered by the fact that neither Isner nor Mahut is a great player. You’d think that Isner having played college tennis, and having his mammoth serve, would’ve learned to serve and volley more, but he doesn’t move into the court well, even though he seems to have good hands. He moves well side to side for a big man, but not forward. Maybe Johnny Mac could teach him a few things on footwork as JMac was sidelines intently watching the match yesterday.
Scoop Malinowski · June 24, 2010 at 12:37 pm
Red, you don’t think Isner & Mahut are not playing great tennis? Sure they have their flaws but they are both playing phenomenal tennis, they both made so many huge shots and the amount of bad misses on easy shots is so infrequent. and they have maintained that phenomenal level the whole way. It’s like the Roddick-El Aynoui match, who were bothh great players that year. Only great players could be capable of playing a match like this. Whatever Isner and Mahut do after this match, they are great players for creating this legendary match in history.
Dan Weil · June 24, 2010 at 2:48 pm
Is there a reason why we have to listen to Hannah Storm? Has she ever said anything intelligent? Does she have a brain?
Scoop Malinowski · June 24, 2010 at 5:00 pm
Hey it could have been worse. Imagine Storm and McAtee or Enberg calling that match together. No matter what she said – and she sure did say a LOT – it couldn’t take away from the match or the excellence of Gilbert, PMcEnroe and Pam at courtside.
Dan Markowitz · June 24, 2010 at 5:02 pm
I didn’t think the level of play was great and I heard PMac and Brad Gilbert say pretty much the same thing. The feat is the phenomenal mental toughness and focus that went into the event. The serving was great on Isner’s part and I like his forehand a lot, but I don’t see Isner being the kind of guy who can get to the semis of a Slam, even though Spadea feels he’s the American with the best chance of doing so.
And, come on, Dan, don’t you like Hannah’s arms and her Veronica Lodge smirk-smile?
Dobey · June 24, 2010 at 9:28 pm
Scoop, Here is an idea for an interview. Gonzalez and Pasarell had that other legendary Wimbledon five setter and it would be interesting to hear Pasarel’s memories of his marathon match with Pancho and how it compares to Isner-Mahut. Isner-Mahut wasa longer match but neither guy is, at least yet, one of the legendary players of all time like Pancho. It would be fascinating to learn from one of Pancho’s opponents about how he felt playing a marathon match at Wimbledon with Pancho, who was then over 40 but still a great player. I can’t imagine Arthur Ashe defeating Pancho in Pancho’s prime on a grass court like W.
Scoop Malinowski · June 25, 2010 at 2:15 am
Dobey that’s a good story idea, if I ever see him at the US Open, will definitely zone in on that story angle. All stories about top players are interesting. Just tonight at the courts we were talking about watching practices before the US Open and one guy said he was watching Edberg come on to a court when a young Darren Cahill, who was top 100 at the time, was finishing his hour. Edberg asked the young Cahill if he wanted to play a set, which they did. After the set, he said Cahill asked Edberg to sign the hat he was wearing.
Mark Sanders · June 25, 2010 at 3:56 am
Working hard for their money. Mahut got $91 per game vs Sharapova’s $2156. Mahut should ask for a bonus for more games played.
Mahut Isner Roddick Sharapova*
$ Per Game $91 $156 $1,121 $2,156
$ Per Winner $69 $114 $801 $2,002
$ Per Point $34 $59 $330 $510
*played two sets
Sharapova got paid $2002 per winner vs Mahut’s 69 bucks. At $69 bucks even I an afford to buy a few of those shots.
figures taken from Wall Street Journal article
Sid Bachrach · June 25, 2010 at 4:08 am
I think that Laver had some marathon sets in some of the years he won Wimbledon but of course nothing like Mahut-Isner. But then again, in that era they would have to play all sets with win by 2 games rules. I wonder if Laver or any of his contemporaries ever had a five setter with more total games than Isner-Mahut. You could have had several 20-18 type sets. Isner-Mahut would be tough to beat but maybe it has happened.
vinko · June 25, 2010 at 6:11 am
The US Open should get rid out of the tie break in the fifth set. The drama of an extended math is much greater than the gimmicky tie break. At a minimum they should use the traditional finish in the championship match. The USTA needs to tell the CBS brass they don’t give a you know what if 60 Minutes has to run an hour late.
vinko · June 25, 2010 at 6:12 am
oops, extended match not extended math although when it gets 70-68 it really is extended math.
Scoop Malinowski · June 25, 2010 at 1:48 pm
Mark; Those stats show it’s not equal prize money at all. You really have to give BJK credit for working that situation out for the benefit of the womens players at the expense of the mens game.
I’d rent Chirici’s forehand or Siebecker’s backhand for $50 a month. I’d rent you my backhand volley for $10 : )
Scoop Malinowski · June 25, 2010 at 1:59 pm
Sid, Nothing ever came close to the amazing freak show of the IsnerMahutathon. Nothing ever will. We’d sooner see the US beat Ghana 24-22 this weekend than any other tennis match go to 70-68 in the fifth.
Vinko; Doubt we will see such drastic changes at the US Open. A Wilson employee told me a couple years ago they have marathon meetings just about the exact placement of the Wilson ice water containers and props like that on the court by the player chairs. Changes are rarely made in tennis, highly unlikely we will ever see 60 Minutes take a back seat to a tennis match. Kinda like the US Open as it is though. Would like to see them re-name Armstrong Stadium to Evert or Connors Stadium, if anything.