British Tennis Forum - Celebrating 20 Years!

GAMEOVER · Satellite level

RE: Weeks 27 & 28 - The Championships, Wimbledon (Womens') (grass) - main draw

emmsie69 · Top national player

GAMEOVER wrote:
When I went to the ladies final in 2002 the cost of a ticket was £62.

According to the BofE inflation calculator that would be £115 now. I can't remember the exact amount I paid in 2010, somewhere around £104 and that would be £160 now.

Spireman · Club Coach

I paid £200 a ticket in 2017 for the mens final. Nice to see Federer in a final but Cilic got injured quite early in 2nd set, played on as it was the final but rest of match wasn't competitive, so not great. Did get doubles after but I would have rather paid a lot less and gone in the first week with all the outside courts to watch etc.

the addict · Tennis legend

£210 a ticket for the QF's on Tuesday on No 1 court. Did get yo see Taylor Fritz, Amanda Anisimova and a fabulous women's doubles with Kudermetova and Mertens agai st Dabrowski and Routliffe.

dodrade · Futures qualifying

emmsie69 wrote:
That's not a criticism of Amanda, it's just a lot of money for a pretty rubbish match, that's the nature of Sport but prices are so high now it's not worth taking a chance that you'll get a classic.

I'm sure Iga won't care but that kind of result isn't good for the tournament and women's tennis in particular.

emmsie69 · Top national player

Spireman wrote:
I paid £200 a ticket in 2017 for the mens final. Nice to see Federer in a final but Cilic got injured quite early in 2nd set, played on as it was the final but rest of match wasn't competitive, so not great. Did get doubles after but I would have rather paid a lot less and gone in the first week with all the outside courts to watch etc.

The 1st 4 days are great value and my favourite days but after that it becomes difficult to justify paying for the 2 main courts. Court 2 is a good option the end of the 1st week.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

dodrade wrote:
emmsie69 wrote:
That's not a criticism of Amanda, it's just a lot of money for a pretty rubbish match, that's the nature of Sport but prices are so high now it's not worth taking a chance that you'll get a classic.
I'm sure Iga won't care but that kind of result isn't good for the tournament and women's tennis in particular.

Yes

I don't know the relevance but I'm sure it's not great to have suddenly have your parents fly in

I mean, you've been doing great all week, you're only 22 or whatever, and suddenly your mum flies across the Atlantic to see this one match, your final

Holger Rune looked like a 10 year-old on sports day when he played Jack Draper earlier this year, and bottled it, looking at his dad after every shot and so desperately wanting to do well

And I'm not sure Anismova's mum should have come either. (Now, maybe Amanda really wanted her to, begged her to, whatever, but .....)

Net net, it was really painful to watch

But she made the final of Queens, she made the final of Wimbledon, it's an amazing grass court season

Just a shame it had to finish like that

GAMEOVER · Satellite level

Putintseva beat Iga at Wimbledon last year and lost to Amanda in the first round this year without winning a game. How many games has Iga won in a row,? It is 18 + with the Bencic match. Back in 1925 one hundred years ago Suzanne Lenglen won Wimbledon only losing 2 games in the final and 50 years later in 1975 Billie Jean only dropped 1 game in the final, It was a historic tournament for Polish women's tennis as Iga won Polish women their first ever title at senior Wimbledon.

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

Coup Droit wrote:
Helen40 wrote:
I'm not sure it bothers other players that much, but it's not pleasant for me as a spectator.

I remember another player being asked about Shreikopova's scream and saying it wasn't an issue.
yes - I think they should introduce the rule for us, the TV watchers, it's dreadful - but basing it on the other player and the ball crossing the net seems easy - it's rather arbitrary otherwise, unless you have a noise meter it's going to be very discretionary, and that generally is not good.
The serve clock has worked pretty well. The fact that umpires no longer overturn linecalls and linesmen no longer call them works pretty well. Nothing is perfect, there will be mistakes, but there's far fewer with technology, IMO, and there's far less ability for the top players to exert pressure, as they did before.
Now, toilet breaks etc are another point .....
But I think the noise rule re crossing the net would be quite simple and a benefit to everyone

I'm not sure how easy it would be to implement without it being discretionary, the umpire can see the point that the ball goes over the net, but if its a scream that dies off, then at what point (unless there's a noise meter - and then what happens if the crowd is being noisy) is a scream acceptable.

The stop clock I do like, Rafa really used to take the mick.

I don't understand why there isn't a policy re end of set 'toilet' breaks, seems like a simple thing to do.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Yes, it would be discretionary - I agree, I don't think you can have an automated device
But I might be wrong - maybe there could be a device to monitor decibels and length of noise? - it sounds a little officious but, thinking it over, maybe that would be better - I'm not a techie - but I assume that would be perfectly possible? And there usually is no/very little crowd noise as the player actually hits the ball
And the more and more automated things become, the better, in my opinion - so much less room for grandstanding and arguments

PaulM · Tennis legend

Congratulations to Katie O'Brien who shares 35k with Thomas Johansson for winning the Invitational Mixed. A Wimbledon Champion!

I think she won more matches at Wimbledon this week than in her entire professional career biggrin

telstar · Club Coach

Helen40 wrote:
Coup Droit wrote:
Helen40 wrote:
I'm not sure it bothers other players that much, but it's not pleasant for me as a spectator.

I remember another player being asked about Shreikopova's scream and saying it wasn't an issue.
yes - I think they should introduce the rule for us, the TV watchers, it's dreadful - but basing it on the other player and the ball crossing the net seems easy - it's rather arbitrary otherwise, unless you have a noise meter it's going to be very discretionary, and that generally is not good.
The serve clock has worked pretty well. The fact that umpires no longer overturn linecalls and linesmen no longer call them works pretty well. Nothing is perfect, there will be mistakes, but there's far fewer with technology, IMO, and there's far less ability for the top players to exert pressure, as they did before.
Now, toilet breaks etc are another point .....
But I think the noise rule re crossing the net would be quite simple and a benefit to everyone
I'm not sure how easy it would be to implement without it being discretionary, the umpire can see the point that the ball goes over the net, but if its a scream that dies off, then at what point (unless there's a noise meter - and then what happens if the crowd is being noisy) is a scream acceptable.
The stop clock I do like, Rafa really used to take the mick.
I don't understand why there isn't a policy re end of set 'toilet' breaks, seems like a simple thing to do.

Here's my suggestion for the 'toilet break' issue. Have a 5 minute break at the end of each set. During it players can do any of thr following: go the toilet, have a shower, talk to their coach, sit and contemplate life, practice their serve. If they take more then 5 mins they will lose a point for each 30 additional seconds. The 5 minutes can be used by the broadcasters for ad breaks or 'expert' commentary. The current system is unfair to the player who is leading. My suggestion would regularise matters. At lower levels ,if both players agree, there could be no break.

-- Edited by telstar on Sunday 13th of July 2025 04:13:27 PM

emmsie69 · Top national player

Coup Droit wrote:
Yes, it would be discretionary - I agree, I don't think you can have an automated device
But I might be wrong - maybe there could be a device to monitor decibels and length of noise? - it sounds a little officious but, thinking it over, maybe that would be better - I'm not a techie - but I assume that would be perfectly possible? And there usually is no/very little crowd noise as the player actually hits the ball
And the more and more automated things become, the better, in my opinion - so much less room for grandstanding and arguments

I disagree, there will just be different focus to the grandstanding because ultimately, you can get rid of the all the peripheral humans but the Players will still look for an outlet when they play badly, hit a poor shot, are having a bad day, someone in the crowd disturbs them, etc.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Yes, the players will sound off when they mess up, definitely - and that's fine, that's a show of 'character'

But they basically won't be influencing the umpire, you won't get/will get miles less intimidation, and accusations of bias and umpires kowtowing to top names, and double standards, as has been the case up till now

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

I'm all for not influencing the umpire, and if we make them all into robots, I'm not sure tennis would keep it's fan base. It's the characters and rivalries that that make it. Look at Kyrios - box office due to being a character (whether I agree with all he does or not)

Toilet break wise, I don't think you can just have a blanket rule of five minutes, just due to the proximity in some places, but maybe a calculation of time to get there plus urm 'execution' time. I wonder about something like the stop clock rule, but over a season or something. So with the stop clock rule, I think the umpires only call them out on it if their average is above the 25 seconds - so a version of that. Again, for me it would be good to stop that gamesmanship.