L16: Santiago González (MEX) & Ken Skupski CR 102 (48+54) defeated (16) Austin Krajicek & Franko Skugor (USA/CRO) CR 77 (42+35) by 3 & 4
******
QF: Henri Kontinen & Jan-Lennard Struff (FIN/GER) CR 82 (17+65) vs (11) Rajeev Ram (USA) & Joe Salisbury CR 43 (22+21)
QF: Marcelo Arévalo (ESA) & Jonny O'Mara CR 130 (71+59) vs (4) Ivan Dodig & Filip Polasek (CRO/SVK) CR 25 (13+12)
QF: (WC) Max Purcell & Luke Saville (AUS/AUS) CR 170 (88+82) vs Santiago González (MEX) & Ken Skupski CR 102 (48+54)
Looking at the draw we have :
Joe and Rajeev v Kontinen and Struff - 50/50 match to be honest but I think Joe and Rajeev can come through as the more established pair
Winner of that plays Bublik/Kukushkin or Aussie pair Duckworth/Polmans (wild cards) - again, so hard to call that.
Then we have Jonny and Marcelo v Dodig/Polasek - Jonny will be underdogs here, got to fancy Dodig and Polasek, but..
Purcell and Saville are again wild cards, and home boys, but fancy Ken and Santiago in that.
Of all the above, my instinct tells me Dodig and Polasek will make the final from bottom half, obviously highest seeded players, and Joe and Rajeev at the top, again with seedings.
But very clearly that means very little this event - I think the MTB 3rd set in a slam is a mistake and does make it more of a lottery but you still have to win 6 matches to win the event, making it an achievement regardless.
Does anyone know what format the other slams will have this year? FO has been 3 sets, as has USO, are they going to MTB? Presumably Wimbledon sticking with 5 sets which sort of makes it the King of the Doubles Grand Slams, the de facto World Championships...
I see the only non Brit QF is being played now, after the Nadal v Nick K match - must feel a bit like trying to dance after the party is over and the lights are on
I agree with you Jon about the MTB in slams. I don't understand why they can't just play best of three sets. Not sure what the rationale is, whether MTB is supposed to be more exciting (not for me, as it makes the result more of a lottery in my view) or to make it more attractive to singles players by reducing the effort they have to put it to in practice a maximum of two and a bit sets.
I see the only non Brit QF is being played now, after the Nadal v Nick K match - must feel a bit like trying to dance after the party is over and the lights are on
The doubles QF is nearing end of first set at c. 1215 am local time. It is going to be a 1 am finish most likely,
I agree with you Jon about the MTB in slams. I don't understand why they can't just play best of three sets. Not sure what the rationale is, whether MTB is supposed to be more exciting (not for me, as it makes the result more of a lottery in my view) or to make it more attractive to singles players by reducing the effort they have to put it to in practice a maximum of two and a bit sets.
Folk, in the men's and wimen's doubles they do play best of 3. It's a MTB at 6-6 in the 3rd, not simply a MTB decider at one set all. It's just the mixed doubles that has that.
I agree with you Jon about the MTB in slams. I don't understand why they can't just play best of three sets. Not sure what the rationale is, whether MTB is supposed to be more exciting (not for me, as it makes the result more of a lottery in my view) or to make it more attractive to singles players by reducing the effort they have to put it to in practice a maximum of two and a bit sets.
Folk, in the men's and wimen's doubles they do play best of 3. It's a MTB at 6-6 in the 3rd, not simply a MTB decider at one set all. It's just the mixed doubles that has that.
Ah, good. I am having a mare! I dont think I am paying as much attention as normal and read it through as a straight MTB without the set. That is better then, in which case the "lottery" of the results is probably more to do with early season and new , scratch pairings in many cases, and a general evenness of the field.