You entered the ballot. Of course you did. And
of course, you didn't get in. So you pack a tent,
set off at dawn, and join the pilgrimage to South
West London. By sunset, you're pitched up along
the fence, nestled into the great British tradition
that is the queue. At dawn, you shuffle forward,
bleary -eyed but buzzing. And somehow, you land
one of the last tickets to a show court. And
then, you're in. Through the main gates and into
a world of pristine lawns, manicured flower beds
and quiet prestige. There's a hum in the air,
a sense of occasion you can feel in your chest.
You meander past Henman Hill, pause at the so
-called Champion's Graveyard and queue again,
obviously, for your strawberries and cream. Too
early for Pimms? Maybe, but it seems rude not
to. You take your seat. The sun is out, the roof
is open, the grass is untouched, the lines are
crisp. It feels like home. And then the tennis
begins. The world's finest, ladies and gentlemen.
Athletes, artists, warriors, locked in the noble
pursuit of immortality. One by one knocked out
until only the very best remain, standing beneath
a glorious gold cup or lifting a majestic silver
plate high. Its charm is incomparable. Its attraction
is unique. It is the Wimbledon Championships.
And this is... The Sporting Almanac Podcast.
Good morning, Jack. A morning recording session.
Yeah, another one. Trying to avoid the heat of
the midday sun because it is already very, very
warm here and it's only going to get warmer in
the United Kingdom. It's boiling hot, which is
why I feel so grim. And apologies to anyone if
my voice sounds a little hoarse. I am nursing
a hangover having been at Headingley for the
first day of the test match between England and
India yesterday. where England are getting their
arses handed to themselves. It happens from time
to time. It's a long old series. But... Could
go either way. But, Jack, the start of Test Match
Summer and other major established sporting events
like the British Grand Prix on the horizon and
the focus of today's episode, the British Sporting
Summer, has begun. You described it last week
at the end as being like... embraced warmly by
your culture and i think that is such an excellent
way to describe the wimbledon championships it
is the most quintessentially british thing but
i think it's also brilliant because it links
like every all the all the class distinctions
you have in britain the upper class the working
class middle classes i think it just bridges
that line between everyone it is quite a prim
and proper event but it's open to everyone everyone
can go visit everyone can get the strawberries
and cream it's british it's britain encapsulated
in a single place for two weeks and i love it
wimbledon yeah bbc big screens in the city everything's
white flowers people queuing properly like yeah
yeah you want to learn how to queue go to wimbledon
it's home it's home it is home and it's always
brilliant it's always fantastic from a sporting
point of view as well as everything else and
it has a lot of history behind it does have a
lot of everything we love it's the oldest tennis
tournament in the world it has that much history
behind it yeah it barely it barely uh is predated
by the sport of lawn tennis itself um which i'll
come to in a sec it was very very quick why don't
you come to it now tell us about it come to it
now yeah so i really like the way tennis came
about because obviously we've talked a lot about
british invented sports specifically football
and rugby where they came from and that is largely
they were played at public schools they're all
team sports and then tennis is obviously not
that tennis now is the most watched non -team
sport in the world notwithstanding the fact it
can obviously be played in doubles or team events
like the davis cup it's the fourth most watched
and the sixth most played sport on the planet
it's very different in its roots compared to
other sports i did not know that i didn't know
it was that popular that's that's it's so popular
yeah badminton is played a little more because
obviously it's played very heavily in china which
has a ludicrously massive population distorts
the stats yeah yeah it's it's the fourth most
watched sport in the world that's incredible
yeah it is so one similarity between the invention
of tennis and other sports was in the late 19th
century people had a lot more spare time than
they used to obviously with the empire the british
empire as affluent as it was and a lot of expendable
income in the United Kingdom and a growing middle
class as well. People had more spare time and
a desire to fill it with fun new sports and games.
So tennis itself has some precursors. The game
of fives, which is like squash played without
a racket, so you play with your hands. Similar
sports have been played back to Roman times,
and a early version was definitely played, similar
sports were thought to have been played back
to Roman times, I should say, but the earliest
definitely played version was played in the 12th
century by monks in France, which was called
Jeux de Palme, the Game of the Palm. appropriately
named yeah next up came the sport of real tennis
which is a very similar sport to modern day tennis
but played indoors over a net where the walls
and floors are both used there's big links between
that and aristocracy henry day famously played
it there's still a court at hampton court and
there's many in paris uh it was very popular
amongst the french aristocracy until That was
brought to an end and actually played a notable
part in the French Revolution when a real tennis
court at Versailles hosted what was known as
the Tennis Court Oath, where members of the Third
Estate, who represent the common people of France,
vowed to remain united until they gained a constitution
in their country, which was the first time French
citizens had openly opposed the monarchy. Three
and a half weeks later, the Bastille was stormed
and the French Revolution began. I was going
to say, how did that go? Yep. So... Similar sports
also, rackets and squash. Rackets and squash
are very similar, just the ball and the racket
are slightly different to one another. Rackets
was a sport invented in debtors' prisons in London,
obviously opposed to real tennis, which was linked
heavily with royalty. So yeah, people had a lot
more time on their hands. The invention of the
lawnmower in 1830 meant that a lot of their recreation
took part on their lovely lush lawns at manor
houses out in the countryside. From the 1850s
through to the 1860s, the big thing was croquet.
Croquet people were obsessed with. If anyone
doesn't know what croquet is, you play with a
mallet and a ball. Boss game. Yeah, it's very
fun trying to hit between targets in the ground
and then try and hit a middle spike. It was a
good game for men and women to play together.
At this point, women were discouraged from playing
any sports with any amount of physicality, so
they were allowed to do things like archery,
croquet, horse riding, which were deemed to not
be... too physical but anything beyond that horse
riding i know but they had to they had to sit
side saddle and stuff yeah that was once a time
anyway sorry conservative victorian etiquette
you could do a whole episode on it it's weird
isn't it we always mention that this is like
the juxtaposition whatever it is with the victorians
like the brothers and sisters of the victorian
era are basically responsible for every modern
day sport but we're also left a lot to be desired
in terms of how they were run and their other
wider conduct. It's very interesting from a historical
point of view, but yeah, I mean, women had very
little power at this point, very little opportunity
to even do recreation in the same way as men.
We've already talked about what happened during
the First World War, women getting the opportunity
to play football. This is actually a very interesting
story, and I'll come to it now, but yeah, so
as I said, croquet essentially gave men and women
the opportunity to converse with one another
before they were married which victorian etiquette
absolutely very limited limited opportunity to
do that but by the 1870s the fad of croquet had
faded and the well -to -do of victorian england
were ready for a new long game enter walter winfield
creator entrepreneur retired army officer and
he was looking for a new way to make money and
decided the best way to do that was to create
a new game called lawn tennis uh created with
sort of he built around an aristocratic veneer
essentially it was just marketing when it came
down to it nice in order to market initially
to the upper classes and then have the middle
classes desire it because obviously the rich
and the famous of the day were playing it aspirational
yeah yeah so in 1874 he started selling tennis
kits that could be bought from shops or mail
ordered they would cost five guineas again going
back to what guinea is um but that's equivalent
to about 500 pounds a day we're actually a very
lucky point in inflationary terms in that one
guinea is is almost exactly equivalent to 100
pounds today so it makes doing these conversions
extremely easy for me oh that's fun throwing
one out to our bank of england enthusiasts and
there's plenty of them around possibly So the
game he created was marketed as Sveristak, which
was Greek for the art of playing ball, or lawn
tennis, which is why it said on the box, it said
Sveristak or lawn tennis. Unsurprisingly, the
latter was the one that caught on. So it became
popular very quickly. It was fuelled by links
to the upper classes and royalties, I said, deliberately
emphasised by Wingfield with lumeries such as
the Duke of Edinburgh, which was Queen Victoria's
second son, and also Oscar Wilde taking up the
game. While they soon moved on to... the new
fad, golf in Wilde's case. Their names were used
in marketing for years to come, selling the game
to the middle classes who ate it up. Can I just
say I did not expect Oscar Wilde to play a leading
role in this story when it started. There you
go. You're teaching me stuff, Jack. That's what
I'm trying to say. I didn't either. I'm teaching
myself stuff when I do my research. The kits
came with six basic rules of tennis, most of
which are still used today, such as the ball
can't bounce twice, you have to serve from a
certain position. The difference was it used
hourglass courts originally, so hourglass -shaped
courts, as in wide at the ends and narrowing
in the middle. That's odd. Instead of a rectangular
court. The rules were standardised in 1875 by
the Marlborough Cricket Club, the MCC. Yeah,
I knew about this. So they tried... That doesn't
surprise me, I guess. They've got the lawns,
haven't they? In a popular sport, people want
to play it there. They got rid of the hourglass
courts and recommended rectangular courts instead.
There was also originally a single point -based
system, similar to badminton or table tennis.
One, two, three, four. However, Wingfield was
a smart man, a smart marketer. He preferred that
the game be marketed the same as real tennis,
which was... 15 30 40 same as tennis is today
as opposed to racket the debtors prison game
so preferring the royal game to the debtors prison
game obviously to sell his game hence why the
scoring system used in real tennis is used so
no one's entirely certain why it goes 15 30 40
interestingly instead of 15 30 45 some say it's
from clock faces but since the scoring system
predates the minute hand on clocks it's definitely
not that what about Is there any explanation
as to juice advantage? Yeah, so they think it's
because instead of going 15, 30, 45, then you'd
have to go like 52 .5, 60 to complete a point.
It's 15, 30, 40, 50, 60 if juice is needed. So
that's the theory, although... it's bonkers i
guess people with too much time on their hands
it doesn't really matter anyway no but what i
what i do like is why is the theory on why zero
is love okay let's hear that that's fun the nice
theory is it derives from playing for love as
in playing for the love of the game rather than
for prize or reward i want it to be that it's
not going to be that though is it alternatively
it might be from the french word for egg which
is with eggs resembling a zero which is also
where the term duck comes from in cricket, as
in getting zero in cricket is called a duck because
it's said to resemble a duck egg, a zero. That's
probably more likely, isn't it? Yeah, it's less
fun, though. I like the link there, though. That's
something. It also makes it more probable because
these things in sport do tend to be linked and
sort of recycled, don't they? They do, yeah.
Anyway, digressing hard here, so back to the
actual tennis. Well, this is the tennis. This
is the scoring system. Yeah, go on. The first
public game was held in Knightsbridge, West London,
on the 6th of May, 1874, at Prince's Club Cricket
Field. A doubles match played in front of a few
hundred spectators. Walter Wingfield participated
in it, as it was his game. The Morning Post had
encouraged his readers to go along and watch,
which brought a bit of a crowd out. No doubt
in part due to the many, many advertisements
Walter had taken out in their paper for his game
kits. So mutually beneficial situation. First
game was played on his hourglass court. They
wore plus fours, long sleeve t -shirts and cricket
caps, as was the fashion at the time. And the
most important thing is it caught on ridiculously
quickly. So bear in mind, this is 1874. 1875,
the rules were first standardized. The first
Wimbledon championships, and bear in mind, Wimbledon
was not the first tennis tournament. The first
Wimbledon was in 1877. So it caught on super
quickly from being essentially a fad marketing
ploy to being a proper sport, which I think is
quite cool. That is quite cool, yeah. So tennis
clubs were founded at this point. The first tennis
club was formed in Leamington Spa, with many
more to follow. It allowed, as I mentioned, a
certain amount of socialization between men and
women and between classes, albeit... middle to
upper classes with the working class excluded
this increases popularity amongst upwardly thinking
young professional men the likes of lawyers and
bankers giving them social contacts they'd otherwise
struggle to get it also caught on with that type
of people because a lot of them have played team
sports at school they played rugby or cricket
or football while at school but were looking
in older life for a less physical game, less
likely to injure them, less likely to take up
too much of their time, a more singular game,
they don't have to rely on their teammates, and
obviously the game of tennis really suited that
type of people as well. The newly growing middle
class. As I said, it's not just men it was popular
with. The vast majority of sports in Victorian
England obviously excluded women, since they
were deemed unladylike. tennis managed to almost
sneak it under the radar piggybacking on the
popularity of croquet well i guess if you start
from the premise that you're allowed to play
it then it becomes easier exactly to you know
like all these other sports were created for
men played by men and then the introduction of
women was a challenge to the status quo i guess
if you're starting from the premise that you
are allowed to play it becomes a lot easier to
establish it as a sport in which we routinely
play Yeah, it's like seeing a bunch of people
kicking around a football on a football pitch
and going over to ask them to play. They can
say no to you. If you're there in the first place
when the game starts, they can't kick you out,
can they? Well, they can, but it's a lot harder,
right? Exactly, yeah. And they tried. Of course
they tried. Women had been playing it on the
lawns of these country homes. It had been a sport
that a lot of women had got very good at very
quickly, a lot of young women particularly. yeah
because women are also good at sports yeah weird
so what tends to happen is the the 18 19 20 year
old women would play tennis because they wanted
to find themselves you know they want to socialize
with Men. Men, yeah. And potentially find themselves
a husband. That was their priority. The 13, 14
-year -old women who were watching their older
sisters do this, they just loved the game. They
just loved playing it. So it was those players
that became the first Wimbledon champions, the
first champions of the sport. The likes of Lottie
Dodd, Maud Watson, Maud and Lillian Watson were
an example of that. So yeah, the early stars
of the game. Yeah, it's cool. Yeah, it's really
cool. Wingfield was smart. He was a smart man.
He marketed his game heavily as being unisex,
as any good salesman would, with women included
on the images on the game boxes, and even offered
a discount of a whole guinea to women buying
his kits. That's like £100 in today's money,
which is a nice, easy conversion. That's also
not an insignificant sum back in the day, probably.
Yeah. So essentially what this resulted in was
by the time men in power woke up to the fact
women were playing this energetic new sport,
it was too late to stop them. Strong -willed,
middle - and upper -class women with little political
power but plenty of collective power through
their husbands and fathers and the power they
exerted over them, simply didn't allow themselves
to be sidelined and carried on playing the game.
There were concessions made. They were made to
wear ridiculous outfits, full -length dresses,
bonnets on their head, corsets. Until 1920s,
they had to wear corsets to play tennis. That
is what is going on, man. That is ridiculous.
I mean, basically, essentially, it was... trying
to minimize lust over any sense of practicality
and yeah trying to watch a game of tennis and
their first thought is lust victorian men apparently
yeah apparently they also so they had terrible
changing facilities at the tournaments they went
to they had to be chaperoned everywhere by their
mothers or the rants or whoever it was but they
were allowed to play And they were allowed to
compete in tournaments. And they were allowed
to attract gate receipts. And that solidified
their position in the game because it was popular.
Just as popular in many cases as the men's game.
And tennis clubs became mixed clubs. Some tennis
clubs tried to go single sex. There were some
men's clubs and some women's clubs. But they
invariably failed for one very good reason. People
wanted... mixed sex tennis clubs because it gave
that opportunity to socialize in the same way
that croquet had done obviously on the lawns
of the posh parts of england and that makes sense
because back in the day like all sport was recreational
so like if that if people if people amateur yeah
and if people are balking at that idea that you
know like oh it's a place for effectively courtship
to take place and you know that's improper it's
like well no back in the day all sport was recreation
it was all just for dawson and so of course it
was a great opportunity to go and meet the opposite
sex and hang out with them and just have fun
so that makes perfect sense to me it was a controlled
enough environment that it passed sort of the
victorian morality test whilst being a free enough
environment to allow enjoyment to be had essentially
so it was a mutually beneficial situation for
women it gave them it essentially meant that
their game stayed on the same level as a men's
game without rules getting changed without the
game being minimized or made into a secondary
consideration for men it had probably a slightly
more direct benefit in that there was a lot of
accusations towards tennis players at that time
particularly from footballers and rugby players
that it was a soft game essentially questioning
the masculinity of the men playing the game well
if you're in a tennis club and there's lots of
athletic young women going to the same club as
you that gives you a defense to go out and say
well stop questioning my uh masculinity i'm the
one who gets to hang out with these beautiful
young women yeah in this environment so it was
a mutually beneficial situation even if it's
not necessarily the best reason for being so
protected the egos of men and let women play
essentially yeah and egos of men is often what
you've got to stroke in order to allow such things
to continue especially when men have all the
power there was also mixed doubles was growing
in popularity as well although bizarrely some
clubs restricted partnering in mixed doubles
to spouses siblings or officially engaged couples
only so you couldn't just have the two best the
best male player and the best female player in
the club playing together against other clubs
bizarrely it's bizarre which you'd think would
be logical yeah well you know it didn't get it
all right that's what we're saying But it was
much more progressive than others. They definitely
didn't get it all right because it took a long
time for these women to be given any real power
within the clubs. In terms of positions on committees
or anything like that, that was into war period
before that started happening, really. And it
also became about as close to equality between
men and women that existed, but only middle class
and above men and women. The working class was
still largely excluded from these clubs. Although
there were some public tennis courts popping
around which gave... opportunity for working
class people of talent to go and play the game
to display their talent and maybe get some coaching
out of that particularly in America that's actually
how a lot of the great early American champions
and bear in mind America dominated the sport
of tennis for until what 2002 pretty much for
probably 100 years since the early 1900s absolutely
dominated it yeah well a lot of the great Wimbledon
winners Connors, Jimmy Connors, Sam Press, McEnroe.
They're all American, weren't they? Yeah. You
could say the same, well, to a slightly lesser
degree, actually, about the women, but yeah.
Yeah, it was a long old domination. Anyway, Wimbledon.
Tell a bit about the history of the tournament
itself. How did it come about? I mean, this is
lovely, the tennis stuff and everything, but
let's get on to the main event. So, as I said,
A lot more expendable income, which wasn't just
for giving people the opportunity to play the
game. It also put more money in people's pockets
for enthusiasts to go and watch the game, meaning
there was a market there for these tournaments
to come about and make people some money, which
is always important. It's all about the Benjamins
at the end of the day. Indeed. So Wimbledon wasn't
the first tennis tournament, but the All England
Club... at the time was a croquet club originally
and it was in trouble because croquet as i mentioned
had gone out of fashion so instead it's also
not a great viewer sport either croquet it's
not a good spectator sport as well yeah we're
there so they tried tennis instead generous to
call it a sport really it's a game it's it's
fun it's enjoyable i would not criticize croquet
or anyone who plays it and there is no such thing
as bad sport that's our motto here on the almanac
but It's probably not as good a viewer sport
as tennis, to be fair. If someone set up a croquet
championship that was of the size and scale of
Wimbledon, I would want that person to teach
me everything they know about marketing. Oh,
absolutely. That person is a genius. Yeah. Sorry,
anyway, Wimbledon. Yeah, they tried lawn tennis
and nailed it. That's pretty much it. The All
England Croquet Club was founded in 1868 in Wimbledon,
but by the 1870s... It really didn't take long
for croquet to not be that fashionable anymore.
But they made a good decision quickly to move
on to tennis. And by 1877, the club's committee,
led by Secretary Henry Jones, decided to organise
a lawn tennis tournament to raise funds for the
purchase of a new lawn roller. Which is a good
enough reason as any. Yeah, that's fun. Henry
Jones disliked the variations in the rules across
different tournaments and regions. And somewhat
counterintuitively, he decided to create his
own rules, which seems... sort of part of the
problem but nevertheless those rules did eventually
become the standardized form or the basis for
the standardized rules that we play today and
it was very similar the first Wimbledon tournament
it's very recognizable as modern tennis well
that makes sense because it is the oldest tournament
in the world and therefore you would have thought
that it would have all other tournaments would
have taken its lead from Wimbledon absolutely
So most importantly, they introduced rectangular
court as per the MCC standardised rules, as opposed
to the hourglass shape, which is just easier.
Just a lot easier to comprehend, I think. Must
be easier to draw the lines as well. Yeah, literally.
I mean, obviously, as a coach, a football coach,
I am used to drawing lines on the pitch. It is
not easy to get those things straight, let alone
if you have to. The hardest lines to do on the
pitch are the ones with any curve in them. So
the penalty D in the centre circle. Absolute
nightmare. So, yeah. So the tournament was advertised
in the Field Sports magazine in June 1877, inviting
amateur gentlemen to enter a singles competition
for a fee of one guinea, about £100 today, for
the opportunity to win a silver challenge cup.
So the first Wimbledon Championship began on
the 9th of July 1877 with 22 amateur players,
and it would remain amateur, as I said, until
1968, competing in a knockout format on the grass
courts of Walpole Road. The final was delayed
due to rain and took place on the 18th of July
1877 with Spencer Gore defeating William Marshall
in straight sets to become the first Wimbledon
champion. I believe there was also a two -day
break within the first tournament itself for
the Harrow versus Eton cricket match, which was
going on at Lourdes at the time. Just to not
want to split those particular crowds, they took
a couple of days off. So spectators played one
shilling each to watch the final, with an estimated
200 people in attendance, marking the birth of
what will become the most prestigious tournament
in the world. There we go. And that's how we
get to Wimbledon. That's how we get to Wimbledon.
That is a very good potted history of how you
end up with one of the most prestigious and established
sports events in the world. I should also mention
before, I forget, 1884 was the first women's
single. So that is seven years after, but still
pretty early in the day. It just goes to show
how deep the history of women's sport goes. And
we will get into that more in the future. Wimbledon
is going to be an amnial event. I hope that will
be going on for many years to come. And I absolutely
will dive into some of these wonderful early
women like Morden, Lillian Watson, Lottie Dodd.
Susan Longland. Yeah, nice. Lots of legends.
Of course there will be because, as you say,
this is going to be a pillar of the sporting
calendar for us. Yeah, it's going to be one of
those ones. We're never going to knock to Wimbledon.
Exactly. I mean, is it worth saying? I was only
going to add, like, in the open area, it's not
just the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet
Club. It's now in collaboration with the Lawn
Tennis Association. The LTA being the... national
governing body for tennis in the UK so yeah that's
how we that's how we get here I mean the grass
court season I find this fascinating about tennis
the grass court season is really short mainly
it's ridiculously short it's basically just in
England and yeah I think there's a couple in
the eastern United States yeah there's one in
Germany as well but there's not many tournaments
Harley in Germany I think it's Harley or Hall
Hala, I think it'll be. Nice. It's a very prestigious
event. So yeah, I think Federer used to go there
in warm -up for Wimbledon. But over here, obviously,
it's Queen's, which has just concluded. And we're
the women's edition this year. But on the women's
circuit, you also have Nottingham, Birmingham,
and perhaps more famously, Eastbourne. Yeah.
But that's kind of it. Yeah, I mean, lawn tennis
was originally lawn tennis. It was originally
played on grass. The first variation in a court
was... It's very difficult to maintain good grass
in the south of France, so what they started
using instead was red clay, which is why clay
is the most popular surface in France. Obviously,
the French Open played on red clay. I think the
US... Yeah, it was just practicality. The US
originally went to clay. It had grass, and then
it went to clay, and then it went, I think, green
clay, and then it went to hardcore, obviously,
which is what it is now, and the Aussie Open
is also... Hardcore to relatively recent. Yeah.
But yeah, it's fascinating. I mean, obviously
that means the inference there that everyone
can draw is that Wimbledon is the only major
or played on grass. The traditional surface,
obviously. They're for the best. Obviously. So,
should explain for anyone who doesn't know, different
surfaces offer different challenges to players.
Yes. A clay court is slower. which gives you
more time to get about the court. So rallies
tend to be longer, and it favours players who
are quicker and fitter and can move across court
and maintain long rallies, such as Rafael Nadal,
who, until his retirement, dominated the clay
court scene for the best part of two decades.
Yeah, forever. Our lifetime. And yeah, hardcore's
fast. Very fast, but bouncier as well. Wimbledon
tends to be low and fast, which tends to lead
to shorter rallies. Yes, that's the thing about
grass, is that the ball does not bounce as high,
but it's still fairly quick. And if you manage
to win it all, you get... Quite a lot of cash.
You do. And whether or not you're a man or a
woman nowadays, you get the same amount of cash,
which is... You do get the same amount of cash.
I think the prize money is 50 mil, or it might
just be over this year. In 2024, the winner got
2 .7 mil. This year, it's going to be three million
pounds. Three million pounds for winning a single
tournament. I mean, you get plenty of money even
for just getting there, even for... getting knocked
out in the early rounds. If you get knocked out
in the first round, you get 66 grand. I wouldn't
say no. Yeah, 66 grand for a defeat in the first
round. And if you get given a wild card... About
twice as much as the average salary in the United
Kingdom, that. Yeah, and if you get given a wild
card, you've effectively been given 66k because
you won't have qualified. Which is, yeah, it's
insane. I mean, prize money was only awarded
in for the first time. Well, it's the open area,
basically, for the first time in 1968. Yeah,
it's been equal prize money since 2007, I think.
Oh, is it? The men and women are paid the same,
yeah. That's pretty good, since 2007. I thought
it was more recent than that, but... I think
Venus and Serena Williams had a big impact on
that. Unsurprisingly. Obviously, their stratospheric
fame and ability. Yeah, and ability, and the
fact that they kept winning. Yeah, I mean, it
first awarded in 1968. And back in 1968, they
got 26 grand for the pot and the men's title
and two grand, which is the equivalent of about
44 ,000 pounds in the modern day. And the women's
single champion only received 750 quid, which
is the equivalent to about 16 grand, just over
16 and a half grand. How times change. Yeah,
so 16 grand and 44 grand to 3 million is quite
a significant. And exponential growth. It's such
a popular sport in the TV era. It is such a good
sport to watch on TV. It's very easy to follow.
It's very enjoyable to watch. Very visual and
easy to track. The ball's easy to track. Bright
yellow ball. Did you know why the ball's yellow?
Did you know? No. Tennis balls used to be white,
and since colour TV was introduced in the 1970s,
they changed it to yellow to make it more visible.
But do you know whose idea that was? Probably
the most famous person on the BBC. National treasure.
Sue Barker? No, even more of a national treasure.
David Attenborough? David Attenborough. Was it?
Whose idea that was. Or who, certainly, maybe
not his idea, but certainly who popularised it
and got that changed. There you go. random fact
about David that was 50 odd years ago and the
man's still going strong that's absolutely crazy
that he's responsible for or partially responsible
for yellow balls in tennis yeah it's fun isn't
it that's absolutely insane yeah people's lives
take you in all sorts of different directions
I mean what a life is it worth Do we want to
talk about, like, the modern format of the Wimbledon
Championship? It's quite simple, actually. So,
yeah, I don't think it'll take long. Go ahead.
Yeah, it's very simple. I mean, it's all pro
these days. Well, it's not strictly true. You
can be in it as an amateur. But it's a professional
tournament because tennis is professional. And
it's a single elimination tournament. me and
you can get real geeky about the setups of tournaments
and the way in which you can formulate them and
things like that but the gentlemen singles 128
people enter it lady singles 128 people enter
it the only difference between those two events
is that the gentlemen play a best of five sets
and the women play best of three do we know why
the women still play best of three because it's
such a incredibly professional well attended
sport and there's literally no reason that women
can't play five sets. Is it just tradition? Or
has it just not quite reached the call to change
it yet? Well, I don't know. I think it's probably
a combination of factors. Tradition probably
being the thing that underpins it all. But I
would say that scheduling is another. And for
grass courts, for instance, you have to factor
in wear, which is probably a modern... a modern
phenomenon that is taken into account in a way
that perhaps wasn't at the forefront of the mind
originally and then maybe maybe to a lesser extent
you know like the commercial viability of it
yeah because obviously all majors they play men
and women all play on the same courts one after
the other. So the game, sorry, what I mean by
that is you don't go to the men's tournament
and then the women's tournament. You go to a
day at Wimbledon and you will see alternate games
between men and women. What that means is that
the tournament's success and its viewership is
not gender bias. And I don't know, and I don't
have the statistics to comment with any degree
of veracity about this, but I do wonder whether
or not that also has a role in terms of, selling
tickets and dedicating courts yeah i guess obviously
it's probably one of those things similar to
what we mentioned before it's probably had we
been creating the sport now with equal prize
money with equal prestige they would be playing
the same we'd probably make them both the same
whether that be both playing three or both playing
five it would be the same but it's harder to
change and probably i can't imagine that the
women who actually play the game probably want
it to happen like if they're really as much as
they'd like to say i'm sure they can do it i'm
sure they know they can do it it is probably
easier for them to play best of three when they
have such a hectic schedule. So perhaps there's
just no desire for it to change. Nevertheless,
that is the only difference. Yeah, one other
slight variation is the means by which you can
enter the main draw. So you get 104 direct entries
from the men's and you get 108 into the ladies.
And then the difference is made up by eight wildcard
entries into both tournaments and then qualifiers
fill in the gaps. So the men have slightly less
direct entries than the women. More people can
qualify for the men's tournament. And then the
top 32 players are given seedings in the men
and women's draws. The seedings does get a little
bit complicated. There's a committee that sees
the top 10 players, and then in respect to the
doubles, obviously the pairs, based on their
rankings. But it used to be discretionary. There's
now an agreement in place of the ATP to use their
seeding system as of 2021. But it gets real boring.
And it's effectively the players' previous grass
court performances. So it's not just their world
ranking. So I think the ATP entry system is like
100 % of the points you earn on all grass court
tournaments in the past 12 months. 75 % of the
points you earned on the grass court tournaments
in the 12 months prior to that. Fair enough.
It's a slightly complicated equation. What it
essentially leads to is that the player deemed
the best in the tournament cannot play the player
deemed the second best in the tournament until
the final. Unless they both reach the final.
Yeah, exactly. Which is often the case. And it's
just alternate. So one and three will be on the
same side of the draw as two and four and so
on and so forth. Bit of an oddity, really, in
seeding systems, because normally one plays four,
obviously, to give the benefit to the top seed.
Regardless, it doesn't matter, because you still
have to beat everyone to win it. It doesn't matter,
exactly. The majority of people are unseeded
as well, which is also the reason it doesn't
matter. But if you think that seeding is unimportant,
think again. Because only two unseeded players
have ever won the gentlemen's singles. A certain
Boris Becker in 1985. Two ridiculous tournaments
as well. Yes. Legendary. And the other is Goran
Isinisevic in 2001. Which, yeah, I think that's
the moment I fell in love with Wimbledon. I remember
Pete Sampras winning it. I remember it happening,
but I don't remember being so engrossed by it.
But Goran Ivanovic, I was all in for him for
that final, as were most of the British public.
Yeah, we love an underdog. It's another thing
about tennis, which has always been the case
from the start. It's a very star -driven sport.
Obviously, when there's a single player with
a single personality, their style of play and
the way they approach the game and their personality
and everything has a huge impact on how the fans
react to them. with the British public, particularly
with Wimbledon. We don't care about flags or
nationality compared to how we would in other
sports. There'll be times where a British player
might be playing a very popular foreign player
and be treated as equals essentially by the crowd.
Certainly you'd end up with both players getting
a huge standing ovation at the end of the game
if it's a good game. There's just a lot of respect
for... foreign players who play the game the
right way the most notable example of that in
the past 20 years being roger federer yeah like
absolutely adored by the british public for good
reason yeah if you're one of winwood and his
favorite sons it doesn't matter who you're playing
you will still be supported it is slightly unusual
in the sense that you know you're sort of a hostage
to the relative performance of your country's
ability to produce talent and so therefore you
will naturally create an affiliation to you know
your favorite or best player that remains available
to you regardless of their nationality so there
is that but yeah the fact the fact that Andy
Murray is a bit of an oddity in a in in the men's
game in that he's a British player who actually
won Wimbledon yes which hadn't happened for what
was it 80 years? Ridiculous. Fred Perry, yeah.
No, exactly. And that doesn't mean we're not
partisan. I mean, when Murray was at his pomp,
we were partisan. And Tim Henman before that
as well. Yeah. But what would probably be fair
to say is if you were, you know, the next rung
down of talent, like a Dan Evans or someone like
that, you would be well supported at Wimbledon
and people would definitely want you to win.
But if you were knocked out by Roger Federer,
people wouldn't be devastated. Yeah, that's what
it comes down to. Obviously, everyone who goes
is a tennis fan. There's a huge appreciation
for playing tennis in a certain style that's
eye -catching, that's elegant. Roger Federer,
that's why he's so popular. Not just talented,
but so good to watch. The man. Sorry. No, no,
don't say sorry. I don't know if you want to
know any more about those seeded victories because
I can shit all over Beckers if you want. do it
only to say in 1985 there were only 16 seeds
and becca was ranked 20th so in the modern day
becca would be a seeded player to have won the
tournament and so it's a little um like you know
a disingenuous to claim that that was sort of
like a other than the fact that he was an actual
child it was a bit disingenuous from a seeding
i was gonna say to say he was 17 years old at
the time yeah And then Isovich, on the other
hand, was ranked 125th when he won. And he also
was a wildcard entrant. However, it's also fair
to say that Isovich was a damn good player. And
actually been a finalist three times. He's been
ranked number two in the world. And he was only
ranked so low because he'd been injured, basically,
for a long period of time. But it was still,
I mean, it was still an incredible story, especially
because he had lost three finals before. He was
this nearly mad, very volatile player. very almost
split personality kind of player who could go
from being brilliant to being terrible in a moment.
And we, the British public, love someone like
that. We love a flawed hero. And he nearly had
his pants pulled by Hemman in the semis, but
the rain stopped play and even Isovich rallied
afterwards. And, well, the rest is history, as
they say. In 1996, the title was run by Richard
Kroychek. He was originally unseeded. He was
ranked 17th and only 16 players were seeded.
But he was promoted to a seeded position when
a chap called Thomas Muster withdrew. There is
one other person to have won the title unseeded.
Marketa Vondrusova. Yes, ranked 42. In 2023.
And prior to her... Just making sure that gets
mentioned. Yeah, well, no, I was going to say
prior to her, the lowest seeded female champion
was Venus Williams, who won from 23rd. That doesn't
surprise me. But this does actually surprise
me that I would have thought the women's game
is possibly more likely to produce unseeded winners
because it can be a bit more unpredictable than
the men's game a lot of the time, obviously being
shorter matches, obviously only having to win
two sets to win it. And you get a lot more players
sort of leaving the game and coming back as well
because they may leave the game to start a family
and then they'll come back to it. So they might
come back to it with a lower seed than their
ability deserves, things like that. I'm surprised
that was the only one. Although, again, that's
a bit of an anomaly because she was coming back
from injury. She would have been ranked way higher
because it was 2007. I mean, the other people
that we mentioned earlier, the two other ways
of qualifying, wild cards and qualifiers. Qualifiers
have also done well at Wimbledon. It's not unheard
of. Most famously from a British perspective
is Emma Raducanu winning the US Open as a qualifier.
That was incredible. Yeah, we'll probably speak
about it another time. But qualifiers can do
well in tournaments. It's just very, very rare.
There's a massive qualifying tournament held
a week before Wimbledon at the Bank of England
Sports Ground in Roehampton. The singles qualifying
competitions are three -round events. But from
2019, single qualification will increase to 128
players. which is pretty crazy. So it's just
a huge qualification tournament to get into the
main draw. The furthest that any qualifier has
progressed in the singles tournament is the semifinals.
John McEnroe did it in 1977. And a chap called
Vladimir Volchakov in 2000 also made the semifinals.
Don't remember him. And in the women's... No,
I don't either, weirdly. Yeah. And in the women's...
I've heard of this guy McEnroe, though. He's
quite good. I think he came back. Maybe once
or twice more. Yeah, he had a few moments. And
then Alexandra Stevenson in 1999 made the ladies
single semis as well. So nobody's ever won Wimbledon
as a qualifier. Emma Raducanu has won the US
Open. Can I point that out again as a qualifier?
So yeah, I think that's quite interesting though.
It sort of shows that whilst it's an individual
sport, upsets are very, very rare. On the wild
cards, they go to people who have performed well
in previous tournaments or, and this is the big
one, I guess, would stimulate public interest
in Wimbledon by participating, which normally
means they give a disproportionate number to
British players and or injured legends. Yeah.
Either a young, up -and -coming British player
or a old -timer who, you know, you want to see
at the tournament again. Similar things obviously
happen in other sports, golf. once you've won
a tournament often you get a place in slightly
different with golf though because the field
is slightly you know you can you can increase
the size of the field a bit easier yeah definitely
and can i quickly say before we move on to perhaps
talking more about the event itself like is in
the games or the stars yeah it's not just the
gentlemen singles and the lady singles you have
Gentlemen's doubles, ladies doubles, mixed doubles,
boys singles, girls singles, boys doubles, girls
doubles and then a series of invitationals as
well all taking place. But frankly, we're all
here for the singles. And wheelchair tennis and...
Yeah, they're part of the invitationals. Sorry,
I should have made that clear. Yes, you have
all the wheelchair events. There's an awful lot
of tennis played in not a lot of time, really.
Yeah, and it's all on TV. I mean, even the boys
and girls singles sometimes make TV if British
players get there. You certainly get the highlights.
All of those tournaments are popular. And again,
those games are mixed in amongst the singles
and stuff. I think some of them start a bit later
because obviously the men's and women's major
events are the headline shows with the highest
number of participants. If you want, by comparison,
in the gentlemen's doubles, there are 64 entries,
same with the ladies. Mixed doubles is only 32.
Boys and girls singles, 64 -person tournaments.
So they stagger them throughout the week, the
two week, the fortnight, but they are all played
amongst one another. So yeah. That's the tournament
itself. That's what you're gearing up for if
you're going to tune in. People who are familiar
with Wimbledon might know quite a lot of that,
but I think nonetheless it's quite interesting.
Yeah, what do you want to talk about next? I
mean, I can go anywhere, mate. I can go on to
the infrastructure. I can tell you about the
courts. I can tell you about the makeup of the
fucking grass again. Go on. Right now, tell me
the grass. I want to know the grass immediately.
Don't spare any details. Okay. The grass. Right,
let me find this, mate. I do have it. That's
what happens when you have a demanding co -host.
Okay, the grass. Prior to 2001, the grass was
a combination of ryegrass and creeping red fesco,
or fescue. 70 % ryegrass, 30 % the other stuff,
the creeping red. Creeping red is best adapted
to, because it's... Good for draining soils in
cool, temperate climates. Prefers shadier areas.
It's often planted in the shade for its tolerance,
which obviously makes sense in a stand or in
a court surrounded by stands. It's also an ornamental
grass and good for the aesthetics with a springy
characteristic. Again, good attributes for lawn
tennis at Wimbledon. Picking all the boxes. Because
it looks beautiful. It's springy. Gives you that
little extra, you know, surface unpredictability.
Since 2001, the court has basically been sown
with 100 % perennial ryegrass, which is a grass
native to Europe, not to be confused with the
grain rye, and is traditionally a grazing grass
used for pasture. It's also popular on lawns,
and most grass court tennis courts use it. I
think the change was made to improve the durability
of the grass and strengthen the sward. Well,
obviously. To better withstand the increasing
wear of the modern game, the sword being the
upper layer of soil, especially when covered
with a short layer of grass. So there you go.
There's the grass at Wimbledon. You didn't think
I could deliver. I'm always here for our horticulturalists.
No problem. I always believe in you. You have
a lack of faith in my faith in you. So to me,
there's nothing better looking in sport than
day one of Wimbledon, how good the grass looks.
Now, it does tend to fade as the days go on,
especially around surface areas, service areas
around the back of the court. But, you know,
day one, nothing looks better than a freshly
cut Wimbledon green grass court. It's a beautiful
place. The reverence. It's a reference in our
voices. It's true. Like it's, you know, the flowers,
like the colors. Yeah. Like you say, the grass
is pristine. It's just got everything. It has
everything. Q's, strawberries. What more could
you want? Oh, mate, traditions. Yeah. Well, now
that you mentioned them, allow me. So like, I
don't know what order to do this in. I'll do
this in order of as if you were seeking to attend.
There is the ballot for those outside of the
UK. I mean, well, actually, there's a ballot
for everyone, but those who don't live in the
UK will be less familiar with it. You have to
sign up for a ballot to get tickets. It's extremely
oversubscribed. I think it's like four to one,
something like that, get tickets. So, you know,
very difficult. But if you don't get tickets,
do not despair, because there is another way.
perhaps a more famous way of getting into the
grounds of Wimbledon, which is to get into the
queue. And it is just called the queue. And yes,
we are famed for queuing. And yes, we do have
an actual queue for Wimbledon. It's really fucking
long. You have to get there like 4am, maybe even
earlier. Some people camp overnight. You can
get sent to court tickets and court number one
tickets through the queue, but there are obviously
very, very few of them. So you have to be right
at the front, but you can get ground court tickets,
which give you access to. Quartz, I think it's
probably three and beyond now because Quartz
2 is bigger, but possibly includes Quartz 2.
So that's how you get in. Once you're in, strawberries
and cream, naturally. That's what you'll be indulging
on. I actually had tickets this year, but I can't
go. My mate Justin, who you know, got us both
tickets. His name is actually Jack, but that's
my name, so he's Justin. Got us tickets, but
unfortunately it clashes with our summer gala
at the football club. Priorities. That is, yeah.
Heartbreaking. Better not be sending court tickets,
mate. No, no, no. Just open tickets. Okay. That's
fine. That's forgivable. Okay. So, yeah. Strawberries
and cream. If you're not eating strawberries
and cream, you might be drinking champagne. If
you can afford it. If you allow yourself. So,
yeah. It's all highbrow stuff. But, get to the
courts. Actually, no. Before we get to the courts.
The Orangy Terrace. Do you know what the Orangy
Terrace is? I actually don't. Yes, you do. You
just don't know what it's actually called. Has
been known over the years as the Rosetzky Ridge.
There we go. Henman Hill. And more recently,
Murray Mound. Most still call it Henman Hill.
It is a bank within the grounds outside of Centre
Court. And Centre Court has a huge screen on
it where people gather to watch the games that
are going on within it with their ground passes.
I did assume that's what you were talking about,
but I didn't want to spoil your moment there.
You want to burst my bubble? You could have burst
it. I would never. Yeah, so that's a whistle
-stop of your traditions as a fan. But if you're
going on to court, then you better be wearing
all white. Otherwise, you're getting kicked the
fuck out. It's a strict all -white dress code
for competitors. I think you're allowed a modicum
of color on a collar or the sole of your shoe
or something like that. Don't take the piss,
otherwise you're getting fined. The sole of your
shoe. Honestly, it's something absurd like that.
But that's the most famous one, in fact. Yeah,
even off -white or cream is considered a violation,
apparently. Yeah, damn right it is. So male players
originally wore cricket whites, did you know?
Oh, so they played cricket in whites and the
women played in corsets. That seems fair. Yeah,
fair. But yeah, all white is taken very seriously,
but it does make it look cool. You can still
make fashion statements. I think the Williams
sisters have done some cool stuff over the years.
Roger Federer's worn his cardigan. Yeah, people
can still be flexible. Roger Federer can do whatever
he wants. Roger Federer's probably the only man
who could get away with wearing all red if he
wanted to. I don't even think the organizers
would just be like, yeah, go ahead, Roger. You
earned it. No, no, no, no, no. But he never would.
He never would. Maybe that's it. Maybe you're
right, actually. He just wouldn't, would he?
That's just Roger, her classy operator. Talking
as if we know him. Weird. Well, I mean, he's
won eight Wimbledon titles. We basically know
him. I feel like I know him. Yeah, exactly. And
then, yeah, beyond the all -white dress code,
you've got the ball boys and girls, which everybody
will see on TV. They have their dress code. Average
age of 15, apparently. I didn't know. Predominantly
taken from year 11 and 10 in the school, the
British school system. Can you translate that
to American for us? That would be the 9th and
10th grade. I think they're one below. Yeah,
because the 12th grade is senior in high school,
which would be year 13 for us. Okay, yeah. So
they're allowed to be a boy and girl up until
year 13. They can do up to five tournaments.
Their brief is, and I think this is like... This
is a bit of a relic, to be fair. Not sure it
would be coined if someone was drafting a motto
for them or a guidance note for them tomorrow.
But it says they should not be seen. They should
blend into the background and get on with their
jobs quietly. Which the majority do, the majority
of the time. They do, they're very good. Apart
from when Tim Hammond hits them in the face with
rogue shots. Which was his fault. Which was his
fault. And then he gave the young girl a bunch
of flowers and did say sorry. Having been disqualified.
Having been DQ'd, yeah. Because it was one of
those instances where he just smashed the ball
away in frustration. Hit a poor ball girl in
the face. You will get DQ'd 100 % of the time
for that. Yes. As you should. Yeah, yeah. Who
is it? Sharapolov in the Davis Cup hit the umpire
in the face. We're just hitting the ball into
the... He was trying to hit the ball away in
frustration as a crowd. Hit the umpire in the
eye. I could forgive hitting an umpire more than
I could forgive hitting a ball boy or girl. Yeah,
we're DQ'd immediately. Who was it Kyrgios was
saying should have been DQ'd? Yeah, that really
fiery game with Tsitsipas, that's it. When Tsitsipas
smashed the ball into the crowd and Kyrgios was
like, don't you get DQ'd for that? He didn't
because it didn't hit anyone. And Kyrgios was
like, that's a bit of a perverse rule. Why has
he got to hit someone in the face before you
get DQ'd? Which I think he's got a point about.
I agree with Nick Kyrgios sometimes, to be fair.
I like Nick Kyrgios a lot. That might be one
of those examples. Yeah, he's very entertaining.
He's very entertaining. I'm just such a shame
he's got so many injuries because I really hoped
he was going to get a slam when he made that
women's final against Djokovic. Yeah. But yeah,
what else are we going to tell you about the
boy girls and ball boys and ball girls? They
receive a certificate. They get a can of used
balls, which is a bit weird. Random. There's
a photograph taken of them, obviously. They do
get paid, but I mean, like... I don't know what
Wimbledon are trying to do here. They're not
really paid. They get a total of £160 to £250
for the entire 13 -day period. That's pocket
money, isn't it? Yeah. I'm surprised that's legal.
£17 a day. That feels... Like, that someone should
be investigating that. Just call them volunteers.
Do you know what I mean? Like, if you're going
to do that, don't do the piss and say you're
paying them. They keep their kit, though. They
are split 50 -50, which is great. Girls were
only introduced in 1977, though, and didn't appear
on Senate court until 1985. So, as we were saying
earlier, the sport is not perfect. But it has
done, historically. better than most and it is
cool that it's 50 -50 and they're 50 -50 on court
as well for all games now which is cool and then
the final tradition I was going to mention which
is just you know because it's fun is the Wimbledon
Championship dinner Wimbledon Champions dinner
sorry formerly known as the Champions Ball invite
event at the end obviously the two champs go
traditionally they dance together and there's
a picture of their respective trophies like it's
just a tradition Which is fun. Fair enough. I
got a couple more random facts. Yeah, of course.
We love a random fact. So I like this one. The
tournament employs, and I'm saying employs because
he does a very important job, a resident hawk
named Rufus, whose job is to scare away pigeons
predominantly. So anyone who's ever been to London
will know. There's a lot of pigeons, yeah. Pigeons
are everywhere. So Rufus does a valuable job.
That's a cool job. Rufus the hawk. Yeah, legend.
Rufus the hawk. Players are always referred to
by formal titles as well. Formal honorifics.
I think that's just been dropped. Has it? Oh,
I did not know that. Yes, but you are right.
You're not wrong to raise that because that is
traditionally what's been done, but I think it's
just been dropped. I'm okay with that. Yeah.
A bit old -fashioned. Indeed. You were going
to say, though, it was Mr., Miss, Miss, all that
stuff. Which is what the umpire would traditionally
announce players as. And it appears on the scoreboard
that way as well. Although men don't have their
prefix. I think it was only women. Okay. In that
case, I'm okay with it going. Yeah. Yeah. Other
quirks? I've got some others. Do you want me
to chuck out a couple more? These are less tradition.
It's just interesting facts. Yeah, go for it.
The relationship with Schlesinger is the world's
longest running sports sponsorship. Cool. They've
been providing the balls for the tournament since
1902. which is pretty cool. Yeah, I noticed in
my research for this, there was deals between
early champions and Schlesinger, like obviously
to market their rackets and stuff. And I was
surprised how far back Schlesinger went, really.
Yeah, same. Very ubiquitous in British tennis.
I really didn't know that they were that longstanding
either. From a playing perspective, it's the
only major that retains a nighttime curfew. Matches
can continue until 11 at night, but under the
lights, but not beyond that. The challenge is,
I mean, apparently this is because of transport
connectivity and getting visitors home safely.
Fair enough. But I think it's more a whinge from
the rich people that live in Wimbledon. Also
probably likely. Yeah. It's a very affluent area.
It is. Rain used to stop play across the tournament
and still does, except on Centre and Court 1.
It rains a lot here, guys, for those who don't
know. Yeah, so anyone who doesn't know anything
about the United Kingdom, it actually rains a
lot here. Not today, unfortunately. I would love
some rain because it is the course of this recording
slowly getting warmer. Yes, it is a hot day.
But even in the middle of July and June, yeah,
we're partial to some rain. So, yeah, they now
have roofs. We can talk about the courts if you
want. We can go into a bit more detail about
that. But that is a fairly recent change in the
two show courts having roofs put on them. Yeah,
it was on Centre Court first and then very recently,
I think, on number one in the last couple of
years. Yeah, just pre -COVID, but yeah. Oh, was
it? But yeah. COVID distorts time. Yeah. That's
a couple of years ago, COVID, wasn't it? Jesus.
They used to play on the middle Sunday. There
used to be no play on the middle Sunday, sorry,
but that's now changed. It was traditionally
to give the grass a break. Yeah. But like technology,
et cetera. That was always, it was never going
to last too much, too many games played now.
Yeah. And this is really sad one. All in -person
line judges are being replaced this year by the
electronic line calling system for the first
time in 147 year history. Why? I don't know.
Oh, the unceasing march of technology against
our traditions and our labour. I hate that. I
don't understand why you can't just retain the
challenge system. I guess because people are
saying, why should I lose because of a cock -up?
But how often does that happen, right? Because
that's sport. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I could go into
a rant about this. It's happening in baseball
as well, or potentially happening in baseball.
There's now a review system in baseball. yes
there were some very bad umpires and yes there
are going to be line judges who are better than
others in tennis but that's sport both players
have to deal with it yeah and it's only a single
point single points always seem important if
they're contextually a set point a game point
or something like that or even a match point
but across the course of a game you're going
to get a handful it's going to make a very small
difference to the result yes i agree don't like
that I'm not a big fan of it either. I know it's
the way things are going, but, you know, what's
wrong with having your judges make the initial
call and having the technology there to back
it up? What's wrong with mistakes in sport? Yeah,
yeah. I mean, players make mistakes, but then
people would say that that's how the game's supposed
to be defined and blah, blah, blah. Yeah, I get
it. All right, let's not go down this rabbit
hole. Let's talk about the grounds quickly. Courts.
Very quickly. There's 19 of them. Show courts,
centre court, court one. They're obviously used
exclusively for Wimbledon. There have been a
few exceptions to that. Davis Cup, Olympics,
that sort of thing. Yeah, I was going to say
the Olympics, yeah. Yeah, the other 17 are used
for other things occasionally as well, other
events and things. But Sands Court is where it's
at. It's the iconic venue. The grounds are beautiful.
The stadium is beautiful. The flowers are beautiful.
The setup, it's much bigger than you think. If
you've never been, you should try and go. It's
a very, very cool place. Capacity, just under
15 ,000. It's got the Royal Box in it. You can
sit in there for your invite as well. Famously,
you get people like Beckham sat in there. Usually
hosts the final and the semis. A lot of earlier
round games played in centre court, but obviously
it normally involves top seeded players or local
favourites. Yes. It must be rare for Andy Murray
to play anywhere other than centre court, really.
Yeah, maybe on court one occasionally, but you're
right. Murray would have been a centre court
stalwart. being a high seed and a local favourite.
Same with Federer, Djokovic, Nadal, all the big
names. Yeah. Yeah, court one, capacity a bit
smaller, 12 ,345. Some players prefer it. Apparently
it's a bit more intimate, better atmosphere.
As we said earlier, both of those courts have
a roof on them. First championship match to take
place under the roof on centre was a fourth round
women's singles match between... Dinara Safina
and Amelie Maresmo in 2009. Maresmo being a very
good player. Well, they're both very good players
there, actually. But Maresmo, I think, won two
majors and became Andy Murray's coach later in
life. I was going to say, and a coach, yeah,
later. First full match to be played under the
roof featured Andy Murray and Stan Marinka. Played
on the same day, presumably because they just
started pissing it down. Nice. The first final
was the 2012 Gentlemen's Singles Final, 8th of
July, 2012. We'll probably both remember this
one. Federer versus Murray. Oh, heartbreaking,
yeah. Not because Federer won. You can always
respect that. That interview with Andy Murray.
I can't watch it. I can't watch that. It makes
me cry every time. But it's one of the wonderful
things about sport that on the basis of that,
it made what happened in 2013 all the better.
And a few weeks later at Wimbledon in the Olympics.
Yes, true. Yeah. God, he had a good 2012 and
2013, didn't he? He was, yes. He was very good.
Quart 2, just very, like, I want to touch on
these two because I think this is fun and you'll
like this. So Quart 2 is 3 .5 metres below ground.
Oh, cool. They had to dig it down into the ground
for planning permission because the people of
Wimbledon, who we were whinging about earlier,
banging on about it being like an eyesore and
it had to stay like one storey high so they had
to build it into the ground. Quart 2 has a capacity
for 4 ,000 people, no roof. The Old Court No.
2 has been renamed Court No. 3, and the Old Court
2, so now 3, was known as the Graveyard of Champions.
Ooh, that's a good name. Yeah, because so many
highly seeded players have been eliminated there
during the early rounds over the years, including
Ili Nastazi, John McEnroe, Boris Becker, Andre
Agassi, Pete Sampras, Martina Hingis, Venus Williams,
Serena Williams, Maria Sharapova. They've all
had their pants pulled in the graveyard. That's
a hell of a list. Yeah, you can see why it's
got its name, right? Close to being everyone.
Yeah, yeah. So yeah, that was just a fun stat.
That's all I really want to say about the courts.
There's loads of them. But why don't we talk
about some of the games or the protagonists who
have been on the courts? It is all about the
games and the players. As I said earlier, it's
such a personality and such a hero -driven sport.
And the Wimbledon public and the British public,
they love a champion. Love a champion regardless
of where they're from in the world. They do.
And the most wins, God himself. The Federation.
Sir Roger Federer. Can we do that? Can you get
one? You can give him an honorary one, but let's
make an exception. There should be some movement
for that. If Beckham's getting one. I mean, I
love Beckham, but not an eight -time champ. At
Wimbledon. Also won it five times between 2003
and 2007. Like, if you haven't gathered, Jack
and I are very big fans of Roger Federer. He
is... There is no Wimbledon without Federer in
my life. We were very blessed at our age. The
level of champions that we were able to watch,
obviously. Got Serena and Venus on the women's
side coming through at the same time. Federer,
Nadal, Djokovic and Murray, the big four, all
winning. And of those, by some distance, well,
I mean, obviously we love Andy Murray too, but
Roger Federer was iconic. Like Tiger Woods. Like
Usain Bolt. And he's been involved in some of
the great finals, even the ones he lost, like
when he lost to Nadal in five, when he lost to
Djokovic in five, when he had a match point against
Djokovic. Like, you know, some of the greatest
Wimbledon finals you've ever seen. Basically,
what it demonstrates to me is that, you know,
you can... You can debate until the cows come
home which of those three in particular you consider
to be the greatest of all time. And obviously
the statistics would suggest it's Shokovic now,
but that's not always the full picture. We would
say Federer, I think. But I think what that demonstrates
is that if you were going to win Wimbledon and
Roger Federer was in that tournament, you have
to go to the depths and be at your very, very
best to beat him. I don't know if he's ever lost
a Wimbledon final, not in five. He might have
lost one in four against Djokovic. He's never
been straight set in the final, I don't think.
Federer lost one against Djokovic in four. The
rest have been five, and two of those have gone
to extra sets at the end. So, obviously, 9 -7
against Nadal, and then I think it was like 12
-10 against Djokovic. Yeah. An absolute heartbreaker
in 2019. Yeah, that was a sickness. 13 -12. Yeah,
that went all the way to a final set tie break.
They just changed the rules. That is a sickness.
Federer on grass is like the pinnacle of the
sport. If you can beat him, then you've done
something miraculous. Banging on a little bit
here about the men's side, Navratilova has won
nine women's titles. Yeah. Which is insane. She
also won six in a row. She's also got the most
match wins at Wimbledon, 120. Federer's got 105.
But yeah. I mean, I've got one game I want to
talk about, but you got anything else you want
to mention about events, players, people? I mean,
we've mentioned Becker winning at 17, which is
absolutely barbaric. I'm going to assume you're
going to talk about Federer and Nadal. Oh, no,
I wasn't. I was going to go more niche than that.
You do Federer and Nadal, then, if you want to
have a dabble. Well, I mean, I can have a quick
word on it. Let me just get my notes up, because
you've done what I've done to you earlier in
the episode now. Caught me on the worst. 2008
men's final yeah so it widely regarded by many
as the greatest match in tennis history certainly
at the time four hours 48 minutes which is an
epic relentless shot making two rain delays momentum
swings left and right and eventually Nadal ending
Federer's five -year reign at Wimbledon in near
darkness 9 -7 in the fifth set which was We talk
about what it takes to beat him. That's what
it takes to beat him. And Nadal was an incredible
player in his own right, obviously. Almost unbeatable
on clay, but a brilliant player, even on grass.
Yeah, he got two titles himself, didn't he, Rafa?
Yeah, along with, was it nine? No, more than
that. Was it more than that, 13 or something
mad? Yeah, it's mad. His slam total is heavily
distorted by the French. That's not to... disparaging
about him as a player. It's just his dominance
in France was as dominant as Federer has been
at Wimbledon. What on earth? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,
7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 French Opens. Absolutely
insane. I do apologise for saying nine originally.
Yeah, that's embarrassing. Bouluminec. I mean,
yeah, that final was, yeah, something else. It's
one of those things where sometimes you just
have to watch sport and be like, it doesn't really
matter who wins this. No. As I said, we're so
honoured, so blessed to have been able to watch
that. Like you say, gone down in history as possibly
the greatest game ever. I know recency bias is
probably playing a role here, but that Alcraz
-Sinner final in the French this year, where
Alcraz saved three match points and came from
two sets down and 5 -4 down in the third, facing
three match points is pretty wild. But maybe
where Rafa Federer has the edge is the status
and greatness of the two guys that competed in
it. The finals between them that preceded it,
obviously, Federer being successful up to then.
This was Nadal's turn. It took a monster effort
to win it. All sport is great, but some sport
is greater than others. That's a nice way of
putting it. A little bit of an Animal Farm quotation.
I was going to mention the longest match that's
ever been played. Ah, yes. You do that, please.
John Isner versus Nicola Mahou. For anyone who
doesn't know this, this is absurd. This is absurd.
Okay, I'll just put some context for you. So
it's not the case anymore. Now, if the last set
is 12 all, they'll have a tiebreaker. So a tiebreaker
is single points until someone is seven points
or two points clear. Previously, in the final
set at Wimbledon, you just played until someone
was two sets clear. So picture in your mind...
Two games clear in the set. Two games clear.
I do apologise. Yeah, two games clear. So just
picture in your mind what you think a ridiculous
score for the last set would be. And then let's
hear this story, if you don't know already, obviously.
So the year is 2010. The round is the first round,
which makes this even more ridiculous, I think.
Because Nicolas Mahou qualified. He qualified.
John Isner is in the main draw. They're both
good players. They are both decent players, yeah.
Very good players. And they're both much more
famous than perhaps they might have been for
this game. We're on court 18. And Jesus Christ.
It's an 11 hours and 5 minutes game. The third
and fourth, right, so it's a five -set game.
It's 11 hours and five minutes in total. The
third and fourth both went to tie breaks as well.
So first and second sets are like, I can't remember
off the top of my head, 6 -4, 4 -6, something
like that. Then it's two tie breaks though. So
those two sets go the distance. Then you're in
the fifth. And it has to, obviously, as you say,
reach a conclusion by which someone has won by
two clear games. It spanned three days. So Tuesday,
they started on the Tuesday. Just stop on health
and safety grounds. The game started on Tuesday
at 6 .13 in the evening. And they played until
seven minutes past nine. And then they have to
suspend the game for light. And then they come
back on Wednesday to carry on the game. Start
at 2 .05 in the afternoon and play until 9 .09
in the evening on Wednesday. And then they come
back on Thursday and they play. This is a first
round game. And they're on Thursday of the first
week. This is insane. Do not blame them for changing
the rules. Put it that way. And then 3 .40 on
Thursday, they play until 4 .47. Seven hours,
four minutes was played on day two. There was
a total of 183 games. In the match. And it finished
70 -68 to Isner in the fifth. It's absurd. It
can never happen again because they've changed
the rules. Honestly. It's the most consecutive
service games held in a match. 168. 84 times
each they both held service. The final set was
longer than the previous longest game. That's
incredible. I mean, what else do you want to
know? Most points won in the match as well. I
think this is actually, I was going to mention
this to you because I think this is one of the
weirdest anomalies about tennis is the scoring
system and the way in which games are won. So
this had the most points won in a match, right?
Nicholas Mahou won 502 points to John Isner's
478. Yeah. And John Isner won. Heartbreaking.
because obviously if you win your service games
quicker than your opponent wins theirs then you
will this is one of the weirdest things about
tennis is you can win more points in tennis routinely
and not be considered the better player you can
win more points than your opponent and lose and
I think that is such a weird I don't know like
dynamic to the game like it's all about winning
the big points it's not about winning every point
yeah I think Roger Federer speaks Very eloquently
on this, the idea of as a tennis player, you
have to put every single point behind you, whether
it's the best shot you've ever done in your life
or the worst mistake you've ever done in your
life. You have to forget about it immediately
because one point is worth nothing in a tennis
match. It is the accumulation of those points,
obviously. The wind you a game, the set wind
you a match. You've just got to put it behind
you and move on. 502 points in a game won and
not winning those. How do you put that behind
you? You played for 11 hours in the first round
game. John Isner was seeded 23 in that tournament
as well. But I think they're now very good friends,
these guys. I don't blame them. There's a plaque
on court 18 in commemoration to it. I think at
the end of the game, they were both given, I
think the tournament gave them some sort of,
not a trophy as such, but I guess like a symbol
of sorts, gave both of them something. And then
someone who won their first round game and was
waiting on the result of that game just sat around
for two days waiting, three days, sorry, waiting
for this match to finish to be able to play their
second round game. And then beat John Isner in
straight sets, obviously. Unsurprisingly. Yeah,
like Isner didn't stand a chance. Fair play to
him for not just pulling out. Well, indeed. I
mean, I think that game encapsulates everything
that sort of makes... tennis one of the great
games like it's it's about attrition hard work
determination psychological fortitude yeah arts
yeah like and that's the thing actually it sort
of combines it combines like um a very technical
aesthetically pleasing skill at its best with
like an endurance and an uh an energy in a way
that a lot of sports don't actually it's quite
interesting so i it was the most frustrating
game that i've ever played I play tennis a little
bit, just a tiny bit, just dabble from time to
time. I found it so frustrating because I knew
what I was capable of. I knew I was capable of
hitting a forehand right on the tram lines. Beautiful
timing. I just could do it so rarely. You turn
it in on yourself. Golf, we talked about this
in the Masters episode with golf. I know obviously
you have an opponent in tennis and their skill
is a... It's a lot different to golf in that
respect. But you're still playing yourself. There's
no one else to blame, nowhere else to hide. It's
you against your own mind a lot of the time.
Yeah, definitely. I guess where it is different
to golf, though, is that your opponent can defeat
you. Whereas in golf, you sort of defeat yourself,
right? It's you versus the course in golf. And
if someone else happens to do better, nothing
you can do about that. Yeah, exactly. But anyway.
Yeah, can I just end by saying, obviously I mentioned
earlier there was a boys and girls tournament
as well as the men's and women's. There have
actually been four men and four women who have
won the juniors and seniors singles titles in
the open era, which I thought was kind of fun.
I don't know who any of these are, so I'm very
interested. I think it's four men and three women
have won in the open era. There are four and
four, I think, across the lifespan of Wimbledon.
Yeah, do you want to have a guess? The men? One
of them you'll be able to get. Oh. Two of them
you'll be able to get. You should be able to
get, if you think logically. Andy Roddick? No,
he never won Wimbledon. He never won Wimbledon,
did he? No, he lost two finals. He famously said
about Federer, after Federer beat him in a final,
I threw the kitchen sink at him and he threw
the bathtub back. So I know he's won a boys Wimbledon.
That was why I guessed that. And then immediately
after I said it, I realised he never actually
won Wimbledon. And that was heartbreaking, too,
when he lost that final. Yeah, well, that's the
quote I was just giving you. It's funny. Yeah.
No, just tell me. All right. Are we guessing
all day? Pete Sampras? I don't know. No, I would
have guessed Pete, but no. Bjorn Borg, Pat Cash,
Stefan Edberg, and Roger Federer. Ah, that would
have been an easy one to guess. Yeah, that's
the one I thought you'd go with first. And then
I thought you'd guess Borg just because of his
record at Wimbledon being so incredible as well.
Yeah, what a player. One icon. But yeah, the
women are Ash Barty, Martina Hingis, and the
aforementioned Amelie Maresmo. Okay, cool. Yeah,
it is cool, isn't it? It's very impressive, actually.
It just goes to show, and this comes back to
your point on scouting a little bit, like these
are the players who are the absolute best in
the world at the age of 16 years old, and how
few of them then go on to win major. Don't get
me wrong, I'm sure a lot of them go on to become
good professionals, Andy Roddick being an example,
but... Yeah, shows what can happen. Development,
you know, you are nowhere near developed at 16,
other than Roger Federer, obviously, who's always,
always a Don. Yeah, well, exactly. He'll always
be Wimbledon's greatest son. Yeah. There has
not been anyone better at the tournament ever.
Yeah, even if someone ends up winning more than
him, and it will happen, all records are made
to be broken. it will take a lot for that person
to be as beloved and as well -respected and as
admired as Roger Federer. Indeed. But this year,
it's likely to be the new... I say they're new,
they're not really new anymore. It feels new,
but again, because years have flown by recently.
Yeah, so you're Yannick Sinners of this world,
you're Carlos Alcaraz's. Novak is still in the
mix, to be fair to him. Zverev will probably
be around, trying to go deep. Kind of those three
or four on rotation at the moment. Let's see.
There might be a shock. Yeah, and then the women's
side, anyone's guess. It's very open, women's
tennis. Always has been, yeah. Well, less so
when Serena Williams was playing, to be fair.
Less so when Serena Williams was playing, when
Martina Navratilova was playing. Steffi Graf
in her pomp. It was also extremely good. I say
extremely good, she's one of the greatest of
all time. Yeah, I mean, that's Wimbledon. We're
gearing up. We're ready to go. We mentioned Sue
Barker in passing earlier. I wish she was still
presenting it. That also just did something for
me. Sounds weirder than I intended it. But yeah.
National treasure, that woman. She is a national
treasure. McEnroe will hopefully be on comms.
Yeah, he's very good. He's very, very good. You
cannot be serious. Oh, Sue Barker has the same
birthday as me. There you go. That's a fun fact.
Oh, that is a fun fact. Obviously not the same
birth. Yeah. No. Although, as you mentioned,
she's aging like a fine wine, so. We are both
getting very weird now. Maybe that's our time
to take our leave. Yeah. Yeah. When would we
have said anything else? I don't think so. I
just think tune in, watch it. If you're in the
United Kingdom, it is the BBC. If you miss anything,
it's all on the red button or whatever it is
now, iPlayer. And yeah, I don't know where it's
going to be broadcast abroad, but as you tell
me every week, Jack, I should just tell people
to go on Google. Or Bing. Other search engines
are available. They are. Where are we going after
Wimbledon has started? Next week, we're going
to that bastion of fair play. Yeah, couldn't
keep a straight face there. Next week, we're
going to the greatest cycling competition on
the planet. Probably one of the top handful of
sporting events on the planet. Legendary, iconic,
controversial, the Tour de France. Le Tour. Yeah,
that's going to be fun. It's going to be heavily,
heavily focused on doping. It will be. As we
mentioned before, you've got a bit of knowledge
on that subject. I've got an interest in it.
I think there's a lot of things public. aren't
aware of necessarily about the extremes that
some of these teams went to obviously there'll
be people who are aware but nevertheless we'll
bring you some of that information next week
and i can't wait yeah we'll be a good one maybe
fun right stay cool good luck with that yeah
as i melt into my chair and i'll see you soon
pal see you soon bye Once again, thank you for
listening to the Sporting Almanac podcast. If
you enjoyed it, give it a like, subscribe, rate
or comment. But easier than that is always word
of mouth. Tell your friends and spread the word.
Our theme tune is Oh Yeah by Harmonia Productions.
You can find us on Instagram and Blue Sky at
atthesportingalmanac or drop us an email at thesportingalmanacpodcast
at gmail .com. If you want to know more about
the history of tennis, I can recommend A People's
History of Tennis by David Barry. It was a great
source for me on the early history of the game.
Next up, it's the Tour de France. Until then,
stay curious. As FIFA are currently finding out,
sport is nothing without the history that makes
it. Goodbye.