In the gallery of epic tennis matches lie contests of diverse length, competitiveness, and quality. The Nadal-Federer 2008 Wimbledon final is renowned for not just the eye-popping winners, but for the two rain delays that extended the match, the fact that it ended in darkness, and the historical significance. The men’s 2012 Australian Open final redefined the limits of physical endurance in tennis as Novak Djokovic overcame exhaustion and Rafael Nadal to win an impossibly attritional five-hour, 53-minute battle. The 2018 Australian Open semifinal between Simona Halep and Angelique Kerber is of legendary status for its third set, a frame of heavenly quality in which both players saved a pair of match points before Halep edged out her rival.

What do these classics have in common? The first answer that comes to mind is that they are all extremely close, with the results hinging on one or two key points. But this criterion could also apply to a match in which errors were made on every point. The quality of the tennis is crucial, not just in terms of how many winners were hit but relating to rally intensity as well. In the Halep-Kerber semifinal, there was one more unforced error than winner between the players, but such was the length and intensity of the exchanges that this stat loses a lot of weight.

Some prefer the first-strike tennis that is seen frequently at Wimbledon, while others are partial to the longer rallies that Roland-Garros gives way to, so in that sense quality can be subjective.

A strange commonality between many fantastic matches are small chokes. At first this seems ridiculous, as a choke is a dip in level, but often times a lapse from one player will spark a spirited comeback by the other. The aforementioned 2008 Wimbledon final and 2012 Australian Open final both featured mini-chokes by the eventual winner that greatly increased the overall quality of the match. In the former, Nadal led two sets to one and 5-2 in the fourth-set tiebreak but made consecutive errors on serve, allowing Federer to get a foothold in the breaker. While the two points were lost on unforced mistakes, it lengthened the tiebreak, allowing the Center Court crowd to witness perhaps the finest ever back-to-back passing shots a few minutes later, as well as an absorbing fifth set. Djokovic led the 2012 final in Melbourne two sets to one and held a 5-3 advantage in the tiebreak, but made three forehand unforced errors that helped Nadal win the fourth set. A minor choke, yes, yet it allowed an 80-minute fifth set that made the match the longest major final ever. The Halep-Kerber semifinal saw both players make an unforced error on match point in a game that they would end up losing, but this contributed to the drama and the length of the third set. Naomi Osaka and Petra Kvitová clashed for possession of the 2019 Australian Open title, and Osaka had three championship points in the second set, yet couldn’t take any, failed to serve out the match, and lost the frame. Yet she rebounded to win the third, thereby making the final an example of her mental fortitude.

Another feature of great contests is a simultaneously high level of play from the participants. The 2019 Wimbledon final between Djokovic and Federer saw Djokovic lapse significantly in the second and fourth sets, while Federer was unable to find his best level in the three tiebreaks that took place during the final. While there was some high-quality play from both, the unevenly strong tennis was significant enough that this match is generally not considered one of the best ever, though it did take nearly five hours to crown a winner.

Most matches heralded as the best ever contain at least one legend of the game, often two. This is partly because the strongest players are the most capable of producing high-quality tennis, and partly because matches with lower-ranked players get less attention from fans and pundits. Yet having two all-time greats isn’t a requirement for a spectacle. Fernando Verdasco, an ATP player that has never made it inside the top five, took part in one of the finest matches ever, a 2009 Australian Open semifinal with Nadal (Nadal’s presence in many of the best men’s contests deserves a mention, his capacity to play epic matches is probably unparalleled on the ATP). Verdasco went for broke from the outset, clocking 95 winners across a five-hour, 14-minute battle that saw several amazing rallies (he would end up losing 6-4 in the fifth. The performance was likely his finest). Anyone can take part in an epic; it depends on level of play, not status.

The atmosphere and crowd at a match can contribute to its place in the history books. While both are unrelated to the forehands and backhands struck by the athletes, crowd support can energize a player. The 2001 Wimbledon final between Pat Rafter and Goran Ivanišević is known as “People’s Monday”. An excellent match in its own right, the final was bolstered by the buzzing crowd, many of them Croatian or Australian and ecstatic to see their man in the Wimbledon final. The five-set battle is also remembered for Ivanišević’s improbable triumph; he entered the tournament courtesy of a wild card and was ranked outside the top 100.

A great tennis match defines a variety of contests, and has many criteria, yet failing to meet one or two doesn’t often disqualify a match from being great. There have been epics of myriad types in the past, and there will surely be many more in the future.

Thanks for reading! If you have questions or feedback, please leave a comment or tweet @tennisnation.