The US Open is facing renewed scrutiny regarding its scheduling practices after Ben Shelton’s quarterfinal victory over Carlos Alcaraz concluded at 3:33 a.m. on Wednesday. This match marks the latest finish in the tournament’s history, as play did not commence until after 11 p.m. ET. The grueling timeline left many spectators departing before the contest began, highlighting a recurring issue that has become an annual point of contention for organizers, players, and fans alike.
US Open scheduling currently relies on a dual session structure—day and night—designed to maximize revenue by selling two separate ticket batches for court access. While these primetime slots capitalize on television demand, the absence of a strict curfew, unlike the 11 p.m. cut-off observed at Wimbledon, often results in matches stretching deep into the morning. The delay on Tuesday was exacerbated by a backlog of marathon matches that preceded the Shelton-Alcaraz showdown, forcing the night session start time to shift back by 30 minutes.
Critics, including 18-time grand slam champion Martina Navratilova, have publicly declared the current system unsustainable. Former tennis champion Boris Becker echoed this sentiment, stating, “That’s simply too late to play tennis.” Players frequently face physical exhaustion, compounded by the logistical requirements of post-match recovery, media responsibilities, and the disruption of sleep and nutrition routines. Concerns are now mounting regarding how such an late finish will affect players like Shelton as they move into high-stakes semifinal matches, such as his upcoming face-off against Frances Tiafoe on Friday.
The impact on athletes is significant, with many arguing that the scheduling forces them to compete at sub-optimal hours before thinning crowds. Women’s star Aryna Sabalenka noted that the resulting shift in sleep cycles and preparation routines can severely disrupt a player’s tournament performance. Venus Williams also criticized the late start, remarking that her own match against Sofia Kenin, which began after midnight, was “not ideal” and that the sport should explore improvements to prevent such late finishes.
Tournament organizers face a difficult balancing act. Brendan McIntyre, head of US Open communications, acknowledged the situation, stating that while officials were impressed by the high-quality play featuring four matches that went to a maximum of 16 sets, the organization must evaluate all future scheduling options. However, the logistical reality remains complex; shifting start times earlier could conflict with New York’s heavy rush-hour traffic and potentially diminish the value of primetime television broadcasting rights.
Tournament director Eric Butorac has previously characterized the scheduling process as a complex “jigsaw puzzle,” noting that while he considers potential adjustments, the 7 p.m. start time currently feels like the “right time” for the event. Despite his openness to considering a 6 p.m. start in the future, the tournament continues to prioritize the current format as it seeks to maintain its financial model while responding to growing pressure to protect athlete welfare. The report also notes that the scene was not one alien to this year’s tournament, despite how bizarre it was to see the two players still battling it out in the early hours. The report also notes that to some, they are exactly what makes the grand slam so special. The report also notes that namely the players and fans with actual tickets, it’s becoming an unsustainable trend that pushes athletes to their absolute limits and leads to empty stands for some of the biggest matches, but for others. The report also notes that allowing for more lucrative TV deals at primetime slots for fans finishing work to watch, the most high-profile matches involving the world’s best players are often saved for the evenings. The report also notes that eT and with no curfew in place – unlike the 11 p.m. cut off at Wimbledon – it’s no surprise that matches regularly tick past midnight.
