Tennis Forum banner

Article:Should the Women play best-of-five-set finals?

2K views 43 replies 33 participants last post by  alexia1huff 
#1 ·
From The Times
July 9, 2007
Williams gives voice to those starting to feel short-changed
Neil Harman, Tennis Correspondent

The easiest of Venus Williams’s four Wimbledon triumphs – which is by no means to decry the contribution of Marion Bartoli to the championships – was greeted with undiluted joy by an American contingent that won the boys’ singles and paraded finalists in the men’s doubles and girls’ singles. As the United States exports some of its finer tennis minds to Britain, its domestic game enjoys one of its more exceptional recent hours.

Of Williams’s three previous final victories at Wimbledon, two had been won in three sets and the other – her first, in 2000 – a straight-sets affair against Lindsay Davenport. Now it is back to the hard courts at home to see if either she or Serena, her sister, can end four years of external dominance of the US Open.

Whoever reaches the climax in New York, if recent trends are maintained, the final will be over in a jiffy. The last 11 finals there have been won in straight sets, with only one of those 22 sets going to a tie-break. One-sided matches have become the norm in women’s finals in New York and Paris, whereas at Wimbledon, where the surface makes for far less predictability, they tend towards greater theatre. The memory of Steffi Graf allowing Monica Seles only three games in the 1991 final seems like a mirage.

Which is why, as The Times reported last week, the heads of tennis – at least those of a grand-slam bent – are coming round to a consensus that best-of-five-set finals on the four biggest occasions of the year are no bad thing. Arlen Kantarian, the chief executive officer of professional tennis at the USTA, confirmed yesterday that the subject is “definitely on the front burner”.

Kantarian would have considerations, not least whether a five-set final would be conducive to CBS, the American broadcasting company which pays through the nose for the rights to the Open and may be averse to the prospect of a women’s final – at prime time on Saturday night – spreading late into the evening. That conveniently overlooks the patrons who spend hard-earned dollars on tickets for these events and are fed up with being short-changed by women’s finals that barely scratch the surface.

When Williams thanked those in her coterie for helping her to Wimbledon victory, she made special mention of Amber Donaldson, a Sony Ericsson WTA Tour physiotherapist working on site, and Kerrie Brooks, her personal trainer at home in Florida. This may have been only her eighth tournament of the year (as opposed to Bartoli’s seventeenth), but she completed it with a welter of bandages on her left thigh. It is remarkable that there was a supply left after Serena’s imitation of an extra in Holby City in her fourth-round and quarter-final matches.

The women’s drive for equal prize-money and professional recognition has been determined and painstaking. How could they not, in the circumstances, embrace the concept of a five-set final in the grand-slam championships to help to silence those who remain fundamentally opposed to the principle? Dee Dutta, the head of marketing for Sony Ericsson, the communications company that has plunged $80 million (about £40 million) into women’s tennis, agreed that “it would not be an unfair request”.

Of course, as with Williams’s victory, two reasonably one-sided sets could become three, which might lead to half an hour’s more purgatory for the loser. But it would be half an hour more tennis, and that is what the ticket-holders want and deserve. After three games of the final, one had a horrible impression of Graf/Seles revisited, but Bartoli nudged her way back into contention.

But, as she was to say later, Williams possesses the greatest wing-span in the women’s game and has an innate ability – like Rafael Nadal – to turn defence into attack in a indistinguishable flash of wrist speed and racket momentum. Bartoli wondered how so many of her best strokes came back across the net and into such difficult areas that she was working twice as hard on subsequent strokes just to stay in the rally.

That is Williams and the attitude she has had since childhood. One more shot, her father, Richard, would say, just one more. We could, perhaps, be on the cusp of another period of Williams dominance; they have won two of the three grand-slam tournaments this year and one would be favoured to win in the United States, not least with the prize-money about to be raised for the champion to more than $1.4 million. Should they not play at least three sets to earn such extravagances?
 
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: cheyk
#6 ·
Well that's never going to happen as you see the disparity in ATP & WTA prize money is already staggering. The issue is whether the women deserve equal prize money during the slams? I'm not sure if making the women play the best of five will solve anything in the skeptics mind. We'll still hear the same criciticism about the level of play and how the men deserve more. It's really a lose lose situation. :wavey:
 
#7 ·
If the women played best of five sets, there would be so many matches ended by retirement due to injury. It would be a personal victory just to have survived to the final. It would be horrendous at the AO open especially. I can't see women playing 5 sets in that heat. It would kill them, literally.
 
#12 ·
These men cannot help themselves they just want to emphasise that women are not strong as men physically and they dont deserve equal money.
I feel five sets is not possible at Roland Garros and Australia.Those fragile girls like pova hantukova will not survive five sets they will be taken out in stretchers off the court,at the same time this will encourage doping.
 
#19 ·
I agree. If the men play best of three, the matches would be a lot more interest and more people would watch. Most 5 set tennis matches are very boring, especially on Clay.
 
#14 ·
now if you actually paid for center court tickets for a slam final upwards of around $150 and it was all over in 45 mins, then i'm sure you'd want some more.

best of five doesnt mean any more high quality but it does make it last a bit longer and make it worth paying for.
 
#16 ·
No. The idea of having best-of-five finals when the rest of the tournament is best-of-three is riduculous. Another reason why I like the WTA more. :weirdo:

It's like, "OK, so were changing the rules mid-tournament. This is totally not stupid!"
 
#17 ·
I'd love for 5 set finals...
 
#18 ·
There are SO MANY factual errors in that article it was difficult to read.

As far as the content...I don't care. My current favorite would probably win every five set final. Venus would be hard to defeat in best of five format. I think players like Mauresmo would do well too. The athletes would prevail.

To be honest, I would rather the men play three sets. Watching a five set match is a true commitment.

SF
 
#20 ·
I personally find it hard to sit still for four or five hours at a time, even when they are interesting. Best of three please. If they did start playing five, they should do it all the time, not just on special occasions.
This way, the players could get used to it. But one of the things that would occur is the strategy would change, and players would be holding back more. Frankly, men playing three is fine. I only wind up watching two or three of the sets anyway.

Feel bad for those people who paid $1000 US for seats to a Mike Tyson fight, to see it end in 30 seconds.
 
#21 ·
I think the real issue hear is the rating system and seeding, when you're number three and beat consistently by a lower ranked player at every slam, somethings up. You can't always predict who's going to be a good match-up of course, and it's unfair to the players to base it just on that. I guess what
I'm saying is I don't have the answer here.
 
#22 ·
The girls should definitely play b/5 in the final. Rolly poly Marion would have had to of been carried off but, that's hers, and other players problem! GET IN BETTER SHAPE!!! If that's their answer to why they shouldn't play b/5 then they're even more pathetic then I thought they were. The fatties will have to work harder and eat less crap, and the skinny-"I'm really here to have my picture taken"- bimbos will be run off or forced to take their tennis careers seriously. Oh shock and horror.

Women don't run shorter marathons; they don't play less quarters in B-Ball; the IM in swimming isn't shorten for them so why are the wta girls playing b/3 throughout the tournament. Imo, the best thing that could happen to women's tennis is that their matches, even if it's only for part of the tournament, go to b/5. If they're pros, they'll adjust. Time to fire all the bf's and daddies who can't coach their way out of a wet paper bag. It will be interesting to see if the girls are excited or bemoan the suggestion. The ones who bitch and play the delicate female routine are pathetic, and need to find another line of work!
 
#25 ·
Women don't run shorter marathons;
EXACTLY.

What's this crap about the women not being able to cope with playing the best of 5 sets??? That's like an opinion from the dark ages ;)

Of course they can play the best of five. The fitness levels of a lot may have to be risen but that can only be a good thing IMO.
 
#23 ·
i tend to agree with this idea now....but i think given the fact that women might be more susceptible to fatigue...i'd say that for the time being it might be good to have the 4 finals as best of 5 sets.....after seeing that...perhaps one can ponder on introducing best of 5 sets from the semis or the quarters.....

if ppl are averse to change then the game can stagnate....to make some changes here and there to get the most out of wta is not such a bad idea
 
#24 ·
There is no reason why women can't play best of five. The game would shift because endurance would become a bigger factor among the tools you need along with power, finesse and speed. Maybe, just maybe you'd see more of an all around level of fitness in the ladies like you do in other professional sports like basketball, beach volleyball and soccer. For a few years it'd suck until a new generation of athletes who are used to playing five grows up and starts playing pro.

At the same time I'd really prefer the men gave up best of five except late in a tournament. Media companies would have to be happy too because they must know people go off and do other things until the second or third set of a five setter starts.
 
#26 ·
the women used to play best of five at the championships many years ago. i think steffi and hingis went the full five sets against each other. anyone know why the stopped doing that?
 
#29 ·
Sabatini and Seles went 5 one year too. It stopped because NBC, who had the tv rights at the time, didn't want to give the air time for a potential 5 set match so the wta grand poobahs went along. I wouldn't be surprised if the networks kill the newest drive for 5. IDIOTS!
 
#30 ·
No way...do you have any idea that the error fests, that are prevalent in 3 set matches now, are only going to be amplified in best of fives..Cant wait for that 150 unforced errors combined final...
 
#32 ·
Back in my day, the guys thought we should only play best of 5 points...
 
#34 ·
I would like to see women play best of 5 sets, that would be great but i just can't see it happening.
 
#35 ·
Yes, they should in Grand Slams.

They demand equal pay.

Earn it.

They are supposedly bigger, stronger, better trained, and use better
equipment than women of earlier eras. Show us.

It's ridiculous to see a brilliant 5 setter from the men, and then
another lackluster Grand Slam final from the women.

I would not recommend it anywhere else, but, the Grand Slam finals.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top