Do you miss pre-2000 changeovers?
I'm gearing up for the Aussie Open and currently watching some old tennis tapes. I put in the classic 1999 USO SF between Hingis and Venus, and was reminded that changeovers used to occur after an odd game, always. For instance, at 1-0 at the start of each set was a changeover. This also meant that a set could end after an even number of games, so another game would have to be finished before the players got a rest. Thus, one set could be finished and the next started all before a new changeover.
I'm not 100% sure when the switch occurred and who proposed it, but I think it began with the start of the 2000 tennis season. Maybe someone could confirm that for me. I bet there was a lot of confusion during matches before players got used to sitting down at the end of a 6-2 set or a 6-4 set and not sitting down after the first game of a set!
My question to you is, which style/format do you prefer? I definitely prefer the current format. I think it's better for fans and also for the players. It's a bit tedious to stop play after the first game of a match - players shouldn't need a 90-second sit-down then. Which is why there are now 2-minute breaks between sets so the players get a little extra rest before doing 3 games in a row. I also think it must have sucked in the past for a player to be serving down 4-5 in a set and think to themselves, "Okay, let's play a solid couple of games and come out of it 6*-5 ahead, or at least in good position for a tiebreak"... and then be down 4-6, 0*-1, just like that. Ooops!