PDA

View Full Version : Would you like this change in rules?


tenn_ace
Feb 16th, 2004, 05:41 PM
Apparently, Horst Klosterkemper, a president of ATP Europe, proposed a change in number of games in set needed for a win (from 6 to 4). He said that in that case, the game would be more dynamic and attractive to fans... He went on saying that fans rarely watch beginnings of sets and it makes it difficult for TV networks to plan their coverage...

What say you?

I'm :rolleyes: ...

LindsayRulez
Feb 16th, 2004, 05:44 PM
No Way!

jimbo mack
Feb 16th, 2004, 05:45 PM
nope, leave it the way it is i say

cant see the players takin a liking to that............

ghosts
Feb 16th, 2004, 05:47 PM
tommyrot

Joachim
Feb 16th, 2004, 05:49 PM
no way

Jericho
Feb 16th, 2004, 05:50 PM
that would benefit players who almost always start out firing on all cylinders, like kim...and be a disadvantage to slow starters like Venus

*JR*
Feb 16th, 2004, 05:50 PM
I prefer the opposite sort of change, to a "Table Tennis" sort of scoring. (As most posters probably know, it's 5 serves then switch, first to 21 ahead by 2 or more wins game, "TB" if players reach 20-20, but only till someone wins by 2).

alfajeffster
Feb 16th, 2004, 05:54 PM
Limit the size of the equipment, not the size of the set, and you'll soon see fans clamoring to get in to see the great tennis from the beginning of the match!

Shooter
Feb 16th, 2004, 05:55 PM
Under this new rule, how many sets would there be to a match? 2 out of 3 would not be enough, so I guess it would have to be 3 of 5. I don't like the idea. 2 out of 3 six game sets is about right for women. One small change I'd like to see is that tie-breakers are only used in the first 2 sets. The 3rd set should be played out with no tie-breaker (like they do at Wimbledon).

http://www.mfwweb.com/tennis/Misc/Shooter.jpg

tenn_ace
Feb 16th, 2004, 05:57 PM
Unfortunately, I don't know about the number of sets... The article in Russian translation didn't say anything about it. I was trying to search and found some interviews in German, but don't speak a word in it, so maybe German posters could help us to find an original source.

GoDominique
Feb 16th, 2004, 06:08 PM
I prefer the opposite sort of change, to a "Table Tennis" sort of scoring. (As most posters probably know, it's 5 serves then switch, first to 21 ahead by 2 or more wins game, "TB" if players reach 20-20, but only till someone wins by 2).
It WAS like that in table-tennis, but they changed the rules to first to 11 and switching serves after every two points and playing best of 5 instead of best 3 sets.
And actually Klosterkemper is using this as an example for a good change but IMO it's total crap.

The short scoring test was at end of 2000 (I think), check aceman for scores.

tennisIlove09
Feb 16th, 2004, 06:10 PM
NO! If the ATP wants changes: change best of 5 to best of 3 :)

starr
Feb 16th, 2004, 06:16 PM
Stupid, because no one would ever have a chance to break back.

It's sort of like saying that books shouldn't be over 50 pages long.

tenn_ace
Feb 16th, 2004, 08:15 PM
so, are there tennis fans who don't watch the beginnings of the sets? where did this come from?

R&J
Feb 16th, 2004, 08:18 PM
I hope they dont change that.

But I do think that if there was anything to change in the game. I think there should only be 1 serve, instead of getting a second chance at the serve.

tenn_ace
Feb 16th, 2004, 08:22 PM
no lets on serve seems like fun (if you've seen a US college tennis match)

Pamela Shriver
Feb 16th, 2004, 08:48 PM
I'd love a change in the rules where is was illegal for any player called Pamela Howard to lose.

Crazy Canuck
Feb 16th, 2004, 09:46 PM
NO! If the ATP wants changes: change best of 5 to best of 3 :)
Bah. I object to that rule just as much as this ridiculous 4 game suggestion.

ys
Feb 16th, 2004, 09:51 PM
I would give it a try, it might work. If it would make women play best of 5 and men - best of 7, it could increase the amount of big points per match.

GoDominique
Feb 16th, 2004, 10:03 PM
Well, here is one of the draws where the system was tested.

ITF Women's Circuit
Naples,USA
Week of 13 November 2000
32 Draw-$50 000

First Round

Erika De Lone(USA)(1) d. Anca Barna(GER) 4-0,4-0,3-5,4-1
Karolina Jagieniak(FRA) d. Petra Rampre(SLO) 4-0,4-2,2-4,4-1
q-Ansley Cargill(USA) d. WC-Cory Ann Avants(USA) 5-3,4-2,3-5,2-4,4-1
Yvette Basting(NED)(6) d. WC-Kristina Triska(SWE) 4-1,4-0,4-0
Miroslava Vavrinec(SUI)(4) d. Sandra Cacic(USA) 4-2,3-1 ret.
LL-Lioudmila Skavronskaya(RUS) d. Milagros Sequera(VEN) 1-4,4-2,4-2,1-4,5-3
Adriana Barna(GER) d. Samantha Reeves(USA) 4-1,2-4,0-4,5-3,5-3
Marion Maruska(AUT) d. Dawn Buth(USA)(8) 4-1,4-5(3),4-1,4-0
Holly Parkinson(USA)(5) d. q-Rachel Viollet(GBR) 4-2,4-1,5-4(6)
q-Clarisa Fernandez(ARG) d. Svetlana Kriventcheva(BUL) 4-1,4-1,4-2
Catalina Castano(COL) d. Nana Miyagi(JPN) 4-2,4-2,4-2
Alina Jidkova(RUS)(3) d. q-Valentina Sassi(ITA) 1-4,2-4,4-0,4-1,4-2
Katalin Marosi-Aracama(HUN)(7) d. LL-Kelly McCain(USA) 5-3,4-2,4-2
Karin Miller(USA) d. WC-Candice Fuchs(USA) 4-2,4-1,5-4(5)
Michaela Pastikova(CZE) d. Tracy Almeda-Singian(USA) 4-5(2),4-1,5-4(5),4-2
Rossana De Los Rios(PAR)(2) d. LL-Maret Ani(EST) 4-5(5),4-0,4-5(7),4-2,4-0

Second Round

Karolina Jagieniak(FRA) d. Erika De Lone(USA)(1) 1-3 ret.
Yvette Basting(NED)(6) d. q-Ansley Cargill(USA) 4-1,4-1,4-0
Miroslava Vavrinec(SUI)(4) d. LL-Lioudmila Skavronskaya(RUS) 4-1,4-1,4-0
Marion Maruska(AUT) d. Adriana Barna(GER) 4-1,4-2,4-0
q-Clarisa Fernandez(ARG) d. Holly Parkinson(USA)(5) 5-4(2),4-1,0-4,4-1
Catalina Castano(COL) d. Alina Jidkova(RUS)(3) 5-4(3),4-5(2),4-1,3-1 ret.
Katalin Marosi-Aracama(HUN)(7) d. Karin Miller(USA) 4-2,2-4,5-4(2),4-2
Michaela Pastikova(CZE) d. Rossana De Los Rios(PAR)(2) 4-2,5-4(3),2-4,4-2

Quarterfinals

Yvette Basting(NED)(6) d. Karolina Jagieniak(FRA) 2-4,3-5,5-3,4-2,4-2
Marion Maruska(AUT) d. Miroslava Vavrinec(SUI)(4) 5-4(4),4-0,4-2
Catalina Castano(COL) d. q-Clarisa Fernandez(ARG) 4-2,4-1,4-0
Katalin Marosi-Aracama(HUN)(7) d. Michaela Pastikova(CZE) 4-5(6),4-1,4-0,2-4,4-2

Semifinals

Yvette Basting(NED)(6) d. Marion Maruska(AUT) 5-3,4-1,4-0
Catalina Castano(COL) d. Katalin Marosi-Aracama(HUN)(7) 4-0,2-4,4-1,4-1

Final

Yvette Basting(NED)(6) d. Catalina Castano(COL) 4-0,4-1,4-2

---------------

As far as I remember most players hated it because a lot of matches lasted more than 3 hours. Under the current system the maximum number of games is 39, here it was 45. I doubt that even longer matches would increase fans' interest.

And best of 3 would be way too short. So forget it.

~ The Leopard ~
Feb 16th, 2004, 10:38 PM
Thing is, if a player is broken, the set is over so it's boring. Won't happen.
Exactly.

jdog3008
Feb 16th, 2004, 11:08 PM
After seeing those results, I actually like it.

ys
Feb 16th, 2004, 11:12 PM
Thing is, if a player is broken, the set is over so it's boring. Won't happen.
Exactly.First, we are talking about women, remember?

Do you really find entertaining all those sets where a top player would lazily allow the underdog to get to 5 and then would win 4-5 games in a row and take the set? I find them extremely annoying. That would pretty much eliminate them?

ktwtennis
Feb 17th, 2004, 12:04 AM
A VERY dumb idea IMO...

CinnamoninCinema
Feb 17th, 2004, 12:13 AM
Apparently, Horst Klosterkemper, a president of ATP Europe, proposed a change in number of games in set needed for a win (from 6 to 4). He said that in that case, the game would be more dynamic and attractive to fans... He went on saying that fans rarely watch beginnings of sets and it makes it difficult for TV networks to plan their coverage...

What say you?

I'm :rolleyes: ...

Not exactly a new idea. And not exactly a good one.

CinnamoninCinema
Feb 17th, 2004, 12:14 AM
But like ... fans don't watch the beginning of sets? Well, then I guess they don't watch the first few innings of a baseball game. Let's make it 6 innings then. Let's make it only 3 quarters in basketball and football.

azza
Feb 17th, 2004, 12:20 AM
Hell No :eek:

- L i n a -
Feb 17th, 2004, 12:50 AM
I prefer the opposite sort of change, to a "Table Tennis" sort of scoring. (As most posters probably know, it's 5 serves then switch, first to 21 ahead by 2 or more wins game, "TB" if players reach 20-20, but only till someone wins by 2).
This is I agree with... but I'd prefer to see a system similar to volleyball.

First to 15, by 2. Serve switches every 2 points, just like tiebreak now.

Play best of 5, or best of 7 sets with this.