PDA

View Full Version : Does Supertiebreakers improve ladies doubles? Vote in the poll!


kittyking
Mar 6th, 2008, 10:59 AM
A super tiebreak currently occurs if the match is tied at 1 set all. Super Tiebreak is first to ten points (you have to win by a margin of at least two).

Vote in the poll

Yes or No

Farina Elia Fan
Mar 6th, 2008, 11:11 AM
I dont like it, the only positives I see is some of the top players might play it more and it gives lower ranked players a chance to try and not get tight when the pressure is on

*Jool*
Mar 6th, 2008, 11:13 AM
actually I'm not sure (so I voted "no" ).
Some teams excell at it and this is where the nerves count, in that sense that's great . But it can be a source of "chokes/tankings" in 2nd set too ...

kittyking
Mar 6th, 2008, 11:14 AM
I dont like it, the only positives I see is some of the top players might play it more and it gives lower ranked players a chance to try and not get tight when the pressure is on

I haven't noticed any sudden rise in top players deciding to play since Super tiebreakers were implemented. Also there are a few top doubles players (most notably Sam Stosur) out injured at the moment and usually this would be the time for top players to play a couple of doubles tournaments as it makes it easier money for them.

Poova
Mar 6th, 2008, 11:16 AM
I think the super tiebreak is ridiculous myself. The way the WTA is going doubles probably isn't going to exist soon the way they keep trying to cut it down with super tiebreaks and no-advantage scoring. :o It's a shame really.

So to answer the question, no it definitely doesn't improve doubles. :wavey:

*Jool*
Mar 6th, 2008, 11:20 AM
the "no-ad" is worse than anythoing , definitely ...

kittyking
Mar 6th, 2008, 11:51 AM
the "no-ad" is worse than anythoing , definitely ...

I was going to make a thread about that at the same time, can't believe I forgot :o

http://www.wtaworld.com/showthread.php?t=335062 :)

kittyking
Mar 6th, 2008, 11:52 AM
I think the super tiebreak is ridiculous myself. The way the WTA is going doubles probably isn't going to exist soon the way they keep trying to cut it down with super tiebreaks and no-advantage scoring. :o It's a shame really.

So to answer the question, no it definitely doesn't improve doubles. :wavey:

I think the reality is that ladies doubles will survive even if super tiebreaks and no-ad scoring however it's going down the track of mixed doubles (if you've seen the crowds at an average mixed double event at a Grand Slam you'll understand what I mean).

jonny84
Mar 6th, 2008, 12:50 PM
I can see why it is done but do not like it. Teams win through having a few lucky points....

stefi62
Mar 6th, 2008, 01:44 PM
I hate super tie breaks! I think it retrieves an aspect in the doubles game. I mean it's totally different to start the fight for a third set than to play the first to 10. Not the same involvement from the teams, it levels the teams I guess, and I don't think it helps doubles...

Dave.
Mar 6th, 2008, 04:35 PM
Super tie-breaks, along with no-ad are the most stupid things to be brought into tennis recently. No way should a professional match (where people are making their careers) should be decided by some crappy match tie-break. Players deserve to play a third set and win the match properly. Why should players like Cara/Liezel, Kveta/Rennae etc. whose careers are completely in doubles, be treated differently to the singles players?

IanRadi
Mar 6th, 2008, 05:13 PM
I think SPTs are the worst decision that ATP's/WTA's directors have ever made :fiery:

esdee
Mar 6th, 2008, 05:27 PM
I absolutely hate the new doubles scoring, both the no-ad and the super tie-breaker:fiery:. It's turned it into a lottery.:mad:

:topic:
The only change to original scoring I would like to see is in the Mens' Doubles at Wimbledon. I think they should play best of 3 sets up to the quarter finals. The courts are so much slower these days, and it would help the schedule when there is bad weather.

Dave.
Mar 6th, 2008, 05:47 PM
I absolutely hate the new doubles scoring, both the no-ad and the super tie-breaker:fiery:. It's turned it into a lottery.:mad:

:topic:
The only change to original scoring I would like to see is in the Mens' Doubles at Wimbledon. I think they should play best of 3 sets up to the quarter finals. The courts are so much slower these days, and it would help the schedule when there is bad weather.

I think all men's matches should be 3 sets. The amount of complaining they do about women having equal prize money despite playing less is annoying. Some men's matches defeintely drone on and on when they would be much more exciting if they were 3 sets, like everywhere else on the ATP tour. 5 setters are certainly to blamce for the schedule at Wimbledon being messed around. Anyway, that's all I have to say on men's tennis.

CanIGetAWhat
Mar 6th, 2008, 06:17 PM
I hate super tiebreaks almost as much as I hate the USO 3rd set tiebreaks.

Dodoboy.
Mar 6th, 2008, 07:13 PM
I hate them aswell!

Would a normal three-setter be so bad?

Elwin.
Mar 6th, 2008, 09:23 PM
I don't like it :o

Harvs
Mar 6th, 2008, 09:23 PM
no theyre terrible

kittyking
Mar 6th, 2008, 09:39 PM
Interesting to see that 16% of people who have voted so far have said yes. This room is completely open for debate, I'd like someone who said yes to say why they chose it.