PDA

View Full Version : Do you think No-Ad scoring is good for tennis? Vote in the poll!


kittyking
Mar 6th, 2008, 10:49 AM
No-Ad scoring is used primarily for doubles matches at the moment, but in recent times more and more exhibition tournaments have also started to include them.

Do you think No-Ad scoring is good for tennis?

*Jool*
Mar 6th, 2008, 12:00 PM
worse idea I've ever heard of regarding tennis rules :weirdo: complete bullshit and non-sense , no words for that :o

Poova
Mar 6th, 2008, 12:01 PM
This I am deffo 100% against. It introduces luck to the game, and its not nice at a crucial moment in the match when at deuce a team double faults or hits an error and then they end up losing the game/match.

mandy7
Mar 6th, 2008, 12:02 PM
This I am deffo 100% against. It introduces luck to the game, and its not nice at a crucial moment in the match when at deuce a team double faults or hits an error and then they end up losing the game/match.
i've seen it in antwerp, saw lots of doubles there, and it was actually pretty cool.
players don't seem to mind it either
i don't think any of the teams won or lost by being lucky....

TomTennis
Mar 6th, 2008, 12:03 PM
no way.

Duece/Ad is something unique to tennis. Dont take that away.

stefi62
Mar 6th, 2008, 12:30 PM
Actually I don't know if it is good or bad for tennis, but I don't like it. I mean, I like it when you have a struggle to get to the point that can bring you to the game point, see what I mean? Now, at 40-40, that's more chance than really game construction that can make you score... But they say it makes the game last less time, and it brings dynamics, so ...

A player told me once, when I asked her what she thought about it: "well, with no ad and super tie break, I play less and I'm paid as much, so...." lol

*Jool*
Mar 6th, 2008, 12:32 PM
wanna make the matches shorter? make the men play best of three at slams :rolleyes:
it would not totally screw the schedules like it did at RG last year (Day 3 :fiery: )

stefi62
Mar 6th, 2008, 12:39 PM
wanna make the matches shorter? make the men play best of three at slams :rolleyes:
it would not totally screw the schedules like it did at RG last year (Day 3 :fiery: )

Agreed! :kiss:

But the idea is that they think people don't like doubles, so they want to make IT shorter. The problem IMO is you cannot like if they don't show you, and TV coverage of doubles is beyond zero....

Poova
Mar 6th, 2008, 12:48 PM
Actually I don't know if it is good or bad for tennis, but I don't like it. I mean, I like it when you have a struggle to get to the point that can bring you to the game point, see what I mean? Now, at 40-40, that's more chance than really game construction that can make you score... But they say it makes the game last less time, and it brings dynamics, so ...

A player told me once, when I asked her what she thought about it: "well, with no ad and super tie break, I play less and I'm paid as much, so...." lol
I never thought about it like that actually. :lol: I guess the players don't mind but for us fans it totally sucks. :mad:

And I agree *Jool*... men's matches are too long. :ras:

*Jool*
Mar 6th, 2008, 12:50 PM
Agreed! :kiss:

But the idea is that they think people don't like doubles, so they want to make IT shorter. The problem IMO is you cannot like if they don't show you, and TV coverage of doubles is beyond zero....
you're absolutely right .
that's a huge problem in this sport - all credit/mediatization is given to singles players . be it for their skills and/OR looks ( :tape: ) .
I know it's pretty normal but such a difference is disrespectful to doubles players AND amateurs .

kittyking
Mar 6th, 2008, 08:36 PM
Speaking on a (mostly) personal level, I find mens doubles very exciting at Grand Slams. Infact we get a fair amount of mens doubles coverage here (in relation to singles), and because there is so many well defined teams each with their own style it really makes for some good viewing. On the women's side it seems to really lack behind, and I really don't think you can blame that on poor crowds. I think there needs to be a boost in funding at the Wta level to increase the quality of doubles overall. I don't see how No-Ad scoring was meant to make increase the quality of ladies doubles.

LegionArgentina
Mar 6th, 2008, 11:04 PM
A player told me once, when I asked her what she thought about it: "well, with no ad and super tie break, I play less and I'm paid as much, so...." lol

Such a good idea :lol:
I dont like the idea of no ad scoring for me it is one of the most stupid rules ever :o
Other thing that I dont like it is that in YEC only four teams are in,would be better to have 8 teams,like the ATP doubles.

Jojo_
Mar 7th, 2008, 08:53 AM
No AD !! NOOOooo I dont' like, No Ad is a Lottery !!

kittyking
Mar 7th, 2008, 09:06 AM
No AD !! NOOOooo I dont' like, No Ad is a Lottery !!

I find lotteries exciting.....................I don't even have time to react to No Ad scoring because one second its 40-40 and the next second the games over :o

stefi62
Mar 7th, 2008, 09:24 AM
With a score of 20 to 0, I guess we can say that "NOBODY HERE LIKES NO AD!!!"

kittyking
Mar 7th, 2008, 09:25 AM
With a score of 20 to 0, I guess we can say that "NOBODY HERE LIKES NO AD!!!"

Larry Scott disputes that fact :p

SloKid
Mar 7th, 2008, 08:47 PM
I'm not a fan of no-ad, it takes away from the drama in matches, when games can end so quickly.
The super tb on the other hand is alright, I don't mind that much.

What is the worst though is men's doubles being played as best of 5 at Wimbledon. :o

Kai
Mar 7th, 2008, 09:12 PM
I really like the no-ad scoring :D
the 3rd set-tb rule is great too :D