PDA

View Full Version : Who is for a 5 set semi/final? *hands up*


SvetaPleaseWin.
Jul 4th, 2010, 03:48 AM
it is so hard for a 3 set match to be "great", the press are always going to prefer a 5 set match

the women can go 5 sets, imo it would get rid of some of the nerves and make for better matches

and most importantly favour svet ;)

RenaSlam.
Jul 4th, 2010, 03:53 AM
Yes, although if the women have this many injuries with 2/3 set matches...then god help the WTA Tour if they had to even deal with 5 set SF/F.

ZeroSOFInfinity
Jul 4th, 2010, 03:54 AM
it is so hard for a 3 set match to be "great", the press are always going to prefer a 5 set match

the women can go 5 sets, imo it would get rid of some of the nerves and make for better matches

and most importantly favour svet ;)

*awaits the Women Rights groups to barge into Tennis Forum and scream "No Five Setters! Equality for Women!"*

Tennis Fool
Jul 4th, 2010, 03:54 AM
^ There are plenty of 3 sets matches that are great, even two set matches. It depends on whether the players are evenly matched. Anyway, I don't expect any great 5 setters coming from anyone meeting Serena... the average scores would be 60 61 61 every time :lol:

On the flip, I think the men should play fewer 5 setters. Too many of them end like this year's Wimby semis :yawn:

SvetaPleaseWin.
Jul 4th, 2010, 03:56 AM
^ There are plenty of 3 sets matches that are great, even two set matches. It depends on whether the players are evenly matched. Anyway, I don't expect any great 5 setters coming from anyone meeting Serena... the average scores would be 60 61 61 every time :lol:

On the flip, I think the men should play fewer 5 setters. Too many of them end like this year's Wimby semis :bored:

agree with you on the mens side :lol:

i think a 6-3 6-4 match can be great but tbf in the "normal" mind a tennis match is only great if it goes beyond 7-5 in the 3rd. a 5 set match would fix that

Tennis Fool
Jul 4th, 2010, 04:01 AM
agree with you on the mens side :lol:

i think a 6-3 6-4 match can be great but tbf in the "normal" mind a tennis match is only great if it goes beyond 7-5 in the 3rd. a 5 set match would fix that
God save us from normal minds. That's five steps down from TF :scared: 75 in the 3rd set, to 16 in the 4th or 16 06 in the 5th. Typical men's match.

Volcana
Jul 4th, 2010, 04:02 AM
it is so hard for a 3 set match to be "great", the press are always going to prefer a 5 set matchI disagree. We've seen many great three-setters. The problem is we're seeing too many two setters, or three setters with a bad set in them.

SvetaPleaseWin.
Jul 4th, 2010, 04:05 AM
God save us from normal minds. That's five steps down from TF :scared: 75 in the 3rd set, to 16 in the 4th or 16 06 in the 5th. Typical men's match.

im with ya but normal minds is what the womens game has to impress and it isnt doin it atm

I disagree. We've seen many great three-setters. The problem is we're seeing too many two setters, or three setters with a bad set in them.

i agree, but its all about what the general public think tbf and atm it aint good

Andy.
Jul 4th, 2010, 04:11 AM
No! they go for too long. I would prefer it if all matched, mens included was best of 3 sets.

Atrixo
Jul 4th, 2010, 04:15 AM
I'd take it one step further, and go with best-of-five sets from the 4th round/quarterfinals onward. The schedule at that point in the tournament would certainly allow for it. Most of the women have the endurance for it. Does it necessarily garrantee a good match? No. But it would certainly shut up the detractors of the women's game about the equal pay/equal work BS argument. It would also give the perception that the viewer is getting their "money's worth".

Loungy
Jul 4th, 2010, 04:35 AM
No! they go for too long. I would prefer it if all matched, mens included was best of 3 sets.
No way. Two sets down miraculous comebacks in Slams are THE BEST. And the crowd tends to get very involved. (Murray vs Gasquet in Wimbledon 2008, for instance.)

*hands up* I like the idea of bo5 for women's Slam finals, yes. May help Slam final virgins get rid of the nervousness.

fammmmedspin
Jul 4th, 2010, 05:08 AM
Doesn't work - even Graf couldn't play 5 sets without taking one off after one on at the YEC when they had 5 sets,.
Would make Serena's GS matches look like drawn out executions rather than walkovers.
Wouldn't solve the basic problem that most of the top 20 are underperforming - would make it worse in many ways.
Would increase Serena's advantages. She turns up fresh after relaxing for most of the year and some poor sap who has been working out there on the tour arrives injure, tired and out of shape and somehow has to play her for 5 sets.

Slutiana
Jul 4th, 2010, 09:59 AM
I'd take it one step further, and go with best-of-five sets from the 4th round/quarterfinals onward. The schedule at that point in the tournament would certainly allow for it. Most of the women have the endurance for it. Does it necessarily garrantee a good match? No. But it would certainly shut up the detractors of the women's game about the equal pay/equal work BS argument. It would also give the perception that the viewer is getting their "money's worth".
This.

5 set matches are so much better because it means that there's a better chance of a seeded player dropping a set just out of losing concentration/lower ranked player losing inhibitions which brings about more excitement. Also, it means that there's a better chance of the top players making it through to the end of the tournament because there's a longer time period for them to find their form and pick up their games while losing.

I think it should at least be tried out. If it doesn't work whatever reason then it can always go back to 3 sets, but I would love to see them try it out.

Jajaloo
Jul 4th, 2010, 10:11 AM
I think it should at least be tried out. If it doesn't work whatever reason then it can always go back to 3 sets, but I would love to see them try it out.


I agree!

HippityHop
Jul 4th, 2010, 12:19 PM
No way. Two sets down miraculous comebacks in Slams are THE BEST. And the crowd tends to get very involved. (Murray vs Gasquet in Wimbledon 2008, for instance.)

*hands up* I like the idea of bo5 for women's Slam finals, yes. May help Slam final virgins get rid of the nervousness.

Not necessarily. Kvitova had a "miraculous" comback against Kanepi in 3 sets. Besides 3 sets mean that you'd better come out blazing in the first set and not round assing and goldbricking.

WTF is ths business about professional players needing a set to get rid of nerves. If you're a pro suck it up and deal with it.

KournikovaFan91
Jul 4th, 2010, 12:51 PM
I think GS Final, YEC Final and Olympic Final should be 5 setters but thats it.

I think it is very difficult to have a 3 set classic and also making them a 5 setter would mean it would get less bashing by people who say the women's finals are always crap.

Carotastrophe
Jul 4th, 2010, 12:55 PM
I would agree with 5 set matches starting from the semi finals on-wards. And then maybe a longer break before the final.

azinna
Jul 4th, 2010, 12:57 PM
...I think it should at least be tried out. If it doesn't work whatever reason then it can always go back to 3 sets, but I would love to see them try it out.

Not sure if you're aware, Slutiana, but it was tried out at the YEC for a number of years. It was OK. Definitely did not improve the quality of the tennis. As fammedspin says, even Graf -- queen of endurance -- had to check out for alternate sets.

If there's going to be any further tinkering with the best-of-formula, it'll be in the opposite direction. The men no longer have to play best-of-5 for masters finals. And for several good reasons, the ITF/ATP probably would contemplate switching to best-of-3 until the 4th round/QF of slams.

calico_101
Jul 4th, 2010, 04:23 PM
I've been saying this for years.....too often nerves ruin the women's final. A five set final would give them more time to get into it, rather than loosening up at 6-1, 5-3 down...

Loungy
Jul 4th, 2010, 04:39 PM
Not necessarily. Kvitova had a "miraculous" comback against Kanepi in 3 sets.
Not the same. :shrug:

I cited Murray's comeback in 2008, but the men's final of that year was also an example. Roger came back from 2 down to push it to 5. He lost, but that was still amazing.

I like bo5 and I think women could pull it off in GS finals. :shrug:

HippityHop
Jul 4th, 2010, 05:23 PM
Not the same. :shrug:

I cited Murray's comeback in 2008, but the men's final of that year was also an example. Roger came back from 2 down to push it to 5. He lost, but that was still amazing.

I like bo5 and I think women could pull it off in GS finals. :shrug:

Nothing's the same. Everything is what it is. And I'm simply not interested in giving a mentally weak player time to get it together. If you've made a semi or a final you need to have it together when you walk on the court.

Dodoboy.
Jul 4th, 2010, 05:41 PM
Never supported it, until now!

Something has to be done, would be great!

homogenius
Jul 4th, 2010, 09:32 PM
Some players would tank entire sets.Not sure the result would be that good.

Ryan
Jul 4th, 2010, 09:34 PM
I like this idea. I'd even be happy with best-of-5 QF and on, plus Tier 1/whatever-theyre-called-now finals.

tennislover
Jul 4th, 2010, 09:35 PM
making those one-sided "agony"-matches longer? no, thank you

DevilishAttitude
Jul 4th, 2010, 09:38 PM
A 5 set WTA match would be just.. dreadful. Anyone in favour of this is just silly. 5 set WTA matches would be 99% dreadful & most of the women wouldn't be able to cope with the fitness. The WTA needs new stars, not fatalistic ideas.

xan
Jul 4th, 2010, 09:52 PM
I'd take it one step further, and go with best-of-five sets from the 4th round/quarterfinals onward. The schedule at that point in the tournament would certainly allow for it. Most of the women have the endurance for it. Does it necessarily garrantee a good match? No. But it would certainly shut up the detractors of the women's game about the equal pay/equal work BS argument. It would also give the perception that the viewer is getting their "money's worth".

Good points.

The argument that women can't play five sets is the same one that used to say that women couldn't run 5,000 metres or marathons. It's all about the training and preparation. Of course most of the women would RATHER not play 5 - but that's a different argument

Myskinacomeback
Jul 4th, 2010, 09:55 PM
if i was Justine
i would raise my hand for this

Break My Rapture
Jul 4th, 2010, 10:03 PM
Uhm, NO. Allowing this would increase the chances of getting injured plus the amount of retirements in a match drastically.

JackFrost
Jul 4th, 2010, 10:08 PM
I donīt think, that a match gets better just because itīs best of 5.
80% of the wta-players will not fight back, when they lost the first two sets. So the third set will likely a 0:6 or 1:6.
Who choked three set matches away, will choke five set matches away. The well known choker will just have more time to do that.
The only advantage I see is for the fitter player to tire down not so fit players.

Ryan
Jul 4th, 2010, 11:56 PM
I don't think a best of 5 match could be WORSE than a best of 3. Maybe we'll see players change tactics, lower ranked girls feel less pressure early on and take chances they normally wouldn't....nah, who am I kidding, we'd just see matches with 100+ UE's. I still want to try it though.

Roookie
Jul 5th, 2010, 12:22 AM
at least the GS finals

HippityHop
Jul 5th, 2010, 12:24 AM
And of course the first two set would proably be 6-0, 0-6. The the real match could start.
Yes that would be a real improvement. :rolleyes:

MK Ultra
Jul 5th, 2010, 12:30 AM
Hell no!Would you wanna watch wozniacki for five sets?!

xan
Jul 5th, 2010, 12:43 AM
The main arguments FOR 5 sets in semis and Finals of slams are

1. Value for money for the punters and TV viewers. Paying huge sums to see a 60 minute washout final will not be popular with a lot of people. A five setter will at least mean a minimum of 90 minutes for a final.

2. Elimination of the "nerves" factor that has plagued women's tennis. Matches are often through so quickly that a nervous lapse at the start of set 1 can put you in an almost impossible position before you've been on court ten minutes. A five setter would allow players to settle, and fight back from nervous starts or mid-match lapses.

All in all I think it a good idea for these reasons. I don't think women's bodies are less able to endure longer events than mens, but they would need to get their conditioning up beforehand.

Joana
Jul 5th, 2010, 01:00 AM
YES! We really needed this year's final to go 6-3 6-2 6-0. That would have been awesome!

Corswandt
Jul 5th, 2010, 01:39 AM
The main arguments FOR 5 sets in semis and Finals of slams are

1. Value for money for the punters and TV viewers. Paying huge sums to see a 60 minute washout final will not be popular with a lot of people. A five setter will at least mean a minimum of 90 minutes for a final.

But you must remember that best of five is bad from a (live) TV programming perspective as the length of the match becomes wholly unpredictable. Plus casual viewers can't be arsed to watch five-setters in their entirety anyway.

Atrixo
Jul 5th, 2010, 01:41 AM
But you must remember that best of five is bad from a (live) TV programming perspective as the length of the match becomes wholly unpredictable. Plus casual viewers can't be arsed to watch five-setters in their entirety anyway.

Doesn't seem to be considered a problem for the men's side. Why is it considered one for the women?

tennislover
Jul 6th, 2010, 06:22 AM
Hell no!Would you wanna watch wozniacki for five sets?!

very good point :lol:

moby
Jul 6th, 2010, 06:29 AM
The world might have ended if the Sveta-Chak semi were allowed to go to a fourth set.

narutos
Jul 6th, 2010, 06:47 AM
5 sets but just between WS Sharapova Henin and Clijsters. I don't want to see others playing 5 sets seriously it's not necessary.

Dodoboy.
Jul 6th, 2010, 10:28 AM
Wozniacki's chance of winning a GS would definitely improve.

Shepster
Jul 6th, 2010, 11:46 AM
it is so hard for a 3 set match to be "great", the press are always going to prefer a 5 set match
After the men's Wimbledon final sucking *that* badly? :devil:

mr_burns
Jul 6th, 2010, 12:09 PM
the answer is and always waa yes

The only problem will be RG, where the players have less time to recover after ohter slams, but even without best of 5 the RG finalists failed to do well on grass.

I would say give it a try, but it will never happen, pretty sure

edificio
Jul 6th, 2010, 12:14 PM
No. I don't like seeing the men go on that long, especially in the awful heat. I always tape the men's final, but rarely watch the whole thing unless it ends in 3.

Baselinebasher
Jul 6th, 2010, 12:24 PM
Absolutely not. The quality of female tennis, which is already pretty low, would simply turn into pushing, moonballing and outlasting clown contest with most matches ending with someone retiring from either injury or fatigue. If people think making women play 5 set finals in hopes of getting classics like 07/08 Wimbledon finals and 09 AO SF/F, they are sadly mistaken.

Shepster
Jul 6th, 2010, 04:10 PM
The only problem will be RG, where the players have less time to recover after ohter slams, but even without best of 5 the RG finalists failed to do well on grass.
Schiavone even with last year's QF run is 11-11 at Wimbledon, and Sam is 5-8 there. Neither are anyone's idea of good grass court players even when they've not gone to the final in Paris - it's nothing to do with the recovery time.