TennisForum.com - Reply to Topic

Thread: Your perspective on the experimental format Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.

Registration Image

  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
Feb 20th, 2014 12:18 AM
2nd_serve
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

Thanks for those links. While mostly the same things that we have been saying here, Dick Gould's statement about the future of tennis broadcasting being online sounds so very true.
Feb 19th, 2014 11:49 PM
tie_breaker
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

No surprise about the feedback from players and coaches...responses have been similar to what the majority have stated earlier


From ZooTennis:
http://tenniskalamazoo.blogspot.com/...28ZooTennis%29

As I mentioned last week, I spoke to most of the women's coaches about the ITA's experimental format when I was in Charlottesville, Va. for the Team Indoor Championships. Part one of the article presenting those views is up today at the Tennis Recruiting Network, with part two scheduled to appear on Friday. Frankly, I was surprised at how unpopular the format was with everyone I spoke to. I'm not sure with this kind of opposition how it even made it to the experimental stage, but it did, although I would be even more surprised if it was adopted permanently... (more see link)


From TRN:
http://www.tennisrecruiting.net/article.asp?id=1891

In part one of this two-part series, eight top Division I women's coaches give their thoughts on the experiment... (more see link)
Feb 17th, 2014 05:22 PM
beachman49
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

Somebody forgot to tell the Pacific and Santa Barbara coaches the 'grand' experiment is over for this year? Or are they both just looking for short work days?

Either way, I'll bet the Santa Barbara coach would like to rethink his decision to play 'short' after dropping all four of the ridiculous crap shoot 10 pointers

Pacific 6, UCSB 1
Feb. 16, 2014
Santa Barbara, Calif.

Doubles
1. Hana Ritterova/ Regina Suarez (PAC) def. April Scatliffe/Priscilla Garcia (UCSB) 6-4
2. Cristina Saenz de Buruaga Ruiz/Iveta Masarova (PAC) def. Melissa Baker/Kaiulani Boyer (UCSB) 6-2
3. Luisa Ortiz Candio/Kirsten Meeham (UCSB) def. Francis Dean/Gergana Boncheva (PAC) 6-2

Singles
1. Iveta Masarova (PAC) def. Kaiulani Boyer (UCSB) 6-7 (5), 7-6 (4), 10-8
2. Hana Ritterova (PAC) def. April Scatliffe (UCSB) 6-3, 7-5
3. Cristina Saenz de Buruaga Ruiz (PAC) def. Kiersten Meehan (UCSB) 4-6, 6-4, 10-8
4. Christiana Ferrari (PAC) def. Jaimee Gilbertson (UCSB) 6-3, 4-6, 10-7
5. Stacy Yam (UCSB) def. Francis Dean (PAC) 6-4, 6-3
6. Gergana Boncheva (PAC) def. Melissa Baker (UCSB) 1-6, 6-2, 10-5

UCSB Season Record: (1-6)
Feb 16th, 2014 03:42 PM
beachman49
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

I attended 5-2 match yesterday that took 3 hours 2o min to the point where the 4th point was decided.

However, that included a good 15 minute delay waiting for # 4 doubles to finish since a girl in that match was part of the six in singles.

So official match time if you stopped doubles at the point and then stopped singles at the 4th match point would have been 3 hours 5 minutes. And it was a decent match with some question of outcome for a bit.
Feb 16th, 2014 04:46 AM
slickshoes510
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

Quote:
Originally Posted by knoxt View Post
I'm not entirely caught up on this, but can someone explain briefly the difference between the new and old format?
The main differences:

- Doubles is played up to 6 instead of 8. If tied at 6-6 then there's a standard tiebreak.
- There's no warm up before singles matches after the doubles matches. What teams are now doing is they will just stay out on the courts to practice/warm up with their own teammates.
- For singles, there's no 3rd set. In place of the 3rd set is a super tiebreaker up to 10 must win by 2.

This experimental format as ended...for now at least.
Feb 16th, 2014 04:25 AM
knoxt
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

Quote:
Originally Posted by mboyle View Post
Why couldn't they play singles first and then play doubles only in the case that it's a 3-3 tie?
Then in that case top schools that regularly record shutouts are not going to even play doubles. That will be unfair in terms of how many doubles matches they are able to play, rankings controversy and needed experience leading up to the NCAAs.
Feb 16th, 2014 04:23 AM
knoxt
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

I'm not entirely caught up on this, but can someone explain briefly the difference between the new and old format?
Feb 15th, 2014 03:54 AM
3gtennis
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

it is a simple thing. doubles is the most exciting part of college tennis--it gets both players and fans psyched up! fast paced, pounding put-a-ways, sticking volleys --0h yeah--getting ready for saturday tennis.
Feb 15th, 2014 02:45 AM
slickshoes510
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

Quote:
Originally Posted by mboyle View Post
Why couldn't they play singles first and then play doubles only in the case that it's a 3-3 tie?
Colleges would only need to recruit girls who can play singles then. That happens most of the time anyway but I like that it gives girls who are more "doubles specialist" a chance at a scholarship and at playing time.
Feb 14th, 2014 11:51 PM
TennisSee
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

Quote:
Originally Posted by mboyle View Post
Why couldn't they play singles first and then play doubles only in the case that it's a 3-3 tie?
Doubles is enjoyed by just as many if not more people than singles. You'd be surprised how many fans leave after doubles. Why would you want to do without doubles. Things should be exactly the same as they are now. Remember after Indoors things go back to normal. 8 game pro set, 2 out of three singles. I say to the scoring, welcome back and I hope you get to stay around for a long, long time. Do I hear a second?
Feb 14th, 2014 11:01 PM
mboyle
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

Why couldn't they play singles first and then play doubles only in the case that it's a 3-3 tie?
Feb 12th, 2014 04:49 PM
3gtennis
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

I said before the number of HD cameras and crews needed to have quality broadcasts that the conferences will turn out for other sports that only need two cameras has created a cost estimate that shocked conference leaders. Televise one per school during conference play and let the rest video stream. Start the telecast 30 minutes in and edit where needed to shorten. pick up a few important out of conference matches if wanted and the conference tournaments. This gives those conference networks some extra filler programming in the football down time and lets them show they are fair to all sports.
Feb 12th, 2014 03:10 PM
beachman49
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

Quote:
Originally Posted by TennisSee View Post
That's something I never thought of but you are so right. Picking up the match in progress would be the answer to all the problems.
I work in sports TV world. Other than a couple of mega-conferences that have their own obscure networks doing 2 or 3 matches per year this TV argument is a non starter.

You can always edit. ESPN did this and has still discontinued their NCAA finals coverage. It costs a lot of money to do events and college tennnis involves multiple courts (cameras/crews) simultaneously. And the audience is minimal at best. You could shorten this to 1 hour and it's not going to change.

As an example, water polo takes less than an hour to play and can be done in one pool very easily. Hmmmmm, I still do not see much water polo on tv either.

This TV argument is a misdirection play toward another objective: Shorter days.
Feb 12th, 2014 01:50 PM
TennisSee
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

Quote:
Originally Posted by philbert View Post
I've experienced a half dozen experimental matches on the women's side. I don't like this experimental 6-point doubles format whatsoever, but I think that no ad doubles play is considerably worse than a shorten doubles set. The doubles outcomes with no ad play seem to be far more arbitrary than shortening a match to 6 games.

Moreover, I don't see any advantage in changing the doubles format because of a cable broadcast. Have any of you joined a basketball game in progress when another game ran over? All that is required is for the teams to begin doubles at a time in advance of the cable start time. The cameras just pick up the action very late in doubles. The doubles video time would be compressed since the beginning games are not broadcast, but the fans at the match get treated to the entirety of the action.
That's something I never thought of but you are so right. Picking up the match in progress would be the answer to all the problems.
Feb 12th, 2014 10:31 AM
GBTG_Fan
Re: Your perspective on the experimental format

Doubles no-ad makes 100% sense as it is what happens on the Pro Tour.
This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome