Tennis Forum banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,647 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
This subject may have been discussed to death in the past, but I have been reading Monica's book,in which She described the Virginia slims, the only Womens Tournament to have a best of five final. I have often thought the Finals of the four Slams should be the best of five,do You think this would be a good thing or am I pissing into the wind?
 

·
Team WTAworld, Senior Member
Joined
·
8,003 Posts
Well I think the tour champs should be again, but not the slams. :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,570 Posts
best of five might spoil the quality of the tennis, plus its against tradition, so i say no for the slams
but i think it would be good for the YEC final, and also tier 1 finals maybe? :shrug:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,118 Posts
They usually create boring, unbalanced, error filled matches. I remember in 96 when Graf beat Hingis in the final of the YEC, it was a five set match, but Graf won two of her three sets by a 6-0 score. :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,233 Posts
Quarterfinals onward, and Final for YEC.

Men's should also be best of three in the first four rounds, than best of 5 in the Quarters onward.

Just think what that change in the men's would do during Wimbledon rain-delays. ;)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
959 Posts
If they have abolished it, why are we trying to bring it back.
I dont think we should bring it back, it might be good for those ticket holder, but for the players, they cannot last that long. There are some women who can last longer than men, but most women cant especially all court players like Hingis. So I dont think it's a good idea.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,187 Posts
Do we really wanna see even more lopsided affairs and more unforced errors? best of 3 all the time for the women is fine the way it is.;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,753 Posts
Eh.. They need to shorten the mens to best of 3 in the grand slams too. They do it in most other tournies anyway. Best of 5 gets boring to me after too long.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,514 Posts
I think that the semis/finals of the YEC should be best of 5. All other matches should be best of three.

For the men, the R16 onwards should DEFINATELY be best of 5 (I think all matches should be, but the R16 on must be.) However, having best of 5 set doubles matches is downright pathetic. Men's and women's doubles at the slams should be best of 3 tiebreak sets. Mixed should be best of two tiebreak and one super tiebreak sets. Doubles is better when it is short.:)
 

·
Plainclothes Division
Joined
·
6,350 Posts
The women used to play best of 5, way back in the early days. It was changed largely because men complained about having to wait for women's matches to finish. (I'm surprised they didn't shorten it furhter.)

I don't like the idea of a changeover to a lot of b/o 5 matches. For one thing, it changes the way the tennis is played. The women tend to try to win every point. They go all out. If an opponent is serving at 30-0, she's digging in and trying to win the point. The men tend to go into "flail" mode in this situation, and just swat at the returns. If they get lucky, and a couple go in, then they'll try to win the game.

I go with the reverse idea as well. Reduce the men's matches to b/o 3. That will, over time, improve the quality of the matches. And the fact is, you almost never see a match with 5 great sets of tennis. Even the legendary Borg-McEnroe match did not have 5 great sets. Instead, what often happens is that a lot of matches are twice as long as they should be without being any more interesting.

Best of 3 favors the more skilled player. It also means you get to the drama more quickly, as a player losing the first set is on the brink of elimination. And if the match is a blowout, it's over quickly. The only thing worse than watching a match that's bad and/or uncompetitive is having to watch it at least 50% longer.

Best of 3 also helps with the scheduling. It's easier to keep a tournament on track. And it would allow spectators and TV viewers to see more matches and players. This would allow audiences to build up familiarity with players who aren't from the "home team".

Anecdotal evidence suggests the public at large doesn't care for a constant diet of b/o 5. Whether it's a player-turned-writer frequently overhearing fans say they'll "come back for the start of the 3rd set", or an official citing TV data showing fans switching away at the starts of sets on a regular basis. By reducing to b/o 3, it increases the urgency of the very first set.

Sure, by doing away with b/o 5, you might sacrifice a few upsets, and wind up with a few more blowouts in the early rounds, but it would pay off in more late-round encounters between the best players. And, let's face it, it's the late-round great matches that stick in the public consciousness for a long time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,615 Posts
The YEC final should be best-of-five-sets. It's the final match of the year - the wrap-up. Whoever wins that battle deserves to be the Year-Ending Champion. It's one match out of an entire calendar year and it's a great way to end the year. Does anyone know why they dropped the format? Was it for TV? That's a shame if it was. Jana Novotna was the last woman to win a best-of-five set match at the WTA Tour Championships in 1997, in which she won in straight sets over Mary Pierce. Hooray for Jana! The last woman to win a 5-set match was Steffi Graf the previous year. Hooray for Steffi! I'm outta here before I go overboard with the Hooray's. Hooray for me!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,369 Posts
Best of 5 sets would be good in some situations (like SF/F of slams, final at YEC)
but not for all of the matches
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
883 Posts
I think all slam finals and the YEC should be best of five sets. The women are so much fitter now then they where even five years ago so it should be no problem in tearms of fitness.
I believe it would make better matchs. Imagine if the Justine Jen match had been best of five sets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
664 Posts
Brian Stewart said:
The women used to play best of 5, way back in the early days. It was changed largely because men complained about having to wait for women's matches to finish. (I'm surprised they didn't shorten it furhter.)

I don't like the idea of a changeover to a lot of b/o 5 matches. For one thing, it changes the way the tennis is played. The women tend to try to win every point. They go all out. If an opponent is serving at 30-0, she's digging in and trying to win the point. The men tend to go into "flail" mode in this situation, and just swat at the returns. If they get lucky, and a couple go in, then they'll try to win the game.

I go with the reverse idea as well. Reduce the men's matches to b/o 3. That will, over time, improve the quality of the matches. And the fact is, you almost never see a match with 5 great sets of tennis. Even the legendary Borg-McEnroe match did not have 5 great sets. Instead, what often happens is that a lot of matches are twice as long as they should be without being any more interesting.

Best of 3 favors the more skilled player. It also means you get to the drama more quickly, as a player losing the first set is on the brink of elimination. And if the match is a blowout, it's over quickly. The only thing worse than watching a match that's bad and/or uncompetitive is having to watch it at least 50% longer.

Best of 3 also helps with the scheduling. It's easier to keep a tournament on track. And it would allow spectators and TV viewers to see more matches and players. This would allow audiences to build up familiarity with players who aren't from the "home team".

Anecdotal evidence suggests the public at large doesn't care for a constant diet of b/o 5. Whether it's a player-turned-writer frequently overhearing fans say they'll "come back for the start of the 3rd set", or an official citing TV data showing fans switching away at the starts of sets on a regular basis. By reducing to b/o 3, it increases the urgency of the very first set.

Sure, by doing away with b/o 5, you might sacrifice a few upsets, and wind up with a few more blowouts in the early rounds, but it would pay off in more late-round encounters between the best players. And, let's face it, it's the late-round great matches that stick in the public consciousness for a long time.
Great post Brian, excellent points I totally agree with! :yeah:

Though I do think it would be interesting and feasible if --- as people have said --- both the men and women played best-of-five matches from the R16/QF on. But, only at the Grand Slams, Tier 1's, and the YEC. The same applies for doubles I guess.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top