Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 65 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,201 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The WTA is always full of upsets because the format of Bo3 make all top players vulnerables. It's simple.

Fedalovic would never have been Fedalovic if GS on ATP were on Bo3. Djokovic would have just lost to Musetti for exemple and would have lost against Federer at the USO SF 2011 and against Kevin Anderson at Wimbledon 2015.
Nadal is invincible at RG because of the Bo5. I doubt he would have won 13 FO (and maybe 14) if he was playing on Bo3. Djokerer would have scored multiples wins against him IMO.

Serena and Sharapova would have won IMO 30 GS and 10 GS because on Bo5, even if the rest of their game is off, are the strongest mentally and would outlast their opponents like Fedalovic did it.
Serena was the only consistent because she possessed a super weapon to bail out her matches : her serve. The others doesn't have this luxury

If the top player play slightly worst and if her opponent play slightly better, the match can be over. It's more easy to have the mindset of peaking for two sets than for three sets.

Ostapenko would never have won the FO 2017 if it was the Bo5 because she would never be able to maintain her low% game for 5 sets. Halep would have outlasted in the final (and maybe she would even not beating Baczinski).
It's even possible than Barty and Muguruza could have outlasted Kenin on Bo5 at the AO 2020.


WTA is not ATP and will never be like ATP because of the lack of a Bo5 format.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
116,007 Posts
You dont know that. It would really hurt someone who had a long 5 setter, especially if there are rain delays and no off days. I dont think best of 5 is why the big 2 always win. They would still win best of 3

Best of 5 would help grinders who want a long match.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,185 Posts
so what? watch men's tennis then
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,201 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
You dont know that. It would really hurt someone who had a long 5 setter, especially if there are rain delays and no off days. I dont think best of 5 is why the big 2 always win. They would still win best of 3

Best of 5 would help grinders who want a long match.
No. Fedalovic would have lost plenty matches.

Old Big 3 are still winning everything because it's so difficult to beat them on Bo5. You forgot Thiem was leading 2-1 against Djokovic at the AO 2020 Final.
For Swiatek, it change nothing. Even on Bo5, she would have lost against Sakkari. She didn't play a good match and Sakkari was treeing on serve.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,948 Posts
It's wishful thinking.
The top women are always injured because they are clearly not ready to sustain the grind of the tour. I can't even begin to imagine how many of them would be injured if they had to play best of five. They might as well open a new WTA department at all of the major hospitals in Melbourne, Paris, London and New York.

Halep, who is supposed to be one of the fittest women on the tour, was hospitalized after playing long 3-set matches against Davis, Kerber and Wozniacki in Melbourne a couple of years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34,902 Posts
Stop making ridiculous excuses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: longtin23

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,201 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
It's wishful thinking.
The top women are always injured because they are clearly not ready to sustain the grind of the tour. I can't even begin to imagine how many of them would be injured if they had to play best of five. They might as well open a new WTA department at all of the major hospitals in Melbourne, Paris, London and New York.

Halep, who is supposed to be one of the fittest women on the tour, was hospitalized after playing long 3-set matches against Davis, Kerber and Wozniacki in Melbourne a couple of years ago.
Because the WTA have crap serves too.

But we will always have random slam winners/finalists because of the Bo3 format on WTA and I see no reason why it won't be different for more 10-20 years

And yes Fedalovic even when they are playing bad have always a big weapon to bail them out :

  • Federer has his serve
  • Nadal has his defense and his Fearhand
  • Djokovic has his mentality and his ROS.

In the WTA, none of them except Peak Serena (her serve) and Peak Sharapova (her Djokovic-like mentality) have this. Andreescu has a Djokovic-like mentality but she has less weapons that him and she is outplayed right now. Osaka on HC has still her first serve to bail her out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,612 Posts
I remember the days when people complained women's tennis was too predictable because the same players always got to the latter stages, and the men's game was more exciting because there were more upsets. Idk why it's changed so much on the women's side in the past few years but I don't think it's just the format.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,201 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
I remember the days when people complained women's tennis was too predictable because the same players always got to the latter stages, and the men's game was more exciting because there were more upsets. Idk why it's changed so much on the women's side in the past few years but I don't think it's just the format.
The format change everything.

Wozniacki and Halep would have won more GS because their opponents (often BBB, big hitters) wouldn't be able to maintain their level.
I don't think that Lucic-Baroni and Ostapenko would have been able to beat Halep at the FO for exemple.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,612 Posts
The format change everything.

Wozniacki and Halep would have won more GS because their opponents (often BBB, big hitters) wouldn't be able to maintain their level.
I don't think that Lucic-Baroni and Ostapenko would have been able to beat Halep at the FO for exemple.
It may be part of the reason, and no doubt some results would have been different. My point is that this lack of consistency in the WTA is relatively new and it's always been bo3 so the format can't be the only or main reason.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,286 Posts
Exactly. So many matches the big 4 have played where they lost the first two sets only to win it in 5. In WTA format, they would be routined.

This makes Serena even more impressive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
Only partly.

Even though best-of-3 makes upsets easier, the Big 3 still took the lions' share of the M1000. They're less dominant there than at slams, but still dominant.

And despite best-of-3 making upsets easier, many past women did show a level of consistency that is sorely missing today.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,286 Posts
If this had been best-of-3, maybe they wouldn't have lost the first two sets... they also know they still have time ahead, so don't need to fight back all-out to recover the second set.
Nope. It is not like they lost on purpose. They lost those sets in the same way higher ranked seeds on WTA lose their matches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Absolute10

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,222 Posts
And what's the point ? Play even 10 sets until the top player wins over the challenger ? This is ridiculous.
Anyway it's impossible to schedule a slam with both men and women Bof5 unless you expand its duration hurting the pre slams other tournaments or having something like 30 courts or play at night ??
And just imagine with raining days in R1/R2 the nightmare it would be for the organizers.
 
1 - 20 of 65 Posts
Top