PDA

View Full Version : Should Women's Grand Slam Finals be best of 5?


Ronaldo
02-26-2007, 01:15 PM
Well should they? Mauresmo: We would play best of five finals

Amelie Mauresmo has said she believes women would be prepared to play the best of five sets in grand slam finals.

Mauresmo - who won both the Australian Open and Wimbledon in 2006 - was reacting to arguments that against equal prize money for women on the basis that men spend longer on court and said women should give five set finals a trial.

"Most of the people agree that it's not a matter of how long we spend on court," Mauresmo told BBC Radio Five Live.

"We actually have never been asked to play five [sets].

"I think in the past what was done at the championships at the end of the year was to play the final in five sets and I think why not. I don't think I would disagree to have them in maybe semi finals and finals.

"I think most of the semi finals and finals are very exciting just the way they are in the best of three sets format.

"I think its rare when you have a final that goes just the one way or 100 percent one way is rare, so you know why not think about it.

"I think I would really definitely agree for a final. Lets try that, lets see how it goes and lets see how we react to a best of five because it would be a big physical effort."

I only recall one Slim final going the distance, Gabby/Monica Last One Standing in 1990.

larlarbd
02-26-2007, 01:52 PM
hmm..... gd question , now that pay is equal , why won't they work as much as men ? after all ppl want gd bang for buck . There are two solutions -
no#1 . Girls play Five Setter & Bore Ppl to death . I Love the three SET version of WTA if they made it FIVE - it'll be tiresome , but then thay want same , they should work same .
solution no#2 . the sets are formatted to go to 9-7 each & they play three sets ( best of three I mean ) & no Tie-breaks in the Final sets from rd.16.

johnny ballgame
02-26-2007, 01:56 PM
I'd be for it. Women run marathons. They compete in triathalons. Their soccer matches, basketball games, etc. are the same length as the men's. Why can't they play best of 5?

larlarbd
02-26-2007, 02:24 PM
I'd be for it. Women run marathons. They compete in triathalons. Their soccer matches, basketball games, etc. are the same length as the men's. Why can't they play best of 5?

ahh , very well put . I was looking for a gd argument & he put one through . yes & if you look at the marathon times it's within 2/3mins of the mens side . So , Now they ( women ) are gonna argue that "It's quality , not quantity " - I have a pretty good answer to that , what quality are they providing ? surely it's not the quality of the groundstrokes comparing to men & ohh , please spare me the crap - it's a "PHYSICAL" sport - the only quality ppl might get if they played 5-setters or longer matches & they trained harder for that , WTA is plain lazy in my view .
You want equal pay - come earn it . Only then it'll be fair to MEN.

jelle v
02-26-2007, 02:30 PM
I'm all for..

I think it would bring a lot of extra tension to the women's game. Not that I like watching women's tennis, but a best of five match imo has extra tension because the other player has more opportunity to get back in the game, plus it gets to be more about the physique.

4brotherdrive
02-26-2007, 02:33 PM
I agree, womens slam finals are way too short, and people pay way too much money to watch a 45 minute match.

dukemunson
02-26-2007, 03:05 PM
You guys have all completely missed the point. Of course we DONT WANT the women to play best of 5 sets...what the men or women make effects us (the fans) very little other then in discussion board fodder...but if the women were to play best of 5 that simply means more womens tennis is on TV. Much like ESPN depressingly adding NASCAR this year (now Nascar is all over Sportscenter, etc...) if women were to play best of 5 then womens tennis would be on TV an extra hour...give me more of the mens doubles finals, hell even the the boys final as 2 out of 3 sets is more then enough womens tennis for anyone...5 sets of Sharapova would kill even the deafest of fans...

caesar66
02-26-2007, 09:04 PM
i think finals should immediately become best of five and phase into best of five every match at grand slams. i dont want to hear that women cant do it; men do best of five against men, women should by all logic be able to play best of five against other women. If you want to really make things fair w/ prize money, it needs to be done.

tursafinov
02-26-2007, 09:18 PM
Would that format create a new breed of Player.

I have to ask, could Serena or Sharapova belt away at the ball for 5 SETS???
Would styles that are more fluid and seemingly energy conserving like Mauresmos become pervasive in the womens field???
What do you think.
I thing the Heavy weights would be weeded out.

~Tursa

psp2
02-26-2007, 10:26 PM
I say 75% of the WTA field can't make it past the 3rd set and have enough in their tanks to consistantly play at a competitive level. Fitness would be a much larger factor than tennis skills....all IMHO.

Polaris
02-26-2007, 10:49 PM
.5 sets of Sharapova would kill even the deafest of fans...
LMAO. I shudder at the thought of listening to Maria over 5 sets. :grin:

Eviscerator
02-26-2007, 10:51 PM
No it is hard enough to watch 3 sets.

avmoghe
02-26-2007, 11:58 PM
No thank you. It's bad enough watching them for 3 sets. In fact, let's just shrink them to 1 set. I'd much rather see the men's doubles semis or finals.

The Grand Slam
02-27-2007, 12:23 AM
Well, it may not be the best solution, but I'd like to see them play a super tiebreak if it gets to two sets all. :P The pressure would be ON!

A super tiebreak is first to 10 points, for those who don't know. You still have to win by two points so it can go to 11-9, 12-10, 13-11, 14-12, 15-13, etc.

CanadianChic
02-27-2007, 01:10 AM
I believe there should be five sets, the same as the men, and am aware that they will suffer more injuries due to the exertion. That is why they need to be trained and coached on par with the men's tour.

vive le beau jeu !
02-27-2007, 02:05 AM
No it is hard enough to watch 3 sets.
No thank you. It's bad enough watching them for 3 sets. In fact, let's just shrink them to 1 set. I'd much rather see the men's doubles semis or finals.
ummm you wanna make them play a single tie-break in 5 points instead of 3 sets ?! :rolleyes:

at least, they should have kept the 5 sets final at the masters... that was interesting to see them play 5 sets once in a while. :)

by the way, does anybody have audience comparison between men and women tennis ?... or polls asking people if they prefer to watch men or women ? (maybe i'll make a poll here)
i admit i definitely prefer watching the guys ! even if sometimes i enjoy an interesting shock between top women players...

and what i dislike also is when they show (on TV) a fellow countryman play a boring match against i don't know who... while 2 top players are having an exciting match on another court ! pfff...... :?
(the worst being when the boring match lasts long !)

caulcano
02-27-2007, 02:07 AM
I don't see a big problem playing 5-setters in GS slams only. I'm sure if the 2 remaining players meet in the final then they'll have enough in the 'tank' to compete. They could have longer between end-changes or something like that.

The major problem is fitness. If it means a dramatic drop in quality in the 4th & 5th sets (more UE than winners) then I wouldn't want to see it.

avmoghe
02-27-2007, 03:08 AM
ummm you wanna make them play a single tie-break in 5 points instead of 3 sets ?! :rolleyes:



Err... no. I said we can reduce them to 1 full set, with a tie-break if necessary. I made the comment in jest. However, I was dead serious about not wanting to see women play best-of-five sets.

sypl
02-27-2007, 03:57 AM
I agree with Amelie, 5-setters from semis onwards. Not earlier than that, cos we all know that there are never more than four women seriously in the field who can win.

Why the hell was the 5-setter eliminated from the year end final anyway? I don't remember hearing anyone complaining about it.

Ronaldo
02-27-2007, 04:40 AM
I agree with Amelie, 5-setters from semis onwards. Not earlier than that, cos we all know that there are never more than four women seriously in the field who can win.

Why the hell was the 5-setter eliminated from the year end final anyway? I don't remember hearing anyone complaining about it.

Very few compelling matches and remember Mary Pierce and her injury time-outs.

MaxT
02-27-2007, 05:55 AM
5 or not is a TV rating decision, will people watch woman play that long?

Equal pay is a political decision, better not to reason it.

Captain
02-27-2007, 07:05 AM
How many times do commentators excuse awful tennis by saying a girl is tired because she played a hard 3 set game the previous day. There is no way the vast majority of players could last 5 sets. Already, because of the lack of tactics, regular shots and control, almost anything can happen in most ladies matches. 5 sets would be a complete fiasco.

bluegrasser
02-27-2007, 07:16 AM
i think finals should immediately become best of five and phase into best of five every match at grand slams. i dont want to hear that women cant do it; men do best of five against men, women should by all logic be able to play best of five against other women. If you want to really make things fair w/ prize money, it needs to be done.

Maybe just have the final best of five, this way they have something in the tank.

caesar66
02-27-2007, 10:54 AM
Maybe just have the final best of five, this way they have something in the tank.

I agree that this would be a problem at first, the current crop of women's players would by and large have nothing in the tank by the end of a grand slam, but if we started training the next generation to handle it, i think five sets every match at a gs is feasible. I don't see why more women players dont demand that it be tried, at least to get away from the stigma of only playing two out of three while men are playing three out of five. i would think pride would cause them to step up to the plate.

caesar66
02-27-2007, 10:55 AM
And i love how women players have no trouble asking for equal money, but when asked about playing best of five, mauresmo's comment was "no one has asked us to." i think the women who want the money should be the ones to step up and take responsibility.

tennissavy
02-27-2007, 11:11 AM
I think the ATP should only have best of 3 sets at the grand slams. It gets so painful to sit through 5 sets of choking from the guys. In addition, there would be no dispute about equal prize money. Best of 3 for both tours would be better for us and maybe add more to the players' career longevity.

ne1410is
02-27-2007, 11:18 AM
i dont think the women should play best of 5. i like the best of 3 format. i also think the men should play best of 3 just like at all the other tournaments. its much more manageable. i personally do not think matches can stay compelling for that long.

ja_
02-27-2007, 02:52 PM
And i love how women players have no trouble asking for equal money, but when asked about playing best of five, mauresmo's comment was "no one has asked us to." i think the women who want the money should be the ones to step up and take responsibility.
I agree.

Many people are saying that 5 setters would be boring, the women will be tired, it won't hold an audience, etc., etc. The basic point is that the final only, and maybe semifinals, is what's being discussed (unless I misunderstood the OP). I think it would be exciting because there would be two worthy opponents in the final, as always: Mauresmo, Henin, Serena, Sharapova, and very likely, Venus. Anyway way you pair these players up, it's a match worth watching (and worth muting, if it's Venus/Serena/Sharapova). Think about it: Would Henin have won Dubai 4 years in a row had it been best 3 of 5? Probably, but they would've been some epic matches.

I say, make finals best 3 of 5. Let the women know that the WTA isn't a serving of chocolate pudding and they have to actually compete in order to earn what they want.