10-point tiebreak vs. playing a 3rd Set

kennydoe · Nov 7, 2009

I'm not sure if this is national or just Eastern USTA, but if we split the first two sets, the winner of the match is determined by a 10 point tiebreak.

Most of us HATE this. I, for one would rather play a no-ad 3rd set if they need to cut the time down

What is the general concensus here?

PatrickB · Nov 7, 2009

We play match tiebreaks in USTA league out here in New Mexico, too. Personally, I'd prefer a full third set...

Cindysphinx · Nov 7, 2009

We don't play the third set out. We have indoor 2-hour matches, and it would be too difficult to complete three full sets in that time.

OrangePower · Nov 7, 2009

I'm in Norcal... here it is the choice of the home team whether to play full 3rd or 10-point. Per the rules, the home team is supposed to indicate prior to the start of each match what their choice is per court. In practice, many forget to make that choice up front, and then the decision ends up being made if and when the match gets to 1-set all.

My personal preference is for a full 3rd set. We have no time limitations at our home courts, so I almost always choose the 3rd set. There have been maybe 1 or 2 occassions where I opted for 10-point (once I was not feeling well, and the other time I needed to be done by a certain time for a social event).

My experience when playing away is that most prefer a full 3rd, and most will choose that option unless their club limits their court usage time and has a policy about playing having to play a 10-point.

jefferson · Nov 7, 2009

3rd set. A ten point breaker can go either way. Just takes someone to get hot for a few points and its over!

Why is this called a 10 point breaker, when a tiebreaker ends at 7 points and is called a 12 point?

Ripper014 · Nov 7, 2009

I hate this, and since I have not been paying attention to tennis for about 15 years.. found out they are doing this in professional tennis... in doubles? What is that about... I used to love watching doubles as much as singles... in the days of McEnroe and Fleming and previous to that watching Hewitt and McMillan.

Doubles is really a lost art now.

goober · Nov 7, 2009

jefferson said:
Why is this called a 10 point breaker, when a tiebreaker ends at 7 points and is called a 12 point?

When tiebreakers were first introduced in professional play at the 1970 US Open they used a 9 point tie breaker. This was first to 5. There was no winning by 2 rule. The maximum amount of points you have between 2 players was 9.

This was later changed in 1979 to first to 7 win by 2. To carry on the tradition and I guess not to confuse people it was called a 12 point tie break because it was "the best of 12."

So why is the 10 point tie breaker called a 10 point instead of an 18 point tie breaker to carry on the tradition? Good question- perhaps people would be really confused by the term 18 point tie breaker. I never thought 12 point tie break was a good term to begin with. They also added the term "super-tie break" to differentiate from the end of set tiebreak.

Ripper014 · Nov 7, 2009

I was just thinking, if they are going to insist on doing this, because of time limitations... then bring back no-ad scoring and regular tie-breakers. This should allow you to complete 3 sets in 2 hours. Much better than settling everything on a 10 point tiebreaker. Getting off to a slow start at the beginning of a 10 point tiebreaker, and the match could be over before you knew it.

amarone · Nov 7, 2009

It's a full three sets in Atlanta. If it ever went to a 10-point tie-break, I suspect many players would just stick with ALTA and give up USTA.

Ripper014 · Nov 7, 2009

I remember 13 point tie-breakers in the past and seeing it go to 6-6 meaning the next point decided the match. I thought what an awful way to complete a match. I still like that thought of playing it out in a final set.

OrangePower · Nov 7, 2009

Ripper014 said:
I was just thinking, if they are going to insist on doing this, because of time limitations... then bring back no-ad scoring and regular tie-breakers. This should allow you to complete 3 sets in 2 hours. Much better than settling everything on a 10 point tiebreaker. Getting off to a slow start at the beginning of a 10 point tiebreaker, and the match could be over before you knew it.

Sorry I disagree...

Of course I would prefer to play a full 3rd set rather than a 10-point tiebreaker...

But if I have to choose between a 10-point 3rd versus all three sets no-ad, then I choose the 10-point 3rd. That way at least I get to play 2 'normal' sets, and in the case where one player wins the first two sets, then the whole match is played normally. Versus if you start playing no-ad from the beginning and the match only goes 2 sets, you're getting shortchanged for nothing. Plus I think the outcome of no-ad is just as arbitrary as the outcome of a 10-point.

jserve · Nov 7, 2009

I much much prefer playing out the 3rd sets, but in the PNW we also use the 10 point breakers leagues and most tournaments. It's frustrating when you play a great second set and don't get broken once during the set to then turn around and lose the match because of one poorly played service point in a breaker.

Also the 10 point breakers don't reward players for having higher levels of fitness and endurance that a full 3rd set would, which has allowed me to continue doing well while still in disturbingly poor shape. If we had to play out the third sets it might actually motivate me to drop some weight.

ttbrowne · Nov 7, 2009

Rather play 3rd set...anyday!

darrinbaker00 · Nov 7, 2009

OrangePower said:
I'm in Norcal... here it is the choice of the home team whether to play full 3rd or 10-point. Per the rules, the home team is supposed to indicate prior to the start of each match what their choice is per court. In practice, many forget to make that choice up front, and then the decision ends up being made if and when the match gets to 1-set all.

My personal preference is for a full 3rd set. We have no time limitations at our home courts, so I almost always choose the 3rd set. There have been maybe 1 or 2 occassions where I opted for 10-point (once I was not feeling well, and the other time I needed to be done by a certain time for a social event).

My experience when playing away is that most prefer a full 3rd, and most will choose that option unless their club limits their court usage time and has a policy about playing having to play a 10-point.

In Adult League and Flex League matches, the third set is recorded as 1-0 either way, so you may as well play the match tiebreak. Like you, I'd much rather play a full third set, which is why I prefer playing tournaments to leagues.

arche3 · Nov 8, 2009

I personally would not care. I am pretty confident on tie breakers and have always won most of them. My main problem is the first set... slow starter.

chalkflewup · Nov 8, 2009

A lot of the tournaments in Florida are starting play the 3rd set as a super breaker. For the most part, the only people that seem to be in favor of this format are the tournament directors. I wish they would mirror what the ATP does 2 out 3 sets for singles and 2 out 3 sets for doubles with the 3rd set being determined by a 10pt breaker.

jefferson · Nov 8, 2009

All tournaments around here,upstate NY, have been using 10 point breakers, aka super breakers, for the third set. At least up until the semi, where sometimes the tournament rules are to play out a third set.

Cnote · Nov 8, 2009

I play Peach tennis in NC. We have a choice of a third set or 10 pt superset. I always choose the former.

mikeler · Nov 8, 2009

chalkflewup said:
A lot of the tournaments in Florida are starting play the 3rd set as a super breaker. For the most part, the only people that seem to be in favor of this format are the tournament directors. I wish they would mirror what the ATP does 2 out 3 sets for singles and 2 out 3 sets for doubles with the 3rd set being determined by a 10pt breaker.

I hate match tiebreakers too, but during the summer here in Florida it probably is safer for the players who have to play 2 matches in 1 day in the brutal heat.

kennydoe · Nov 8, 2009

I think the Super-tiebreak gives the team that won the 2nd set an advantage - momentum being in their favor + the deflated-ness of the team that won the first set losing the 2nd.

I'm sure they don't exist, but I'd like to see the statistics showing the percentage of how often the team that won the 2nd set wins the ST. I'll bet it's well above 50%.

I'm a proponent of a no-ad set for the 3rd OR, just start the 3rd set and at the 2-hour mark count the games if the set hasn't completed.

kennydoe · Nov 8, 2009

That is, count the games for the match - all set combined.

if the score is 6-2, 2-6 and they're at 2-4 in the third set, the team that won 12 games is the winner.

Cindysphinx · Nov 8, 2009

I'd far prefer the 10-point tiebreak to no-ad scoring. No-ad is lame. Might as well flip a coin. At least a 10-point tiebreak gives you multiple chances to turn things around.

JavierLW · Nov 8, 2009

kennydoe said:
I'm not sure if this is national or just Eastern USTA, but if we split the first two sets, the winner of the match is determined by a 10 point tiebreak.

Most of us HATE this. I, for one would rather play a no-ad 3rd set if they need to cut the time down

What is the general concensus here?

We play full 3 sets here for league play. (but tournaments are usually match tiebreaker until the semi's)

But I would prefer a match tiebreak to a no-ad set. But that's just me, I HATE no ad.....especially in doubles.

(but I would prefer no-ad to a timed match though.....)

JavierLW · Nov 8, 2009

Cindysphinx said:
I'd far prefer the 10-point tiebreak to no-ad scoring. No-ad is lame. Might as well flip a coin. At least a 10-point tiebreak gives you multiple chances to turn things around.

I dont know if it's the equivalent of flipping a coin.

But what I dont like is in doubles, it makes things a lot different when you are playing a stronger player and a weaker player.

In the regular scenario you know that as long as you can win your serve when the weaker player is returning you will never lose the game. He/She MUST win at least one point otherwise his team cant win.

But in no-ad, he/she can lose every single point and his team can still win because when it gets to deuce of course the stronger player will take it everytime.

sphinx780 · Nov 8, 2009

Because so much of our season is stuck indoors in the northern section, we're stuck with the 10 pt tb and although I'd much rather play a full match, court space is so limited for the amount of players we have, it would be impossible to allow everyone to play.

Our matches are 1 hr 45min a piece and even keeping the warm up short, many times we find that we'll have to shorten the second set or play the third set tb at a later date to decide the match.

I just keep telling myself there are a lot worse things I could do than playing tennis

Cindysphinx · Nov 8, 2009

sphinx780 said:
Because so much of our season is stuck indoors in the northern section, we're stuck with the 10 pt tb and although I'd much rather play a full match, court space is so limited for the amount of players we have, it would be impossible to allow everyone to play.

Our matches are 1 hr 45min a piece and even keeping the warm up short, many times we find that we'll have to shorten the second set or play the third set tb at a later date to decide the match.

I just keep telling myself there are a lot worse things I could do than playing tennis

That's curious. Why 1 hour 45 min?

Around here, it's 2 hours, period. If you don't finish, you don't reschedule to complete the match (with one rare and narrow exception). We have elaborate rules to figure out who won when a match isn't finished.

Thankfully, I have noticed that it is rare at 3.5 and 4.0 for my doubles matches not to be completed in 2 hours. The reason is that players are a little better (compared to 3.0) at finishing points, so the match goes faster.

And I have never, ever had a mixed match go the full 2 hours. No way.

Cindy -- who has played 39 matches this year and only 1 has timed out, and that was because the opponents blatantly stalled

Ripper014 · Nov 8, 2009

Cindysphinx said:
I'd far prefer the 10-point tiebreak to no-ad scoring. No-ad is lame. Might as well flip a coin. At least a 10-point tiebreak gives you multiple chances to turn things around.

I don't particularly like no-ad scoring either but if you are that much better you should never let the game get to a deuce. And if the teams are that even... you would like to think that you would win 50% of those point.

My point is that I would hate to decide a third set strictly on a tiebreaker... I would rather play out a set with no-ad scoring than play a 10 point tie-breaker. In general I hate tie-breaker scoring system anyway... it was designed for TV not for the best interest of tennis. The last set of the Men's finals of Wimbledon was pretty exciting this year.

Ripper014 · Nov 8, 2009

kennydoe said:
I'm a proponent of a no-ad set for the 3rd.

This would be a compromise... if time permits.

Wakenslam · Nov 8, 2009

amarone said:
It's a full three sets in Atlanta. If it ever went to a 10-point tie-break, I suspect many players would just stick with ALTA and give up USTA.

Agreed. While I understand that many places have time constraints, that is not a problem here in ATL. I've said it before. "The day they replace the third set with a tiebreak is the day I quit the league." That also goes for this no-ad BS. NEVER!!!

sphinx780 · Nov 8, 2009

Cindysphinx said:
That's curious. Why 1 hour 45 min?

They were previously 90 min but that obviously led to too many matches needing to be rescheduled...so this was a compromise to get more matches finished with teams having to be o.k. with their fair share of later start times.

The last matches of the night start at 9:30. So if you have a short drive from the club, you're getting in at midnight when you factor in packing up, getting the parking ramp and all. Two hours would force the clubs to put less teams on each night. I'd guess they would then have to limit the amount of teams per league because they simply wouldn't be able to accommodate everyone.

Toons · Nov 8, 2009

For you norcal folks that have responded here, you might be surprised to know that individual clubs may make local rules that supersede usta rules. Usually the home team can choose (full 3rd or 10 pt) but some clubs have a rule stating ONLY 10 point third sets for league play. There is at least one club owner that was very instrumental in pushing for the 10 pt 3rd set rule and (you may recall the first year it was a hard requirement) this club owner stubbornly continues to require his league teams to go along with his way of thinking. Just an FYI.

OrangePower · Nov 8, 2009

darrinbaker00 said:
In Adult League and Flex League matches, the third set is recorded as 1-0 either way, so you may as well play the match tiebreak. Like you, I'd much rather play a full third set, which is why I prefer playing tournaments to leagues.

Yeah the 3rd set is recorded as 1-0 either way, but why would that influence you to play the match tiebreak? I don't care how the score is recorded; I still want to get in a full 3rd if possible since that's the more accurate way to determine the better player.

OrangePower · Nov 8, 2009

Toons said:
For you norcal folks that have responded here, you might be surprised to know that individual clubs may make local rules that supersede usta rules. Usually the home team can choose (full 3rd or 10 pt) but some clubs have a rule stating ONLY 10 point third sets for league play. There is at least one club owner that was very instrumental in pushing for the 10 pt 3rd set rule and (you may recall the first year it was a hard requirement) this club owner stubbornly continues to require his league teams to go along with his way of thinking. Just an FYI.

Yes you're right, and I know of a couple of clubs that have the 10-point for 3rd rule. Basically what these clubs are saying is that their members, when playing at home, must always choose the 10-point.

Fortunately these clubs are in the minority, and most players when allowed to make their own choice go for the full 3rd.

Off the top of my head, my adult team over the course of 14 league matches in the regular season (70 individual matches), probably went to a 3rd set around 30 times, of which probably no more than 5 were decided by 10-point.

GeoffB · Nov 8, 2009

It doesn't sound like anyone likes the third set supertiebreak in lieu of a third set. No surprise there. Would a tennis player prefer to play a third set, or go home, wash the dishes, do the laundry, and mow the lawn?

The super tiebreak is a compromise that keeps the length of a match to a shorter (and more predictable) length. Sometimes it's because court time is at a premium (manhattan in the winter, for instance), and sometimes it's because players are just really busy.

But nah, nobody seems to prefer it.

raiden031 · Nov 8, 2009

USTA uses a 10-pt tiebreak at Nationals.

I don't mind the 10-pt tiebreak because I rarely have time to complete 3 sets anyways. I kinda like the added pressure knowing you can easily blow the match in a 10-pt tiebreak. Of course if I wasn't under time constraints I'd prefer the 3rd set, but I'm so used to not playing it so I don't really care anymore.

Wakenslam · Nov 8, 2009

raiden031 said:
Of course if I wasn't under time constraints I'd prefer the 3rd set, but I'm so used to not playing it so I don't really care anymore.

This is exactly the problem I have with this. Let's take away the third set because of time. Let's play no-ad because of time. What's next? Let's just play a pro set instead. It's a slippery slope...

darrinbaker00 · Nov 8, 2009

OrangePower said:
Yeah the 3rd set is recorded as 1-0 either way, but why would that influence you to play the match tiebreak? I don't care how the score is recorded; I still want to get in a full 3rd if possible since that's the more accurate way to determine the better player.

If it's not going to count as a full set score, I'm not going to waste my time playing one, even though that's my overwhelming preference. That's why I don't play Adult Leagues, and I'll probably drop USTA Flex League after this season.

10sguy · Nov 8, 2009

raiden031 said:
USTA uses a 10-pt tiebreak at Nationals.

I don't mind the 10-pt tiebreak because I rarely have time to complete 3 sets anyways. I kinda like the added pressure knowing you can easily blow the match in a 10-pt tiebreak. Of course if I wasn't under time constraints I'd prefer the 3rd set, but I'm so used to not playing it so I don't really care anymore.

The match tiebreak (that's the correct name for what most of you call 10 point tiebreakER) is mandatory at Nationals (and usually Sectionals & Districts too) because of time constraint issues related to the format and SO MANY TEAMS. It would be a huge headache for the TD's AND participants if they permitted full third set play.

OrangePower · Nov 8, 2009

10sguy said:
The match tiebreak (that's the correct name for what most of you call 10 point tiebreakER) is mandatory at Nationals (and usually Sectionals & Districts too) because of time constraint issues related to the format and SO MANY TEAMS. It would be a huge headache for the TD's AND participants if they permitted full third set play.

Right... and it would be even simpler for scheduling if each match consisted of just one single pro-set... no, wait, how about we just make each match consist of a single match tiebreak and that's it?

Seriously, I understand the constraints and so on, and I can live with the match tiebreak.

But I also think it's important to preserve the integrity of the game and to ensure as much as possible that the better player / team wins, and the match tiebreak undermines this somewhat. It's a slippery slope - once the governing bodies start compromising for the sake of ease / convenience / simplicity, the danger is that in a decade or two we'll just be playing a single no-ad pro-set for all the marbles.

For example, look at what's happened with doubles on the ATP tour.

kennydoe · Nov 9, 2009

kennydoe said:
That is, count the games for the match - all set combined.

if the score is 6-2, 2-6 and they're at 2-4 in the third set, the team that won 12 games is the winner.

Would anybody consider this?

You'll probably have to deal with the person ahead taking shoe-tying breaks and long changeovers, but I'd still rather count games.

Ripper014 · Nov 9, 2009

kennydoe said:
Would anybody consider this?

You'll probably have to deal with the person ahead taking shoe-tying breaks and long changeovers, but I'd still rather count games.

Not really... what I have always liked about tennis is that you are not on the clock... you do not lose because you are out of time. That you you can always come back as long as you don't lose the last point. To be able to come back from the brink of defeat... unlike any other sport where you can just run out the time your opponent has... with tennis you have to push to the last point. I like that.

HitItHarder · Nov 9, 2009

Here in SC our local USTA league has us vote (each NTRP level) at the beginning of each season as to whether we play a third set or use the 10-point tie break. Overwhelmingly, the Adult leagues (all NTRP levels and both men and women) choose to play the third set. However, it is not unusual to see our Senior and Super Senior leagues opt for the 10-point tie break.

It is interesting because once you get to Districts, you have to use the 10-point tie break instead of the third set. I actually think this gives an advantage to those teams that use 10-point tie breakers during their league play because I believe there is a different mentality you have to have in a tie breaker set. You drop a couple points and you can be done quickly.

kennydoe · Nov 9, 2009

Here in NY, time is very much an issue...ALL leagues are played indoors, and most clubs don't have an awful lot of time available.

On top of that, I can tell you as a captain, that it can be like pulling teeth to get players to the court for ONE match, much less rescheduling to play a 3rd set...

To me, playing it all at one time is a measure of a players/teams fitness as well...and very much a part of the game. if I work to get myself into shape to go three rounds and my opponents don't, why should they get the benefit of getting a fresh start?

There has to be a better way....

Ripper014 · Nov 9, 2009

kennydoe said:
Here in NY, time is very much an issue...ALL leagues are played indoors, and most clubs don't have an awful lot of time available.

On top of that, I can tell you as a captain, that it can be like pulling teeth to get players to the court for ONE match, much less rescheduling to play a 3rd set...

To me, playing it all at one time is a measure of a players/teams fitness as well...and very much a part of the game. if I work to get myself into shape to go three rounds and my opponents don't, why should they get the benefit of getting a fresh start?

There has to be a better way....

Totally agree... I have not played league in probably 20 years... but back then it was never an issue we always played out all three sets with tie-breakers at 6-6.

Once in a mixed doubles tourament we were required to play no-ad scoring but otherwise everything else was the same. Tie-breakers at 6-6 and playing all 3 sets... but this was because the tournament committee wanted better control of match times. Did I like it "NO", was it better than deciding the match on a third set 10 point tie-breaker... it was preferable to me. It is not like every game in a set goes to deuce.

TnTBigman · Nov 9, 2009

This rule sucks. I'm in FL. Something about complaints from tennis facilities saying the matches go on too long and past their normal closing time. If you win the 2nd set, then the momentum is with you. However, if you take time build a momentum, you're screwed. That's why you must win it in 2

.

JT_2eighty · Nov 9, 2009

I don't play usta leagues, but in the GCITA (greater cinci indoor...), it's about allotted time. If you can squeeze three sets into the time period, you play them out. If you are out of time and on serve, you play a tiebreak for that set, whether it's the first, second or third. It's all 9-pt tiebreaks, first to 5.

When indoors you have to set some kind of time limit, in the end it sucks, but none of us are getting paid for this, so it is what it is. I've won and lost many matches by one point. In the end it has made me a stronger player mentally in those clutch situations.

The catch is, if you are up a break in a set, say 3-1, and time is up, you win that set... so sometimes you get losers who start to prolong time between points when they are up a break and time is running out, so you don't get a chance to break back. I'd rather play a super tb instead of lose a set 0-2 (which has happened too often as well).

10-point tiebreak vs. playing a 3rd Set

New User

Rookie

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Legend

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Hall of Fame

Legend

Rookie

Hall of Fame

Professional

Banned

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

Rookie

Moderator

New User

New User

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Rookie

Hall of Fame

New User

Legend

Legend

Rookie

Legend

Rookie

Professional

Rookie

Legend

New User

Hall of Fame

Semi-Pro

New User

Hall of Fame

Professional

Hall of Fame

Similar threads