A 10-pt tiebreak should never decide a match

polski

Semi-Pro
I have been the benefactor of the 10-point tiebreaker in both of my last two league matches. In both matches, I managed to get bageled in the 2nd set after close 1st sets & then find a way to win the 10-point tiebreakers both times.

I am fine with tiebreakers deciding a set, but in league matches we really need to play out the 3rd set. There is a huge difference in what it takes to win a tiebreak vs. what it takes to win 6 games. I shouldn't have won either of these matches this weekend, but since the USTA wants us playing tiebreakers I was able to.
 

Caesar

Banned
No thanks.

A third set adds anything up to an hour onto the end of the match. It's an inconvenience for those of us with real lives, who have other things to do with our weekends.

A MTB keeps matchtimes down, and allows the finishing time to be more easily predicted. If you made everyone play best of three sets you'd have a lot of people giving up league play.
 

Clintspin

Professional
Yes the 10 point tie-break is a lousy way to decide a otherwise good match. I have a friend (was a 5.0 player now a 4.5 after shoulder and cancer issues) who usually takes a loss in the first set but is in the process of wearing out his opponent. He can go all day and will win the second set. Then, before the change to the 10 point tie-break, he would almost always win the third set. Now his opponents just have to pull themselves together for a quick tie-break. It's like running a 5K and seeing the time-clock.
 

gmatheis

Hall of Fame
No thanks.

A third set adds anything up to an hour onto the end of the match. It's an inconvenience for those of us with real lives, who have other things to do with our weekends.

A MTB keeps matchtimes down, and allows the finishing time to be more easily predicted. If you made everyone play best of three sets you'd have a lot of people giving up league play.

I have to disagree here , I join USTA leagues because I want to play tennis, not because I want to do "other things" with my weekend.

Playing 3 full sets shouldn't take much more than 2.5 hours anyway, and you can get back to your "real life"
 

goran_ace

Hall of Fame
I agree with what Caesar said but would also add that it would be inconvenient from a scheduling/court reservation standpoint as well.
 

bcart1991

Professional
Best of three sets should be just that, best of three sets. I don't like the match tiebreak either.

If I'm joining a league, I'm setting aside that time to potentially play three sets that day. If I have other things that are more pressing, I don't play that day. It's quite simple.

No me gusta.
 

rjw

Professional
No thanks.

A third set adds anything up to an hour onto the end of the match. It's an inconvenience for those of us with real lives, who have other things to do with our weekends.

A MTB keeps matchtimes down, and allows the finishing time to be more easily predicted. If you made everyone play best of three sets you'd have a lot of people giving up league play.

Maybe spend more time playing than surfing here?
 

spot

Hall of Fame
I think it just comes down to court availability. If its important for the success of a league that matches get done in 2 hours then sure- play the tiebreak. In areas where courts are plentiful and there isn't a scheduling problem then play the third set.
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
Here, we play indoor matches. Two hours costs $17.

If you eliminate the match tiebreak, you'd need to reserve a third hour. That would mean a USTA match would cost $25, and the third hour would often be wasted.

You'd also drastically reduce court availability. Now, matches run from 7-9 and from 9-11. Without the match tiebreak, you couldn't get two matches done each evening.
 

goober

Legend
I've played many three set matches in USTA over the years, and not one of them was longer than two hours.

I am not sure what this proves. I have played 2 set matches that were over 2 hours. We play third set 10 point tiebreak and every single week at least 1 line sometimes 2 lines goes over 2hours.
 

spot

Hall of Fame
I've played many three set matches in USTA over the years, and not one of them was longer than two hours.

Seriously? I think that the number of 2 set matches that go over 2 hours is far greater than the number of 3 set matches that finish in under 2 hours.
 

kylebarendrick

Professional
Since pro doubles matches now use 10 point tiebreaks everywhere but the majors, I don't see how much success adult league players will have in arguing that we need to play full third sets.
 

NoQuarter

Rookie
I think that it has been a part of league tennis long enough that it doesn't bother me anymore. Never really liked it....but have adapted to it now.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
I am not sure what this proves. I have played 2 set matches that were over 2 hours. We play third set 10 point tiebreak and every single week at least 1 line sometimes 2 lines goes over 2hours.

Yeah, me too. I played one match 3 or 4 years ago where we split 7-6 5-7 that went 2:45 to the end of the 2nd. We started the 3rd and were on serve at 1-2 when we were kicked off by a tournament director for being an hour over our court time. We would have argued to complete the match (since NJ USTA is 3 sets), but the other team had won 4-0 an hour and a hlaf ago, so we just played the MTB and let him have the court for the tournament. The match was still over 3 hours with the MTB and probably headed close to 4 had we played out the 3rd.
 

andfor

Legend
We have a better chance of changing the tax code in this country before the USTA stops using the MTB in league play.
 

sphinx780

Hall of Fame
I'd love to see the 3rd set be played out but here we have to play indoors so often it would force the USTA to have to decide who could play league for a season and who couldn't due to court availability.

The main club that leagues are played in here (UofM) had to reduce court time to 1hr 45 min per USTA match to try to fit 3 matches on each night. 6-7:45, 7:45-9:30, 9:30-11:15.

Without the TB, there's no way this is remotely functional and we've already seen at the 4.5 level that if your team doesn't have a request in soon enough to the home court, you better hope another club has something open. Leaving many players with a 45+ min drive just to get to their home court to play.

I save the third setters for hitting with friends at this point or when we can all agree to play one during the outdoor season. Sometimes all it takes is asking.
 

ian2

Semi-Pro
To the OP: it's noble of you to say you shouldn't have won those matches, but in reality the outcome of the third set (if you were to play it) would be as unpredictable as a 10-point tie-breaker.

Personally, I'd prefer to play full three sets every time, but practical considerations (courts availability, cost, scheduling) make the 10-point tie-break a viable and fair compromise.

I'm lucky to play USTA leagues in an area where court time is essentially free and scheduling conflicts are rare. Even though 10-point tie-break is now mandated by USTA for most of the leagues, we (the players) often decide before the match starts that we'll play full third set. A few times, we agreed beforehand to play the tiebreaker but in the end went ahead and played the full third set because time allowed, and the match was too much fun to cut short. Again, I realize not everyone is so lucky to have a choice.
 
Last edited:

Maui19

Hall of Fame
I understand the reasons mentioned above supporting a MTB. Also, playing a third set in the summer heat also just about killed some seniors in my area, which is one of the reasons they gave us for the switch.

However, I just hate the rule. I think the 3rd set is the most fun to play, and brings fitness into the equation as well. I wish we played them out.
 

rjw

Professional
To the OP: it's noble of you to say you shouldn't have won those matches, but in reality the outcome of the third set (if you were to play it) would be as unpredictable as a 10-point tie-breaker.

I totally agree with that.....momentum shifts can change everything whether it's a tie breaker or a set
 

escii_35

Rookie
meh, No-ad over three sets is much worse.

I don't sign up for any no-ad tourneys.

7-6 8,0-6,11-9 Sectionals one year. Couple beneficial net cords in the first set. 5-6 in the MTB serving I freaked. All the spectators were watching our match as we were the last on, up against the best team in the pool after beating the worst 2-1 winning court 3 in a MTB. I figured it was 1-1. Two doubles later it as 5-8. I looked over at the other courts to see if I could locate the scorecards. Ohhhh, 6-1,6-2 and 6-0,6-3 them. Two deep breaths and a relaxed smile later 11-9.

The team ended winning nationals.
 

purge

Hall of Fame
the match tiebreak has the one purpose of keeping match time in check. how do you think it came to be in the first place?

obviously somethign was needed because the play schedules wouldnt work out as smooth without it. or do you think 3 pot-heads just sat together on a saturday night with a joint and one said "hey you know what would be like totally awesome? we should like totally play a 10 point tiebreak instead of a 3rd set that would be hi-laaarius i tell you like h my god like for real and stuff"?
-nah
 

Angle Queen

Professional
A 3-set match in less than 2 hrs? Only if done in straight sets, my friend.

I'm with Spot. I see plenty of 2-set matches (w/MTB) that exceed 2 hours. Just had one two weeks ago: walked on-court at 10:50am, walked off with a big W almost three hours later -- 7-5, 6(6)-7, 10-7 -- at 1:45pm. Seems like almost every game went to multiple deuces and there were only a few easy points to be had.

Our District made the switch to MTB in 2005. Didn't like it then, don't like it now but that's the way it is and we've learned how to play them well. Even when we get down in them, I like to remind myself that "It's a Long Way to Ten" (sung to the tune of It's a Long Way to Tipperary). I also didn't like the switch to the Comen TB...but am now a fan...in doubles.

As to the OP, I also don't like that a line or even a match can come down to a MTB...but them's the breaks.
 
i hate, i repeat hate 10pt tie breaks. luckily here in socal there are tons of courts that are always available so we use the best of 3 three setup. i have played some tournies where they try and squeeze as much play time as possible and have mtb's. MTB's are for the weak and out of shape. if you dont have time to play a full 3 sets then dont play.

i love that feeling of playing a 3rd set after you just had two sets decided by tie breaks on a 95 degree day and you feel that you have literally no more gas and want to pass out. you keep on playing because youve practiced for this exact moment and will not allow yourself to lose to a worthy opponent. your legs are jello and shirt is drenched with sweat, but after you win the match and go home you can reflect on your beautifil running dtl winner while using your last ounce of energy to save break point. at that point you break through the wall and get your second wind, taking that momentum and playing the best tennis of your life.

this is why i play tennis. not for cheesy MTB's to determine a hard fought match.
 

goran_ace

Hall of Fame
meh, No-ad over three sets is much worse.

+1. I'd take deuce scoring and a TB over playing no-ad and playing out the third set.

I don't like the idea of a TB instead of a third set, but I'm willing to accept it.

It's along the lines of a soccer or hockey game being decided with a shootout.
 

volleygirl

Rookie
I have to disagree here , I join USTA leagues because I want to play tennis, not because I want to do "other things" with my weekend.

Playing 3 full sets shouldn't take much more than 2.5 hours anyway, and you can get back to your "real life"



Agreed. I dont like the 3rd set tiebreaker and if you cant put aside enough time to play 3 full sets, then please dont come back. 3 sets isnt asking too much.
 

treo

Semi-Pro
My USTA team played best of 3 the entire regular season and playoffs. The captains all decided that is what's best. Then in the city finals, USTA demands MTB. I don't mind MTB during regular season if courts are tight, but in the finals it should be best of 3. USTA needs to spend some more and book more courts.
 

Vik

Rookie
I actually think the 2nd set should be a 10pt tiebreaker.
Then the 3rd set could be played out if needed.

Radical, I know.
 

rjw

Professional
I actually think the 2nd set should be a 10pt tiebreaker.
Then the 3rd set could be played out if needed.

Radical, I know.

Or maybe 1st and 2nd should be tiebreakers and play the 3rd only if needed?

Heck, a match could last like 15 minutes? jk of course

I've got it !! drive thru tennis
 

gmatheis

Hall of Fame
To the OP: it's noble of you to say you shouldn't have won those matches, but in reality the outcome of the third set (if you were to play it) would be as unpredictable as a 10-point tie-breaker.

Personally, I'd prefer to play full three sets every time, but practical considerations (courts availability, cost, scheduling) make the 10-point tie-break a viable and fair compromise.

I'm lucky to play USTA leagues in an area where court time is essentially free and scheduling conflicts are rare. Even though 10-point tie-break is now mandated by USTA for most of the leagues, we (the players) often decide before the match starts that we'll play full third set. A few times, we agreed beforehand to play the tiebreaker but in the end went ahead and played the full third set because time allowed, and the match was too much fun to cut short. Again, I realize not everyone is so lucky to have a choice.

The full 3rd set actually favors the stronger team, anyone can have a few good points in a row, and in a tie breaker that's often enough to win it, but in a set a stronger opponent has time to come back.

Everything else I agree with tho. I really like the way your area handles the 3rd set, and perhaps that should become a standard rule ... let teams agree at the start of the match on which method to use based on court availability etc.

The USTA is about playing tennis right ... why not let people play more if they want to ?
 

polski

Semi-Pro
The full 3rd set actually favors the stronger team, anyone can have a few good points in a row, and in a tie breaker that's often enough to win it, but in a set a stronger opponent has time to come back.

Exactly...I was not the better team either match this weekend & I still won both matches because we got on a small roll in the tiebreaker (one of them, we just didn't double fault & our opponents did twice). One of these wins decided that the overall team match went our way 2 to 1.

I like to win as much as the next guy, but I don't feel like I should have won. I just prefer that the best team should win and that wasn't me this weekend.

Heck, what if this gets me bumped up?
 

dizzlmcwizzl

Hall of Fame
Exactly...I was not the better team either match this weekend & I still won both matches because we got on a small roll in the tiebreaker (one of them, we just didn't double fault & our opponents did twice). One of these wins decided that the overall team match went our way 2 to 1.

I like to win as much as the next guy, but I don't feel like I should have won. I just prefer that the best team should win and that wasn't me this weekend.

Heck, what if this gets me bumped up?

Your ratings depends more on game score than match results. If you got bageled in the second set then winning the match tiebreak would be equivalent to losing the second set 6-1 instead of 6-0.

It should not make a difference in your year end rating ... one game should not make that much of a difference.
 

goober

Legend
I like to win as much as the next guy, but I don't feel like I should have won. I just prefer that the best team should win and that wasn't me this weekend.

Heck, what if this gets me bumped up?

Winning and losing is not a factor in bump ups. You can still get bumped up with a losing record if your matches with highly rated players are close. Also I am not sure if 3rd set tiebreakers are even factored into dynamic calculations.
 

kelawai

Rookie
I would like to play 3rd set. I have seen many and played a few matches when the 1st set is close 7-5 or decided by TB. The winner will slow down and killing time during the second set bcos of 2 hours time match.

Especially 4.5 and 5.0 level shouldn't play 10 points tie breaker at all.
 

Backhand DTL

New User
I have been the benefactor of the 10-point tiebreaker in both of my last two league matches. In both matches, I managed to get bageled in the 2nd set after close 1st sets & then find a way to win the 10-point tiebreakers both times.

I am fine with tiebreakers deciding a set, but in league matches we really need to play out the 3rd set. There is a huge difference in what it takes to win a tiebreak vs. what it takes to win 6 games. I shouldn't have won either of these matches this weekend, but since the USTA wants us playing tiebreakers I was able to.

I agree! I'm 41 years old and still prefer to play a set. The better player on that day will win the set, but in a breaker, anything can happen!
 

andfor

Legend
Exactly...I was not the better team either match this weekend & I still won both matches because we got on a small roll in the tiebreaker (one of them, we just didn't double fault & our opponents did twice). One of these wins decided that the overall team match went our way 2 to 1.

I like to win as much as the next guy, but I don't feel like I should have won. I just prefer that the best team should win and that wasn't me this weekend.

Heck, what if this gets me bumped up?

Realizing I know you believe you know exactly what you are talking about, however, you are really stating an opinion.

I saw a stat that on the ATP doubles tour the higher (better) ranked team wins the 3rd set MTB at about the identical rate they did when a full 3rd set was played. I believe the better player wins even at the amateur level just the same. Sure the "lesser" player will beat the "better" player on occasion. That's going to happen, blaming in to a MTB is nothing more than an excuse.

I will say that the MTB has reduced the need to be in the kind of shape needed to most effectively play a full 3rd set.

Again, the MTB is here to stay in league tennis. I got over it 15 years ago when it was first introduced. I hope everyone else can too. For those who don't like it, look for tournaments that play out the 3rd set.
 

Fuji

Legend
Jeeze you guys take a long time to play 3 sets! Normally I can finish 5 sets in under 4 hours. 3 full sets takes me just under 2 hours. Maybe I'm just no nonsense when I play! ;)

-Fuji
 

kelawai

Rookie
Jeeze you guys take a long time to play 3 sets! Normally I can finish 5 sets in under 4 hours. 3 full sets takes me just under 2 hours. Maybe I'm just no nonsense when I play! ;)

-Fuji

Maybe we have too many Pusher in the league's :)
 

Fuji

Legend
Maybe we have too many Pusher in the league's :)

LOL that's quite a possibility!

The other thing is that my game is made to dismantle defensive players. I was almost solely grooved to defeat any type of defensive player through my numerous hours of doubles I spent as a younger player. Playing pushers for me is easier then a normal practice session! :) I was taught when I first started out, that defense is bad. Defense means your going to loose. If you are on defense, you are loosing the game! Of course it's not totally true, but that mindset really made me an attacking type player!

-Fuji
 

ChipNCharge

Professional
Jeeze you guys take a long time to play 3 sets! Normally I can finish 5 sets in under 4 hours. 3 full sets takes me just under 2 hours. Maybe I'm just no nonsense when I play! ;)

-Fuji

Same here. Not sure why it takes the people in this thread so long to play a tennis match. They must be taking the full time to warm up, the full time between change-overs, every game goes to duece, and each player catches their toss two or three times when serving.
 

Caesar

Banned
You guys must have very short rallies. A relatively even set will take the better part of 45 minutes. Matches that go to three sets are usually fairly evenly contested.

Throw in a warmup etc. and by the time you get to the end of the second set, you're usually well into the last half hour of play for a 2hr court booking. A MTB means you can wrap up the match before the time runs out.

It's pretty rare I've played a three set match that's taken less than 2 hours. Most are closer to 2.5.
 
Top