We are so lucky the slams are best-of-5-sets, otherwise the wimpy teens would be sneaking into slam finals

[Deleted member 791948]

Was it John McEnroe who recently supported the idea of best-of-3-sets? Would be disastrous, plus nobody would take slam titles seriously anymore.
And if someone won 20 or 30 slams with the best-of-3-sets, they'd never be rated as high as Nadal, because Nadal won them with best-of-5-sets

 

[TheNachoMan]

I agree with you for once.
BO3 slams would be a disaster. There’s no way you’d take any of the wins seriously compared to the guys who did it in BO5.

 

[Slicehand]

Yeah slams are great how they are, if you make them 3 setters what is gonna set them appart from the rest of the tournaments? That you play 2 extra rounds against players like the 150 of the world?

 

[Mustard]

I agree with you for once.
BO3 slams would be a disaster. There’s no way you’d take any of the wins seriously compared to the guys who did it in BO5.

Beware them trying it by stealth, like making the first 3 or 4 rounds best of 3 sets, and keeping the latter stages best of 5 sets. They did that at the US Open for a while in the 1970s (1975-1978).

 

[TimHenmanATG]

This ain't it, bruv: