Would tennis be better with the following rule changes?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by halbrikj, Jan 21, 2013.

  1. halbrikj

    halbrikj Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    Messages:
    167
    Location:
    Caspiar
    I think the sport is long overdue for some rule changes. I'd propose the following:

    1) One serve

    I don't know about you, but I watch tennis for the rallies. I find little entertainment value watching a fault, service winner, or even an ace. One serve means players will be hitting second serves, which means we'd see more rallies.

    Moreover, while I don't have statistics at hand, I would venture to guess that players are holding serve upwards of 85% of the time - because they're winning upwards of 85% of their first serve points. However, if they were only hitting second serves, players would probably only hold 50 - 55% of the time, i.e. games would be more close, more competitive, thus more entertaining.

    Lastly, with one serve, you'd see the more talented players rise to the top of the game, rather than 6'5 plus guys who can hold serve by hitting aces at will. I believe the most talented players are the most entertaining to watch. Think of guys like Mcenroe, Rios, Arazi, etc.

    2) No ad scoring

    One of tennis's biggest challenges has always been gaining new fans. It's never been as popular as baseball, basketball, football, and today it's even taken a back seat to golf, which is pretty hard to do. One reason, I believe, is that those unfamiliar with the sport will be channel surfing, perhaps stop on the USO on CBS, then hear "15, 30, 40, deuce," and wonder what in the heck they're talking about. Point being, most casual viewers will immediately lose interest if they can't even figure out the score, or who's winning. Forget about tradition, dump the deuce and ad scoring and just go with 1-2-3-game.

    Also, by dumping the ad, you'd add an element of entertainment missing from the sport, i.e. the simultaneous game point.

    3) First to six wins

    This rule change would only work if the one serve rule was implemented. Again, with one serve, statistically speaking both server and receiver would have an equal chance of winning the game, thereby obviating the need for a win by two set.

    Could you imagine the excitement of a Wimbledon final, 5th set, five all, three all, i.e. simultaneous championship point!!

    4) Score like badminton, table tennis, volleyball...

    Or... perhaps tennis should do away with the six game set all together and go with straight up scoring, e.g. first to 21 or 25 points wins the set. One of the reasons casual fan watches beach volleyball (apart from the bikinis), is he can understand the scoring. 15 - 15 means both teams have scored 15 points. What a concept!

    Also, straight up scoring would ensure that the better player wins the set, whereas under the current rules, a player could be outscored in points but still win the set.
    _ _ _ _

    Thanks for reading. I look forward to your responses.
     
    #1
  2. woodrow1029

    woodrow1029 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,653
    I like #2.

    Hate the rest.
     
    #2
  3. vive le beau jeu !

    vive le beau jeu ! G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    Messages:
    11,446
    Location:
    Ometepe, Pink Granite, Queyras, Kerguelen (...)
    hate each of those propositions.

    try that if you want, but just don't call it tennis !
     
    #3
  4. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,046
    Tennis needs to go back to 65 sq in wood and gut and be played on grass or clay only. That is what will make it interesting.
     
    #4
  5. Jeepers

    Jeepers Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,459
    Location:
    England
    I think to reduce the duration of tennis matches and increase excitement the following should be implemented:

    At 4:00 hours: Release the Jaguar
     
    #5
  6. Viper

    Viper Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,478
    Location:
    Santa Barbara, CA
    I don't know why everyone hates the idea of only one serve. We don't play with 60 sq. inch frames anymore, so getting the ball in consistently is not an issue anymore. It would force players to play more smart first serves, rather than just bashing one down the middle and getting lucky.
     
    #6
  7. jokinla

    jokinla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,705
    BAHAHAHAHA, yes this is the one, hilarious!!!!
     
    #7
  8. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,742
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    All those suggestions are horrible. Long games with lots of tension are fantastic viewing for fans.
     
    #8
  9. Defcon

    Defcon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    3,708
    The only change the sport needs is speeding up the courts. All these 'rule changes' are horrible and would destroy tennis.
     
    #9
  10. RF20Lennon

    RF20Lennon Legend

    Joined:
    May 2, 2011
    Messages:
    7,225
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #10
  11. Ripper014

    Ripper014 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,863
    I like this idea... but there is nothing wrong with hard courts being part of the mix. It would be nice to have distinct surfaces again instead of making everything homogenized.

    And going back to a smaller head size would put a premium on hitting the ball in the middle of the racket and not all about power. And for those of you that don't know... you can still hit a ball pretty hard with a 65 sq in racket when you have time.

    But I might be convinced to go to 85 sq inches.
     
    #11
  12. mattennis

    mattennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,228
    Totally agree. The four rules of the OP are terrible.

    Just have polarized conditions as it always was and use 65 s.i. wooden racquets or at most 80-85 s.i. graphite racquets from the late 70s and beginning of the 80s.

    Then we would see a totally different top-5 (from the current top 5, probably only Federer would still be top 5 in this case).

    Seriously, I would love it!
     
    #12
  13. firepanda

    firepanda Professional

    Joined:
    May 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,423
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Get rid of serving I agree with. I could probably play with Raonic, Karlovic etc if you take away their first serve. They are not playing tennis and are a disgrace to the game.

    The rest... I'm not sure if you're trolling or not...
     
    #13
  14. RF20Lennon

    RF20Lennon Legend

    Joined:
    May 2, 2011
    Messages:
    7,225
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Two serves are needed! otherwise while under pressure no one would go for a huge serve to save BP's and theres nothing to rely on. Big servers should get rewarded
     
    #14
  15. Leelord337

    Leelord337 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    3,911
    Location:
    univ houston courts
    It would be interesting to see a 1 serve match w/the top players though.
     
    #15
  16. tacou

    tacou Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,032
    Tennis isn't that popular in America, and because of that, you want to completely change the scoring system? No. There rules are all garbage, no offense as you seem to have thought them out. But I don't see them helping anything.

    Second serves have won and lost slam championships...you want to do away with them too?
     
    #16
  17. Alchemy-Z

    Alchemy-Z Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2010
    Messages:
    1,503
    Location:
    Augusta, GA
    When we practice we play a 1 serve rule and while I don;t know if the pro game needs it....it really helps build a well placed 2nd serve and lets you feel like you can go for more on your first serve because you no longer feel that ...okay now for my weak serve.
     
    #17
  18. gregor.b

    gregor.b Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,205
    Location:
    Brisvegas
    I like the first serve thing, but the rest, um, no.

    Maybe use a soccer ball ball for baseball because it would be easier to hit?

    Or a baseball for NFL because it would be easier to throw?

    Some things are the way they are.
     
    #18
  19. ChanceEncounter

    ChanceEncounter Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2009
    Messages:
    1,269
    #19
  20. OrangePower

    OrangePower Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,058
    Location:
    NorCal Bay Area
    About the serve thing, we already tried that, in spirit at least... it's called the WTA. For the ladies, serve is generally not a weapon and in some cases is actually a liability. So there you go - you want to watch tennis where serve is not a determining factor, the WTA is your answer.
     
    #20
  21. TheCheese

    TheCheese Professional

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    954
    I think they should just start enforcing the 25 second rule between points.
     
    #21
  22. woodrow1029

    woodrow1029 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,653
    Oh wait, they already started doing so.

    Oh, but you probably forgot that there is no 25 second rule at the grand slams, it's 20, which at the slams is still discretionary, loss of point not first serve, and pretty much unenforceable because of the ridiculousness of the rule.

    Either that, or you just don't pay attention.
     
    #22

Share This Page