Really. Tennis should be a game for marathon runners and Tour de France champions only? Tennis players are already some of the most fit athletes on the planet. That wasn’t how the forefathers ever envisioned the sport. They never envisioned 20 ball baseline rallies. It was to be played on natural surfaces where serving and coming to the net would allow points to be won quickly without succumbing to the vagaries of odd bounces.
Asphalt courts, modern rackets and strings have bastardized Tennis to the sport it is today. A baseline grinders game where volleying has become an afterthought and fitness rules far more than it did at its inception. The forefathers are likely turning in their graves.
So given the evolution of the sport away from its original design, why rail against one more modernizing addition. Your view of tennis is not the right one. It’s just yours. And it’s not based on any of the realities of where Tennis originated.
But I can see if your game is based on fitness rather than any weapons, No ad would bother you. Kind of like how polyester strings bothered Sampras.
Here is solid proof that you are not the tennis expert or historian that you would like your readers to believe you are:
Contrary to your claim that the “baseline grinder” games are a result of “asphalt courts, modern racquets and strings,” you just witnessed two baseline bashers as far back as 1931. Did you see anyone coming to the net in this video? Don’t get me wrong. I’m a fan of all playing styles. I am simply pointing out that you’re having some serious credibility issues as someone who would like to be respected as some type of authority on tennis.
Also, you said that there were “forefathers” of tennis. Modern tennis was invented about twenty years before the formation of the USTA by two wealthy men and was played exclusively among the wealthy classes. The USTA was then formed in 1881 and was committed fully to keeping it there, but, this year, we are presently celebrating the 50th Anniversary of Open tennis which marks a victory over the USTA and other federations who were forced by Lamar Hunt to finally allow players from less fortunate backgrounds, like Rod Laver, Ken Rosewall, Pancho Gonzales, and other greats to play in their Grand Slams. Lamar Hunt created an ATP-like tour to compete with Slams, and he succeeded! Before this victory, the USTA and other federations penalized Laver, Rosewall, Gonzales, Kramer, Riggs, and other greats by prohibiting them from playing in the Slams simply because they refused to continue playing for them for free, like a slave. As you may already understand, historically and to this day, some wealthy people have a serious problem with people who refuse to work for free and demand a living wage.
Moving on, here are some regular ad scoring pro matches of players whose games are based on both fitness and weapons:
McEnroe defeated Connors in the 1984 US Open Semifinals 6-4, 4-6, 7-5, 4-6, 6-3.
Connors defeated McEnroe in the 1982 Wimbledon Finals 3-6, 6-3, 6-7, 7-6, 6-4.
McEnroe defeated Connors in the 1980 US Open Semifinals 6-4,5-7, 0-6, 6-3, 7-6.
Federer defeated Roddick in the 2009 Wimbledon finals 5-7, 7-6 (6), 7-6 (5), 3-6, 16-14.
These matches were the drugs that brought the fans back wanting more. This level of excitement where all playing styles were on full display by extremely fit athletes with incredible weapons would never be produced by No Ad scoring.
But No Ad scoring is just the tip of the iceberg that could very well snuff out this level of excitement and interest by discouraging talented juniors from less fortunate backgrounds to even consider playing the game. Without them, tennis would not be where it is today. Again look at where all the American greats came from. It certainly was not the country club.
It is undeniable that the USTA has historically been involved in blatant class discrimination since its inception in 1881, and I believe this is still true to this day. This is one of the main reasons that explains why the US hasn’t produced a dominant male pro world no. 1, like Connors, McEnroe, Agassi, and Sampras, in a very long time. The USTA, the ITF, and the other federations are all unashamedly guilty of openly desiring to keep the sport for the elite social classes, like polo, and the implementation of the new ITF Transition Tour, for juniors aspiring to become professionals, proves this. The soaring National Junior Tournament registration fees also prove that the USTA wants to make it practically impossible for the less fortunate to play at their tournaments so that the children of their donor classes have a better chance of earning national ranking points and winning the tournament. Some of these fees are as high as $146 per player! Can you imagine the financial impact this will have on less fortunate families with just two promising tennis junior athletes both wanting to play? These fees could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back for many tennis-loving families, and the USTA know this. They know these families are already struggling with the high costs of just the very basics: a decent pair of tennis shoes that regularly need to be replaced, multiple tennis racquets, constant tennis stringing and strings, travel expenses, lodging, meals, etc. No Ad scoring gives good players from wealthy backgrounds a better chance of succeeding at the junior level and into the pros because it takes fitness and conditioning out of the sport.
I usually don’t continue on with someone who has lost all credibility, but I made an exception with you this one time to get this message out to anyone interested in saving the sport of tennis from crashing into the iceberg that the USTA and the ITF have sent its way. Please have the last word. I’m not interested in debating someone who writes like a propagandist.
By the way, it did feel as if I was being tag teamed by a group of propagandists working incognito for the USTA and ITF to push their stupid ideas.