A Future With No Sets?

BGod

G.O.A.T.
Here's a question for all here: Do you think with ever growing calls to shorten the Slams to Best of 3 that one day there may be no sets at all?

Before you give me a raised eye brow and say I'm crazy, consider how restricted the game has become in just 50 years. With discussion of time-clock and super tiebreaks replacing sets. You also look at other sports growing in market-share and tennis has its unique format. So what if in the future instead of sets we just have a point total like a set in Volleyball? If I had to guess I'd think it would be 15 games.
 

Federer and Del Potro

Bionic Poster
gnE4FFhtFoLKM.gif
 

tenisdecente

Hall of Fame
Tennis will be in trouble once Fed and Nadal retires, because no one else will sell TV rights and tickets at tournaments, not because of the "obsolete" tennis format. Football is the same for quite a while and sells like **** (I mean real football, BTW)
 

Jackuar

Hall of Fame
Wii tennis or virtua tennis? I'm sure 20 years from now they can simulate any sport to 99.9% real world conditions.
 

noobforehand20

Professional
you always have to take into consideration that any radical changes, would not affect the present or future of tennis, but the past, really all the record that the sport has would become irrelevant and would be a big f-you to all the champions who have raised the sport.

imagine if they downgraded slams to 3 sets and put 3 more in the year, somehow a new guy wins 20 slams, would you rank him above federer? it cannot even be compared in that instance.

what could be a more appropiate idea is to set a parallel tour with all those rules and changes that are in discussion, although you have to wonder how it would be possible to sustain that
 

GabeT

G.O.A.T.
you always have to take into consideration that any radical changes, would not affect the present or future of tennis, but the past, really all the record that the sport has would become irrelevant and would be a big f-you to all the champions who have raised the sport.

imagine if they downgraded slams to 3 sets and put 3 more in the year, somehow a new guy wins 20 slams, would you rank him above federer? it cannot even be compared in that instance.

what could be a more appropiate idea is to set a parallel tour with all those rules and changes that are in discussion, although you have to wonder how it would be possible to sustain that
How is that different from today? The importance of slams has changed a lot already and makes it impossible to compare today's results with those of Borg, for example.
 

Devilito

Legend
if you'd want to shorten the game the answer is more sets and fewer games, not the other way around. Best of 5 sets, 4 game sets, no ad scoring. Keep tiebreaks. Remove let cords on serves. The nice things about 4 game sets is no more feeling out or slow first few games. Most sets don't even get interesting until at least 3-3. More intensity and quality over the entire match.
 

BGod

G.O.A.T.
Look guys the only reason I bring this up is because as a Historian (not just sports, majored in History) and looking at the advances being made, nothing is out of question.

Drone referees are now being discussed when I brought it up a decade ago. AI is likely going to get close to or reach singularity by 2050.

Then I look at tennis and the baseline game is par for the course considering racquet changes and improved fitness. Some match points are ridiculously long and even with courts speeding up it would appear players will adjust accordingly. The timeline is pretty damn small too. The tiebreak was unveiled in 1965. In 1972, Wimbledon put in the 12 point tie-break at 8-8 and only brought in the 6-6 change in 1979. The Miami Open was a Best of 5 set tournament start to finish until 1990.

So come 2050, would not surprise me in the least if we have 3 set Slams and some other kind of shortening tactic. I doubt ads would ever be touched but I could see tiebreaks taking place at 4-4.
 

Mr.Lob

G.O.A.T.
No on a future with no sets. Once you start messing with the basic foundation and structure of how the game is scored, you destroy its history. All of the greats records become meaningless. Tennis would have to sink pretty low before I'd okay how the game is scored.
 

noobforehand20

Professional
How is that different from today? The importance of slams has changed a lot already and makes it impossible to compare today's results with those of Borg, for example.

but it still possible to make comparisons, of course there are gray areas like raquets differences, size of the tour, etc.

but borg and all other greats had to win best of five sets to win all their grand slams, also everytime they played one, imagine taking out that part? it would be like starting a parallel timeline in wich a future generation of the sport is totally irrelevant to this one, im oversteping with this example but i try to convey the idea
 

kabob

Hall of Fame
You do know that whether it's beach volleyball or indoor, they play sets, right? What an oddball comparison. Did you mean to say not having games within sets? Why would that be a good thing or help interest? Is volleyball more popular than tennis in your mind? It's not.
 
Top