Has Absolute Power Corrupted Tennis Absoluetly?

[your best friend]

There are lots of little reports out their that the lords of pro tennis are thinking of instituting fundamental changes to the game (rule changes, scoring changes, etc.) in order to entertain millennials, primarily, and shorten up tennis matches.
It's a rhetorical question but is tennis ignoring it's real problem, which is a stylistic one and not one of time?
Of course they are!

They can't do a thing about the dull monochromatic nature of tennis in 2016
and the robotic similarity between 95% of all pros out there today. That would be admitting their game is about as interesting as watching paint dry because of dull mind numbing uniformity in play and style.

So like the old joke about rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic pro tennis will try to shorten matches
in a brilliant solution that admits they can't make the game anymore appealing but they can shorten the amount of time one has to sit there and try to watch it.

Tennis is like boxing. It's all about match ups and contrasts in style. If they want to take the power equation out of the modern game, which forces everyone to play a hamster like back and forth
baseline bore-athon (for the most part) then they will force pros to think and create again and find
new ways to win.
That means (for pro tennis), good bye to poly strings and overly powerful frames in a game where many players now resemble NBA players with racquets. Will it happen? I doubt it and tennis will continue
to suffer from terminal boredom.

 

[TheFifthSet]

I agree, it drives me off the wall, and it's misguided.


How about instead of changing the very fabric of the game, we start small? Have a GC masters event (just make Queens one, if the logistics are too cumbersome otherwise), and proceed from there.

 

[Vanilla Slice]

I agree, it drives me off the wall, and it's misguided.


How about instead of changing the very fabric of the game, we start small? Have a GC masters event (just make Queens one, if the logistics are too cumbersome otherwise), and proceed from there.

I absolutely agree, but which hard court master should be cast aside for a grass court masters event? I think the perfect number is five hard, 3 clay, and 1 grass court masters event.

Personally, I'd get rid the Paris Masters because it replaces a decently fast hard court with a fast grass surface. Plus, it'd give the top players more recovery time before the World Tour Finals, ensuring some higher quality matches at the end of the year.

 

[your best friend]

This still does not address the problem of power corrupting tennis absolutely. You can't do anything about governing the players...they will continue to grow taller and become faster and stronger. What you can govern are the variables...the balls, the racquets, the strings, the court surfaces.
Matches aren't too long (not by and large). They are too boring and too stylistically uniform.

Tennis is the only sport where professionals are allowed to use equipment that amateurs have to use in order to generate power. Golf and baseball certainly doesn't allow such a dichotomy.

 

[TheMuzziah]

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

-Lord Acton/ June Finch

 

[GPBurdell]

Tennis is the only sport where professionals are allowed to use equipment that amateurs have to use in order to generate power. Golf and baseball certainly doesn't allow such a dichotomy.

Huh??? How is tennis the only sport that does that? Explain the golf analogy please??

 

[JSummers]

Huh??? How is tennis the only sport that does that? Explain the golf analogy please??

Golf: PGA limits tournament eligible clubs with a coefficient of restitution (COE) below some limits, and club head size smaller than certain dimensions, etc. This effectively limits the amount of energy each club can generate at impact and hence the distance a club can potentially hit. There is no restriction for amateurs.

Baseball: I don't know details but Pros can only use woodies. Amateurs usually swing metal bats, and are more powerful.

 

[Recoveringhobo]

I would be okay getting rid of poly strings. In my mind, they are what have really ruined tennis over the past few years.

 

[Kalin]

Tennis is the only sport where professionals are allowed to use equipment that amateurs have to use in order to generate power. Golf and baseball certainly doesn't allow such a dichotomy.

Golf: PGA limits tournament eligible clubs with a coefficient of restitution (COE) below some limits, and club head size smaller than certain dimensions, etc. This effectively limits the amount of energy each club can generate at impact and hence the distance a club can potentially hit. There is no restriction for amateurs.

Baseball: I don't know details but Pros can only use woodies. Amateurs usually swing metal bats, and are more powerful.

While golf may allow amateurs a certain type of equipment which is different from what the pros are allowed to use it is hardly happening in real life.

It is generally considered very bad form for amateurs to use equipment which is not allowed on the PGA Tour. Very few people use illegal drivers (over the max COR) and clubs over the max size limit (460 cc) are pretty much non-existent. Few amateurs can make contact with a driver which is over the max allowed length (48") so it's also a non-issue.

The only exception is the wedges, ever since they made the non-square groove rule. People aren't going to throw out their old expensive wedges and it was made clear nobody expects them to. But what we're seeing on Tour shows the new 'legal' groves are as good, if not actually better than the old ones that were deemed too easy.

Having said that, I don't mind limits on equipment. But, splitting the game into 'pro' and 'amateur' isn't the way to do it.

Plus, aren't Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray playing with what is effectively very old frames (OK, Roger has recently switched to shanking with a bigger frame but he won all his majors with an ancient one)? Which part of their equipment should be made illegal?

Speed up the balls and the surfaces and the pushers will disappear. It's not the racquets.

 

[OhYes]

I think that with shortening the matches, there will be more excitement. Answer shouldn't be always in rackets or in surfaces.

 

[Marius_Hancu]

Yes, there is an attack in the works against the very nature and fabric of this sport.

Just read

As tennis officials try to keep millennials watching, massive changes could be coming to tennis

WTA CEO Steve Simon wants shorter matches, more Premier Mandatory events

and following is my answer posted in the comments to the above articles at tennis.com, also
on twitter

@Marius_Hancu
RT Do not let @WTA @ATPWorldTour get away with this attack against the very nature of tennis http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2016/10/tennis-changes-chris-kermode-peter-bodo-millenials-tennis-scoring/61609/ #donottouchourtennis

Go there and fight for your sport!
Don't lie down.
Post on twitter too!
---
Simon, Kermode:

DO NOT BE STUPID.

LOOK AT GOLF: THEY ARE ON TV FOR MIN. 10 HOURS A DAY, FROM MORNING TO EVENING,

FOR 18 ROUNDS, NOT 2-3, DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

AND FOR THE PLAYERS: THAT'S WHY THE GOLFERS ARE MUCH BETTER PAID THAN YOU, MORE OF THEM.


WANT MORE COVERAGE, NOT LESS COVERAGE. THAT'S ACHIEVED BY STAYING ON,

NOT BE RUNNING AWAY FROM CAMERA.

YOU WANT THE PEOPLE TO WATCH A MATCH, GO OUT SHOPPING, COME BACK AND STILL FIND THAT MATCH GOING ON AND BE IMMERSED IN IT.



TENNIS SHOT ITSELF IN THE FOOT WHEN IT ADOPTED TIEBREAKERS AND NO AD.



DO NOT TOUCH OUR GAME, OR WE'LL GO ELSEWHERE.

WE'LL ACTIVELY MILITATE FOR THAT, IF THAT HAPPENS.

YOU LEAVE US, WE LEAVE YOU.

WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER STUPID VAN ALLEN HERE,

WHO INTRODUCED TIEBREAKERS AS HE WAS TOO OLD TO WATCH.

LONG PRESENCE, LONG MATCHES IS THE BEST EXPOSURE AND MARKETING.
----

 

[MLRoy]

I don't think it's a bad idea to do a few things to speed things up. I noticed this week that Nike isn't helping the "generic" look of the game with their weekly "uniforms". It's stupid to have the players under contract wearing the same exact style of clothing. At least make them wear different colors.

 

[droliver]

I think there's a lot of merit with the idea that some of these changes need to be experimented with, and it's not surprising some of it's coming from the players . Best of 5 sets borders on inhumane at times in Australian and NYC Summer day sessions whens it's warm. The idea of no ad-scoring, playing lets, 5th set tie breakers at Wimbledon, and maybe limiting best of 5 matches to the later stages of majors are fairly modest ways to better control the grind of those tournaments without completely upsetting what's essential to the game.

I like the drama of 5 set matches, but we're not going to miss what we remember by truncating R1-4
to best of 3.