Men should be limited to three-set tennis at Grand Slams, says Heather Watson

ollinger

G.O.A.T.
I seem to recall playing table tennis games to 21 points, but if you won the first 7 consecutive points the game was over and declared a shutout. Let's try something similar in tennis: slam matches are best of 5, UNLESS one player wins the first two sets at which point a shutout is declared, game - set - match.
 

Rippy

Hall of Fame
How about the women start generating the same revenue as the men, if they are so determined to be treated equally?

Or in fact, if the women's game is just as tough as the men's, why even have a separate women's tour? Just have one tour for both men and women, competing against each other.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
How about the women start generating the same revenue as the men, if they are so determined to be treated equally?

Or in fact, if the women's game is just as tough as the men's, why even have a separate women's tour? Just have one tour for both men and women, competing against each other.
Hey look contender for dumbest post of the year! Nobody wants to watch men play women day in day out. A once off battle of the sexes sure, but not a merged tour, would be super boring. Plus it would really be a dampener to the sexists on this forum who whinge about the women screaming and moaning and how they should be on their knees and in the kitchen (yes, these are all comments that appear on these forums and in the public), so merging tours would be very stupid and detrimental to tennis in general. Current system isn't broken, you know that right? Why are you looking to destroy it

And you want to discuss revenue? How about how less popular players like Albot and Fabbiano got paid the same for losing in the US Open 3R as Cilic and Isner even though they generate far less revenue and pull a much smaller audience than Cilic/Isner? Arguing for players to be paid by revenue is unbelievably stupid, the Granollers, Cornet, Bellis and Donaldon's of the world would get nothing whilst Federer, Serena, Sharapova and Nadal would get everything. Pull your head out, the system isn't broken despite your whinging.
 
Last edited:

Firstservingman

Talk Tennis Guru
why even have a separate women's tour? Just have one tour for both men and women, competing against each other.
I don't get why people suggest this other than to troll.
Why would anyone want to watch the female players get owned constantly? More than one match of that would be unbelievably boring and pointless.
It doesn't tell us anything that we don't already know.
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
There's a fine line between being objective about sex differences and being sexist.

Few manage to stay on it and I'm not sure people will ever agree on where it lies to begin with. Such topics inevitably turn to horrible **** shows.

My take: You're entitled to your opinion Heather, but it seems to me that it lacks any substantive basis outside from sex-egalitarian ideals.
 

sportmac

Hall of Fame
At no point does she state men should be limited to 3 sets.

“I would be really interested to see the men’s point of view and whether they actually want to play to five sets,”.
That's not questioning if they want to or stating that they should be limited to 3, it's showing interest in their take on it. She'd like to hear what they have to say about it.

As for it getting hotter, at least in Australia, it is. 15 of the 16 hottest years on record happened in the past 15 years. New York is a different heat. It might not reach the highs of the AO but it has humidity to go along with that heat. There has been serious health concerns in recent years at the AO because of the heat. I think it was 2014 where water bottles melted and players passed out.

Totally don't agree with best of 3 in slams. I'm a fan of best of 5 and would like to see the women play it too. (For those who say they can't, nonsense. Eastbourne had a day rained out and in the next day's schedule where they had to play two matches something like 3 of those went 6 sets and 2 went 5. The winners showed up and played the next day.)

Still, if there are changes coming I'd much rather see best of 3 over the nextgen broflake format.
 
Last edited:

sportmac

Hall of Fame
I seem to recall playing table tennis games to 21 points, but if you won the first 7 consecutive points the game was over and declared a shutout. Let's try something similar in tennis: slam matches are best of 5, UNLESS one player wins the first two sets at which point a shutout is declared, game - set - match.
That would certainly rewrite the record books.

Fed would not have won his 17th at Wimbledon 2012 because he would have went out to Julien Benneteau. Murray would not have won his first Wimbledon when he did because he would have lost in the quarters to Verdasco.

Even matches that don't decide the title live on in the history books. In '87 Connors was down 6-1, 6-1, 4-1 and came back to win.
There's a long list of narrow escapes.
 
Last edited:
A

Attila_the_gorilla

Guest
I'd be happy with best of 3 for men. Maybe best of 5 for semis and final.
 

chrisb

Semi-Pro
They shortened doubs to 3 sets, and 2 sets and a tie breaker and it has survived. The ATP finals is 3 sets, and that seems to be fine. I have been involved and playing tennis 64 years, and frankly 5 set matches are for the most part boring. Having players on the court for over 4 hrs does not appeal to me, and I am sure many people who are not tennis nuts feel the same way. I could use the idiocy that occurs at the slams that have no breaker in the 5th and go into a lengthy diatribe of what that did to Isner, and how much money it cost the man but everyone here knows about that.
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
I seem to recall playing table tennis games to 21 points, but if you won the first 7 consecutive points the game was over and declared a shutout. Let's try something similar in tennis: slam matches are best of 5, UNLESS one player wins the first two sets at which point a shutout is declared, game - set - match.
Yes.

Let's make the sport better by taking out the best parts. What can possibly go wrong
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
They shortened doubs to 3 sets, and 2 sets and a tie breaker and it has survived. The ATP finals is 3 sets, and that seems to be fine. I have been involved and playing tennis 64 years, and frankly 5 set matches are for the most part boring. Having players on the court for over 4 hrs does not appeal to me, and I am sure many people who are not tennis nuts feel the same way. I could use the idiocy that occurs at the slams that have no breaker in the 5th and go into a lengthy diatribe of what that did to Isner, and how much money it cost the man but everyone here knows about that.
Have you seen a doubles tournament only?

Have you seen the attendance of the doubles even at the most prestigious events?

I thought so.

The dubs survive on the back of the singles/men despite of often being more entertaining. It has nothing to do with them being best of 3/5, so they figured, if it doesn't matter they might as well cut the negatives from playing longer.

The ATP finals are 3 sets and they "seem" to be fine, but there are enough (the majority?) people that think otherwise.

Isner is not the whole tour.
 
Last edited:

Roddick85

Hall of Fame
I'm sorry but there's nothing as epic as a tight 5 sets match. I can live with matches outside of slam being best of 3, even though I'd like to see best of 5 back for the final only. Some of my best memories in tennis lie with 5 sets matches, like the Wimbledon finals from 07,08,09, and so many other matches from the USO and AO. Sure they are time consuming, but how many matches go the distance anyways? Not many. If you can't make the time to enjoy and watch those matches, then I'm sorry but that's your problem. If the women's game doesn't or can't play best of 5 matches, then that's fine. It would be stupid to see the men's game downgrade and go in that direction for the sake of "equality" or whatever politic BS. At the end of the day, the men & women game are 2 distinct and independent product, so they should be treated as such.
 
Top