Novak Djokovic: "I support some best of three at slams... we need to save tennis from pickleball"

[Djokovic_is_the_best#1]

First couple of rounds for sure. But even r3 is no big deal. It's a very top heavy sport. People are not even 100% interested in the top 10 in the world. Maybe 5/6 players.

I see your point. It just feels the more rounds you make best of 3 then is it really a best of 5 tournament. It feels the less you do it the better or not at all. It just my view.

 

[Razer]

Changing opening rounds to BO3 will maybe reduce the top heavy nature of tennis with more upsets ?

Looks like Novak doesn't give a sh1t for what happens to tennis because anyway his career is ending, so now he is ok with any change.

The only logical way to "save" tennis is to bring down the records that Big 3 created and what better way than to add a 5th Slam ? The SAUDI ARABIA OPEN.... make it indoors.... just scrap off the useless ATP Finals.

 

[nolefam_2024]

I see your point. It just feels the more rounds you make best of 3 then is it really a best of 5 tournament. It feels the less you do it the better or not at all. It just my view.

It's not and that's what will be best..

Only 7 matches bo5. It's very top heavy sport. Right now Alcaraz has won 6-3 and 6-4

Why should we watch set 3. It's obvious win. And it's boring.

 

[GloW]

It's not and that's what will be best..

Only 7 matches bo5. It's very top heavy sport. Right now Alcaraz has won 6-3 and 6-4

Why should we watch set 3. It's obvious win. And it's boring.

Humbert proceeds to break

 

[Born_to_slice]

a congregation of rednecks getting drunk together, capturing the lowest social cache

Sounds fun. I bet those people are way better than urban folks who laugh at them. Anyway, my point was that motor sports should be viewed separately.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Humbert proceeds to break

If he takes to four then ok. But still to see.

 

[GloW]

If he takes to four then ok. But still to see.

proceeds to break again.

 

[Olli Jokinen]

I'm from Europe (Germany) and I literally never heard anyone talk about watching cricket. Seriously, never. Of course football (soccer) is huge here, but the American sports also definitely have their fans (apart from Baseball which is far behind). Cricket on the other hand, I doubt more than half of the people would even narrowly know what you do in that sport.

F1 was huge here when Schumacher was active. He was a legend, but after him the boom was over. Even Vettel couldn't stop the decline. But I wouldn't say that WATCHING motor sports had anything to do with being rich. Of course rich people were usually interested in DRIVING expensive cars.

In terms of cricket, you have to count all the people in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. That's a lot.

 

[Olli Jokinen]

Exactly. NASCAR races here in the States are viewed with the lowest of the low prestige, a congregation of rednecks getting drunk together, capturing the lowest social cache, and not at all a “sporting event”.

Then suddenly we put some pretty Euro boys in the seats and it’s a prestigious sport.

Hilarious.

It's always been like that in the rest of the world. We have to be able to go around corners and everything. And it's more like this: Then suddenly we put a bunch of hicks in the seats and it's a low-life sport.

 

[nolefam_2024]

proceeds to break again.

Yes I see how high quality set 3 and 4 have been
Lol

This would be better as a three setter. Now both doing clownery

 

[coolbh6]

It works both ways. Would GOAT Djoker have 24 Slams with a 3 set format? As everyone knows Djoker has a penchant for losing early sets.
Was even down 2 sets to Tsitsipas at RG Finals.

But history cannot be changed - the future can.

 

[Razer]

In terms of cricket, you have to count all the people in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. That's a lot.

I wasn’t talking about Germany. Is that known for being population dense? Oh I see the confusion. I was trying to be politically correct but I’ll just say it. Cricket is one of the most popular sports in the world because the teams that play represent countries that are poor and population dense. Not Germany dense, a lot more dense than that. Largely I am talking about countries like Pakistan Bangladesh India. My parents are from one of those countries so that’s why I’ve been there and know what they watch. There are more. There are a couple richer countries in cricket too I think.

I only bring up the fact that most of the countries are poor because it leads to greater popularity because there are less options

Cricket is like a sibling of Baseball created in England.

Cricket is a game played by England, Australia-Nz, indian subcontinent nations and some africans. 90% of the viewerbase is from the Indian subcontinent.

So that's 1 Billion+ viewers

However Cricket is 7th on the list of sports played by participation, narrowly above Tennis which is at 6th.

01. Football
02. Badminton
03. Hockey
04. Volleyball
05. Basketball
06. Tennis
07. Cricket

 

[Mustard]

Carlos Alcaraz is right, and Boris Becker.

Djokovic is wrong, and Medvedev, and McEnroe. I do not want LESS tennis at the majors.

 

[a10best]

If 3 sets matches become the Norm I suppose Novaks' Slam record will never be touched - as lesser players have bigger chances in BO3 - as they need to win one set and get lucky in another - versus now where they have to win one and get lucky in two.

lesser players haven't won very many masters so that argument is debunked.

 

[a10best]

Carlos Alcaraz is right, and Boris Becker.

Djokovic is wrong, and Medvedev, and McEnroe. I do not want LESS tennis at the majors.

The problem is too many matches are being delayed for days by rain and not all courts are covered.
USO and Wimbledon would rather do BO3 than to build roofs for all courts.
IW and Miami had huge problems w/ scheduling from rainy weather changes that are here to stay.

 

[Turning Pro]

I doubt he means it. He's been down 2-0 in so many slams that I've lost count........

 

[MiamiWeekendWarrior]

Bad idea for Novak. If the early rounds were best of 3 he would have maybe half as many slam titles.

 

[coolbh6]

Bad idea for Novak. If the early rounds were best of 3 he would have maybe half as many slam titles.

He has already made his history. It wont effect him anyway.

 

[GabeT]

Bad idea for Novak. If the early rounds were best of 3 he would have maybe half as many slam titles.

I doubt he means it. He's been down 2-0 in so many slams that I've lost count........

Let’s recall that Novak holds the records at WTF and masters, all Bo3. He has no problem winning Bo3. I suspect many of his slam matches where he was 2-0 or 2-1 down are explained by letting his guard down a bit, knowing he had 5 sets to make it up.

 

[socallefty]

Is there any data to support the fact that more young fans will watch Bestof3 tournaments as a % of the total viewing public than in Slams? What does the data say from all the Masters and smaller tournaments today? What about the NextGen finals where the format is Fast4? What does the data say?

 

[Federev]

Let’s recall that Novak holds the records at WTF and masters, all Bo3. He has no problem winning Bo3. I suspect many of his slam matches where he was 2-0 or 2-1 down are explained by letting his guard down a bit, knowing he had 5 sets to make it up.

100%

Novak knows how to pace; he’s a great marathon runner.

But he can sprint like a freaking boss.

 

[jm1980]

Just want to say - overall some good thoughts from Djokovic. But the idea that tennis is the "third or fourth most popular sport in the world, most watched sport in the world, along with cricket." is laughable. I have no idea how they are arriving at that conclusion or number but it is obviously not correct.

He's quoted those types of figures when talking about the PTPA.

I'm pretty sure someone who works for the PTPA just went to some random website with the "Top 10 most popular sports in the world" ranking tennis very highly

 

[Federev]

I see your point. It just feels the more rounds you make best of 3 then is it really a best of 5 tournament. It feels the less you do it the better or not at all. It just my view.

I’d rather tennis die at the hands of pickles than have it sell its soul to the age of dopamine.

 

[Razer]

I’d rather tennis die at the hands of pickles than have it sell its soul to the age of dopamine.

Best of 3 Sets in Slams will wipe out Tennis entirely.... the only way to generate interest in public is to introduce a 5th slam and keep the remaining slams as they are.

 

[The Blond Blur]

No to BO3 at any round at the schlems. Anyone who’s advocating for this is just burring their heads in the sand when it comes to the consequences of making that potential change. We already lost BO5 MS1000 and YEC Fs. Tennis has been wussified enough. If we introduce BO3 sets in the early rounds what’s to stop the tournament directors from going ahead and making the change for every round? It’s a slippery slope you don’t want to mess with if you have respect for the history of the game.

 

[messiahrobins]

Djokovic is an intelligent guy and his thoughts are obviously well thought out but i cannot agree that slams should be anything other than best of 5 sets and M1000s finals and Olympics final should be best of 5 sets. But then again i am an old fashioned has been from another era, a relic if you will who loves Test cricket, still thinks Brazil is a major soccer nation (they are useless now), want England to play 4-4-2 in soccer and get it in the mixer, still have a sony walkman and commodore 64 and voted Reform, so all things considered its probably best to go with the total opposite to what i think in the modern world.
I think cricket is a good lesson for tennis. Test cricket just doesnt appeal to younger fans, 20/20 is what they love, and Djokovic is clearly thinking about the prospect of losing younger generation of fans. The world is changing, and like it or not, as much as us old fogies moan about the young the reality is young people will always win ideological battles as obviously they will ultimately be the ones in power so we do have to ensure they remain engaged in the game.

 

[messiahrobins]

No to BO3 at any round at the schlems. Anyone who’s advocating for this is just burring their heads in the sand when it comes to the consequences of making that potential change. We already lost BO5 MS1000 and YEC Fs. Tennis has been wussified enough. If we introduce BO3 sets in the early rounds what’s to stop the tournament directors from going ahead and making the change for every round? It’s a slippery slope you don’t want to mess with if you have respect for the history of the game.

I agree with you, but history nowadays isnt something that younger people are interested in, and the money men ultimately have to look at what appeals to the young as they are the ones who they need to keep interested as they are the long term customers. I totally agree with you though.

 

[GabeT]

He's quoted those types of figures when talking about the PTPA.

I'm pretty sure someone who works for the PTPA just went to some random website with the "Top 10 most popular sports in the world" ranking tennis very highly

I’ve seen those numbers quoted in many places but when you try to dig down it’s hard to find the original source

 

[Olli Jokinen]

I think all finals should be BO5. People pay a lot of money to see them, so why not gove them a little bit extra. A 6-1 6-3 final is no fun for anyone but the guy who wins it.

 

[Better_Call_Raul]

But history cannot be changed - the future can.

Some say that majors must remain at five sets. Tradition. But we have no problem with majors switching to three sets.
As for Slam records, who cares.
Borg could have won many more majors had he not skipped Australian Open. Players were not as obsessed with majors then. It was a different time. Year End championships and Davis Cup were considered as important as majors. Times change.

 

[ChaelAZ]

Of course he supports shorter matches as a old guy on his way out. Gives him a few more opportunities to vulture stats. How stupid.

 

[GabeT]

Of course he supports shorter matches as an old guy on his way out. Gives him a few more opportunities to vulture stats. How stupid.

It’s like you didn’t read anything and just decided to pollute a thread

 

[BigThreeForever]

It’s like you didn’t read anything and just decided to pollute a thread

Anything to throw Djokovic under the bus repeatedly and make him look bad.

 

[GabeT]

Anything to throw Djokovic under the bus repeatedly and make him look bad.

We have a perfectly nice thread, for once debating topics that are relevant to tennis and not yet another Big 3 rehash, and some posters can’t control themselves and feel the need to spam it

 

[Tano]

What is not discussed here yet is how the agenda of the television stations and streaming services are putting pressure on the ITF to allow Grand Slam tournaments in the men's branch to reduce its format "in order to attract a younger audience" and remove what makes the Majors tournaments different from the other events that make up the circuit.
I wouldn't be surprised if the ATP is also (behind the scenes) involved in modifying one of the great traditions of tennis.
It is unfortunate!

 

[BGod]

I really do hate pickleball and it's absolutely the less athletic version of tennis or squash. Yes I've tried it to prove how pathetic it really is.

 

[mike danny]

Sounds fun. I bet those people are way better than urban folks who laugh at them. Anyway, my point was that motor sports should be viewed separately.

Pretty much. To me a sport is anything that at least requires some physical effort. Although I struggle with how to label golf

 

[Olli Jokinen]

Pretty much. To me a sport is anything that at least requires some physical effort. Although I struggle with how to label golf

F1 drivers are some of the fittest people in the world. You can't drive at those speeds and G-forces without being extremely fit. My kid brother used to race Formula Renault and Formula 3, and he's a beast.

 

[Waves]

Wise words from Novak. Gotta be able to adapt. It’s not the 1970’s anymore. And I predicted several years ago he’d get to 30, and this would help.

 

[fafa]

He's right, IW has become a pickleball club when the tournament isn't played:

 

[pirhaksar]

Tennis has traditionally been financed, marketed and made global by the western powers US and Europe. The US being such a massive market has alarmingly not produced a great player in a while to sustain interest and add in pickleball being accessible and easy to get used to for the young and old alike, tennis is in big danger in the US. The only way to spread the game is to make it accessible in the developing world. Many Indians can reel off stats and figures on tennis going back decades but have never touched a racket in their lives, they just love and follow the sport via mass media (this was me till I actually moved to the US). Investing in developing world and making it accessible as a fun activity is where the future is. All these ideas are just band aids. And God no slams are the pinnacle of the sport testing endurance, skill and will at the highest level over 2 weeks - absolutely needs to be 5 sets. Not sure adding a 5th major does anything other than dilute the relevance and put a temp band aid.

 

[Nappa]

Djokovic knows if grand slams change to bo3 his records will never be surpassed

 

[Lauren_Girl']

No. I rarely disagree with Djokovic, but this is one of those times. Grand Slams should always remain BO5. Forever. I even think women should start having BO5 GS finals. Who wants to watch another Swiatek/Paolini or Graf/Zvereva situation. No one.

If something should change in Grand Slams, it may be the 32 seeds. It should be 16 instead. jmo

 

[McGradey]

I think it's flawed thinking to jump to best of 3 or by extension, shorter matches, as the catch-all solution to tennis remaining competitive as an entertainment product. Is this argument made because it's assumed young people don't watch things that are long any more because their brains are all Tiktok fried? I'm not convinced it's entirely true — sure to an extent people are choosing shorter content for entertainment, but that doesn't mean short formats are the only approach that can work.

YouTube promotes a mix of long and short form content. In movies, those Marvel flicks are often very long and look at how people flocked to them over and over again. I think people of all ages will happily strap in for long form content if it is compelling and backed by an effective strategy that keeps fans engaged throughout the season. Tennis needs hero players that draw people in and make them want to follow the journey. I think it's that simple. It feels like a cop out to say what amounts to 'Well, our product isn't good enough to justify long matches, so let's make less of it and see if that works.'

Best of 5 is the pinnacle for keen tennis fans, the issue lies in getting new fans invested enough that they want to graduate to watching these epic matches. I imagine young fans now might start their journey watching tennis shorts on Insta/YT, but if they become hooked, I don't see why they wouldn't they enjoy a long match with their favourite player.

 

[Devilito]

wrong format. Less games, more sets is the right answer. Best of 5 first to 4 is better than best of 3 first to 6

 

[nolefam_2024]

Bad idea for Novak. If the early rounds were best of 3 he would have maybe half as many slam titles.

Novak shouldn't worry about the past and his naysayers

 

[TheFifthSet]

The 1975-1978 USO had the first few rounds BO3 and the rest of the rounds were BO5 so it has been done before. Djokovic made great points about club tennis and how padel and pickeball are taking over, but I just don't know if that's the solution. He has to realize, that would make it easier for his records to be reached/surpassed. I guess he's thinking about the state of tennis as a whole though and not really thinking about that.

Less BO5 might preserve players bodies better but you would definitely see more early-rounds upsets.

I want BO5 to stay from R4-onward but wouldn’t be too opposed to BO3 until then. Makes the first few matches feel less NID (or just mercifully saves us having to watch one less set of a mismatch) while reducing wear-and-tear which might allow contenders to reach the closing stages in better form, giving us a better product.

Not entirely sold, but I’m less hostile to it than I would’ve been 10 years ago.

 

[NoleFam]

Less BO5 might preserve players bodies better but you would definitely see more early-rounds upsets.

I want BO5 to stay from R4-onward but wouldn’t be too opposed to BO3 until then. Makes the first few matches feel less NID (or just mercifully saves us having to watch one less set of a mismatch) while reducing wear-and-tear which might allow contenders to reach the closing stages in better form, giving us a better product.

Not entirely sold, but I’m less hostile to it than I would’ve been 10 years ago.

My real problem with it going BO3 is the historical implication of a Slam being won with less sets compared to most of the other ones won in the Open Era. It just seems like a Slam won't be the same because you're not winning seven BO5 matches any longer. If it weren't for that, I think the change from R1-R3 would be fine.

 

[_phantom]

You're hot then you're cold, you're yes then you're no.

2018 "I would have even grand slams best of 3"
2020 "I am more a proponent of 2 out of 3 everywhere"
2021 "I would prefer best of 5 to best of 3. I feel I am fit, I have more experience"
2024 "I support some best of 3 at slams"

 

[optic yellow]

Just playing devils advocate here - if it were best of 5 from only the 4th round on, that would still distinguish it from other events.

It's be a cheapened watered down product. The concept is laughable.