Should Women Play Five Sets?

Getting equal money for lesser results is inane, which apparently passes for progressive thinking in your limited mind. If anybody is clamoring for a potential 4 hr plus match of womens tennis, I've yet to hear it but that's a hard pass for most.
So if a male player takes out his opponent he should get 60% of the pay? If his opponent retires in the first round he should get less than 20% of the pay? While I wouldn't agree with this I would congratulate you for at least being consistent. Otherwise....
 
Here is why they should:
  • Women have actually tested to be comparatively better than men in many endurance activities.
No, they have not. They have appeared to do better in a few specific events - such as long distance swimming - but, in general, the events they are close at they do much slower than men and the nuance of details matters. In long distance swimming for example the naturally higher body fat of females contributes to greater insulation and buoyancy - which has seen some females do better than men. But this is a highly specific sport - open sea, ultra distance swimming - where there are rarely group races.

This notion should usually be regarded as basically a myth.
 
I think the guy that capped it at 3 100 years ago basically said "I don't think people would want to watch women play five sets".
 
I agree with BJK, make the first week of the Slams best of 3 for men and women and the second week best of 5 for men and women.
 
Is there actually a market for BO5 for women? Some of the women's matches on the show courts have had few people watching. Maybe that's the same for the men?
 
In men's tennis BO5 increases quality of results (higher percentage of matches with better player winning) while in women's tennis it could change results to the worse, pushing them too much to their physical limits, resulting more in an endurance contest than tennis.
There is a reason why traditionally women play BO3 and men play BO5. Not every rule that you don't undertand is stupid.
 
Tennis has modernized.
1. changes in line calls -it's electronic
2. changes in tournament schedules, masters are now 2 weeks long. (not sure if all are, correct me if wrong (I know you will).
3. There's in game coaching and during set break, toweling off, etc.

As it is now, it's EQUAL prize money for women playing far less with far less quality and mystery. No more excuses.

4. ---> Women should play BO5, OR first to 10-games in the 3rd set.
If women go to BO%, then each woman must play the first 2 sets with regular scoring, then it's no ad scoring up to 4 games in sets 3 to 5. That way we don't need to see debacles like Swiatek v. Anisimova too long.

5. The men playing BO5 is dated and unfair. They are too tired and leads to more injuries, walkovers.
They should also play BO3 and with the 3rd set being the first to win 10 games by 2. then a 10-pt tiebreak.
Most tennis fans don't watch the full 5 sets, for 4 or 5 hours. That's crazy in this day and time of so many things to do.

As it is not the men run a 35-mile marathon while the women do 25 miles.
 
I don’t want women playing 5 sets, I only want men doing it at slams. I wouldn’t want to run the risk of hearing Sabalenka screaming for 5 sets.

I want the old format Davis Cup back, together with the best of 5 sets matches. I want Piqué to be denied entrance to all tennis venues around the world.
I think men should be paid more than women in tennis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PDJ
Should the women play best of 5 sets in the majors? Yes, they should. This is only about the majors, not every WTA tour event.

The majors are supposed to be the hardest events to win, yet one could make a case that best of 3 sets majors are easier to win apart from the reputation of them being majors, because the matches are more spaced out at the majors.
 
Should the women play best of 5 sets in the majors? Yes, they should. This is only about the majors, not every WTA tour event.

The majors are supposed to be the hardest events to win, yet one could make a case that best of 3 sets majors are easier to win apart from theB reputation of them being majors, because the matches are more spaced out at the majors.
Best of 3 for women, with less prize money that the men get who play best of 5 at slams
 
There is no desire to change the number of sets among anyone other than people with an agenda outside tennis.
 
I don’t want women playing 5 sets, I only want men doing it at slams. I wouldn’t want to run the risk of hearing Sabalenka screaming for 5 sets.

I want the old format Davis Cup back, together with the best of 5 sets matches. I want Piqué to be denied entrance to all tennis venues around the world.
I think men should be paid more than women in tennis.

Please add to the list of demands restoration of a coastal border for Bolivia. This one is a deal breaker for me. Thank you.
 
Please add to the list of demands restoration of a coastal border for Bolivia. This one is a deal breaker for me. Thank you.

Thanks for your valuable support regarding the coastal border issue.

Unfortunately, there’s nothing that can be done at this stage, ever since the International Court in The Hague definitively ruled Bolivia claim out a few years ago.

The only viable solution would be to spend the next few centuries building the most powerful military force on Earth, just to win it back through war, i. e., exactly the same way it was lost. Given the current state of the economy, that would be a bit hard, too.
 
For all the talk about best of 5 set women’s matches at grand slams, I think that the first 3-4 rounds of men’s matches being switched to best of 3 is considerably more likely. Again I stress that I would strongly dislike it, but I’ve accepted that it’s inevitable.

Plenty and a seemingly ever increasing number of best of 3 set men’s matches at regular tournaments, and women’s matches in general, are approaching / reaching / surpassing the 3 hour mark these days. The direction of travel at the grand slams will clearly be to shorten grand slam matches for the men, at least in the early rounds, rather than lengthen matches for the women. We’ve seen best of 5 set matches die a death away from the grand slams.

All 7 rounds for the women being the best of 5 sets is a complete non-starter, due to the scheduling complications that would create during the first week / first 3-4 rounds. Only the final being best of 5 sets and no other rounds beforehand, would be a terrible move; players featuring in their first grand slam final would also have to adjust to playing in their first ever best of 5 match as well. So I can understand the lure and appeal of best of 5 set matches for the women from the QF stage onwards, as a compromise / happy medium there.

But I just think that there’s no chance of it happening.
 
This is only for grand slams - quarters, semis and final should be best of 5 sets, everything else is best of 3.
 
I agree with BJK, make the first week of the Slams best of 3 for men and women and the second week best of 5 for men and women.
BJK is a legend and a massive contributor to the game but changing the rules & nature of the competition halfway through is silly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PDJ
Thanks for your valuable support regarding the coastal border issue.

Unfortunately, there’s nothing that can be done at this stage, ever since the International Court in The Hague definitively ruled Bolivia claim out a few years ago.

The only viable solution would be to spend the next few centuries building the most powerful military force on Earth, just to win it back through war, i. e., exactly the same way it was lost. Given the current state of the economy, that would be a bit hard, too.
I view the decision as advisory only.

In any case, I think you’re taking a 20th century view of the military solution. It shouldn’t require the most powerful military on earth. Think out of the box like Raul does when solving tennis tour problems.
 
For all the talk about best of 5 set women’s matches at grand slams, I think that the first 3-4 rounds of men’s matches being switched to best of 3 is considerably more likely. Again I stress that I would strongly dislike it, but I’ve accepted that it’s inevitable.

Plenty and a seemingly ever increasing number of best of 3 set men’s matches at regular tournaments, and women’s matches in general, are approaching / reaching / surpassing the 3 hour mark these days. The direction of travel at the grand slams will clearly be to shorten grand slam matches for the men, at least in the early rounds, rather than lengthen matches for the women. We’ve seen best of 5 set matches die a death away from the grand slams.

All 7 rounds for the women being the best of 5 sets is a complete non-starter, due to the scheduling complications that would create during the first week / first 3-4 rounds. Only the final being best of 5 sets and no other rounds beforehand, would be a terrible move; players featuring in their first grand slam final would also have to adjust to playing in their first ever best of 5 match as well. So I can understand the lure and appeal of best of 5 set matches for the women from the QF stage onwards, as a compromise / happy medium there.

But I just think that there’s no chance of it happening.
This ^ makes better sense than my suggestion and I'm pretty sure most ATP players would be in favor of a friendlier format than a BO5 for all rounds.
A change is inevitable.
Fans accepted the NBA's change with 3 pt shot in the late 70s and the no hand-checking defense, timeouts by a coach, NFL overtime rules, no more winning by 2 games in the 5th set at slams anymore. Women did play BO5 in some masters and tour finals in the late 80s or early 90s but I believe it was the later rounds like the men.
 
Back
Top