Should women play the best of four

[Elektra]

Forget the arguement that women are not strong as men or don't have endurance. Simona Halep and Caroline Wozinacki had a three hour match, so the endurance issue is not relevant. Fail to disagree but for the women what is wrong with their game is that they have not mastered the full technique of how to serve and develop mentally when they play the best of three matches.

They always say the more match play, the better your game is elevated and the more your perfect your tennis craft.

This is what we see with the men when they play best of five they get better and stronger after the first set. When women play best of three, it sometimes can make the matches less competitive because a certain player has to get used to the opponents pace and time to develop confidence.

Should women play best of four, maybe not in the early rounds but the close they get to finals probably around the quarterfinal.

 

[Midaso240]

Best of 4? So the match can finish in a draw?

 

[jm1980]

That's not gonna happen. Far more likely is the men also playing Bo3, even in Slams

 

[rossi46]

Best of 3 is already too painful. The worst part is waiting for them to finish playing so I can watch some real tennis.

 

[Backspin1183]

Please explain how to play best of 4. I would like to try that next time someone challenges me for a best of 5. My stamina sucks at the moment. So best of 4 sounds good to me.

 

[spinovic]

Best of 4, win by two sets. Duh.

That way they could play even longer than the men and get even better and stronger. Serena would eventually turn into She-Hulk.

 

[newpball]

Forget the arguement that women are not strong as men or don't have endurance. Simona Halep and Caroline Wozinacki had a three hour match, so the endurance issue is not relevant. Fail to disagree but for the women what is wrong with their game is that they have not mastered the full technique of how to serve and develop mentally when they play the best of three matches.

They always say the more match play, the better your game is elevated and the more your perfect your tennis craft.

This is what we see with the men when they play best of five they get better and stronger after the first set. When women play best of three, it sometimes can make the matches less competitive because a certain player has to get used to the opponents pace and time to develop confidence.

Should women play best of four, maybe not in the early rounds but the close they get to finals probably around the quarterfinal.

Best of four?

:-?

:grin:

 

[newpball]

Best of 4, win by two sets. Duh.

Am I missing something?
Win by two sets is best of three.

So what's best of four?

:grin:

 

[Luminaire]

Women should play best of 5 in the semis and the final.

 

[Andres]

Best of 4? Dafuq? How would that even work?

 

[Vanhool]

What if nobody won?

 

[Elektra]

What if nobody won?

play a tiebreak.

 

[spinovic]

Am I missing something?
Win by two sets is best of three.

So what's best of four?

:grin:

You are. It's not first to get ahead two sets. It's best-of-4, win by two sets, so the minimum number of sets would be a 3 sets to love victory. Same principle that prevents a 7-game series from playing on after a team wins 4 games would be applied if someone won the first three sets. You could play the fourth, but the outcome is already determined. Make sense?

 

[zep]

Best of four lol

 

[merwy]

With a supertiebreak in case of a draw:wink:

 

[sbengte]

They should play best of one. Especially the shriekers.

 

[MatsPhilander]

What is this the Snooker Premier League? How do you get a winner with an even number? Plus nobody wants to see the majority of women's matches go longer than two as so many of them are one sided.

 

[newpball]

You are. It's not first to get ahead two sets. It's best-of-4, win by two sets, so the minimum number of sets would be a 3 sets to love victory. Same principle that prevents a 7-game series from playing on after a team wins 4 games would be applied if someone won the first three sets. You could play the fourth, but the outcome is already determined. Make sense?

No it does not make any sense!

:grin:

 

[Mainad]

Best of 4?

What happens when they are 2 sets all? Do they toss for it???

 

[Bobby Jr]

Forget the arguement that women are not strong as men or don't have endurance. Simona Halep and Caroline Wozinacki had a three hour match, so the endurance issue is not relevant...

The reason women don't play best of 5 set matches is not about their endurance levels. People don't usually like to admit it but the reason they don't is people don't want to see longer women's matches. They are way too often painful to watch as it is - why would the tour want to prolong that pain?

It is an unspoken lie that women's tennis is remotely as popular at men's. They succeed primarily by coat-tailing on the popularity of the men's tour at the majors and masters tournaments. If it wasn't for the men's tour many - if not most - of the venues used for WTA events would never have received the infrastructure improvements they have had.

 

[newpball]

The reason women don't play best of 5 set matches is not about their endurance levels. People don't usually like to admit it but the reason they don't is people don't want to see longer women's matches. They are way too often painful to watch as it is - why would the tour want to prolong that pain?

It is an unspoken lie that women's tennis is remotely as popular at men's. They succeed primarily by coat-tailing on the popularity of the men's tour at the majors and masters tournaments. If it wasn't for the men's tour many - if not most - of the venues used for WTA events would never have received the infrastructure improvements they have had.

Better go in hiding Bobby as for sure the department of enforcing politically correctness is going to knock on your door. :twisted:

:grin:

 

[spinovic]

No it does not make any sense!

:grin:

On that we can agree.

Best of 4?

What happens when they are 2 sets all? Do they toss for it???

Best of 4, win by two sets. Duh. It not only solves the tie problem, but gives the women the possibility of playing even longer matches than the men, which will make them better and stronger as the OP initially surmised. It's the perfect solution to the conundrum.

Newpball is struggling to grasp this complex system (and the sheer genius of it), but I have faith that you will back me up on this Mainad. Don't let me down.

PS - I'll cheer for Djokovic in a few hours, effectively cursing him, causing him to lose if you do.

 

[spinovic]

Imagine the beauty and glory as Azarenka and Sharapova trade shrieks (and service breaks) for what could hypothetically be forever.

Or, Wozniacki and Errani trade moonballs (and service breaks) for what could hypothetically be for eternity.

Or, to see Ana Ivanovic struggle with her ball toss until the end of time.

 

[BevelDevil]

I'd like to see men go to best of 4 (with a tie break, obv). It would reduce the average duration slightly, while also significantly reducing the variance, which I think is more important. Scheduling would be much better for players and viewers.

 

[jg153040]

Hey that's a good idea. Men should also play best of 6. So, it means if both guys win 3 sets, they both get the trophy.

In many other sports like skiing, you can have two winners.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

I'd like to see men go to best of 4 (with a tie break, obv)...

Don't believe that this is what the OP is suggesting. He seems to be saying the the winner needs to win at least 3 sets (more than 2 sets) and also win 2 more sets than the other player. Not unlike winning a game or TB by 2 points -- but, instead, winning by 2 sets. No idea why the OP is calling this "best of four". Doesn't make a whole lot of sense.