1. Wimbledon would return to the fescue (or fescue mix) and the soil it used in the past (1960s or so), with 100% rye starting at the baseline and moving back. This would help the durability of the baseline, but wouldn't affect the bounce/speed of the court. The balls would also be lower-bouncing, as they were in the past. 2. The US Open would return to grass (something like the current Wimbledon grass and soil, which would differentiate it from the faster and lower bouncing grass of my reformed Wimbledon). 3. The Australian Open would move to fast clay. This would provide a 50/50 grand slam split between grass and clay. Roland Garros would keep its slow clay. (The Australian Open should probably not move back to grass courts because Australia is too dry.) By making a 50/50 split between grass and clay, the net or all court game will not be dominant over the baseline game and vice-versa. It balances the game while also taking away injury-causing hard courts. 4. In order to be eligible to play singles in slams, seeded players would have to enter the doubles. Mixed would be optional. If a player pulls out of the doubles, then they would also have to pull out of the singles as well. If a player cannot find a partner for doubles, a partner would be assigned. Players may enter the doubles without entering the singles. This would revitalize doubles by increasing its visibility and importance. Fans would get to see their favorite players in action more often at slams, and the players would get more net practice. The concern over injury and fatigue is minimal or irrelevant, given my other reforms (no more 5 set matches, no hard courts, lower powered racquets). 5. If a player pulls out of the doubles, their partner may choose another player who isn't already in the draw or who has been knocked out. 6. Professional racquets would have the following characteristics: a) maximums of 80 sq in string area and 55 stiffness, for men b) maximums of 90 sq in string area and 50 stiffness, for women c) no other restrictions, except possibly the use of the single shaft form factor The reduction in racquet stiffness will tone down ball speed and joint shock. (Since female pros have a higher joint injury rate due to stiff racquets and strings, I have set the maximum stiffness lower and given them an extra 5 square inches for reduced shock, to help offset the power loss due to the lower stiffness, and to help them return serve in mixed doubles.) The reductions in head size will make topspin baselining less dominant. Both changes, with the removal of hard courts, are designed to balance the game so that no single playing style has an advantage over another and the reforms also are designed to reduce injury. By reducing the power of racquets, players would also probably be more inclined to use gut, which would also increase joint safety. 7. There would be no dress code at any pro tournament that is more strict than local laws. Players should be able to wear whatever they want to, as long as it's legal in the place they're playing. (This is not a big deal, but it's something I'm in favor of.) 8. Hard courts would be banned and replaced with grass, clay, or indoor carpet. The grass court season will constitute at least 50% of the tennis calendar year. Hard courts are unsafe for professional players. The health of players trumps all other considerations. Tournaments that are "too poor" to afford grass, clay, or indoor carpet will have to cede their professional circuit status to tournaments than can step up. 9. If a player takes an injury time-out, the player is given a one or two point penalty (I'm not sure which number is the best choice yet), in order to reduce abuse of the injury timeout. Players may only take bathroom breaks at the start of one of their service games. 10. No more 5 set matches, or the number of games per set would be reduced. Men would play a maximum of four sets, with a tiebreak. Women would play three sets minimum in the semis and finals of slams, not a minimum of two. *Or, the number of games for men's matches would be reduced so that 5 set matches would not be nearly as long. Perhaps the number of games in the last two or three sets would be cut? Something has to be done to a) shorten matches when compared to traditional 5 setters and b) make women's semis and finals longer, but not absurdly long. 5 set matches cause exhaustion and injury, and lower the quality of slam play/competition. Even the fittest players become exhausted by them. Tennis is not marathon running. Women's semis and finals are too short, in contrast. 11. Get rid of the new "finishing points" in doubles.