Why mens tennis needs to stay best of five sets

There has been a lot of debate about mens tennis, ultra long grand slam matches have been the source of everyone’s focus.  

There’s an interesting dichotomy going on here; read the various tennis forums and there are threads full of complaints that surfaces are too slow and rallies / matches are too long.  Watch the BBC during Wimbledon and we are constantly told this is the greatest era with the best players ever seen.  The x factor is the paying public at the slams, and despite mega long matches, the paying public appear to love them and are prepared to sit through hours upon hours of tennis.

Ultra long tennis matches are nothing new as the game is littered with examples in every decade.  For instance, in 1992 Stefan Edberg defeated Michael Chang in the US Open semifinal in 5hrs 26 minutes which is the longest match in the tournament’s history.  Amazingly, Edberg came back 24 hours later to beat Pete Sampras in the final which went four sets and lasted over 3 hours.  Later that decade in 1996, Pete Sampras would beat Alex Corretja in the quarterfinal of the US Open in 4 hours 9 minutes, Sampras needed to be taken to hospital and put on a drip afterwards.  

Sampras would be involved in a lot of long matches that decade, his matches against Jim Courier at the 1995 Australian Open and 1996 French Open, plus the 1996 ATP Masters final against Becker were all well over 4 hours each.  In the 1998 French Open, Alex Corretja defeated Hernan Gumy in 5hrs and 31 minutes.

The 1980s also threw up its share of long matches.  In 1988 Mats Wilander defeated Ivan Lendl in the final of the US Open in 4 hours and 55 minutes.  Meanwhile in the Davis cup in 1987, Boris Becker defeated John McEnroe in a tie that lasted 6 hours and 21 minutes. However, a look at the list of the longest matches ever played shows that out of 29 matches that have been officially timed over five hours, 23 have taken place since the turn of the new millennium, while 15 of those have taken place since 2008 including the crazy match in 2010 Wimbledon between Isner and Mahut which lasted a whopping 11 hours 5 minutes over a 3 day period.  So it’s quite clear that matches over 5 hours long are increasing with alarming regularity.

So, why are there so many long matches today?  Two common denominators are slower courts and style of play convergence with both factors coinciding at exactly the same time in the course of modern tennis history.  This has meant that the majority of matches have taken place where two players camp out on the baseline playing a counterpunching style, or not possessing big enough weapons to finish points relatively quickly on a regular basis.  What exacerbates the length of matches even further is guys taking longer between points to recover from exhausting rallies.

This has not only lead to lengthy five set matches but also four set matches regularly last four hours as well.  In fact, this year’s Wimbledon final over 3 hours and 30 minutes even though it was a straight sets win for Andy Murray over Novak Djokovic.

The dissenting voices are growing with more and more ex-players and pundits calling for grand slam tournaments to be made best of three sets mimicking the ATP tour; who jettisoned best of five set finals after Federer and Nadal played a five hour blockbuster in Rome in 2006 with both promptly pulling out of the next tournament in Hamburg citing fatigue. 

Recently Martina Navratilova gave her views on the situation "It's really becoming so taxing that I believe one day we will have two out of three sets in the grand slams, otherwise they're going to be taking people out on stretchers,"  But it’s not just about the prospect of players being taken out on stretchers, you also have to think these matches are not really TV friendly and in the end may appeal only to fans who are also prepared to sit through and watch every ball of five day test cricket matches. 

However, despite the naysayers, mens tennis needs to stay as best of five sets for a variety of reasons.  First of all, the integrity of mens tennis depends on grand slam tournaments being played as best of five sets.  Let’s remember that Tennis is and has always been a sport of both skill and endurance; the tiebreaker only came into existence in the early 1970s and in Davis cup the late 1980s.  

Playing best of five sets ensures the traditions of mens tennis stays intact where skill, fitness, mental stamina and the ability to find solutions on the court (as Patrick Mouratoglou would put it) are all part of the package of being a top player.  Top players also possess a good on board computer (brain), best of three sets will take those elements away and turn the situation into more of a lottery.  The perfect example being 2020 cricket where strategy and tactics are virtually a non factor but makes great television for everyone except the bowlers, who are constantly hit out of the grounds into the adjacent river on an ad nauseam basis.   Tennis deserves better than potential one hour blowouts at grand slam level.

But also consider this, every generation throws up a set of circumstances which are unique to their era.  And we can see from the top current four players in the world that the counterpunching style currently rules.  In my time of watching tennis, this may be a first.  Previous eras have always thrown up a mixture of attackers and baseliners at the top: McEnroe, Borg, Lendl and Connors in the early 1980s. Becker, Edberg, Wilander and Lendl in the late 1980s; or Agassi, Becker, Edberg, Sampras and Courier in the early 1990s. Today, the balance is tipped in favour of endurance more than skill.  

The counterpunching style may rule for now but that doesn’t necessarily mean the next generation of top players will play the same way.  There are players coming through who favour shorter more aggressive points and use the serve as a means to get the job done.  Should such players get to the top five positions, it will inevitably lead to shorter grand slam matches in the latter stages in future.  And hopefully that will leave the game in a healthier state.

Let’s sign off by looking at some of the greatest five set matches in recent times that have been timed under four hours…….

2001 Wimbledon semifinal Pat Rafter v Andre Agassi: The classic match between puncher and counterpuncher, this type of matchup has been a serious casualty of style of play convergence.  These two guys played some of the best five set matches in the past 25 years. Incredibly this match was “only” 3hrs 30 minutes despite going to 8:6 in the fifth set!

2001 Wimbledon final Goran Ivanisevic v Pat Rafter:  Proof that a five set battle between two serve and volleyers could produce incredible tennis and high drama.  To be fair, the stakes were high and the raucous crowd made it something special.  The tennis was dynamic, 9-7 to Goran in fifth set but nowhere near four hours.

2000 Wimbledon semifinal Pat Rafter v Andre Agassi: A lot of people say this match was higher quality but the 2001 match had more drama, especially as both guys knew there was no Sampras waiting in the final.  Either way, it was fantastic tennis throughout the whole battle.

2000 Australian Open semifinal Andre Agassi and Pete Sampras: One of their best battles, this match had two incredible tiebreakers, it looked like Sampras would take it in the 4th, but Agassi staged a great comeback to take the deciding set 6:1

2011 US Open semifinal Novak Djokovic v Roger Federer: This is the best rivalry of the current era.  Simply because Federer often plays shorter points and forces Djokovic into playing lesser longer rallies on average.  Even though Djokovic came from two sets down this match was 10 minutes short of four hours, and the tennis was great. 

1999 US Open final Andre Agassi v Todd Martin: Agassi battled back from two sets to one down to claim the title.  And although Martin won the two tiebreaks in the middle of the match, it was done and dusted in 3hrs and 23 minutes.