Thanks to James Harrisson of the ITF staff, I've finally gotten an explanation as to why the juniors at the French Open are playing a tiebreak in lieu of a third set in the doubles. Here's what James emailed me:
Roland Garros organisers decided to experiment with the new format of play in doubles. It is the same system as is used at ATP events. As well as a third set match tiebreak (10 pts) they are playing the no-ad scoring system throughout. The ITF is conducting a survey of players, coaches and spectators to discover the popularity of this new system.
I don't fit into any of those categories, but I do have an opinion of this experiment, and it's not positive. I've always hated "no-ad" and was happy when college tennis abandoned it, and I think it, and the in-lieu-of-a-third-set tiebreak, should only be used when weather has given tournament officials no other option.
This isn't to suggest that I'm some fuddy-duddy purist who hates any innovations. I am fine with the third-set tiebreak in junior singles (or pros, for that matter), but both Roland Garros and Wimbledon still insist the final set continue until a player has won by two games. Looking for an useful experiment? Get rid of that!
And change CAN be good. (Okay, I hated the round robin thing). But I love the US Open blue courts, I'm all for Hawk Eye, and I enjoy seeing tennis played in brightly-colored clothing. I even like the eight-game pro set in college doubles. So I'm not adverse to experiments. But don't mess with the scoring. It favors the less skilled player(s) and it undermines the ITF's commitment to doubles.
When the ITF did away with separate rankings for singles and doubles in the juniors, it was with the express purpose of encouraging doubles play. That innovation was deemed a success, and the USTA has paid their respects to the concept by introducing a similar plan for their rankings, beginning next year. But what's the message the ITF is sending with this no-ad, no-third-set plan? That doubles aren't important enough to be scored traditionally, tournaments can't give them the time and the courts to play a real tennis match, and spectators are too bored to watch a third set.
The ATP and the WTA have adopted the no-third-set format, and I don't like it, but I understand that there are economic and logistical reasons for it. Junior tennis has never been subject to those pressures, so this is a solution without a problem. It's my hope that this idea gets buried under the red clay and never surfaces again, at Roland Garros or anywhere else.
Roland Garros organisers decided to experiment with the new format of play in doubles. It is the same system as is used at ATP events. As well as a third set match tiebreak (10 pts) they are playing the no-ad scoring system throughout. The ITF is conducting a survey of players, coaches and spectators to discover the popularity of this new system.
I don't fit into any of those categories, but I do have an opinion of this experiment, and it's not positive. I've always hated "no-ad" and was happy when college tennis abandoned it, and I think it, and the in-lieu-of-a-third-set tiebreak, should only be used when weather has given tournament officials no other option.
This isn't to suggest that I'm some fuddy-duddy purist who hates any innovations. I am fine with the third-set tiebreak in junior singles (or pros, for that matter), but both Roland Garros and Wimbledon still insist the final set continue until a player has won by two games. Looking for an useful experiment? Get rid of that!
And change CAN be good. (Okay, I hated the round robin thing). But I love the US Open blue courts, I'm all for Hawk Eye, and I enjoy seeing tennis played in brightly-colored clothing. I even like the eight-game pro set in college doubles. So I'm not adverse to experiments. But don't mess with the scoring. It favors the less skilled player(s) and it undermines the ITF's commitment to doubles.
When the ITF did away with separate rankings for singles and doubles in the juniors, it was with the express purpose of encouraging doubles play. That innovation was deemed a success, and the USTA has paid their respects to the concept by introducing a similar plan for their rankings, beginning next year. But what's the message the ITF is sending with this no-ad, no-third-set plan? That doubles aren't important enough to be scored traditionally, tournaments can't give them the time and the courts to play a real tennis match, and spectators are too bored to watch a third set.
The ATP and the WTA have adopted the no-third-set format, and I don't like it, but I understand that there are economic and logistical reasons for it. Junior tennis has never been subject to those pressures, so this is a solution without a problem. It's my hope that this idea gets buried under the red clay and never surfaces again, at Roland Garros or anywhere else.
TAGS:
Post Title
→The Roland Garros Doubles Mystery--Solved!
Post URL
→https://dancing-with-the-stars-2011.blogspot.com/2007/06/roland-garros-doubles-mystery-solved.html
Visit dancing-with-the-stars-2011 for Daily Updated Wedding Dresses Collection
