Lately, I’ve been getting my knickers in a knot over the recent WTA/ATP no-Ad doubles scoring experiment. I don’t like it -- it's confusing to the casual fans that the sport is desperately trying to attract.
I found out about the WTA experiment in passing; for all of the hoopla that followed the WTA's on-court coaching experimentation, this one area of tinkering -- which promises to reduce the time spent on court, thereby easing packed schedules -- has completely flown under the radar.
For the uninformed, no-Ad scoring means that there is no "Deuce" when the scoreline is 40-all. The next point in non-Ad scoring is called the "deciding point"; it serves as the winning point for the game.
Also, there are no best-of-three sets. Instead, there are two sets and each has the ability to use a 7-point tie-breaker to decide a set. In lieu of a third set, a 10-point tie-breaker is used. Some call this the "super tie-breaker".
The WTA began their no-Ad lab experiment on February 5th, at Pattaya. Since then, the new format has been tested at Bangalore, Bogota, Acapulco, Indian Wells and Miami. Presently, women in non-lab rat tournaments are still playing Ad scoring and best-of-three. WTA spokesman Danny Kendall said that more testing may take place at upcoming Tier III and Tier IV tournaments, depending on the outcome of the first phase of testing (which is now complete).
To confuse matters, there are now different scoring formats between the WTA and ATP. The current experiment with no-Ad scoring is to see if the WTA will want to use the same format as the ATP. The twist to the change in the doubles format is that during the slams, the no-Ad scoring system for doubles is chucked out of the window, and the traditional scoring method and sets are back in play.
When the format changed for men there was an uproar. My God! They’re changing tennis! They’re ruining our game! Let's sue them into the ground! But you know, it’s working on the men’s side.
According to Greg Sharko (the ATP's stats guru), prior to going to no-Ad scoring, men’s doubles teams averaged 87.73 minutes per match in 2005. In 2006, after the change, men were on court for an average of 71.51 minutes. So far this year, men’s doubles teams are averaging 72.93 minutes.
The No. 1 womens' doubles team is split on the issue. Lisa Raymond is against it. Samantha Stosur is a little more open-minded.
“Personally, I understand why they want to do it. They’ll know exactly how long a match is going to be and the possibility of having us on more prime time matches and centre court matches. Personally, I’m a stickler for old-fashioned doubles,” Raymond says. “... But I’m also 33 and old school.”
Stosur says that she doesn’t know yet how she feels about the possible format change.
“Obviously it’s different and it’s going to be hard to get used to initially, but I think it could work out okay for someone like me who is still trying to play singles,” Stosur says.
Raymond and Stosur have played together for a long time; any alteration in the scoring format means that there will be drastic changes in their game strategy.
“The first couple points are so important now. You can’t work your way into the match now. You can’t afford any double points. You can’t afford any loose points,” Raymond says.
Raymond went so far as to ask some of the men’s doubles specialists for helpful tips in playing with the new format, as they’ve already undergone the change.
“Men’s doubles is a little bit different. They can serve their way out of a break point. They can serve their way out of trouble . . . We construct points more than the men.”
While there are a handful of doubles specialists like Raymand and Stosur, Paola Suarez and Virginia Ruano Pascal, and Liezel Huber and Cara Black on the WTA tour, many women –- and men for that matter -– play doubles because it’s an extra paycheck in prize money at the end of the day. Not all players receive the Maria or Serena-sized prize money and massive endorsement contracts. Instead, these journeywomen are playing doubles as a way to earn a living.
Nicole Pratt is one of those players. She thinks the non-ad scoring might appeal to fans, but says that it’s hard judge at this point.
“As a player, I found it a lot more exciting,” Pratt said.
She said there was a burst of energy when it comes to “deciding point” in the game and likened it to a penalty shoot-out in soccer.
“I really like it. It’s a step in the right direction. For the men and the women, we need to stay the same,” Pratt noted. “Hopefully, more players will play doubles.”
Hopefully, they will. Hopefully, the scoring formats will soon be fish or fowl, not fish and fowl. Then, hopefully, the fans will find it easier to understand and follow the changes being made to the doubles game.
--Lisa McDermott
