Should women play best-of-five matches in Grand Slam tournaments? | The Tylt
Should women play best-of-five matches in Grand Slam tournaments?
Why doesn't tennis want to get out of the Stone Age? The reason women are required to play three sets instead of five is due to an antiquated rule set centuries ago—when there was a belief women were too delicate for an extended match. However, modern women are proving they are forces to be reckoned with, so five-set matches should be the standard.
Grand Slam titles result in equal paydays to men and women. Tennis players like Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic have been critical of the set disparity, with women getting equal prize money. If women want to shut that criticism down, moving up to five-set matches will do the trick.
Moving up to five sets may be enticing because a five-set match is one of the most exciting spectacles in sports. However, those battles don't occur often, and three-set matches offer just as much drama in a shorter period of time. Instead of a four or five-hour match, you can watch exciting tennis and still live your life afterward.
A lot of people want women to move to five sets, but there's an argument to be made for men moving down to three. They play three-set matches the rest of the year, so why not make it standard for Grand Slam titles? If men are so concerned with women playing three sets, maybe they should lobby for the same if they feel they are being treated unfairly instead of demanding women move up to five.