If It Ain't Broke Don't Fix It

Tennis doesn't need to have its rules changed. It makes no sense. (Courtesy of IStock Images)

Tennis traditionalists like myself share one core belief: the sport is God’s gift to Earth and does not need to be revamped in any way.

Tennis has, aside from some changes to promote gender-equality, been played the same way for the last 139 years. Men have played 5-set matches that last from 2 to 3 hours while the women have played 3-set matches that last up to 1 hour and 30 minutes. Only on a few occasions do matches exceed those limits, but even then, they only happen at the Grand Slams. So, why in the world, after 50 years, are tennis executives crying for shorter matches?

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, right? Or at least that’s my stance on this idiotic debate. Fans on tennis forums and blogs seemingly share this sentiment. Many are outraged that analysts would even utter such a sacrilegious statement and don’t want the sport to be changed. Why the sudden desire to shorten matches? To garner a larger viewing audience and, the reason that pisses people off, money. Neither reason makes much sense.

For years, tennis has been the ugly stepsister to big name sports like baseball, basketball, and football in the U.S. Unless it’s a Grand Slam, matches aren’t watched by millions of people each week. Sure, tennis has stars, but many people in the U.S. can’t name a single player other than Williams sisters and maybe Roger Federer. That’s not to say that tennis doesn’t enjoy a loyal following in the States, but it’s nothing compared to the billboards and parades thrown for players in other countries.

I fail to see how shortening matches will increase viewership. An average football game lasts for 3 hours and 12 minutes. An average NBA games lasts for 2 hours and 15 minutes. An average baseball game is 3 hours and 5 minutes. Remember those figures I mentioned before? Yeah, tennis matches fall beneath those average match times. If fans wanted short matches, none of those sports would have the viewership they do. The one thing that separates those sports from tennis is marketing. If analysts are so concerned with increasing viewership, there needs to be better marketing for the sport.

Don’t only promote the Grand Slams on ESPN; showcase matches at other, smaller tournaments! Many people have no idea that tennis matches take place year-round. Promoting the entirety of the sport, instead of one facet of it, will help increase viewership.

Shortening matches for money purposes ties into trying to get a larger audience. More people, more money. Short, simple, and dumb not only because of the above reasons, but also because the time gained from shorter match-play would be filled up with ads. No one wants to sit through an ad fest. Couple that with unnecessary changes to the game, and tennis would lose its loyal fanbase.

Shortening matches is not the solution to increase viewership. It’ll only damage the sport beyond repair.

TM