A historical-logical question [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

A historical-logical question

Farenhajt
02-09-2008, 08:58 AM
Why the "extra" two games between 5-5 and the tiebreak have been kept? Because arguably a set consists of 10 games (and is cut short when either side wins 6 games), so logical moment for (any kind of a) tiebreak would be 5-5.

CmonAussie
02-09-2008, 10:16 AM
<><><><>
...
it`s obvious!!!! =))) 6 = half a dozen!, why have 5 when you can have 6!!

Dougie
02-09-2008, 10:21 AM
And despite this little oddity, tennis has otherwise a logical and conventional scoring system..?

Renaud
02-09-2008, 10:58 AM
Reminds me a joke one my friends did.
it was the first point of a match we were watching in the crowd. It was the first time ever she even took care of tennis.
After the first point (15/0), she told me...
" Shit, i must have fallen asleep, i missed 14 points."

Farenhajt
02-09-2008, 11:59 AM
And despite this little oddity, tennis has otherwise a logical and conventional scoring system..?

Set-based 2-margin games are not unheard of: take volleyball for example. As of the naming of the points (15, 30, 40), there ARE some theories around.

Perhaps those two games were kind of "compromise" between British-French "tradition" (no tiebreaks, always 2-margin) and American "novelty" (tiebreak) at the time of its introduction? The fact that, among the slams, only USO allows the tiebreak in the decisive set may point out in that direction.

jonny84
02-09-2008, 12:04 PM
Reminds me a joke one my friends did.
it was the first point of a match we were watching in the crowd. It was the first time ever she even took care of tennis.
After the first point (15/0), she told me...
" Shit, i must have fallen asleep, i missed 14 points."


:haha:

Its a classic system!