Commissioner McEnroe - wants to change the scoring system now! [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Commissioner McEnroe - wants to change the scoring system now!

IFoughtThe
03-17-2007, 01:16 AM
http://www.artoischampionships.com/1/home/default.asp

According to this, he wants to change the scoring system!

How can you change the scoring system?

Mind you, I guess to outsiders, it is a bit wierd.

Why are we giving '15' for one point? It is a bit daft really.

Nice to see that there's a proper podcast on iTunes though. About time.

case
03-17-2007, 01:27 AM
Its weird to any thinking person.

I was watching a womans match go to a third set tie break and one player had won four more games. no way was that a "tied" match.

IFoughtThe
03-17-2007, 01:30 AM
Its weird to any thinking person.

I was watching a womans match go to a third set tie break and one player had won four more games. no way was that a "tied" match.

Actually, I don't mind that part of it too much. I'm happy to accept that sets are separate entities, and even though you can win while have fewer points, it makes the idea of 'big points' all the more exciting.

I just don't see how we can communicate our sport to people outside when we're using words like 'love' and giving 15 for each point.

It's an instant turn-off I reckon.

danton
03-17-2007, 02:16 AM
It's not complicated people easily pick it up once you have explained it. Compared to explaining cricket it's a doddle.

I think it would be change for changes sake and it wouldn't increase interest in the sport.

Balerion
03-17-2007, 02:39 AM
This is the kind of thing that alienates current fans and doesn't bring in new fans.


Who is going to say "Hey, tennis got rid of saying love!!! Let's flip the channel over to Dick Enberg!!"


Tennis is what it is. I'm not opposed to considering new ideas, but this is not the answer. The ATP should be marketing #s10-40 in the world more aggressively, not doing pointless tinkering like RR and this.

mangoes
03-17-2007, 02:52 AM
I'm beginning to think that the problem with the tennis leadership is that they are concerning themselves with changing the game instead of focusing on packaging and marketing what is already a great game. There seems to be some misconception that changing the structure of the game will result in more interest in it. I'm hearing very little from the "know it alls" of tennis about a much needed marketing plan for the sport of tennis. Instead, "Let's try Round Robin, Let's change the scoring system.":rolleyes:

GlennMirnyi
03-17-2007, 02:57 AM
Next thing: "let's make the lines red/yellow/brown/purple/orange/green".

Sunset of Age
03-17-2007, 03:04 AM
No, next thing: "All PRETTY players must play shirtless" :p

Sofyaxo
03-17-2007, 03:13 AM
This is the kind of thing that alienates current fans and doesn't bring in new fans.


Who is going to say "Hey, tennis got rid of saying love!!! Let's flip the channel over to Dick Enberg!!"


Tennis is what it is. I'm not opposed to considering new ideas, but this is not the answer. The ATP should be marketing #s10-40 in the world more aggressively, not doing pointless tinkering like RR and this.

But that would actually be a good thing. Why would they want to do it?:rolleyes:

GlennMirnyi
03-17-2007, 03:23 AM
No, next thing: "All PRETTY players must play shirtless" :p

You mean Baghdatis and Nalbandian? :p

IFoughtThe
03-17-2007, 04:21 AM
Whoever mentioned American Football - you might have a big following in the US but don't you think it would be that much bigger if the rest of us could 'get' it?

That's where tennis has a problem.

Why get 15 points when you win one?

Beforehand
03-17-2007, 04:45 AM
Yeah...I agree that with whoever said "It alienates current fans, and doesn't bring in anyone new." I just can't see anyone saying "Now they count by ones! I suddenly get why tennis rules!"

IFoughtThe
03-17-2007, 04:46 AM
^ It's not that you don't "get" it, it's that it's not marketed to you guys at all and your sports market is already saturated with other sports. That has nothing to do with complicated rules. And considering most popular sports are neck-deep in convoluted rules, arbitrary scoring systems, and various other idiosyncracies, to blame a lack of popularity in tennis on its rules seems to be missing the point.

I don't think it has to be seen as negatively as that.

This is about McEnroe's suggestion that an already good game could be improved by changing the scoring system.

refero*fervens
03-17-2007, 05:06 AM
Don't personally think it will help - the scoring isn't difficult to follow, if a bit weird at first. Besides, it differentiates set score (games won) and game score (points won) - when you tell someone a score they get immediately where it's at. :shrug: I find tennis simple in general, only took about half a match for me to get the rules.

jayjay
03-17-2007, 05:56 AM
[QUOTE=IFoughtThe;5044335]Whoever mentioned American Football - you might have a big following in the US but don't you think it would be that much bigger if the rest of us could 'get' it?

That's where tennis has a problem.

American Football actually has quite a decent following in the UK, and liking it or not liking it has nothing to do with "getting it".

I'm sorry, but there is not a single sport out there that is remotely hard to follow once you've either played, watched, or read about the sport for just a very very short while.

Whether you end up liking the sport or not, is another matter. But it has F all to do with the scoring.

The game of tennis has no problem at all. It is a good sport, enjoyed and played by many. The problem with the sport are other factors besides the rules or structure of the game itself. People wanting to make stupid changes to the game, rather than what goes on around it, are also a major problem for tennis.

Why get 15 points when you win one?

Why is a shot from mid-court in basketball not 50 pts? Does it really matter? If people want to know why it's 15-love, then they can read up a little on the history of how it all started. It's not difficult.

You can ask many questions of many sports, tennis is no different.

brent-o
03-17-2007, 07:31 AM
Next thing: "let's make the lines red/yellow/brown/purple/orange/green".

That would be a cool idea. haha sorry!

darrinbaker00
03-17-2007, 07:37 AM
Next thing: "let's make the lines red/yellow/brown/purple/orange/green".
World TeamTennis is already doing that, my friend. ;)

jazar
03-17-2007, 09:19 AM
as long as you arent as thick as shit, then the scoring really isnt difficult to understand.

IFoughtThe
03-18-2007, 01:33 AM
as long as you arent as thick as shit, then the scoring really isnt difficult to understand.

No, it's just plain daft.

R.Federer
03-18-2007, 02:31 AM
Regarding the origins,

The origins of the fifteen, thirty, forty scores are somewhat unclear - one common explanation is that the scoring system was copied from the game sphairistike, which was played by British officers in India during the 19th century. That game's scoring system was based on the different gun calibres of the British naval ships. When firing a salute, the ships first fired their 15-pounder guns on the main deck, followed by the 30-pounders of the middle deck, and finally by the 40-pounders of the lower gun deck.

The scoring system is also sometimes said to have medieval and French roots. A clock face was used on court, with a quarter move of the hand to indicate a score of fifteen, thirty, and forty-five. When the hand moved to sixty, the game was over. Previously, tennis had a scoring system like table tennis or "ping pong" The time it took to play several sets in the hot sun prompted a change and the current scoring and origin of the use of "love" for zero was thought up by World Tennis Promoter Jack March an American of French decent, who resided in Cleveland,Ohio. He wanted to share his love of tennis in a creative way. "Love" derives from the French word for an egg (l‘oeuf). March chose it because an egg looks like the number zero. When stating the score, the server's score is stated first. If the server announces the score as "thirty-love," for example, it means that the server has won two points and the receiver none.

If each player has won three points, the score is described as "deuce" rather than "forty-all". From this point on, whenever the score is tied, it is described as "deuce" regardless of how many points have been played. The player who wins the next point after deuce is said to have the advantage. If the player with advantage loses the next point, the score is again deuce, since the score is tied. If the player with the advantage wins the next point, that player has won the game, since the player now leads by two points. When the server is the player with the advantage, the score is stated by him before the next point as "advantage in." When the server's opponent has the advantage, the server states the score as "advantage out." These phrases are sometimes shortened to "ad in" and "ad out."

tripb19
03-18-2007, 02:35 AM
I think they should do a tournament where the courts are massive sheets of glass on top of water with sharks underneath.

Jogy
03-18-2007, 02:52 AM
agreed, the scoring is stupid in tennis

IFoughtThe
03-18-2007, 03:17 AM
Regarding the origins,

If that lot isn't a reason for change, nothing is. What a load of c*ap.

mecir72
03-18-2007, 03:22 AM
McEnroe has alot of ideas about tennis but I dont get it why he wants to change the game all the time. I have never played anyone who dislikes the scoring system in tennis. In fact I think the scoring system is a great strength in this game.

Tankman
03-18-2007, 03:41 AM
I've never really thought of the scoring system as a problem before... from the tournaments i've been to, half the crowd don't seem to be concerned too much with the score... one of the other posters brought up the fact that it allows you to differentiate btw the game score and set score, which makes it pretty useful

I think it is really how interesting and entertaining the game is to watch, rather than whether or not you get the scoring, that will determine its popularity... even if the scoring in tennis was made pathetically easy to follow, if it bores you to hell then it won't make any difference

what would you change the scoring system to anyway?

cobalt60
03-18-2007, 01:36 PM
No, next thing: "All PRETTY players must play shirtless" :p

Men and Women then for equal money;)

IFoughtThe
03-18-2007, 03:42 PM
I've never really thought of the scoring system as a problem before... from the tournaments i've been to, half the crowd don't seem to be concerned too much with the score... one of the other posters brought up the fact that it allows you to differentiate btw the game score and set score, which makes it pretty useful

I think it is really how interesting and entertaining the game is to watch, rather than whether or not you get the scoring, that will determine its popularity... even if the scoring in tennis was made pathetically easy to follow, if it bores you to hell then it won't make any difference

what would you change the scoring system to anyway?

I'm not sure.

But I'm very curious to see what McEnroe has to say about it tomorrow.

If you consider that he's a guy who played the game for twenty years and has commentated on it for the past 15, it's pretty radical to want to change the scoring system.

Be interesting to listen to.