Mens Tennis Forums banner

3 challenges a set is crap

804 Views 15 Replies 14 Participants Last post by  trixtah
Far too many. Players seem to be challenging everything even remotely close and it seems they barely ever run out. Put it back to 2 a set.
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Far too many. Players seem to be challenging everything even remotely close and it seems they barely ever run out. Put it back to 2 a set.
amen. i even remember people on mtf arguing for unlimited challenges during sets, saying players would be decent enough to not overuse it. :rolleyes:
Federer got 1 challenge right :bigclap:

and 1 wrong immediately after
  • Like
Reactions: 1
eurosport just came up with the stats again: men are over 60% wrong when challenging the calls, women about 70%.
I agree. Three is too many.
Federer being awfull at it doesn't help. People have forgotten what the challenges were for in the first place.
I think it's fine, there have been a lot of bad calls this Australian Open.

Though Federer should get 0, he seems to challenge on a prayer.
There aren't too many. It's not like this really slows the game down. Players take a good 20-30 seconds between points anyway. Besides, you know you just love hearing the crowd go "ooooOOOOOaaaaaaAAAAAHHHHHHH."
There aren't too many. It's not like this really slows the game down. Players take a good 20-30 seconds between points anyway. Besides, you know you just love hearing the crowd go "ooooOOOOOaaaaaaAAAAAHHHHHHH."
:yeah:

Challenges are useless anyway, it's just the crowd factor. If it was meant to be serious, then the umpire would have a little screen with the hawkeye results all the time, and would overturn calls automatically, without anyone asking anything.

The fact that players must do that is obviously meant just as a bit of extra fun for the public. So, 3 is just fine. 2 is too few, because once you make a wrong call, most of the time you would be reluctant to waste another, so it's basically 1 per set. More than 3 I feel would really be too many. :devil:
I can think at least one occasion in this tournament where the third challenge turned around a set. In the third set of Federer-Tipsarevic, Tipsy got a bit burned by two challenges he made early in that set that were a couple of millimeters wide. He still had a third one and used it correctly late in the set as well as the fourth one after that. Might have even used another after those, I'm not so sure. But at least the third and fourth one were in pivotal moments of the set, which he eventually won.

Then again, I'm not confident that any current distance-measuring application can accurately detect a ball bounce area on a millimeter scale on a tennis court. You've just got to draw a line somewhere and apart from the clear cases - which do pop up every now and then - using Hawk-eye to determine a winner of a point that bounces on the outmost atoms of a line is just moving the responsibility from the human line judge to an inanimate machine.
I fully dont agree. They should have even 5, because the worst thing is, when u lose due to bad calls...
5 challenges a set? You and Mr Disney would get along well.
I've always said they should get 9 challenges a set. No more no less.
make it unlimited challenges, with an additional point deficit for each incorrect challenge
I like 3.

2 is way too little.

Also, look at the drama in the Ivanovic/Hantuchova match.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Far too many. Players seem to be challenging everything even remotely close and it seems they barely ever run out. Put it back to 2 a set.
if it doesn't run out then obviously...
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top