Defending the Five-Set Tradition in Grand Slam Tennis
The night stretched into the early hours at the US Open, leaving players exhausted and fans debating the very soul of the sport. As calls to shorten matches grow louder, the tradition of best-of-five play faces its most significant challenge yet.
The first ball struck the red clay at 11:05 pm, but the silence that followed the final ace at 3:33 am felt heavier than the four hours and twenty-eight minutes that preceded it. Ben Shelton and Carlos Alcaraz had just delivered a quarter-final contest that set a new record for the latest-ending US Open match, surpassing previous benchmarks by forty-three minutes. The air in the arena was thick with the humidity of a New York autumn night, the kind that soaks into the fabric of a player’s shirt and clings to the skin long after the final point is decided.
In the wake of this marathon, the conversation has shifted away from the scheduling missteps of the USTA and toward a more fundamental question: should the five-set format be retired? For many observers, abolishing the best-of-five structure would not be a modernization, but a catastrophic mistake. It would strip the men’s game of its most defining characteristic, a badge of honor that distinguishes the grand slams from the rest of the tennis circuit.
A Badge of Honor for Endurance
Five-set matches are more than just extended games; they are the crucible in which true champions are forged. John Isner, who never claimed a major title, remains one of the most respected figures in the sport largely because of his capacity to grind out these grueling contests. His three-day, eleven-hour epic against Nicholas Mahut at Wimbledon in 2010 stands as a testament to the sheer will required to endure such physical and mental strain. Even those who lose are celebrated for their survival, for having stayed in the fray long enough to become part of the sport's mythology.
This format serves as the exclusive framing device for the greatest matches in history. It is an imprimatur of the sport’s most revered champions, a standard that elevates the drama of a final set. When players push into a fifth set, they are not just competing for points; they are engaging in a ritual that has defined the pinnacle of professional tennis for generations. The losers often find themselves remembered as much for their resilience as for their defeat, their names etched into the annals of the game alongside the victors.
The Global Ritual of Nightlong Play
For spectators, the five-set match is a shared experience that transcends time zones. The global group-watch sessions that take over social media when a match goes the distance create a sense of community that shorter formats simply cannot replicate. Viewers who cannot stay up through the night often find themselves waking to the knowledge that the fifth set is still raging, a reminder that the drama has not yet resolved itself. This lingering uncertainty is a key part of the allure, turning the match into a narrative that unfolds over hours.
Critics point to the Australian Open as a prime example of why the format should be abolished, citing the extreme lengths of matches like those in Melbourne. However, many see these instances not as flaws, but as rites of passage. The fact that Craig Tiley, formerly the CEO of Tennis Australia, is now running the USTA suggests a continuity of philosophy. The long hours are not an accident but a feature of the sport’s identity, a testament to the depth of competition that only a five-set structure can demand.
Balancing Tradition with Player Welfare
Yet, the physical toll of these matches is becoming harder to ignore. As players face a hectic touring calendar, the risk of wear and tear increases, putting athletes at greater risk of missing tournaments due to exhaustion. This tension between tradition and evolution has animated a debate that has simmered for years. The pressure to maintain a sustainable level of play for the athletes is a valid concern, one that cannot be dismissed in favor of pure tradition.
Recent comments from incoming Tennis Australia CEO Andrew Abdo have added fuel to this fire. He suggested that the scoring system might need to change, or that not every round should be played to five sets, all while trying to retain what makes the sport special. These remarks follow similar proposals from Novak Djokovic, who has advocated for changes that would keep the five sets but dilute the number of games to keep matches within a two-hour window. As the discourse continues, the challenge remains to find a balance that honors the legacy of the five-set match while protecting the players who endure it, as reported by Guardian Sport.
