Coup Droit wrote:

---

Spireman wrote:

---

indiana wrote:

---

No it doesn't.

---

 What does make it more of a lottery is sudden death deuce and match tie break third sets. This applies to singles when it is used too, eg mtb in 15k qualifying, and quite a lot of junior tournaments, both itf and lta. The supposed better player, higher ranked, or whatever, can usually win a full third set but can easily lose a mtb after managing to lose a set earlier. The format does maybe make players tighten up, maybe become better at tie breaks, no bad thing...

The worst thing was the lta fast 4 format with sudden death in tie breaks. The number of times I've seen it get to 9-9 in a mtb, then anything can happen and often does, unlucky net cord, bad call by an opponent, or just a silly error but with no opportunity to come back. Luckily they have now got rid of sudden death tiebreaks, caused far more problems than the odd minute or two it might save in time.

I know both players know the format before starting, that isn't my point, just that messing about with scoring system makes it more of a lottery.

---

 Yes, if you're the weaker player, you would definitely choose to have sudden death deuce.

But as to MTBs messing with the scoring system and making it more random, it's true. But so do normal tie-breaks. We never used to have them (yonks ago). They also favour the weaker player. They also 'mess' with the traditional system. So why have one and not the other?

I'm 100% in favour of MTBs. I feel that 10 points is long enough. If you get an unlucky dead ball at 9-9, then it's tough but you shouldn't have been at 9-9- in the first place. Exactly as if you get an unlucky one at 5-5 in the normal tie-break. 

---

 Yes, I know scoring system has evolved, I do just about remember when wimbledon had 2 clear games in all sets, but tennis was probably a lot different then. My real recent dislike was the lta fast 4 sudden death tiebreaks, now thankfully discontinued. At least in normal mtb a net cord, or whatever, dodgy call etc,  at 9-9, gives a player the chance to get to 10-10 and still win. No problem with mtb or tie breaks in general, and if you want to avoid mtb then make sure you win in two sets.

Re MTBs, while not random as such, they clearly do give more chance to the generally weaker players as against a normal third set. But to get there the normally stronger players have gone and lost one of the two earlier sets.

As said, playing to win 10 points with at least a 2 point lead is not insignificant. And while yes you could have such as a netcord on MP you could have a netcord at MP in a normal first to 4 with a 2 point lead game.

I would probably still just prefer a normal 3rd set in doubles but am not particularly against MTBs. 

live.itftennis.com/en/live-streams/video.php

Warming up. I have an idea of who I think the majority on here will want to win, but anyone rooting for Naiktha?

6 -2 in the second.  That was easy for Fran.

KK wrote:

---

6 -2 in the second.  That was easy for Fran.

---

 Just caught the end, pretty one sided.

They must know each other reasonably well given the hug afterwards.