The first alternative set scoring format defined in Appendix V is “Short” sets. The placement of the quotation marks around the “Short” is provided courtesy of the Friend at Court. If I had added the annotation, the quotation marks would have been around the word “set.” The simple fact of the matter is that a short set is not a set at all. I do not like it one bit.
As continues to be my thought pattern, when I encounter a recent rule modification, I immediately wonder who inflicted that rule upon tennis and what the “problem” was that the rule was attempting to address. The quotation marks around the word problem are all mine because I think that some recent innovations have been made to solve an issue that tennis does not actually have or for which the actual source isn’t correctly identified. When an engineer blogs about rules, there is inevitably going to be some root cause analysis. It is the nature of the beast.
For the origin of the short sets, I have to give myself a grade of “incomplete” for now. I have been unable to definitively locate when “Short” sets were added to the Rules of Tennis. So today I am writing about what I do know, and pressing on, which is necessary to maintain the daily output commitment for this project. Eventually I am going to have to complete some serious research about historical ITF rule updates and modifications. I am collecting a lot of loose threads to pursue at a future date in this endeavor.
In the meantime, I can attest that the “Short” set format was in the rules as early as 2011 because that is the earliest version of the USTA Friend at Court that I have been able to get my hands on at this point in time. In 2011 the “Short” set definition was as follows:
The first player/team who wins four games wins that set, provided there is a margin of two games over the opponent(s). If the score reaches four games all, a tie- break game shall be played.
USTA Friend at Court (2011), “Short” Set Definition, Appendix IV
By 2020, a second sentence had been added to the Short set definition and the alternative procedures and scoring methods appendix had slid down a spot due to the insertion of a new appendix for rules for player analysis technology.
Alternatively (at the discretion of the sanctioning body), if the score reaches three games all, a tie-break shall be played.
USTA Friend at Court (2020), “Short” Set Definition, Appendix V
To me, the use of of the word “Alternatively” reeks of “We don’t actually know how do to this. You are on your own on this one.” Determining the game count when a tie-break game should commence would seem to be an area where consistency would be desired, but nope.
Though the topic does not appear in the USTA Friend at Court at all, I find it necessary to take another plunge down a rabbit trail to write about a similar set format that is inexplicably gaining traction. I am out of time for today, but tomorrow I start what is most likely a series of rants about Fast4.
- United States Tennis Association (2011) Friend at Court, White Plains, NY.
- United States Tennis Association (2020) Friend at Court. White Plains, NY
- Nine serves up FAST4 tennis, David Knox, TV Tonight (Australia), December 23, 2014
