The Australian Open "obtained permission to follow Wimbledon in shortening the potential length of matches" by introducing a tiebreak in the deciding set across all events, according to Stuart Fraser of the LONDON TIMES. However, in a move that "perfectly sums up the lack of uniformity across the four grand slam tournaments," Australian execs decided their preference is to play a "super tie-break" at 6-6, in which the player must win 10 points by a margin of two. With approval recently granted by the grand slam board, players are now being consulted to "determine whether this should be introduced" as soon as the '19 tournament, which begins on Jan. 14. It is possible that the "full implementation could be delayed for another year, with only a trial taking place next month in qualifying and junior matches." The use by the Australian Open of a tiebreak to 10 points "would mean that all four grand slams would differ in the way they conclude deciding sets." Wimbledon will play a tiebreak to seven points at 12-12 from next summer; the US Open has played a tiebreak to seven points at 6-6 since '70; and the French Open "has given no indication that it wishes to axe the traditional final advantage set" in which a tiebreak is not used at all (LONDON TIMES, 12/5).
DIVIDED OPINIONS: In London, Simon Briggs reported there is a "larger conflict looming on the issue of coaching from the sidelines." This was tried as an experiment at the recent US Open, even though it "applied only to marginal events such as qualifying and juniors, not the main singles and doubles draws." In January, the Australian Open "is poised to follow suit." The standoff on this issue has reportedly not been resolved. The "new-world slams" -- Australia and the U.S. -- want coaching. The old-world powers of Wimbledon and the French Tennis Federation (FFT) "loathe it." Given the way the sport is organized, the traditionalists "hold an advantage on this front." It is "likely to be easier for them to maintain the status quo than for the revolutionaries to change it" (TELEGRAPH, 12/4).
CRITICS WEIGH IN: NEWS.com.au reported the proposed move "has been met with resistance from some tennis commentators," who have accused the move of "taking away the drama" from three-set women’s matches that have drawn out final sets. New York Times tennis writer Ben Rothenberg is upset the proposed rule change would "throw women under the bus." Tennis writer Jose Morgado also criticized the proposal, "saying there is no reason to bring in final set tiebreaks for women’s matches because the three set format already works perfectly" (NEWS.com.au, 12/5).
