The format of Tennis

[Tamthewasp]

As we all know the scoring format of Tennis is very unique.
Points=games=sets=wins.

I'm not going to break down the scoring system as everyone knows it inside out.

I enjoy the way Tennis is scored, the way it's broken down in to points and games and service games. Even though you could potentially score more points than your opponent you could still lose the match, I find this great and also troubling at the same time.
I love the 15-30-40-advantage an I don't know how they came up with these numbers instead of 1-2-3-4 but it is a nice touch.

Tennis is unique in many ways and it's scoring system has rarely been contested, maybe because it is such a huge success or maybe because no 1 has found a better way of Scoring Tennis?

Other Raquet based sports have Similar but very different ways of scoring.

Is the current way of Scoring Tennis the best way to score Tennis or can this unique scoring system be improved upon?

[Corbon]

The 15-30-40-Game rule has been around forever so we can't compare it to an older system. The Deuce rule adds a nice touch to it, even though it prolongs many games by a considerable margin, it's these long games that often contribute to "epic" play. I wouldn't want to change any of this. I always found it odd that 40 isn't 45 (to keep the 15 increment), well it's part of tennis history (apparently based on a clock's face) and changing it to 15-30-45 or 10-20-30 wouldn't change the concept.

I wouldn't change the tie break rule either and I have mixed opinons about final set non-tie breaks. They don't necessarily produce better tennis (Isner-Mahut was terrible to watch and so was Tsonga-Raonic at the Olympics) while final set tie breaks can be absolutely exciting nerve wreckers. I am definitely glad that non-tie break final sets are only played at 3 Slams, the Olympics and the Davis Cup now.

Super tie breaks (played in lieu of a full 3rd set in Mixed at the AO, FO, USO and Olympics) are too short though, they should be longer than 10 points.

[Tamthewasp]

I would like an answer from some1 that has a better way of scoring tennis or an answer that justifies the current scoring system

[SlicerITST]

I have played a lot of table tennis. The scoring system is different (to 11 and previously 21 but less sets). I really dont think there is much difference to tennis scoring as for excitement goes. It really also has the same momentum changes as you would expect from a tennis match.

For the history i found this on wiki:

History
The origins of the 15, 30, and 40 scores are believed to be medieval French. It is possible that a clock face was used on court, with a quarter move of the hand to indicate a score of 15, 30, and 45. When the hand moved to 60, the game was over. However, in order to ensure that the game could not be won by a one-point difference in players' scores, the idea of "deuce" was introduced. To make the score stay within the "60" ticks on the clock face, the 45 was changed to 40. Therefore, if both players have 40, the first player to score receives ten and that moves the clock to 50. If the player scores a second time before the opponent is able to score, they are awarded another ten and the clock moves to 60. The 60 signifies the end of the game. However, if a player fails to score twice in a row, then the clock would move back to 40 to establish another "deuce".[citation needed]

Another theory is that the scoring nomenclature came from the French game jeu de paume (a precursor to tennis which initially used the hand instead of a racquet). Jeu de paume was very popular before the French revolution, with more than 1,000 courts in Paris alone. The traditional court was 90 ft in total with 45 ft on each side. When the server scored, he moved forward 15 ft. If he scored again, he would move another 15 ft. If he scored a third time, he could only move 10 ft closer.[citation needed]

The origin of the use of "love" for zero is also disputed. It is possible that it derives from the French expression for "the egg" (l'œuf) because an egg looks like the number zero.[2][3] This is similar to the origin of the term "duck" in cricket, supposedly from "duck's egg", referring to a batsman who has been called out without completing a run. "Love" is also said to derive from l'heure "the hour" in French[citation needed]. A third possibility comes from the Dutch expression iets voor lof doen, which means to do something for praise, implying no monetary stakes.[4] Another theory on the origins of the use of "love" comes from the acceptance that, at the start of any match, when scores are at zero, players still have "love for each other".

Alternative game scoring
A popular alternative to advantage scoring is "no-advantage" (or "no-ad") scoring, developed by James Van Alen in order to shorten match playing time.[6] No-advantage scoring is a scoring method in which the first player to reach four points wins the game. No-ad scoring eliminates the requirement that a player must win by two points. Therefore, if the game is tied at deuce, the next player to win a point wins the game. This method of scoring is used in most professional doubles matches. When this style of play is implemented, at deuce, the receiver then chooses from which side of the court he desires to return his opponent's serve. However, in no-ad mixed doubles play gender always serves to the same gender at game point and during the final point of tiebreaks

[Tamthewasp]

I knew some of what you said about about the french. An I know "real tennis" the basis for what we now call tennis is a a sport still played.

I did'nt know about the clock face scoring system, an that's a pretty smart way of scoring, but as times change, most sports have also changed. Flo your wiki copy n paste is very well, but is tennis stuck in history or should it look for new ways to improve the sport

[Corbon]

Well tennis is a very traditional sport. I don't remember the introduction of the tie brea but I am sure many people involved in the sport were initially against it but eventually realized that it did benefit the game in the long run.

I would like an answer from some1 that has a better way of scoring tennis

There is no "better" way.

or an answer that justifies the current scoring system

I haven't heard of any major complaints from players, tournament or tour officials about the current scoring system, they all go with the old adage "never change a winning concept", that's their justification.

As for the history about point "names", like I said before, whether you call it Love-15-30-40-Deuce or 0-1-2-3-4-4All doesn't matter because the principle would be the same.

[Tamthewasp]

I think Flo explained the 15-30-40 system through wiki.

As far as my knowledge goes the french aristocrats played it but there was no out, they had a slanted barrier that always kept the ball in.

In relation to the current way tennis is is scored. Games n Set based tennis. We all accept that tennis is scored this way. Throughout human history we are always challenging the "norm" and striving for better, So I find it hard to believe that the scoring system for PROFESSIONAL tennis has not at least been been challenged through the years wher most sports change its rules periodically but tennis uniquely is the same today as it was 70 years ago.

[Corbon]

As far as my knowledge goes the french aristocrats played it but there was no out, they had a slanted barrier that always kept the ball in.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_tennis

---

Well what would YOU want to change and why?

[Tamthewasp]

I'm not sure how i would change it or even that i would change it. I'd like it to a quicker game could do away with sets and just have first to 12 or 18 games.

I'd like to hear what ideas everyone else has