Will Women’s Grand Slam Tennis Matches Soon Proceed to Five Sets?
The debate is resurfacing: should women’s singles matches at Grand Slam tournaments be contested in the best-of-five sets format, mirroring the men’s game? The world No. 1 player is among those voicing support for the change, sparking a conversation that touches on equity, athleticism, and the future of the sport.
Currently, outside of the Australian Open, Roland-Garros, Wimbledon, and the US Open, the rules are consistent for both men, and women. Matches are decided in a best-of-three sets format on both the WTA and ATP tours. However, a potential shift is gaining momentum. In January, Craig Tiley, the newly appointed head of the USTA (United States Tennis Association, governing body of the US Open), proposed extending women’s Grand Slam matches to best-of-five sets, beginning potentially as early as the quarterfinal stage in 2027. This would represent a significant alteration to the established structure of the game.
A Divided Women’s Circuit
The proposal isn’t without its detractors. Opinions within the women’s game are sharply divided. World No. 1 Aryna Sabalenka expressed her belief at Indian Wells that she would likely win “more Grand Slam titles” with a best-of-five format. “Let’s do it. I think I would probably have more Grand Slam titles. I feel very strong physically, and I’m sure my body could handle it,” Sabalenka stated. Coco Gauff, the reigning Roland-Garros champion, also indicated that she would benefit from the change, but emphasized the need for consistent application across an entire tournament to ensure fairness. Former world No. 1 Iga Swiatek, however, voiced her opposition, describing the idea as “bizarre.” She added, “In a world where everything is going faster and faster, I don’t know if the public would really appreciate that.”
Addressing the Long-Standing Debate on Equity
The issue of equal prize money has long been a point of contention in tennis. Women currently earn the same prize money as men despite playing fewer games to reach the same stage of a tournament. This disparity has occasionally drawn criticism from top male players. In 2022, Stefanos Tsitsipas, then ranked No. 5 in the world, pointed out, “There is also the question of equal prize money; women receive the same amount for playing best-of-three sets.” Implementing the same rules for all players could potentially resolve this debate. However, the argument that women lack the physical capacity to compete in longer matches has historically been a counterpoint. “Five sets for a woman? (…) Physically speaking, a woman cannot do it. She doesn’t have the same physical capabilities as men. It’s not humanly possible. That’s it. You can’t ask a woman to play six hours,” former French No. 1 Marion Bartoli asserted in 2014. But that argument is losing traction as the physical conditioning of female athletes continues to evolve.
“Women can play five sets,” recently stated Patrick Mouratoglou, Serena Williams’ former coach. Aligning the format of play could definitively close the debate. Alternatively, some suggest that to achieve true equality, men’s Grand Slam matches could be reduced to a best-of-three sets format. Novak Djokovic has been a long-time proponent of this idea.
Potentially Resolving Roland-Garros Night Session Concerns
The scheduling of night sessions at Grand Slam tournaments has also become a point of discussion. At the Australian Open and US Open, both men’s and women’s matches are regularly scheduled in prime-time slots. However, at Roland-Garros, night sessions have historically featured only men’s matches in 2024 and 2025. Tournament director Amélie Mauresmo has repeatedly defended this practice, citing the potential for longer match durations in men’s contests as justification. Switching to a best-of-five sets format for women could potentially lead to more balanced night session scheduling, offering fans more compelling women’s matches under the lights.
However, extending the format to five sets across the entire two-week tournament would present logistical challenges for organizers. Already lengthy match days could become even more demanding, potentially requiring additional courts or reductions in junior or doubles tournaments – a scenario considered unlikely. Jessica Pegula, currently ranked No. 5 in the world and leading a WTA council focused on calendar reform, has expressed reservations, citing organizational complexities and the fluctuating intensity of matches in a best-of-five format. A compromise, as proposed by Tiley, of implementing the five-set format only in the second week, from the quarterfinals onwards, could mitigate these concerns.
A Past Experiment That Didn’t Last
The idea of best-of-five sets for women isn’t entirely new. In 1995, a proposal to have the women’s final at the Australian Open played in a best-of-three sets format was rejected following opposition from players led by Steffi Graf. The five-set format was briefly experimented with in the early days of the US Open, with women’s matches played over five sets from 1891 to 1901. It resurfaced in the finals of the Masters events in 1984 and 1998. Steffi Graf won the last match in this format against Martina Hingis. However, the most memorable five-set women’s match remains the 1995 encounter between Monica Seles and Gabriela Sabatini (6-4, 5-7, 3-6, 6-4, 6-2), a grueling battle lasting three hours and 47 minutes.
The potential shift to a best-of-five sets format in women’s Grand Slam tennis is a complex issue with passionate arguments on both sides. Even as it could address concerns about equity and potentially showcase the athleticism of female players, it also presents logistical challenges and raises questions about the impact on match scheduling and player endurance. The debate is likely to continue as the sport evolves and seeks to balance tradition with the demands of a modern audience.
The next major checkpoint will be the USTA’s official announcement regarding any potential rule changes for the 2027 US Open. Stay tuned to Archysport for further updates as this story develops.
What are your thoughts on this potential change? Share your opinions in the comments below!
