Alexander Zverev has publicly rejected calls to shorten Grand Slam matches, asserting that the traditional best-of-five format remains the ultimate test in professional tennis.
Zverev defends the five-set tradition
During the ATP tournament in Beijing, Alexander Zverev emphasized that the best-of-five format is essential to the historical identity of the sport’s four major championships. “It is history,” Zverev stated regarding the format used in Melbourne, Paris, London, and New York. The argued that the physical demands of playing up to five sets represent one of the most extreme challenges an athlete can face, making a Grand Slam title the most difficult achievement to secure in professional tennis.
Zverev dismissed the notion that players favor a reduction, claiming he is not aware of any professional currently advocating for a shift to best-of-three sets for men’s matches. In a lighthearted remark, he suggested that Novak Djokovic might theoretically prefer a shorter format due to his age, but noted that even Djokovic would have likely opposed such a change during his younger years.
Australian Open retains best-of-five set format
The discussion surrounding the match format intensified after Andrew Abdo, the CEO of Tennis Australia, publicly questioned whether the early rounds of the Australian Open could transition to a two-out-of-three set structure. No. Following public speculation regarding the Australian Open, tournament organizers confirmed that the best-of-five format will remain unchanged for the upcoming season.
Carlos Alcaraz and the call for a curfew
While the debate over the number of sets remains contentious, Carlos Alcaraz has offered a different perspective on how to address the challenges of modern Grand Slam scheduling. Speaking in Tokyo, Alcaraz warned: Wenn wir das wegnehmen und Best-of-Three spielen, dann töten wir aus meiner Sicht das Vermächtnis der Grand Slams und die Grand Slams selbst
.
Alcaraz has proposed the implementation of a mandatory curfew, similar to the 11 p.m. restriction in place at the Wimbledon Championships, to ensure matches finish at reasonable hours for both players and spectators. This follows his experience at the US Open, where his quarterfinal against Ben Shelton ended at 3:33 a.m. The match, which spanned four hours and 28 minutes, was delayed because the preceding match between Jessica Pegula and Emma Navarro went to three sets, and earlier matches also ran long. Alcaraz noted that many fans left the venue due to the late hour and suggested an earlier start time would have improved the atmosphere.
How the industry views the schedule
The conversation highlights a broader tension between the historical traditions of the sport and the modern demands of global broadcasting and player health. While figures like Zverev champion the rigorous nature of the five-set match, players such as Alcaraz are increasingly vocal about the need for systemic changes to the tour calendar. Alcaraz has suggested that reducing the number of consecutive tournaments would be a more effective way to manage player physical demands than altering the fundamental rules of the Grand Slam events.
Frequently asked questions about the match format debate
What is the primary argument against shortening matches?
Proponents, including Alexander Zverev and Carlos Alcaraz, argue that the best-of-five structure is a unique, historical element that differentiates Grand Slam tournaments from standard ATP events and serves as the ultimate test of physical endurance.
What solution has Carlos Alcaraz proposed for late-night finishes?
Alcaraz has advocated for a strict curfew, similar to the 11 p.m. policy at Wimbledon, which would prevent matches from running into the early hours of the morning and improve the experience for fans in attendance.
Related reading
