The Ladies’ Championship at Wimbledon delivered an exhilarating contest between Czechia’s Barbora Krejčíková and Italy’s Jasmine Paolini.
The 2024 Ladies’ Championship at Wimbledon delivered an exhilarating contest between Czechia’s Barbora Krejčíková and Italy’s Jasmine Paolini. Both players were determined to claim their first Wimbledon title, but it was Krejčíková who emerged victorious, winning in three sets 6-2, 2-6, 6-4. The third set was especially intense and closely contested, with both athletes battling fiercely and passionately.
Ultimately, Krejčíková pulled ahead to secure the lead and the match. However, one can’t help but speculate how the match might have unfolded had the women competed in a best-of-five format. Would the additional sets have allowed for even more strategic gameplay, with players conserving energy and adapting their tactics as the match progressed? Perhaps we would have witnessed even more intense rallies, with each pushing their limits further. The mental and physical endurance required for five sets could have led to unexpected momentum shifts, dramatically altering the outcome of the match. It is interesting to speculate how the longer format might have added a layer of drama and unpredictability.
So, why not play best-of-five sets? Understanding the historical context and the reasons behind this longstanding tradition reveals a complex web of factors that continue to influence tennis today.Ladies’ Set Length at Grand Slams
The history of set length in women’s tennis is deeply rooted in tradition and societal attitudes. From 1891 to 1901, women competed in best-of-five matches during the finals of the US National Championships, the precursor to today’s US Open. While several of these finals went the full distance, the United States National Lawn Tennis Association Council eventually decided to reduce the ladies’ format to best-of-three sets, citing concerns that five sets would be too physically demanding for women. It’s important to note that the council was composed entirely of men, reflecting the prevailing societal beliefs about women’s capabilities in sports. Elisabeth Moore, who competed in and won two five-set matches during the 1896 and 1901 Championships, voiced her criticism of the decision to shorten match lengths. She highlighted the absence of consultation with female players in this decision and argued for the original format, asserting, « Lawn tennis is a game not only of skill but of endurance as well. » Despite her advocacy, the choice to reduce women’s matches to best-of-three sets was upheld, establishing a tradition that persists to this day.
