Australian Open will use a shot clock, plus other changes

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/42070743

Changing from 20 to 25 seconds seems sensible, although I can't decide if a shot clock will help or hinder the enjoyment. Will have to wait an see I guess.

Also they are going back to 16 seeds in 2019, which could make life more difficult in the early rounds for all of the top 32, if they can no longer all avoid each other.

Some might say it’s about time.

In fact ..... 25 seconds of time.

Usurprisingly, Rafa has criticised the shot-clock decision. IMHO, it's a good move. Can't say I'm that thrilled about the reduction of seeds from 32 to 16. Had that been in operation at this year's AO, Federer might have met Murray in the opening round.

They should not be experimenting with Grand Slams at this stage.  I think this is a nonsense decision and is solving a problem that doesn't actually exist.  

The main issue at the moment is too many of the stars are either missing the Slams due to injury or are arriving half-baked.  

For the next few years the main focus of the Grand Slams and the ATP should be to make it as easy as possible for the aging stars to manage a schedule, without being overplayed and without being penalised for choosing to lighten their schedule.

rafa will adapt

Since the Chair Umpire still has the discretionary powers of when to start the shot clock, now you have three, instead of two individuals under pressure.

Will the AO also issue eggs and tomatoes to spectators? Perhaps we should also change the current traditional scoring to the NextGen format. I cannot wait till the WWE announcers start showing up in the middle of the slam courts after every two games to interview players on their 'feelings' within the allotted 90 seconds.

Seems a very good decision to bring in a shot clock. Umpires have generally shown themselves to be inconsistent in their application of the current rule and the likes of Rafa has constantly taken advantage, knowing he's unlikely to receive a punishment. This should mean some consistency.

I'm fine with the shot clock especially if they are raising the time allowed from 20-25 seconds.

Also happy with dropping the number of seeds to 16. Think that the current 32 gives too much protection to the top 16. If, as per earlier example, Murray had to play Federer in the first round of the AO this year what a mouth watering prospect that would have been and would really have kick started the tournament. Over the past few years unless a top seed goes out early there has been very little excitement in the early rounds with most of the top seeds matches being routine.

Shot clock is a fantastic idea. A rule which has been broken far too often and is officiated unfairly too. Umpires will start the clock once they announce the score, so some discretion for longer points etc.

I am a bit torn on the 16 seeds idea. In some ways the first week of a grand slam is often very routine for the top players. But it will lead to more lopsided draws - this years USO was one of the worst slams in memory for me, mainly because of the bottom half. I know the luck of the draw often plays a part now, but it will be much more likely to with 16 seeds - sometimes the best player may not win the slam.

Regarding Slams at 16 seeds, let us say Djokovic, Wawrinka, Murray, Nishikori and Raonic show up at AO 2019 after not having played for 6+ months, and get knocked out in the first round.

Can AO 2019 survive on ticket sales and offer the current prize money that they do?

USTA earned ~$125M from Tickets sales in 2017.

I have no problem with either the shot clock or reducing the seeding down to 16 from 32.

laverfan wrote:Regarding Slams at 16 seeds, let us say Djokovic, Wawrinka, Murray, Nishikori and Raonic show up at AO 2019 after not having played for 6+ months, and get knocked out in the first round.

Can AO 2019 survive on ticket sales and offer the current prize money that they do?

USTA earned ~$125M from Tickets sales in 2017.

Not sure what the question is. I would expect that most if not all tickets for the second week of the tournament will have been sold well in advance of the event. So why would that affect prize money. For the first week getting the possibility of some more interesting match ups might bring more people in.

This will make the first round of the Australian Open more box office than usual, if nothing else it's a good PR move. I'll be more likely to watch. I'm in favour of a shot clock but there's no doubt that it will create more controversy around exactly how it will be applied and needs to be done very carefully.

When the counting starts, does a noise go off to warn the players? Once the count has started can it be restarted if there is crowd noise?

What happens if the 25 seconds are up just as the ball is thrown into the air, or just as the ball is struck by the server?

What announces the end of the 25 seconds - does the umpire have to speak as his direction, does a noise go off?

Does a single second over count as an infraction?

I like the idea of 5 freebies per set, then warning, then first serve removal. I think that would be better than straight in with the infractions.

Is there a document somewhere explaining all these rules? Or have any forumites watched any of the minor tournaments where this will be tried out?

Hm just double checking before posting and I find a story coming out on Eurosport saying that they have clarified that it will only be used in the qualifying rounds this year, not the main draw. Haven't seen that reported elsewhere or the original source so it would be good to get a confirmation.

Not sure if that really is a clarification or if they have backed down due to negative reaction given privately? I don't think there was much public criticism. Hard to tell since I can't find the original source of the story itself or see the full statements put out, just the journos reports.

I am ok with both changes.

If referees had been enforcing time limits more stringently, shot clock would not have been needed, but given that they did not, it is probably a good idea.

In terms of number of seeds, I do not care that much - 16 or 32 is fine with me. It is not that long ago when they used to have 16 seeds at the slams anyway, so they will be just going back to that.

USTA, ATP & WTA Implement Rules Innovations At Events Throughout Summer

for anyone interested.

Good news. Suspect it will work fairly smoothly. Will be interesting to see how often umpires decide to stop the clock.