Making Tennis Fairer: The Grand Tiebreaker
Steven J. Brams, Mehmet S. Ismail, D. Marc Kilgour

TL;DR
This paper analyzes fairness in tennis, showing that current rules can lead to match winners who did not win the most games, and proposes a Grand Tiebreaker to better align game, set, and match outcomes.
Contribution
It introduces the concept of a Grand Tiebreaker to address discrepancies between game and match winners, enhancing fairness and competitiveness.
Findings
Equal skill players have equal chances of winning games, sets, and matches.
Discrepancies occur where game winners differ from match winners, as in notable finals.
Implementing a Grand Tiebreaker could reduce these discrepancies and improve fairness.
Abstract
Tennis, like other games and sports, is governed by rules, including the rules that determine the winner of points, games, sets, and matches. If the two players are equally skilled -- each has the same probability of winning a point when serving or when receiving -- we show that each has an equal chance of winning games, sets, and matches, whether or not sets go to a tiebreak. However, in a women's match that is decided by 2 out of 3 sets, and a men's match that is decided by 3 out of 5 sets, it is possible that the player who wins the most games may not be the player who wins the match. We calculate the probability that this happens and show that it has actually occurred -- most notably, in the 2019 men's Wimbledon final between Novak Djokovic and Roger Federer, which took almost five hours to complete and is considered one of the greatest tennis matches ever (Djokovic won). We argue…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
MethodsSparse Evolutionary Training
