Sports romantics are generally not big fans, but adjusted formats of various games are growing rapidly around the world. Short match formats with adjusted rules have been generated with the purpose of tailoring entertainment to societies changing demands and requirements. The worlds value of time increases day by day, therefore it makes sense to shorten sports at the same rate to compensate for this right?
Well, that depends on what side of the fence you sit. I can certainly understand the benefits of this thought process. For example, economics does dictate that there is a market in this space. If you look at the IPL twenty twenty and the Big Bash in cricket, these are two of the most popular tournaments in the world. Twenty twenty cricket has destroyed the 50 over format and it can be argued that it is fast becoming more popular with many people than the traditional 4 and 5 day format.
In terms of appeal, it is easy to summarise from an economic stand point. Human demands are dynamic and ever changing. This mismatch has been corrected by the introduction of games that demonstrate increased efficiency (higher entertainment value in shorter timeframes, decreasing the perceived "flat periods" of matches).
So this explains why sports are changing to meet societies utility, but there will be an ever growing argument that due to this, society is also changing due to these sports, particularly at grass roots level. Again taking cricket for example, there was a recent interview with West Indies legend Brian Lara on Fox Sports Australia. He suggested that the majority of children in the West Indies now grow up with the main goal of wanting to earn large amounts of money playing twenty twenty in the IPL instead of wanting to play test match cricket for their country. Not only does this question the value of traditional sports and player loyalty, there is also a massive shift in playing style and technique from a young age.
Batting and bowling is like a different sport in both formats. There is a lot more variety and skill involved in the longer format. Cricket faces a future technical quality dip as the value of the longer format decreases.
The same applies to tennis. Tennis Australia are set to launch a "Fast Four" format of the game that is tailored to our busy lifestyles. CEO of Tennis Australia Craig Riley suggested that "The new format is a game changer and is set to revolutionise the game of tennis, particularly at club and social levels". There are four basic rules to this game that differ from traditional tennis.
1. No Lets
2. Sudden death Deuce (no Advantages)
3. First to 4 games wins
4. Tie Break at 3 all.
Again, this effects many things at grass roots level. Both tactically and from a physical and mental stand point. The largest disadvantage of short formats is result randomisation. The shorter the game, the more random the result can be. Ie. an advantage in quality decreases. For example, if you play a best of 7 series in the NBA play off's, it is more than likely that the "better" team will proceed to the next round. If you placed the same two teams in a head to head match up for 5 minutes, with the team in front after 5 minutes progressing, the result becomes much more unpredictable.
This brings me to my Tennis World Cup idea. As adjusted format demand increases, lets create a tennis World Cup. The event to be hosted every four years will provide the patriotism of Davis Cup along with the entertainment of an adjusted format. For example, the tournament could be governed by the following parameters;
1. Each Country is allowed four entrants plus two emergency players (in case of in tournament injury)
2. There are 8 pools of 4 teams.
3. The top two countries of each pool advance after the round robin matches have taken place to the Round of 16, in which the tournament then becomes a knock out event.
4. The match format is best of 5 sets
5. All four players from each country must play at least 3 games of each match.
6. Each country is allowed four substitutions per match.
7. Substitutions can occur mid game (Ie. 30-40).
This would be exciting and different from any other format in the game. It would also increase the value of playing for your country, which has decreased in recent times due to Davis Cup not being as high on players priority lists as it once was historically. A win win for the sport.
Regardless of what side of the fence you sit, short formats have changed the face of sports. For better or for worse is the debate point in which I am sure many of us have differing opinions.
Well, that depends on what side of the fence you sit. I can certainly understand the benefits of this thought process. For example, economics does dictate that there is a market in this space. If you look at the IPL twenty twenty and the Big Bash in cricket, these are two of the most popular tournaments in the world. Twenty twenty cricket has destroyed the 50 over format and it can be argued that it is fast becoming more popular with many people than the traditional 4 and 5 day format.
In terms of appeal, it is easy to summarise from an economic stand point. Human demands are dynamic and ever changing. This mismatch has been corrected by the introduction of games that demonstrate increased efficiency (higher entertainment value in shorter timeframes, decreasing the perceived "flat periods" of matches).
So this explains why sports are changing to meet societies utility, but there will be an ever growing argument that due to this, society is also changing due to these sports, particularly at grass roots level. Again taking cricket for example, there was a recent interview with West Indies legend Brian Lara on Fox Sports Australia. He suggested that the majority of children in the West Indies now grow up with the main goal of wanting to earn large amounts of money playing twenty twenty in the IPL instead of wanting to play test match cricket for their country. Not only does this question the value of traditional sports and player loyalty, there is also a massive shift in playing style and technique from a young age.
Batting and bowling is like a different sport in both formats. There is a lot more variety and skill involved in the longer format. Cricket faces a future technical quality dip as the value of the longer format decreases.
The same applies to tennis. Tennis Australia are set to launch a "Fast Four" format of the game that is tailored to our busy lifestyles. CEO of Tennis Australia Craig Riley suggested that "The new format is a game changer and is set to revolutionise the game of tennis, particularly at club and social levels". There are four basic rules to this game that differ from traditional tennis.
1. No Lets
2. Sudden death Deuce (no Advantages)
3. First to 4 games wins
4. Tie Break at 3 all.
Again, this effects many things at grass roots level. Both tactically and from a physical and mental stand point. The largest disadvantage of short formats is result randomisation. The shorter the game, the more random the result can be. Ie. an advantage in quality decreases. For example, if you play a best of 7 series in the NBA play off's, it is more than likely that the "better" team will proceed to the next round. If you placed the same two teams in a head to head match up for 5 minutes, with the team in front after 5 minutes progressing, the result becomes much more unpredictable.
This brings me to my Tennis World Cup idea. As adjusted format demand increases, lets create a tennis World Cup. The event to be hosted every four years will provide the patriotism of Davis Cup along with the entertainment of an adjusted format. For example, the tournament could be governed by the following parameters;
1. Each Country is allowed four entrants plus two emergency players (in case of in tournament injury)
2. There are 8 pools of 4 teams.
3. The top two countries of each pool advance after the round robin matches have taken place to the Round of 16, in which the tournament then becomes a knock out event.
4. The match format is best of 5 sets
5. All four players from each country must play at least 3 games of each match.
6. Each country is allowed four substitutions per match.
7. Substitutions can occur mid game (Ie. 30-40).
This would be exciting and different from any other format in the game. It would also increase the value of playing for your country, which has decreased in recent times due to Davis Cup not being as high on players priority lists as it once was historically. A win win for the sport.
Regardless of what side of the fence you sit, short formats have changed the face of sports. For better or for worse is the debate point in which I am sure many of us have differing opinions.