NSS = New Scoring System OSS = Old Scoring System Point-progression data were available beginning from the QF stage of the US Open 2007. Here is some limited comparitive analysis for the singles matches only, with some explanations further below. Dabeka - Evans 21-14 (15-8/9) 10-21 (2-15 and 6-1) 24-22 (11-9) Nakanishi - Moody 21-13 (11/12-4) 21-14 (11-4) Vaughan - Nguyen 22-20 (11-9/10) 8-21 (2-15 and 2-1) 21-16 (10-6) Lee - Sasaki 21-13 (13-5/6) 21-17 (12-8) Lee - Rice 21-13 (10/11-3) 21-13 (11-2 and 4-5) Pai - Wang 21-14 (11-5 and 2-1, or 11-5 and 1-1) 21-15 (11-6 and 3-2) Cann - Allegrini 21-18 (11-5 and 5-8, or 11-9) 21-10 (11-2 and 2-0) Jun - Yonekura 21-10 (11-2 and 2-0, or 11-2 and 1-0) 23-21 (9-7) Notations (example Dabeka v Evans game): 1. "/" notation. For first game, there is no record of the first server, requiring the "/" notation. Depending who the first server is, the first game stands at 15-8 or 15-9. (Evans scored the first point. If he was the first server, then the result is 15-9, else it is 15-8.) For subsequent games, the first server is the winner of the previous game, so no ambiguity there. 2. "and" notation. If the game would have ended under OSS but still ongoing under NSS, the "and" notation is intended to state how many more rallies were additionally played. (Evans would have won the second game 15-2 under OSS, but under NSS, Dabeka won 6 additional rallies compared to Evans' 1 rally.) 3. "or" notation is only for the first game due to the "first server" ambiguity. (In the Cann v Allegrini game, if Cann was the first server, she would have won by 11-5 under OSS with Cann winning 5 additional rallies to Allegrini's 8. If Allegrini was the first server, she would lose the first game by 11-9.)
Some conclusions: 1. In MS, 7 out of 10 games were shorter in NSS. (1 game exactly the same length for both.) 2. In WS, only 2 out of 13 games ("or" games counted as 2 games) were shorter in NSS. 3. In WS, for games that were longer in NSS, an average 4.8 (37/8) rallies were additionally played.
I think the NSS mainly shorten double games, rather than singles. Under NSS, it's impossible to have a 2+ hours WD games any more.
The purpose of NSS is to get more exciting matches also for TV broadcast as well....in tennis, every 2 games ( except the first 3 games of beginnibg of the set) has a break so TV can do some commercial..in NSS, they will do it after reaching 11 points...In my opinion, I like NSS .....the players need to keep their nerve to close the matches....
However, the NSS takes away the fun of "great come back". In tennis, you can be down 0:5, but come back, if you protect your own serve, and break opponent's. But if you are down more of 12-15 points in NSS (in an even level of match), almost impossible to come back.
Mainly because in doubles, the serve is immediately under pressure, so there is more chance for the server to make mistakes.
Yes, I like NSS because it makes the match more exciting right from the very beginning. OSS tends to favor players/pairs who are more consistent especially in doubles. With NSS, doubles matches have no longer two services and are thus more dramatic & unpredictable.
Yes, I agree. However, the "0 mistake margin" (when you were down a lot) is the part killing the fun. The OSS give you a reasonable margin (serve rights) when you come back, but the NSS pretty much make sure you have no margin at all.
