The debate over whether women should play best-of-five-set matches at Grand Slam tournaments has erupted once again, reigniting a decades-long conversation that touches on the very fabric of professional tennis. With the dust barely settled from the 2026 Australian Open, the sport finds itself at a crossroads, as key figures weigh in on a potential rule change that could reshape the women’s game for years to come.
Australian Open Tournament Director Craig Tiley set the tennis world abuzz when he floated the idea of introducing best-of-five-set matches for women, possibly as early as the 2027 edition of the tournament. Tiley’s comments came on the heels of a dramatic men’s semifinal round in Melbourne, where marathon five-setters between Carlos Alcaraz and Alexander Zverev, and Novak Djokovic and Jannik Sinner, captivated audiences for more than four hours apiece. “We should look at the last few matches – the quarters and the semis and the finals – and make the women’s side three out of five,” Tiley remarked. “So it’s something we should put on the agenda and start talking to the players about it because there are some matches in those last rounds which would have been fascinating had they been three out of five sets.”
The proposal, though bold, has proven divisive. Many players have been quick to voice their opinions, revealing a patchwork of perspectives across the WTA Tour. Amanda Anisimova, speaking at a press conference during the Qatar Open, left little doubt about her stance: “I mean, we’ve always played best-of-three, so I feel like that would be a crazy change for us. Also very physical on a woman’s body. So, yeah, I prefer to obviously play three sets, for sure.” Her straightforward response echoed the sentiments of a significant portion of the locker room.
Italian star Jasmine Paolini, a two-time Grand Slam runner-up, offered a more nuanced take but ultimately landed in the same camp as Anisimova. “At the moment, I don’t think it’s a good idea. Honestly, to me, maybe it’s better to reduce the sets of the men maybe until the quarterfinals. I’m not sure. I think also some good matches are of course in the best-of-five, but it’s a tough tournament. We could see also in the men that the Australian Open was tough for them. Maybe from the quarterfinals on would be a nice idea. But to the women, I don’t think it’s a good idea, honestly, to me. I mean, we are built different physically. So if the men had a tricky tournament physically, for us, we are different physically, so it’s going to be, I mean, it’s tougher. It’s not a lie. We’re just built different.”
Paolini’s remarks, delivered ahead of her Doha WTA 1000 debut, underscore a recurring theme among players: the physical demands of best-of-five tennis. “Women have different physical characteristics from men and would find it even more difficult to compete in the best of five sets,” she emphasized. The Italian’s suggestion to instead reduce the number of sets for men until the quarterfinals adds another wrinkle to the ongoing discussion about how to balance entertainment, athlete welfare, and tradition.
Not every voice in the game is opposed to the change. Rising star Iva Jovic and Olympic gold medalist Zheng Qinwen have both expressed openness to the idea, with Zheng noting that her endurance might even give her an edge in longer matches. Aryna Sabalenka, world number one and recent Australian Open finalist, has acknowledged that while her physical strength could be an advantage, she’s not in favor of the shift. “I think probably physically I’m one of the strongest ones. Maybe it would benefit me. But I’m not ready to play five sets. I think it’s too much on the woman body. We are not ready for this amount of tennis. I think it would increase the amount of injuries. So this isn’t something I would consider.”
World No. 2 Iga Swiatek, known for her clinical efficiency in Grand Slam play, added another layer to the debate by highlighting both practical and strategic concerns. “I think with the world right now that is kind of, like, speeding up, I don’t really think it makes sense for us to play such long matches. Especially when I think it would be tough to keep the quality up throughout the whole match,” Swiatek explained. “But if you ask specifically about my game, I consider myself one of the players that is kind of tough in coping with endurance and longer matches. I think maybe I would have some advantage. Honestly, I’ve never played such a long match, so I have no idea how my body would react. I think also the whole season would change, because we would need to plan everything differently and prepare for these long, long matches. There would, for sure, be many, many more questions about the scheduling then.”
Coco Gauff, a two-time Grand Slam champion, remains noncommittal but realistic about the implications. “I mean, could I play best-of-five sets? Probably, yes. Do I want to? I mean, it’s a lot of playing. I don’t know,” she admitted. “I feel like, from a spectator’s standpoint, it would be just too much for the men and women to play best-of-five.” Gauff’s comments reflect a recurring concern: the potential for longer matches to impact both player health and fan engagement.
The debate is hardly new. For decades, tennis has grappled with questions of equality, tradition, and spectacle. The push for equal prize money in the Grand Slams was once met with similar resistance, but eventually became the norm. Yet, as many players point out, equality doesn’t necessarily mean identical formats. The best-of-three structure has produced its own share of iconic moments and has allowed for a different kind of athleticism to shine.
Craig Tiley’s proposal, if implemented, would mark a seismic shift in the sport. As one commentator put it, “It is no exaggeration to say that it would be an epochal revolution, destined to change women’s tennis forever and perhaps even to upset the current hierarchies.” The 2026 Australian Open, won by Elena Rybakina after a gripping final against Sabalenka, showcased the drama and unpredictability already present in the women’s game. Rybakina’s comeback from 0-3 down in the deciding set to claim her first Melbourne title was a testament to the intensity and resilience required at the highest level—even within the current format.
As the WTA Tour moves forward and the conversation continues, one thing is clear: the voices of the players themselves will be crucial in shaping any potential change. With strong opinions on both sides and the physical, strategic, and logistical implications still being debated, tennis fans around the world will be watching closely to see whether the sport takes this historic leap—or decides to preserve the traditions that have defined it for generations.
For now, the best-of-five debate remains unresolved, but the passion it has ignited suggests that whatever decision is ultimately made, it will have lasting consequences for women’s tennis and the sport as a whole.