The tennis swing at the Paris Olympics is over, and the scenes have shifted to the North American continent for the players. But not for the tennis fans. They are still stuck at the finals of the Paris Olympics as the Serbian nation and Novak Djokovic fans rejoiced when the World No.2 wiped happy tears after fulfilling his dream. However, not everyone was happy as the favorite to win the tournament, Carlos Alcaraz lost in straight sets on the court that gave him his third Grand Slam. And now tennis fans are searching for the answer to the question: what could have made the difference in the result?

In a high-octane contest on Court Philippe Chatrier, everyone anticipated that the ball was in the Spaniard’s court. And the youngster might toy with the Serbian legend riding high on the Wimbledon results. Maybe they forgot to take Djokovic’s injury and recovery into account. What followed was a scintillating contest of nerves, patience, and power. In the first set itself, 8 breakpoints were defended in just the first set, nearly every game extending into due, and the set itself settled with a tie-break. It was anybody’s game despite the Serbian ace taking the first set.

However, the second set marked the end game for the Spaniard as Djokovic claimed the elusive title and the emotions ran high. It’s not a bad game for the 21-year-old, winning silver in his debut Olympics. But gold would have been better, wouldn’t it? What could have Alcaraz done differently to make history with the top spot? Could he have played better? Maybe not, but he gave his 100% in the finals, and techniques can’t be changed overnight. But rules can be! Could changing the 3-set match to 5 sets have turned the tables around in the finals?

Maybe, maybe not. But it would have certainly given more chance to Alcaraz to fight against the Serb. Hence when the poll was put on X by a tennis fan to take views from others about their choices about the set: Best of five or Best of three? So far, 59.3% of people have voted for best of 5 sets.

Moreover, back in 2016 at the Rio de Janeiro edition of the Olympics, the finals were best of 5 sets. But the rule was later changed, and maybe it did benefit the Serb, as the clouds of injury were headed in his direction. During the quarterfinal, the injury scare came back for Djokovic and he was scared of the future. Had the match extended to 5 sets, the Spaniard could have won the gold. However, no use in crying over split milk, it is the Olympics organization’s die to roll when it comes to rules. However, this isn’t the only rule that needs to be reconsidered.

After Novak Djokovic’s win, another Olympics rule comes under fire

Many players, including Ben Shelton, Frances Tiafoe, and Emma Raducanu, among others, opted to stay away from the most celebrated sports event: the Olympics. Why? There were 2 major factors for this. Firstly, the transition from grass to clay court and further to hard court would have been difficult. Secondly, no gain in ranking points and monetary benefits. The Olympics does not award any ranking points to the winners, nor is there any financial reward. Hence, some players stayed back to get ready for the hard court swing about to begin in North America.

Coco Gauff’s coach also took a dig at the Olympics over this rule. Brad Gilbert said, “Absolutely ridiculous. No points should be 1500 points to winners in singles and doubles. Used to have points, I believe, was, 750 to the winner.” There were points till 2016 Rio Olympics.

Though a few things might require some transformation, it doesn’t change the fact that Djokovic stands at the top of the tennis circuit, as the younger generation chase the greatness!