What are the super tie-break rules for US Open, Australian Open, Wimbledon and French Open after rule change

Here is all you need to know about the tie-break rules for the Grand Slams including US Open, French Open, Wimbledon and Australian Open with recent changes in the scoring system meaning that unlike previously matches cannot continue with no end in sight like they have done in the past.

Tie-breaks occur in tennis when a set reaches 6-6 in games. It is then the first player to win seven points in the tie-break with at least a two-point margin. This could be 7-5, 7-4, 7-3, but also 10-8 or even 14-12. As long as there is not a two point margin, this continues until there is one.

1. Who introduced the new rules on super tie-break?
2. Rybakina v Blinkova - the first example of a super tie-break on tour
3. What changed from previous tie-break rules
4. Why was this rule introduced
5.  A slight change for 2025 at US Open
6. Why would fans and players be for or against super tie-breaks

After a player starts the tie-break with one point on serve, the serving alternates with each player having two each on serve. In 2019, the Australian Open was the first Grand Slam to implement a 10-point tie-break rule in the final set when the score reaches 6-6 in games. These rules also apply to Qualifying during the Australian Open and have been followed suit by other Grand Slams including French Open, Wimbledon and US Open.

“Further to extensive consultation with the WTA, ATP, ITF and tennis officiating community, the Grand Slam Board’s decision is based on a strong desire to create greater consistency in the rules of the game at the grand slams, and thus enhance the experience for the players and fans alike,” read a joint statement.

It is similar to a normal tie-break albeit one player starts off with a point on serve and then the other player has two points on serve and then it alternates between each player having two each. The winner is the first to reach ten with at least a two point margin. If a player gets to ten and this isn't the case, it continues when they achieve that.

In the 2023 edition of the Australian Open though something remarkable occured. Elena Rybakina and Anna Blinkova had to fight out a super tie-break in their final set of Round 2. Both women kept saving tons of match points thrown at them by their opponent. This occurred on a staggering fourteen occasions in total! The super tie-break eventually recorded an endscore of 22-20 in favour of underdog Anna Blinkova who then and there won the match on a.. super tie-break. That was the first time in the whole breaker that one athlete had been able to put the required two points difference in a tie-break on the scoreboard! It was also the longest Grand Slam tie-break in WTA history.

As with other Grand Slams, the superbreaker has not affected the scoring of sets with it still being best of three in the Women's Singles and best of five in the men's singles.

Previously to this agreement, the US Open used a seven point tie-break system at 6-6 in the final set. Wimbledon used a tie-break only at 12-12.

While the French Open did not use a final set tie-break at all and required solely on advantage sets. Now all matches agreed to a substantial change with standardised tie-break rules which are not used at other Grand Slams.

Before 2022, each Grand Slam had its own rule which creates confusion for players, fans and officials alike and meant that for instance Wimbledon after the French Open had different rules for their tournament compared to others.

In additional it came down to player welfare and scheduling. A 10-point tie-break provides a quicker conclusion. Marathon matches such as John Isner v Nicolas Mahut lasted over 11 hours with a 70-68 final set. This would be taxing and causes scheduling delays if it continues to be the case.

But while this is the case, it still creates a dramatic yet more predictable and compact conclusion to a tournament.

It is also interesting to note that during the mixed doubles at the US Open. This will change during that tournament. Albeit players are semi used to the format due to the tie-break tens exhibition events that are played.

Matches are best of three-sets with short set of four games, no-ad scoring and if the match is tied at one set all, a 10 point match tie-break will dictate the outcome. This format is specific to this event and is separate from the Grand Slam final-set rule.

While for many it is a pretty drawn out process and one that sees games completed quicker some aren't as hasty to let go of the old format.

Such issues with the new format include:
- Loss of epic fifth sets: Critics would argue that final sets which extend beyond 6-6 provide some of the most memorable emotional moments in tennis history. Examples include Federer v Roddick at Wimbledon 2009 or Nadal v Djokovic (Australian Open 2012)
- Tiebreak feels so sudden: A 10 point decider can abruptly end a long drawn out match with drama and provide anti-climax
But some would be for it for these reasons:
- Random lottery type feel: With this shorter format, the idea that players who wouldn't win as easy without it means that it could lead to a shock factor
- Scheduling and broadcast clarity: Super tiebreaks help tournaments stick to schedules, avoid marathon delays, and make match timings more predictable for broadcasters and fans.