The length of men’s singles matches at Grand Slam tennis tournaments has come under renewed scrutiny following this year’s US Open, where Ben Shelton’s five-set victory over Carlos Alcaraz extended past 3:30 a.m. local time. The marathon match, which began late at night, ended in the early hours of the morning and was widely described as “epic” due to its duration.

Such extended matches, which can last well over four hours, are a hallmark of men’s tennis at the Grand Slams, where players compete in best-of-five sets, unlike the women’s best-of-three format. While tradition and history are often cited to justify this structure, some observers have called the format outdated, arguing it places unnecessary physical strain on players and affects scheduling.

Alcaraz, who was playing his first tournament in four months after recovering from injury, faced Shelton in a match that epitomized the grueling nature of these drawn-out contests. Jannik Sinner, another top player, was absent from the tournament due to injury, highlighting concerns over the toll such long matches can take on athletes.

Critics contend that shifting men’s Grand Slam matches to a best-of-three sets format would not diminish the sport’s appeal. On the contrary, they suggest shorter matches might enhance viewer engagement by reducing the extended periods of play that some consider “wars of attrition.”

Supporters of the current format maintain that the best-of-five set structure is an integral part of tennis tradition and allows for a more rigorous test of endurance, skill, and mental toughness. However, with player health and evolving audience preferences increasingly in focus, the debate over the men’s match format at major tournaments is likely to continue.