I have decided to institute a points system for my match reviews. The system is inspired by Robert Parker's famous (notorious?) wine rating system, and here is how it breaks down:
All matches are given 50 points for starters. From then on:
Up to 30 points are awarded for the quality of play, 15 points for each player (I only plan to review singles matches.) Generally, few unforced errors and double faults, high first service percentage, good use of strategy, etc. will help to earn a high score in this category.
Up to 10 points can be awarded for the quality of the general plot/storyline of the match. Such things as twists and turns of the plot, emotions of the players, drama (e.g. spectacular recovery, crowd involvement, etc.), the setting or circumstance of the match (e.g. finals of Wimbledon, historical importance, rivalry, etc.) all count towards this
Finally, up to 10 points are awarded for other qualities of the match, including: Contrast of styles (e.g. baseliner vs. serve-volleyer), the number of interesting rallies, spectacular/special points, and spectacular or special shots, winners or "gets".
Of course, my notes on the match provide more detailed information. Generally, a match rated from 80-89 is a good to very good match, but there is a big difference between a 89 point match and an 80 point match. Matches scoring 90 points or more are most likely classics, and are worth purchasing to see. Matches scoring 95 or above are instant classics, and should not be missed by any tennis enthusiast. A match scoring 100 points is theoretically the perfect tennis match.