PDA

View Full Version : Cheaters (heros) vs. Honest Players (villains)


drakulie
05-08-2009, 06:33 AM
I have noticed this section of the boards is CONSTANTLY filled with threads asking what to do with the following type of players:

1. Show up late
2. Don't provide a proper warm up (you know, the ones who want to win the warm-up)
3. Players who hook you on calls.
4. Foot faulters
5. Players who don't play "lets" fairly
6. BLATANT CHEATERS
7. etc.

Anyway, I have also noticed that there are **MANY** posters who seem to feel that "certain rules" shouldn't apply, and always remind us, "they are just out there for fun".

My question is, since when did it become **VOGUE** or **HIP** to allow rule-breaking, and since when did it become the norm that players who play by the rules are "VILLAINS", while the ones who cheat and/or allow cheating to go on, are the "HEROS" and considered somehow "above the ones who follow rules???

Personally, I feel if you are playing a match, you should play by the rules. Period. If not, why bother keeping score, if it is "just for fun"??


Please discuss, and lets keep it clean. :evil:

FloridaAG
05-08-2009, 06:45 AM
Good topic Drak. Wife lost her league semi-final match last night to a cheater/rule breaker - was pathetic. Some examples:

1. The obvious - calling in balls out - I was on a different court and even from that distance saw one blatantly wrong call

2. Her boyfriend arrives whistling mid-match and the woman tries to claim a let on her serve because her boyfriend distracted her

3. Constant chatter between points by boyfriend and opponent

4. She broke a string - and proceeded to say she was quitting twice - walked off the court and then changed her mind and came back.

Unfortunately - my wife is too nice and not experienced enough with people like this to have either reamed her out, demanded a stop, - or simply indicated she was protesting the match unless the opponent ceased her conduct. She decided she did not care enough to deal with it and played the match out simply wanting to be done.

goober
05-08-2009, 07:22 AM
Personally, I feel if you are playing a match, you should play by the rules. Period. If not, why bother keeping score, if it is "just for fun"??



Let me give you the following scenarios since you say you play the by the rules period-

1. Playing social mixed dubs: your 65 year old mother in law has been having a terrible day playing tennis. She is missing easy shots, can't serve the ball in the court. She finally gets a good serve in but foot faults. So you are calling it on her?

2. You have a friendly match with buddy with dinner and beer to the winner on the line. He shows up 20 minutes late because he is stuck in traffic. He easily beats you 6-3, 6-2. But since he was past the 15 minute mark you default him and claim dinner?

3. You are playing in a company tennis tournament finals. Your partner is your boss. He has a call in the middle of the match. He excuses himself for 15 minutes saying it is something important. Everyone agrees to start off where you guys left off- but since you are following the rules you default your team since your are not allowed to take such break in the middle of a match.

Grampy
05-08-2009, 07:27 AM
I have noticed this section of the boards is CONSTANTLY filled with threads asking what to do with the following type of players:

1. Show up late
2. Don't provide a proper warm up (you know, the ones who want to win the warm-up)
3. Players who hook you on calls.
4. Foot faulters
5. Players who don't play "lets" fairly
6. BLATANT CHEATERS
7. etc.

Anyway, I have also noticed that there are **MANY** posters who seem to feel that "certain rules" shouldn't apply, and always remind us, "they are just out there for fun".

My question is, since when did it become **VOGUE** or **HIP** to allow rule-breaking, and since when did it become the norm that players who play by the rules are "VILLAINS", while the ones who cheat and/or allow cheating to go on, are the "HEROS" and considered somehow "above the ones who follow rules???

Personally, I feel if you are playing a match, you should play by the rules. Period. If not, why bother keeping score, if it is "just for fun"??


Please discuss, and lets keep it clean. :evil:

There is a difference between cheaters and people who make bad calls. Some of the people I play with do not call the lines well, but they don't intentionally cheat. Your mental state can affect what you see out there. And some balls are hard to call.

The best thing you can do against an obvious cheater is beat the crap out of them (in tennis, not with your fists). And when they do cheat, consider it a mental test for yourself on whether you can put it behind you and move on, or whether it will affect you the rest of the match.

Now if you are playing in sanctioned tourneys against a cheater, you can always opt for a line judge.

herrburgess
05-08-2009, 07:56 AM
I have noticed this section of the boards is CONSTANTLY filled with threads asking what to do with the following type of players:

1. Show up late
2. Don't provide a proper warm up (you know, the ones who want to win the warm-up)
3. Players who hook you on calls.
4. Foot faulters
5. Players who don't play "lets" fairly
6. BLATANT CHEATERS
7. etc.

Anyway, I have also noticed that there are **MANY** posters who seem to feel that "certain rules" shouldn't apply, and always remind us, "they are just out there for fun".

My question is, since when did it become **VOGUE** or **HIP** to allow rule-breaking, and since when did it become the norm that players who play by the rules are "VILLAINS", while the ones who cheat and/or allow cheating to go on, are the "HEROS" and considered somehow "above the ones who follow rules???

Personally, I feel if you are playing a match, you should play by the rules. Period. If not, why bother keeping score, if it is "just for fun"??


Please discuss, and lets keep it clean. :evil:

For me it's pretty simple: people come before rules. I would rather afford people trust until they demonstrate that they're intentionally abusing that trust. If they do, I'd rather not play with them. And if someone demonstrates that they don't trust me by immediately and constantly being a stickler for the "rules" then I'd rather not play with them either. In such situations I don't see myself as the "hero" or them as the "villains," just that the game is no fun anymore. I think it's the underlying tendency to see people as either "heroes" or "villains" that breeds behavior like "playing by the rules. Period," and not the other way around.

drakulie
05-08-2009, 08:06 AM
Ok, couple of things before I comment.

My question in my op was more::: why are people on thie board, who play honestly and with-the rules considered "villains", and why blatant cheaters are considered "heros"??

secondly, since when did it become "vogue" or "hip" to play outside the rules of tennis???

Anyway, hereyou go:


1. Playing social mixed dubs: your 65 year old mother in law has been having a terrible day playing tennis. She is missing easy shots, can't serve the ball in the court. She finally gets a good serve in but foot faults. So you are calling it on her?

My answer to this scenario is as follows:

Since you are deeming this a "social", then you are implying you could care less about the outcome, nor does anyone else. Therefore, If she can't get any shots in, then why wouldn't you cut her some slack and call her out balls in and just play the point out since you want to be considered a "hero", and not a "villain" towards your mother in law. Why would you only consider cutting her some slack on foot faults, and not on everything else???



2. You have a friendly match with buddy with dinner and beer to the winner on the line. He shows up 20 minutes late because he is stuck in traffic. He easily beats you 6-3, 6-2. But since he was past the 15 minute mark you default him and claim dinner?

You decided to play the match, even though he was late. You lose. Pay up for the beer and dinner.

3. You are playing in a company tennis tournament finals. Your partner is your boss. He has a call in the middle of the match. He excuses himself for 15 minutes saying it is something important. Everyone agrees to start off where you guys left off- but since you are following the rules you default your team since your are not allowed to take such break in the middle of a match.

Everyone has agreed to play the match under these condition you describe. In this case, it is not up to one person, rather the opposing team, whom has given a grace on the time. You play on.


There is a difference between cheaters and people who make bad calls. Some of the people I play with do not call the lines well, but they don't intentionally cheat. Your mental state can affect what you see out there. And some balls are hard to call.

Agreed. However, this is not what I am talking about, nor asking a question about.

The best thing you can do against an obvious cheater is beat the crap out of them (in tennis, not with your fists). And when they do cheat, consider it a mental test for yourself on whether you can put it behind you and move on, or whether it will affect you the rest of the match.

Now if you are playing in sanctioned tourneys against a cheater, you can always opt for a line judge.


again, please read the original post and respond appropriately.

Thanks.

drakulie
05-08-2009, 08:08 AM
For me it's pretty simple: people come before rules. I would rather afford people trust until they demonstrate that they're intentionally abusing that trust. If they do, I'd rather not play with them. And if someone demonstrates that they don't trust me by immediately and constantly being a stickler for the "rules" then I'd rather not play with them either.


In other words, there are certain rules you will play by, and others you refuse to have enforced on you. Thanks.

drakulie
05-08-2009, 08:11 AM
Good topic Drak. Wife lost her league semi-final match last night to a cheater/rule breaker - was pathetic. Some examples:

1. The obvious - calling in balls out - I was on a different court and even from that distance saw one blatantly wrong call

2. Her boyfriend arrives whistling mid-match and the woman tries to claim a let on her serve because her boyfriend distracted her

3. Constant chatter between points by boyfriend and opponent

4. She broke a string - and proceeded to say she was quitting twice - walked off the court and then changed her mind and came back.

Unfortunately - my wife is too nice and not experienced enough with people like this to have either reamed her out, demanded a stop, - or simply indicated she was protesting the match unless the opponent ceased her conduct. She decided she did not care enough to deal with it and played the match out simply wanting to be done.


Sorry to hear that. :(

I'm sure in your wife's case, even though she was well with the rules do say/do something, if she would have>>> she woudl immediately be deemed a villain. Worse, being that she is a woman, would be considered a B!thc.

Very sad when people abuse others and take tit for granted that their behavior is not only OK, but should be tolerated.

This is what our society has come to.

Joeyg
05-08-2009, 08:11 AM
Hi Goober,

You know that you and I are simpatico on a lot of issues. However, I think you are being a little simplistic using the examples you have listed.

Sure, in those situations, you would come off as a bit of a jerk if you upheld the rules.

That being said, I always try and play by all of the rules in "almost" every situation. It just doesn't make sense to me to play by some and not all of the rules.

joeyg

herrburgess
05-08-2009, 08:14 AM
In other words, there are certain rules you will play by, and others you refuse to have enforced on you. Thanks.

To answer your OP: Maybe there's a general tendency for people to think of those who feel it necessary to "enforce [rules] on you" as generally more unpleasant than those who don't.

drakulie
05-08-2009, 08:27 AM
^^^Gotcha, and thanks for clarifying.

But why is it this way???

if a person is cheating, and is called on it, why is the person enforcing the rules, viewed as a "vilain", and made to feel uncomortable, and as if they are doing something wrong????

MNPlayer
05-08-2009, 08:34 AM
My view is that one should attempt to play by the rules. In most cases, this is not too difficult. i.e. Call out balls out, but if there is any doubt, it was in. This does not make you a villain to me.

Tennis is somewhat different than some other sports though - sometimes called a "gentlemans' sport". Because we have rules/conventions like "play at the pace of the server" and spectators should not cause distractions during the serve.

Some of these things are obviously subjective and subject to interpretation. I think this is partly why there is a mentality that one should not be too much of a stickler for the rules, and people look down upon people who engage in gamesmanship (even if it is within the rules).

Let us all start with the assumption that the opponent is honest and honorable. I have very rarely been forced to change that assumption even in very competitive USTA matches and the like, although I've played lots of people with weird, quirky ways of playing. Just because they have a slightly different approach to the game or how the rules are interpreted doesn't mean they are bad people though.

herrburgess
05-08-2009, 08:46 AM
^^^Gotcha, and thanks for clarifying.

But why is it this way???

if a person is cheating, and is called on it, why is the person enforcing the rules, viewed as a "vilain", and made to feel uncomortable, and as if they are doing something wrong????

My guess is it depends on whether they think you're 1) pointing it out in a helpful/fair fashion; 2) pointing it out to get in their head, or 3) in essence calling them a "blatant cheater." #3 tends to get people miffed.

goober
05-08-2009, 08:49 AM
Since you are deeming this a "social", then you are implying you could care less about the outcome, nor does anyone else. Therefore, If she can't get any shots in, then why wouldn't you cut her some slack and call her out balls in and just play the point out since you want to be considered a "hero", and not a "villain" towards your mother in law. Why would you only consider cutting her some slack on foot faults, and not on everything else???

Well I probably would give her all the close calls actually. But maybe that is just me.



You decided to play the match, even though he was late. You lose. Pay up for the beer and dinner. No I am saying that you default him because you are playing by the rules for the dinner, but play the match anyways for practice.




Everyone has agreed to play the match under these condition you describe. In this case, it is not up to one person, rather the opposing team, whom has given a grace on the time. You play on.
No I am saying that everybody but you agrees to play the match but YOU since you are following the rules. Where does it say in the rules that opponents are allowed to give prolonged timeouts to the other team for any reason? If you were in a USTA tournament and decided in the middle of the match "Oh I have to go to the market there is something really important I have to buy" and your oppoents says "ok let's continue this match in an hour!" You go up to the TD and tell him, I can pretty much assure you he is going to default you regardless what the opponents says.

benasp
05-08-2009, 08:55 AM
The rules doesn't imply putting your brain at off and just repeat the code line number ... The rules are made to get by when you cannot get to an agreement.

And when there are cheater, there are jerk who come with a loosy rule just to **** you off. Which one is better, i don't know but i don't like to play either of them

Cruzer
05-08-2009, 08:55 AM
I have noticed this section of the boards is CONSTANTLY filled with threads asking what to do with the following type of players:

1. Show up late
2. Don't provide a proper warm up (you know, the ones who want to win the warm-up)
3. Players who hook you on calls.
4. Foot faulters
5. Players who don't play "lets" fairly
6. BLATANT CHEATERS
7. etc.

Anyway, I have also noticed that there are **MANY** posters who seem to feel that "certain rules" shouldn't apply, and always remind us, "they are just out there for fun".

My question is, since when did it become **VOGUE** or **HIP** to allow rule-breaking, and since when did it become the norm that players who play by the rules are "VILLAINS", while the ones who cheat and/or allow cheating to go on, are the "HEROS" and considered somehow "above the ones who follow rules???

Personally, I feel if you are playing a match, you should play by the rules. Period. If not, why bother keeping score, if it is "just for fun"??


Very good and accurate observations. The people you describe would also likely play golf by winter rules year round, give themselves three foot putts, and kick there ball out of the rough to the short grass.
In any case the person they are fooling the most are themselves.

woodrow1029
05-08-2009, 09:03 AM
Let me give you the following scenarios since you say you play the by the rules period-

1. Playing social mixed dubs: your 65 year old mother in law has been having a terrible day playing tennis. She is missing easy shots, can't serve the ball in the court. She finally gets a good serve in but foot faults. So you are calling it on her?

2. You have a friendly match with buddy with dinner and beer to the winner on the line. He shows up 20 minutes late because he is stuck in traffic. He easily beats you 6-3, 6-2. But since he was past the 15 minute mark you default him and claim dinner?

3. You are playing in a company tennis tournament finals. Your partner is your boss. He has a call in the middle of the match. He excuses himself for 15 minutes saying it is something important. Everyone agrees to start off where you guys left off- but since you are following the rules you default your team since your are not allowed to take such break in the middle of a match.
#1 is invalid because he can't call a foot fault on his opponent the first time they do it.

#2 you can't play the match out, then claim a default because of lateness.

Nellie
05-08-2009, 09:13 AM
There are rules, and then there are "rules," right?

For example, when I play with my father (who is 75 and is a much weaker player) he will get really annoyed when I let stuff slip, like not properly calling a serve or a ball out. He wants to play and win fair-and-square and not get my charity call. On the other hand, he appreciated and I let him take a short break after every game, instead of every odd, or that I let him play on the shady side of the court. Of course this a friendly match.

Last week, in a doubles match, I hit the netman with a straight first serve. After I claimed the point, he walked off cursing expletives at me.

Gemini
05-08-2009, 09:32 AM
I have noticed this section of the boards is CONSTANTLY filled with threads asking what to do with the following type of players:

1. Show up late
2. Don't provide a proper warm up (you know, the ones who want to win the warm-up)
3. Players who hook you on calls.
4. Foot faulters
5. Players who don't play "lets" fairly
6. BLATANT CHEATERS
7. etc.

Anyway, I have also noticed that there are **MANY** posters who seem to feel that "certain rules" shouldn't apply, and always remind us, "they are just out there for fun".

My question is, since when did it become **VOGUE** or **HIP** to allow rule-breaking, and since when did it become the norm that players who play by the rules are "VILLAINS", while the ones who cheat and/or allow cheating to go on, are the "HEROS" and considered somehow "above the ones who follow rules???

Personally, I feel if you are playing a match, you should play by the rules. Period. If not, why bother keeping score, if it is "just for fun"??


Please discuss, and lets keep it clean. :evil:

I wouldn't necessarily look at points 1 and 2 as cheating necessarily UNLESS it can be determined if those things are done consistently and intentionally. Foot faulters, during a competitive match, I generally make my opponent aware of it no matter how severe it is. In a rec match, I might say something about it depending on the severity. Once again, I can say, unless someone is doing it intentionally, I try not to make it an issue. Your other points (blatant cheating, hooking) I definitely do take issue with.

But..to answer the question, I don't necessarily think people place cheaters (people who don't play by the rules) as heroes and make those that do go by the rules as villains. But to clarify my own stance, I have a guy that I've been hitting with for over 20 years. We grew up together. My dad and his dad are co-workers. We went to the same high school as part of the same graduating class. You could say we're kind of close.

When we play matches (which is usually about twice a week), we don't hesitate to catch an obviously out ball (like standing at least 4 feet behind the baseline and having to reach above our heads to catch it). That's what we do in "our" rec matches. Turn that around and having playing each other in a league/tourney match, there's no way I'm touching that obviously out ball until it bounces even if my own mother struck it. He feels the same way. Just because the action is tied to some sort of "courtesy" doesn't mean it does not violate a rule. We do our best to play by those rules that we KNOW explicitly when in serious competition.

I think the rules always do apply but like some said...you choose the times to enforce a rule.

OrangePower
05-08-2009, 09:33 AM
Hi Goober,

You know that you and I are simpatico on a lot of issues. However, I think you are being a little simplistic using the examples you have listed.

Sure, in those situations, you would come off as a bit of a jerk if you upheld the rules.

That being said, I always try and play by all of the rules in "almost" every situation. It just doesn't make sense to me to play by some and not all of the rules.

joeyg

Good - I think we can all agree with this. The "almost" leaves room for judgement but only in very limited cases. This is as it should be.

My view is that one should attempt to play by the rules. In most cases, this is not too difficult. i.e. Call out balls out, but if there is any doubt, it was in. This does not make you a villain to me.

Tennis is somewhat different than some other sports though - sometimes called a "gentlemans' sport". Because we have rules/conventions like "play at the pace of the server" and spectators should not cause distractions during the serve.

Some of these things are obviously subjective and subject to interpretation. I think this is partly why there is a mentality that one should not be too much of a stickler for the rules, and people look down upon people who engage in gamesmanship (even if it is within the rules).

Let us all start with the assumption that the opponent is honest and honorable. I have very rarely been forced to change that assumption even in very competitive USTA matches and the like, although I've played lots of people with weird, quirky ways of playing. Just because they have a slightly different approach to the game or how the rules are interpreted doesn't mean they are bad people though.

Exactly.

^^^Gotcha, and thanks for clarifying.

But why is it this way???

if a person is cheating, and is called on it, why is the person enforcing the rules, viewed as a "vilain", and made to feel uncomortable, and as if they are doing something wrong????

I don't think most reasonable people would view this person as a villain. Certainly not if there is blatant cheating going on. But in some cases, depending on the rule being enforced, that person might be viewed as being petty. Why is this? Probably for the same reason that "bureaucrat" has taken on a negative connotation over the years, warranted or not.

Xisbum
05-08-2009, 09:41 AM
Drak, what I've found in many years of playing friendly matches, league matches, tournament matches and club matches is that most people just don't know the rules - but they think they do because a friend of a friend of a friend of the local pro's wife told them this or that. Or they misread something in Tennis magazine. Or they are simply too stubborn to admit someone else may know a little more about tennis than they do. When I get into a match with some of these people, I treat it as a practice match; life's too short (mine is, anyway) to spend it arguing with a post.

In an ideal world, everyone would treat the game with equal respect; unfortunately, we don't live there.

You are no villain when you expect everyone to show the same respect for the game that you do. At least, not in my book.

goober
05-08-2009, 09:47 AM
#1 is invalid because he can't call a foot fault on his opponent the first time they do it.

#2 you can't play the match out, then claim a default because of lateness.

#1 Ok what if it is the second or third time she did it? Are you giving out warnings and then footfaulting her after that in this setting? I sure am not going to.

#2 ok I''ll phrase it differently you default the match before you play and take the dinner and beer, but you agree to play a practice match for "fun"

The overall point is yes rules in general should be followed. In social matches and practice matches, everyone I know lets things slide a bit in the interest of maintaining your sanity. If a ball is flying 10 ft out and someone catches it so it doesn't bounce over the fence, there is no way I am calling that in a social match and claiming the point. What exactly I am gaining from that?

goober
05-08-2009, 09:50 AM
Hi Goober,

You know that you and I are simpatico on a lot of issues. However, I think you are being a little simplistic using the examples you have listed.

Sure, in those situations, you would come off as a bit of a jerk if you upheld the rules.

That being said, I always try and play by all of the rules in "almost" every situation. It just doesn't make sense to me to play by some and not all of the rules.

joeyg

I actually agree with you. I just don't think it is reasonable to follow the rules without exception in all situations and any conditions especially in social matches and practice.

Xisbum
05-08-2009, 09:58 AM
I actually agree with you. I just don't think it is reasonable to follow the rules without exception in all situations and any conditions especially in social matches and practice.

Agree in obvious practice and fun matches, but I don't think it would be out of line to throw out the phrase, "You know that's our point in a tournament match," or if you or your partner catches the long ball, "you know this would be your point in a tournament match." Still friendly, but educational, too, if someone isn't familiar with that particular rule.

drakulie
05-08-2009, 10:06 AM
Very good and accurate observations. The people you describe would also likely play golf by winter rules year round, give themselves three foot putts, and kick there ball out of the rough to the short grass.
In any case the person they are fooling the most are themselves.


This is the sort of thing I'm talking about. Thanks for responding.

I'm sure most people who post in this section have never playedf league or tournament matches, and have yet to come into the situation where they **have to ** play within the rules.

Although I understand there are certain situation (for fun, goofing about, a family day at the courts, etc), where rules aren't going to be necessarily enforced, I believe people should get into the habit of playing within the rules if they plan on playing at a more competitive level. (hard habits are hard to break>>>> especially foot faults)


Drak, what I've found in many years of playing friendly matches, league matches, tournament matches and club matches is that most people just don't know the rules - but they think they do because a friend of a friend of a friend of the local pro's wife told them this or that. Or they misread something in Tennis magazine. Or they are simply too stubborn to admit someone else may know a little more about tennis than they do. When I get into a match with some of these people, I treat it as a practice match; life's too short (mine is, anyway) to spend it arguing with a post.

In an ideal world, everyone would treat the game with equal respect; unfortunately, we don't live there.

You are no villain when you expect everyone to show the same respect for the game that you do. At least, not in my book.


xisbum, thanks for your input. I think you touch on a very important issue overlooked. ((Do people really know the rules)) As you said, there is a lot of garbage floating out there, and many times, this doesn't help the situation, rather, it hurts it.

When I first started playing, one of the first things that were taught to me, beyond the basics of hitting a ball, were the rules. How to keep score, etc. Not only this, but I was taught the "proper etiquette" (unwritten rules), such as>>> don't walk onto and thru a court when people are playing. Don't return the serve when your opponent is warming up. Hit at the opponent (not away) when warming up. etc.

My first year of playing college, I remember our "first practice" was actually sitting in a classroom and going over/studying rules. Every semester we had to take and pass an exam on the rules of tennis.

Peronsally, I think anyone who signs up to play USTA should have to go thru some sort of rules exam before they are given a membership to play in league and/or tournament.

Lastly, my reason for starting this thread was that I noticed guys like woodrow, javierlw, myslef and several others were being "frowned upon" in other threads when we posted disagreeing with those who felt "above us", because they felt we were being "petty".

drakulie
05-08-2009, 10:07 AM
to add, someone talked about practice.

When I'm drilling >>> I take the Jimmy Connors approach>>> everything is in.

r2473
05-08-2009, 12:18 PM
I have noticed this section of the boards is CONSTANTLY filled with threads asking what to do with the following type of players:

1. Show up late
2. Don't provide a proper warm up (you know, the ones who want to win the warm-up)
3. Players who hook you on calls.
4. Foot faulters
5. Players who don't play "lets" fairly
6. BLATANT CHEATERS
7. etc.

1) In your world there are NO EXCEPTIONS. No mitigating circumstances? If someone is sufficiently late, they are DQ'd, no questions asked? Correct?

2) I don't understand this one.

3) How can anyone prove they were hooked on a call? Do you play on a court with "shot spot"?

4) As I understand the rule, opponents can only give a warning for BLATANT foot faults. Then they have to call an umpire and only the umpire can actually call a foot fault. In singles, how on earth can your opponent call a foot fault? It would have to be BLANTANT!!!!

5) Do you play on a court with Cyclops? If not, how can anyone say with certainty if there is or is not a let? (I suspect there is a reason why lets are played at the collegiate level).

6) What does this mean?

rasajadad
05-08-2009, 12:42 PM
The replies to the OP make a few things clear. One is that there is a big difference between social tennis or practice versus league matches and tournaments. Another is that there is a big difference between tournament and league players versus social players.

There are things I'll do in a tournament match (i.e. default a player for being late) that I'd never do in a social match and vice versa. However there seem to be posters that only see this from one point of view. For example if I only played social tennis with my buddies, I'd never think of calling a foot fault. On the other hand if I'm playing a sectional quarter final against a 6'4" S&V player and he's got two feet in the court, I'd definitely bring it up.

Rule26
05-08-2009, 12:48 PM
Great post - I liken the difference to sportsmanship vs gamesmanship -

Sporting Types tend accept the points taken away by the rules regardless of the final outcome and compete (means to end)

Gamesmanship Types are primarily concerned with the gaining of their points (ends to a mean)

sureshs
05-08-2009, 12:55 PM
Premise of the thread is not correct. Everyone is not posting about these things and saying that cheaters are heroes. It is just a strawman thread which will provoke strong responses.

JavierLW
05-08-2009, 12:56 PM
Let me give you the following scenarios since you say you play the by the rules period-

1. Playing social mixed dubs: your 65 year old mother in law has been having a terrible day playing tennis. She is missing easy shots, can't serve the ball in the court. She finally gets a good serve in but foot faults. So you are calling it on her?

2. You have a friendly match with buddy with dinner and beer to the winner on the line. He shows up 20 minutes late because he is stuck in traffic. He easily beats you 6-3, 6-2. But since he was past the 15 minute mark you default him and claim dinner?

3. You are playing in a company tennis tournament finals. Your partner is your boss. He has a call in the middle of the match. He excuses himself for 15 minutes saying it is something important. Everyone agrees to start off where you guys left off- but since you are following the rules you default your team since your are not allowed to take such break in the middle of a match.

Answer for 1.)

You cant use the extreme excuse as the means to try to defend the actions in all cases. In most cases we are not talking about playing our grannies here, we're talking about playing our peers either in a league or any general outing that we may describe as "fun". (and btw, my grannie would probably kick your *** in tennis so dont feel too sorry for her..... :-) )

Answer for 2.)

You are not allowed to use the lateness rule in all matches. That is a USTA tournament specific rule, or if your specific league has addressed that rule. So in your normal casual match it would be ******** to "make up your own rule" and claim the match.

Although if my opponent/friend is constantly late I may just leave at some point because it is very rude to be constantly late, but I know darn well some people think "it's just a tennis match, it's not important", so they'll show up 40 minutes late.

So again, that's a bad example.

Answer for 3.)

Again, you're quoting USTA Tournament rules for a non-USTA tournament. Another bad example.....

It's not the same thing as catching a fly ball out in left center baseline field, or foot faulting which are CLEARLY against the actual rules of tennis, not just some USTA Tournament rule.

Do you understand that?

Tournament Rule -> Doesnt apply to everything....

Tennis Rule (aka "rules of tennis") -> That's how you play the game, or else you are making up your own game as you go along....

drakulie
05-08-2009, 01:12 PM
1) In your world there are NO EXCEPTIONS. No mitigating circumstances? If someone is sufficiently late, they are DQ'd, no questions asked? Correct?


read post # 31 by javierlw.

2) I don't understand this one.

Please read the entire OP.

I am providing different types of examples continuously brought up by posters in this section of the forum.

3) How can anyone prove they were hooked on a call? Do you play on a court with "shot spot"?

Hmmm. So lets see. If you hit the ball smack dab in the middle of the court, and your opponent calls it out>>>> with your logic, you won't say anything since there is no way you could really prove you were hooked. :roll:


4) As I understand the rule, opponents can only give a warning for BLATANT foot faults. Then they have to call an umpire and only the umpire can actually call a foot fault. In singles, how on earth can your opponent call a foot fault? It would have to be BLANTANT!!!!

well, what's ***YOUR*** definition of blatant?? 1 , 2 , 6 , 29 feet??

Let me know so I could send a memo to the USTA, in order for them to change the rule to what **YOU** feel should be the **real** rule. From there, we will all play with-in your rules.


5) Do you play on a court with Cyclops? If not, how can anyone say with certainty if there is or is not a let? (I suspect there is a reason why lets are played at the collegiate level).

It is painfully obvious you have never even played a set of tennis within the rules, and obviously have no clue what the rules of tennis are.

6) What does this mean?

Try the google encyclopedia. After that, send your second grade teacher a letter for failing you miserably.

JavierLW
05-08-2009, 01:20 PM
For me it's pretty simple: people come before rules. I would rather afford people trust until they demonstrate that they're intentionally abusing that trust. If they do, I'd rather not play with them. And if someone demonstrates that they don't trust me by immediately and constantly being a stickler for the "rules" then I'd rather not play with them either. In such situations I don't see myself as the "hero" or them as the "villains," just that the game is no fun anymore. I think it's the underlying tendency to see people as either "heroes" or "villains" that breeds behavior like "playing by the rules. Period," and not the other way around.

You're not "hurting" anyone by playing by the rules.

Most of us are adults and if our feelings are going to get hurt over one point in a tennis match then we shouldnt be out there.

It's your instance that somehow it's only "fun" if we play the game your way that breeds any of this contempt or bad blood.

There are plenty of people who do play by the rules and they have just as much fun as you imagine that you will playing in your own very special brand of tennis. (like woodrow suggested about his match in the other thread)

LuckyR
05-08-2009, 01:22 PM
I have noticed this section of the boards is CONSTANTLY filled with threads asking what to do with the following type of players:

1. Show up late
2. Don't provide a proper warm up (you know, the ones who want to win the warm-up)
3. Players who hook you on calls.
4. Foot faulters
5. Players who don't play "lets" fairly
6. BLATANT CHEATERS
7. etc.

Anyway, I have also noticed that there are **MANY** posters who seem to feel that "certain rules" shouldn't apply, and always remind us, "they are just out there for fun".

My question is, since when did it become **VOGUE** or **HIP** to allow rule-breaking, and since when did it become the norm that players who play by the rules are "VILLAINS", while the ones who cheat and/or allow cheating to go on, are the "HEROS" and considered somehow "above the ones who follow rules???

Personally, I feel if you are playing a match, you should play by the rules. Period. If not, why bother keeping score, if it is "just for fun"??


Please discuss, and lets keep it clean. :evil:


Well, two thoughts. The first and simplest is to the question you actually asked, namely that appearing relaxed about tennis rules seems cool and enforcing them makes you a stiff. Your observation is correct as it stands but really is in agreement with any set of rules, sports based or otherwise. This is no suprise and why would you suppose that the opposite would be true? (That the strict rules enforcer would be viewed as laid back, relaxed and cool and the lax rules enforcer would be viewed as a tightly wound, anal retentive?) Perhaps this reality is being misread on your part by taking the next step and equating "relaxed and cool" with "HERO" and conversely "uptight and inflexible" with "VILLIAN". True, many will make that assumption but many others would describe "relaxed" as "lacksidasical" and would call someone "inflexible", "no-nonsense".

The question you didn't ask, but is key to this discussion IMO is that some folks see life as black and white while others can appreciate shades of gray. It seems to me that for you rules are either followed or broken (into the two groups you mentioned). Others feel that there are gray areas (involving their mothers-in-law apparantly) where "breaking" rules are warranted. This appears to be escaping many on this thread entirely.

Personally I understand gray, but appreciate that many can't/don't, so I understand the other perspective.

JavierLW
05-08-2009, 01:50 PM
The question you didn't ask, but is key to this discussion IMO is that some folks see life as black and white while others can appreciate shades of gray. It seems to me that for you rules are either followed or broken (into the two groups you mentioned). Others feel that there are gray areas (involving their mothers-in-law apparantly) where "breaking" rules are warranted. This appears to be escaping many on this thread entirely.

Personally I understand gray, but appreciate that many can't/don't, so I understand the other perspective.

No it should escape this thread, because how someone views life has nothing to do with how they view a tennis match, that's just something people love to throw in there to try to dramatize their point that somehow the game is only "fun" when they play it in their own special way.

It's the usual misconception thrown around that if a match is "friendly" or for "fun", we'll let certain things go. However Ive been in these matches and there are just as many arguments in those as a serious Tournament match, because not everyone agrees what is acceptable and what is not. (which is the whole purpose for having rules in the first place)

Like if the ball is caught in midair, that's okay. But if I caught it in midair in the middle of the court that's somehow not okay even though I swear it was going out.

The same with footfaulting. Maybe it's not enforced for everyone but if some guy is jumping into the court and has a huge powerful deadly kick serve, then you'll have people whining about that. (and not just because of the rule but just because they cant handle it and it's not "fair" or "fun)

Here's the deal:

Tennis -> It's just a game. You can play by the rules and have fun and nobody should have their feelings hurt or lose money or anything.

Life -> Important..... We let things slide all the time. Life is just a lot more complicated that way.

Hopefully some of you can tell the difference....

bad_call
05-08-2009, 01:55 PM
BLATANT...hmmm...
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=253683

r2473
05-08-2009, 02:00 PM
read post # 31 by javierlw.

So no exceptions. If your opponent is 1 minute late due to circumstances beyond even God's control, you simply don't want to hear it.


Please read the entire OP.

I am providing different types of examples continuously brought up by posters in this section of the forum.


I think you are trying to say that there is an etiquette to warm-ups and everyone is expected to know and follow this etiquette TO THE LETTER. Right?

Hmmm. So lets see. If you hit the ball smack dab in the middle of the court, and your opponent calls it out>>>> with your logic, you won't say anything since there is no way you could really prove you were hooked. :roll:

Please tell us your stories (or point out posts on this board) of the above happening. I thought you were talking about close line calls that really nobody can call with 100% accuracy or 100% certainty.


well, what's ***YOUR*** definition of blatant?? 1 , 2 , 6 , 29 feet??

Let me know so I could send a memo to the USTA, in order for them to change the rule to what **YOU** feel should be the **real** rule. From there, we will all play with-in your rules.

My definition doesn't matter. That is the rule. You can only call obvious or blatant foot faults against your opponent (and then only a warning). You must call over the official. The official may call a foot fault. I do not think an opposing player can call a foot fault and take the point. If they could, imagine how many problems that would create.


It is painfully obvious you have never even played a set of tennis within the rules, and obviously have no clue what the rules of tennis are.

That is painfully obvious :wink: Nobody ever disputes a let call. They are always so obvious.

Try the google encyclopedia. After that, send your second grade teacher a letter for failing you miserably.

Those darn blatant cheaters. I can spot them a mile away dag-nabbit.



I am assuming that any opponent that does not agree with you with respect to let calls, line calls, foot faults (or anything else) are blatant cheaters.

What on earth makes you think you are 100% correct in all circumstances?

And with respect to players showing up late for a match, you are well within the scope of the rules for DQ'ing anyone that shows up a minute (or a second) too late. Some of us will give people the benefit of the doubt (especially if they do not have a history of being late and / or have a "circumstances beyond my control" type of explanation). I realize the world is not a perfect place and cannot always conform to a disinterested set of rules.

JavierLW
05-08-2009, 02:12 PM
And with respect to players showing up late for a match, you are well within the scope of the rules for DQ'ing anyone that shows up a minute (or a second) too late. Some of us will give people the benefit of the doubt (especially if they do not have a history of being late and / or have a "circumstances beyond my control" type of explanation). I realize the world is not a perfect place and cannot always conform to a disinterested set of rules.

No, you are wrong, most matches do not have a lateness rule, that is just a USTA Tournament rule or it could be a specific rule in whatever format you're playing in that was agreed upon.

You're confusing that with "the rules of tennis" which are the very definition for how we play the game.

r2473
05-08-2009, 02:38 PM
No, you are wrong, most matches do not have a lateness rule, that is just a USTA Tournament rule or it could be a specific rule in whatever format you're playing in that was agreed upon.

You're confusing that with "the rules of tennis" which are the very definition for how we play the game.

I am confused. The OP put in his list "people who show up late" and then went on to discuss how we need to keep to the rules.

I guess that I was saying that, in matches that do have a lateness rule, the OP is well within his rights to DQ anyone that shows up 1 minute (or even a second) TOO LATE (beyond whatever the lateness rule allows) no matter the reason (in fact, he doesn't have to listen to any reasons. I am sure the lateness rule does not typically have any provisions).

I simply said that in such a circumstance, I would consider the persons history (is he always late) and the circumstances (was there an unexpected road closure that he could not have planned for that caused the delay).

LuckyR
05-08-2009, 02:46 PM
No it should escape this thread, because how someone views life has nothing to do with how they view a tennis match, that's just something people love to throw in there to try to dramatize their point that somehow the game is only "fun" when they play it in their own special way.

It's the usual misconception thrown around that if a match is "friendly" or for "fun", we'll let certain things go. However Ive been in these matches and there are just as many arguments in those as a serious Tournament match, because not everyone agrees what is acceptable and what is not. (which is the whole purpose for having rules in the first place)

Like if the ball is caught in midair, that's okay. But if I caught it in midair in the middle of the court that's somehow not okay even though I swear it was going out.

The same with footfaulting. Maybe it's not enforced for everyone but if some guy is jumping into the court and has a huge powerful deadly kick serve, then you'll have people whining about that. (and not just because of the rule but just because they cant handle it and it's not "fair" or "fun)

Here's the deal:

Tennis -> It's just a game. You can play by the rules and have fun and nobody should have their feelings hurt or lose money or anything.
Life -> Important..... We let things slide all the time. Life is just a lot more complicated that way.

Hopefully some of you can tell the difference....

Thanks for very clearly describing my point that some folks cannot appreciate shades of gray. Your post is a perfect example.

I don't disagree that playing tennis by the letter of the law, is any less fun than any other way. I just understand where some folks bring issues into their tennis playing lives that have nothing to do with tennis.

everyone's different.

JavierLW
05-08-2009, 02:57 PM
I don't disagree that playing tennis by the letter of the law, is any less fun than any other way.

everyone's different.

Well Im glad you agree with me then.

So hopefully we can all drop the "it's just for fun", and "it's a friendly match so it's okay to do this...." lame excuses.....

If it's not fun it's because some person took it personally or they are way too self absorbed in their own personal made up guidelines to enjoy the game, whether they are cheating or not.

randomname
05-08-2009, 03:16 PM
I have noticed this section of the boards is CONSTANTLY filled with threads asking what to do with the following type of players:

1. Show up late
2. Don't provide a proper warm up (you know, the ones who want to win the warm-up)
3. Players who hook you on calls.
4. Foot faulters
5. Players who don't play "lets" fairly
6. BLATANT CHEATERS
7. etc.

Anyway, I have also noticed that there are **MANY** posters who seem to feel that "certain rules" shouldn't apply, and always remind us, "they are just out there for fun".

My question is, since when did it become **VOGUE** or **HIP** to allow rule-breaking, and since when did it become the norm that players who play by the rules are "VILLAINS", while the ones who cheat and/or allow cheating to go on, are the "HEROS" and considered somehow "above the ones who follow rules???

Personally, I feel if you are playing a match, you should play by the rules. Period. If not, why bother keeping score, if it is "just for fun"??


Please discuss, and lets keep it clean. :evil:

OK, I'm going to give you as honest and calm an answer as I can, because I dont want to just have this be another argument. But anyway, are you familiar with the graphic novel Watchmen? If not, look it up and the character Rorschach. Thats how most people see the "to the letter rules follower no matter what" as someone who takes the lines between good and evil to the extreme, believes there is no gray area, and very little, if any difference between a minor offense and a murder. He goes so far as to say that he would rather put the world at risk for a nuclear war than let one crime go unpunished. Thats why the rules sticklers are Villains, People dont consider it reasonable to do things like time people on changeovers or call small but consistent foot faults because its just not that big of a deal.

goober
05-08-2009, 03:25 PM
Answer for 1.)

You cant use the extreme excuse as the means to try to defend the actions in all cases. In most cases we are not talking about playing our grannies here, we're talking about playing our peers either in a league or any general outing that we may describe as "fun". (and btw, my grannie would probably kick your *** in tennis so dont feel too sorry for her..... :-) )

Answer for 2.)

You are not allowed to use the lateness rule in all matches. That is a USTA tournament specific rule, or if your specific league has addressed that rule. So in your normal casual match it would be ******** to "make up your own rule" and claim the match.

Although if my opponent/friend is constantly late I may just leave at some point because it is very rude to be constantly late, but I know darn well some people think "it's just a tennis match, it's not important", so they'll show up 40 minutes late.

So again, that's a bad example.

Answer for 3.)

Again, you're quoting USTA Tournament rules for a non-USTA tournament. Another bad example.....

It's not the same thing as catching a fly ball out in left center baseline field, or foot faulting which are CLEARLY against the actual rules of tennis, not just some USTA Tournament rule.

Do you understand that?

Tournament Rule -> Doesnt apply to everything....

Tennis Rule (aka "rules of tennis") -> That's how you play the game, or else you are making up your own game as you go along....

Response to #1): Of course it is an extreme example. The OP took an extreme position that he follows the rules period (which implies without exception).

Response to #2) If it makes you feel better make it a dinner bet on a USTA league match and the opponent shows up 1 minute late past default. Again it is a extreme example but the OP is taking an extreme position.

Response to #3) Sorry this is not a USTA tournament rule. This is situation would violate the basic rules of tennis set forth by the ITF. Read their section on continuous play.

randomname
05-08-2009, 03:48 PM
I'm still intent on keeping it as civil as I can, but why the hell did you say keep it clean when you clearly only want to flame anyone who disagrees with you?

sureshs
05-08-2009, 04:30 PM
OK, I'm going to give you as honest and calm an answer as I can, because I dont want to just have this be another argument. But anyway, are you familiar with the graphic novel Watchmen? If not, look it up and the character Rorschach. Thats how most people see the "to the letter rules follower no matter what" as someone who takes the lines between good and evil to the extreme, believes there is no gray area, and very little, if any difference between a minor offense and a murder. He goes so far as to say that he would rather put the world at risk for a nuclear war than let one crime go unpunished. Thats why the rules sticklers are Villains, People dont consider it reasonable to do things like time people on changeovers or call small but consistent foot faults because its just not that big of a deal.

That is very true. It is the product of a fundamentalist mindset.

randomname
05-08-2009, 05:10 PM
^^^Gotcha, and thanks for clarifying.

But why is it this way???

if a person is cheating, and is called on it, why is the person enforcing the rules, viewed as a "vilain", and made to feel uncomortable, and as if they are doing something wrong????

Part of the problem is your mindset too, if you go in thinking that anyone who catches a ball thats sailing long is a cheater then anything you do is going to be hostile and accusatory, thats probably the biggest reason you come off as a "villain"

The thing is though, you can have your cake and eat it too. Nobody minds the guy who just says, "next time could you just let the ball bounce?" or, "would you mind not talking so much in between points? its really distracting" so why is it so hard to do that?

Steady Eddy
05-08-2009, 06:01 PM
I like to play by all the rules except for footfaults. When I learned the game it was considered rude to call footfaults. I don't call them, and I don't worry about them. BTW, I don't think I footfault myself, at any rate, I've never been called for it.

Cindysphinx
05-09-2009, 09:00 AM
They have a word for guys who are sticklers for the rules, who see no grey, who can't look the other way on the smallest transgression, who won't apply compassion or common sense to any situation.

That word is "ex-husband." :)

chlsmo
05-09-2009, 09:45 AM
I think Drak is talking about the people who claim points on what other people would consider technicalities.

For Example:

When opponents catch long serves before they bounce.

Or when opponents catch balls out of the air and declare that it was sailing long.

When your netman volleys a perfect winner down the middle opening but touches the net before the unreturnable ball bounces twice.

I know I would claim the point in those situations, and I wouldn't feel like a villain. It is those little nagging habits that people have on court that makes these issues come up in the first place. I suggest; don't be lazy, move out of the way of a sailing ball and let it bounce first. And on the last example I provided, I know if I was that netman, I wouldn't feel right trying to claim that point by saying, "You guys never had a play on that ball anyway." I don't see what difference that makes if I touched the net. Maybe people don't hit great shots that often and really need the moral victory.

The bottom line for me is that I play tennis with people like me, we want to have fun but we can also abide the rules. If I get hit by a lob when I am standing 4 feet behind the baseline that is my fault and I lose the point, I don't pull this crap about it was clearly going out and I actually purposefully meant for the ball to tap me on the shoe while I watched for it to bounce (yeah right)...

Anyway Drakulie, I am with you for the most part. If people are willing to let all of those other petty things go by, Why not play balls that are only 5 inches out as still good? They were still close right? Isn't that what matters?

moonbat
05-09-2009, 11:50 AM
They have a word for guys who are sticklers for the rules, who see no grey, who can't look the other way on the smallest transgression, who won't apply compassion or common sense to any situation.

That word is "ex-husband." :)

:-P (Don't you feel better now that he's no longer in your psychic space, or at least much less than he used to be?)

raiden031
05-09-2009, 12:41 PM
Some places where I think it doesn't solve anything to be a stickler for rules:

I don't see what there is to gain by enforcing a rule to claim a point where my opponent catches a ball I hit while they are standing 6 feet behind the baseline. If I have doubts as to where my shot is landing, then I will claim the point and tell them not to do it again. If there is no doubt in my mind that it is going out, then I will not take the point because I don't deserve it.

I won't make an opponent default games or the entire match for being a few minutes late. I don't like being given freebies and as long as they don't completely waste my time (by showing up like 30+ minutes late), why should I take a match or an advantage that doesn't make me feel good because I didn't earn it. I will get more satisfaction by starting on equal terms as far as scoring. I already have the warmup advantage so thats enough.

I generally let things slide that dont give my opponent an advantage over me. In my opinion, the only time that I will be a strickler for rules such as these is when my opponent is abusing it or beng a stickler themselves.

bad_call
05-09-2009, 01:20 PM
Some places where I think it doesn't solve anything to be a stickler for rules:

I don't see what there is to gain by enforcing a rule to claim a point where my opponent catches a ball I hit while they are standing 6 feet behind the baseline. If I have doubts as to where my shot is landing, then I will claim the point and tell them not to do it again. If there is no doubt in my mind that it is going out, then I will not take the point because I don't deserve it.

I won't make an opponent default games or the entire match for being a few minutes late. I don't like being given freebies and as long as they don't completely waste my time (by showing up like 30+ minutes late), why should I take a match or an advantage that doesn't make me feel good because I didn't earn it. I will get more satisfaction by starting on equal terms as far as scoring. I already have the warmup advantage so thats enough.

I generally let things slide that dont give my opponent an advantage over me. In my opinion, the only time that I will be a strickler for rules such as these is when my opponent is abusing it or beng a stickler themselves.

agreed. would think that most are out playing for the game of it and not out to make a living at it. been known to give a few free points now and again...:)

hrstrat57
05-13-2009, 05:35 PM
I like to play by all the rules except for footfaults. When I learned the game it was considered rude to call footfaults. I don't call them, and I don't worry about them. BTW, I don't think I footfault myself, at any rate, I've never been called for it.

I call foot faults on myself, probably at least once per match. I play a lot of S/V tennis and a foot fault would give me an advantage.

Of course I would call it on myself if I was staying back.

If I notice an opponent foot faulting I would warn him. It is very hard tho to call a foot fault on an opponent from the opposite baseline.

Re the OP my firm conviction is if you're not playing by the rules it is not tennis....it's practice.

Practice is great, but it's not tennis....if you want to throw the rule book out(including etiquette) don't keep score.

Of course my assumption is we are discussing folks who know the rules and the code clearly.....many don't. Working as I have for years with high school players I was astounded to find out many young players were unclear that the lines are "in"......make sure your opponent knows better before you accuse them of squeezing you. Often the best way to teach is by example.....calling an opponent's shot in liberally and explaining that you didn't see it "clearly" out often works wonders.

Great thread except for a few sarcastic remarks.

I expect Drak will continue to deal with those:)

Golf and tennis are a lot alike in this regard. Most of my golf is practice....but if I am posting a score the footwedge stays in the bag.

JavierLW
05-13-2009, 09:44 PM
Some places where I think it doesn't solve anything to be a stickler for rules:

I don't see what there is to gain by enforcing a rule to claim a point where my opponent catches a ball I hit while they are standing 6 feet behind the baseline. If I have doubts as to where my shot is landing, then I will claim the point and tell them not to do it again. If there is no doubt in my mind that it is going out, then I will not take the point because I don't deserve it.

I won't make an opponent default games or the entire match for being a few minutes late. I don't like being given freebies and as long as they don't completely waste my time (by showing up like 30+ minutes late), why should I take a match or an advantage that doesn't make me feel good because I didn't earn it. I will get more satisfaction by starting on equal terms as far as scoring. I already have the warmup advantage so thats enough.

I generally let things slide that dont give my opponent an advantage over me. In my opinion, the only time that I will be a strickler for rules such as these is when my opponent is abusing it or beng a stickler themselves.

You deserve the point because they didnt get out of the way of the ball. That's what happens when you do something wrong, you lose the point. Whether or not you did something good to win the point is meaningless, things happen all the time during a course of a match that you have no control over but may result in your point.

(ie.....he has a brain fart and decides to swing and hit the ball and it doesnt go back into play.....you didnt earn the point but you win the point anyway, thus saying "I didnt earn it" is not a reason for not taking the point)

Someone being late is different because in most situations that isnt even a rule. And even in a tournament, it's really the TD's call, not yours.

(and we're there to play tennis, so most of the time we opt to play the game, but while we're playing the game we may choose to play by the actual rules of tennis, not the made up social league version......)

Redflea
05-13-2009, 11:32 PM
As a direct answer to the OP - I offer this.

Put simply, there are two basic types in the world...shades of grey types, and black and white types.

Anyone who's spent any time in a psych or social sciences or even business management courses should have been exposed to research on this, and it's pretty self-evident if you just look at this discussion. :)

The "villain" and "hero" issues are artifacts of that divide...usually shades of grey types reacting to black and white types. "Foot fault? You're calling a foot fault on me? Where are we - Wimbledon? We're just having fun here! Why do you think I called your last serve in even though it was two inches out!? What a jerk!" :)

The reason the black and white types get vilified is that they are actively enforcing rules (foot faut, you're late so you default, etc.) that can negatively impact others, whereas the shades of grey types position is expressed more via inaction (close enough, you caught it but it was clearly going out so OK, etc.).

So the black and white types are "ruining things" for the shades of grey types, who see themselves as above it all and taking the high road. Since the shades of grey guys see themselves as the correct norm (just as the B&W types do), the B&W folks become the bad guys in their eyes.

Shades of grey types don't tend to get labeled as bad guys by the B&W types because the majority of the shades of grey types actions are inactions, go unnoticed or unremarked.

Reality is, neither is good or bad, they just have different views of the world.

Redflea
05-13-2009, 11:33 PM
Full disclosure...I'm a shades of grey type. Everything is relative, as Einstein said. :D

raiden031
05-14-2009, 03:56 AM
You deserve the point because they didnt get out of the way of the ball. That's what happens when you do something wrong, you lose the point. Whether or not you did something good to win the point is meaningless, things happen all the time during a course of a match that you have no control over but may result in your point.

(ie.....he has a brain fart and decides to swing and hit the ball and it doesnt go back into play.....you didnt earn the point but you win the point anyway, thus saying "I didnt earn it" is not a reason for not taking the point)


Catching the ball in that situation is different than earning a point due to UE. When catching the ball, the opponent is saying that the point is over. At that point if I have no doubt that the point is over due to the shot I just hit, I feel no need to take the point by citing a rule that my opponent broke. If there is any doubt then I get the point, its as simple as that. Its a risk for my opponent to catch that ball, and thats why I never do it even though I don't care if others do.

Most of us don't memorize every single rule, and we play within the guidelines of the most commonly known rules. As long as both players play in good faith, even if they make incorrect rulings because of not knowing the correct ruling for every little possible situation, then the match was played fairly.

I think common sense should be utilized. If you let a rule go that gives your opponent an advantage over you, you are stupid. If you let something go that doesn't give them an advantage, then who cares. The person always has the rules to cite when needed and if there is disagreement over something.

raiden031
05-14-2009, 04:08 AM
As a direct answer to the OP - I offer this.

Put simply, there are two basic types in the world...shades of grey types, and black and white types.

Anyone who's spent any time in a psych or social sciences or even business management courses should have been exposed to research on this, and it's pretty self-evident if you just look at this discussion. :)

The "villain" and "hero" issues are artifacts of that divide...usually shades of grey types reacting to black and white types. "Foot fault? You're calling a foot fault on me? Where are we - Wimbledon? We're just having fun here! Why do you think I called your last serve in even though it was two inches out!? What a jerk!" :)

The reason the black and white types get vilified is that they are actively enforcing rules (foot faut, you're late so you default, etc.) that can negatively impact others, whereas the shades of grey types position is expressed more via inaction (close enough, you caught it but it was clearly going out so OK, etc.).

So the black and white types are "ruining things" for the shades of grey types, who see themselves as above it all and taking the high road. Since the shades of grey guys see themselves as the correct norm (just as the B&W types do), the B&W folks become the bad guys in their eyes.

Shades of grey types don't tend to get labeled as bad guys by the B&W types because the majority of the shades of grey types actions are inactions, go unnoticed or unremarked.

Reality is, neither is good or bad, they just have different views of the world.

B&W is a member of a homeowner's association walking around from yard to yard looking for problems to complain about. They bring their tape measurer and then notify the neighbor that their fence is 3" too high/low. Should this person be considered a villain?

B&W people are rigid. They are set in their ways and not willing to compromise. They completely lack common sense, and everything they do in life is based on some written rule. They are willing to make enemies and be confrontational rather than back down just for the sake of peace. They aren't capable of using their own judgement to make decisions. Because they can't think for themselves, they are followers, not leaders. This type of person would put someone in jail for 20 years for stealing from a grocery store, if that is what is written in an out-dated law. The absolute worst kind of person to have as a judge would be a B&W person.

Gray people are flexible. Gray people use common sense to guide them in decision-making. They know when to use the rules, and when not to in order to maintain peace. They are more likely to rebel against rules that they deem unfair. This type of person is more likely to be a leader. In my opinion, the grays are much better people for society. Go Gray!

Xisbum
05-14-2009, 04:37 AM
They have a word for guys or girls who are sticklers for the rules, who see no grey, who can't look the other way on the smallest transgression, who won't apply compassion or common sense to any situation.

That word is "ex-husband." :)

To be fair and balanced, you have to also include "ex wives" in this equation. Or some men might even say just "wives," but not I. :)

Redflea
05-14-2009, 08:45 AM
B&W is a member of a homeowner's association walking around from yard to yard looking for problems to complain about. They bring their tape measurer and then notify the neighbor that their fence is 3" too high/low. Should this person be considered a villain?

B&W people are rigid. They are set in their ways and not willing to compromise. They completely lack common sense, and everything they do in life is based on some written rule. They are willing to make enemies and be confrontational rather than back down just for the sake of peace. They aren't capable of using their own judgement to make decisions. Because they can't think for themselves, they are followers, not leaders. This type of person would put someone in jail for 20 years for stealing from a grocery store, if that is what is written in an out-dated law. The absolute worst kind of person to have as a judge would be a B&W person.

Gray people are flexible. Gray people use common sense to guide them in decision-making. They know when to use the rules, and when not to in order to maintain peace. They are more likely to rebel against rules that they deem unfair. This type of person is more likely to be a leader. In my opinion, the grays are much better people for society. Go Gray!

Devil's advocate:

On the other hand, we Shades of Grey people are:

- Inconsistent
- Unreliable
- Weak willed
- Unable to understand and apply rules/laws as written
- Enablers
- Wimps
- Wishy-washy namby-pambies!

Etc.

:D

It's one of those let's agree to disagree situations, 'cause you rarely ever get anyone from either side to change teams.

And I think everyone knows that Drak is evil...I saw him hitting with Sylar just the other week. ;)

JavierLW
05-14-2009, 09:09 AM
B&W is a member of a homeowner's association walking around from yard to yard looking for problems to complain about. They bring their tape measurer and then notify the neighbor that their fence is 3" too high/low. Should this person be considered a villain?

B&W people are rigid. They are set in their ways and not willing to compromise. They completely lack common sense, and everything they do in life is based on some written rule. They are willing to make enemies and be confrontational rather than back down just for the sake of peace. They aren't capable of using their own judgement to make decisions. Because they can't think for themselves, they are followers, not leaders. This type of person would put someone in jail for 20 years for stealing from a grocery store, if that is what is written in an out-dated law. The absolute worst kind of person to have as a judge would be a B&W person.

Gray people are flexible. Gray people use common sense to guide them in decision-making. They know when to use the rules, and when not to in order to maintain peace. They are more likely to rebel against rules that they deem unfair. This type of person is more likely to be a leader. In my opinion, the grays are much better people for society. Go Gray!

Yes but we are talking about playing a game of tennis, not some big societal drama or little annoyances that make life hard.

You're not going to get a fine or go to jail or lose your home if you don't play by the rules in tennis, you're just going to lose the point. Some of us can accept that and apparently some people can not.

That doesn't sound like a lot of "common sense" to me....

I am a "gray person" as well. I know enough that losing a point in a game of tennis is not a big deal but giving someone a $300 fine is...

Judges sometimes take that into consideration when they give hand out their sentences. (the more burdensome the punishment, the more likely they are to consider all of the circumstances and go beyond the law)

The fact is some so called "gray people" are the very same people who lets things go when it seems to be a "common sense" thing that benefits them, but they will get out the rulebook and analyze it to no end, and even make up their own version of it that they are sticklers about if it's something that's not benefiting them.

And catching the ball is not some weird obscure mysterious rule, only a few people that I know do it, and it's only because they are either ignorant or they feel they are justified in doing it. But some people think it's rude. (precisely because they are saying the point is so far out that it's over)

dataseviltwin
05-14-2009, 09:24 AM
I have noticed this section of the boards is CONSTANTLY filled with threads asking what to do with the following type of players:

1. Show up late
2. Don't provide a proper warm up (you know, the ones who want to win the warm-up)
3. Players who hook you on calls.
4. Foot faulters
5. Players who don't play "lets" fairly
6. BLATANT CHEATERS
7. etc.

Anyway, I have also noticed that there are **MANY** posters who seem to feel that "certain rules" shouldn't apply, and always remind us, "they are just out there for fun".

My question is, since when did it become **VOGUE** or **HIP** to allow rule-breaking, and since when did it become the norm that players who play by the rules are "VILLAINS", while the ones who cheat and/or allow cheating to go on, are the "HEROS" and considered somehow "above the ones who follow rules???

Personally, I feel if you are playing a match, you should play by the rules. Period. If not, why bother keeping score, if it is "just for fun"??


Please discuss, and lets keep it clean. :evil:

Good post, Drak... makes me wanna go on my soap box and rant a bit though, so here goes: it's the same bullcrap logic that says all kids should get a trophy for everything just for playing... let's have a graduation for Kindergarten, the 1st grade, 4th grade, 6th grade, etc., etc. :evil: Bad news, entitlement gen: not everyone can win, you're not *entitled* to a job/bailout/etc., and life isn't "fair" (:idea:the sound you just heard was the clue-bird pooping all over the entitlement generation...). Everyone should play the game fairly, and take personal responsibility for the outcome, win or lose. Cynical enough for you?:shock:

raiden031
05-14-2009, 09:47 AM
Yes but we are talking about playing a game of tennis, not some big societal drama or little annoyances that make life hard.


Which is exactly why it is unecessary to enforce every obscure rule that has zero impact on the results of the match, causing tension because your opponent has to be told they are breaking the rules every 5 minutes when they are just there to have a fun competitive experience.

drakulie
05-14-2009, 09:53 AM
Good post, Drak... makes me wanna go on my soap box and rant a bit though, so here goes: it's the same bullcrap logic that says all kids should get a trophy for everything just for playing... let's have a graduation for Kindergarten, the 1st grade, 4th grade, 6th grade, etc., etc. :evil: Bad news, entitlement gen: not everyone can win, you're not *entitled* to a job/bailout/etc., and life isn't "fair" (:idea:the sound you just heard was the clue-bird pooping all over the entitlement generation...). Everyone should play the game fairly, and take personal responsibility for the outcome, win or lose. Cynical enough for you?:shock:

^^^Very good point.

I agree, we live in this "me", "I", society that is filled with a sense of entitlement.

Just look at many of the posts here where people say, "If someone foot faults, as long as it is with-in reason, it's ok". What they are really saying is>>> that as long as **they** OK it, then the footfaulting will be overlooked. "If you play by the rules>> you are a uptight jerk. You need to play with what **I** believe is within reason".

Cindysphinx
05-14-2009, 09:54 AM
Which guy do you want to be? The guy on the right or the guy on the left?

http://www.toptenz.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/barney-fife-andy-taylor.jpg

drakulie
05-14-2009, 09:56 AM
Which is exactly why it is unecessary to enforce every obscure rule that has zero impact on the results of the match, causing tension because your opponent has to be told they are breaking the rules every 5 minutes when they are just there to have a fun competitive experience.

raiden, what would you consider an "obscure rule"???

For the most part, most of the rules being discussed here are not obscure.

raiden031
05-14-2009, 10:06 AM
raiden, what would you consider an "obscure rule"???

For the most part, most of the rules being discussed here are not obscure.

I guess its debatable what is obscure. Half the league players I've faced don't know when to switch sides during or after a tiebreak. I'm sure just as many people don't know its against the rules to catch a ball that is sailing long.

I will change my statement to simply talk about rules that are harmless and have no impact on the match. I don't like being given an advantage due to a technicality, but instead would like to simply win by playing better tennis than my opponent.

drakulie
05-14-2009, 10:13 AM
^^^Thanks for the clarification.

Question:

You say you would rather win by playing better tennis than your opponent. However, doesn't this extend to rules too?

For instance, you may play someone whom no matter how much better tennis you play than them, you are unable to break their serve because they are serving from two feet inside the baseline, whereas you have your serve broken and are serving within the rules.

So who has a better serve???

Xisbum
05-14-2009, 10:16 AM
Which guy do you want to be? The guy on the right or the guy on the left?

http://www.toptenz.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/barney-fife-andy-taylor.jpg
Trick question; the one on the right is dead. Of course, I'd rather be the one on the left. :)

Just funnin' with you.

raiden031
05-14-2009, 10:41 AM
^^^Thanks for the clarification.

Question:

You say you would rather win by playing better tennis than your opponent. However, doesn't this extend to rules too?

For instance, you may play someone whom no matter how much better tennis you play than them, you are unable to break their serve because they are serving from two feet inside the baseline, whereas you have your serve broken and are serving within the rules.

So who has a better serve???

Thats breaking a rule that clearly gives them an advantage. I wouldn't tolerate that.

Redflea
05-14-2009, 10:58 AM
OK...let's get step-by-step on this.

The questions the OP poses are:

1) "...since when did it become **VOGUE** or **HIP** to allow rule-breaking"

Short answer - There's no evidence it is "Vogue" or "Hip." No one is changing their behavior in this area to be cool, which is what people do when they want to fit in with a standard different from their norm. (Like when I <ick> wore print polyester shirts, bell bottoms, and platform shoes briefly in the late 70s.) ;)

There may have been a flurry of posts with this type of content for some reason (subjects do tend to ebb and surge on web boards, people often "pile on" to a subject), but it's nothing new, there's no objective evidence that it's occurring at a greater rate. People are pretty hardened into their silos in this area, so talking about the "popularity" of one side or another is irrelevant and an unproductive way to look at it.

2) "...since when did it become the norm that players who play by the rules are "VILLAINS", while the ones who cheat and/or allow cheating to go on, are the "HEROS" and considered somehow "above the ones who follow rules???sometimes looked upon as some individuals"

Sounds like some hyperbole on the "villains/heroes" part, but regardless of the actual words/intensity thrown about, people on either side of this divide have a lot of trouble finding empathy for the other's position and actions. It just doesn't make sense to them. (For evidence, read the posts in this thread and marvel at the gap in mutual understanding.) :)

As previously noted, since the B&W side is the one actively enforcing rules, thus "taking something away" from the Grey types, be it serves, points, games, matches, or their energy drinks (;)) - B&Ws can easily get labeled as the "bad guys" by the Greys. Not necessarily fair or correct, but it happens.

This stuff isn't new, it isn't rocket science to figure out why it happens, and virtually no one is going to "convert" someone from one side to the other. There's no "popularity" factor involved, people aren't moving their fundamental world-view from side to side based on who they think is coolest.

Folks do have to work together to find the best compromise they can when world views collide. That's just life, that's what we call society.

samster
05-14-2009, 11:12 AM
I don't know if someone brought up the issue of footfaulting.

I think it is wrong and the player footfaulting ought to be ashamed of him/herself.

drakulie
05-14-2009, 11:25 AM
Thats breaking a rule that clearly gives them an advantage. I wouldn't tolerate that.

OK, but you would tolerate other rules being broken. So then, what if you play someone who tells you (as other here have suggested), you are being unreasonable? Or you catch a ball that is 7 feet out (a rule you would tolerate breaking yourself) , and your opponent tells you, "if you aren't going to tolerate me foot faulting, I'm not going to tolerate you cactching a ball that is 7 feet long"???

Again, when does it stop??? Who decides what is "reasonable", "tolerable", etc??? You?? Your opponent?? Both of you make up rules before the match??? What???

Isn't it much simpler to just play within rules that are already existing?

I'm not knocking on you, I just want to know why people feel it is ok to break some rules, and not others??? And why a particular individual feels entitled to impose thier own set of "rules and what is reasonable"???

OK...let's get step-by-step on this.

The questions the OP poses are:

1) "...since when did it become **VOGUE** or **HIP** to allow rule-breaking"

Short answer - There's no evidence it is "Vogue" or "Hip." No one is changing their behavior in this area to be cool, which is what people do when they want to fit in with a standard different from their norm. (Like when I <ick> wore print polyester shirts, bell bottoms, and platform shoes briefly in the late 70s.) ;)


Actually, there is "evidence" right here on this board. One of the reasons I started this thread, and I spoke about it in my OP was that there is several posters who in several threads say "they are above" enfrocing certain rules, as they deem them to be "petty".And many other posters agree with them. These same posters say posters who are sticklers by the rules are just jerks. hence the "villain" vs "hero" definitions.

bad_call
05-14-2009, 11:31 AM
OK, but you would tolerate other rules being broken. So then, what if you play someone who tells you (as other here have suggested), you are being unreasonable? Or you catch a ball that is 7 feet out (a rule you would tolerate breaking yourself) , and your opponent tells you, "if you aren't going to tolerate me foot faulting, I'm not going to tolerate you cactching a ball that is 7 feet long"???

Again, when does it stop??? Who decides what is "reasonable", "tolerable", etc??? You?? Your opponent?? Both of you make up rules before the match??? What???

Isn't it much simpler to just play within rules that are already existing?

I'm not knocking on you, I just want to know why people feel it is ok to break some rules, and not others??? And why a particular individual feels entitled to impose thier own set of "rules and what is reasonable"???




Actually, there is "evidence" right here on this board. One of the reasons I started this thread, and I spoke about it in my OP was that there is several posters who in several threads say "they are above" enfrocing certain rules, as they deem them to be "petty".And many other posters agree with them. These same posters say posters who are sticklers by the rules are just jerks. hence the "villain" vs "hero" definitions.

what posters did that? i missed the drama again.

drakulie
05-14-2009, 11:34 AM
^^^^You have to go back about a week or two. There were several threads where these type of discussion were going on. ie; what would you do with a person who foot faults. Or, if your opponent catches the ball before it lands, would you take the point, etc.

I created this thread based on several observations I have seen, ironically, in this section of the forums, which discusses "adult league and tournaments. " One would think people posting in this section play by the rules, but alas>>> they feel they are above rules. :roll:

bad_call
05-14-2009, 11:40 AM
some rules are overlooked. kinda like traffic laws...if i only had a badge and a gun. :twisted:

Cindysphinx
05-14-2009, 12:16 PM
Thats breaking a rule that clearly gives them an advantage. I wouldn't tolerate that.

The issue isn't whether the rule itself is or is not important or obscure.

The issue is whether the violation is or is not significant or meaningful. To evaluate that, you have to consider the purpose of the rule and the consequences of its violation.

Our rules say that if someone is 10 or more minutes late to a match, a default must be taken. If someone is 10:01 minutes late to a match, are you being an "honest player" or a "cheater" if you take their default rather than let it go?

Neither, I say. You are being a reasonable and fair-minded good sport.

If someone decided to be a stickler and take the default because the opponent was 1 second late, I would say that person is engaged in poor sportsmanship and is being unreasonable and petty because they have not been harmed in the slightest by the one-second delay.

I wonder what the OP would do if the opponent were 1 second late in the scenario I described. Rules are rules, after all . . . .

JavierLW
05-14-2009, 12:17 PM
Which guy do you want to be? The guy on the right or the guy on the left?

http://www.toptenz.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/barney-fife-andy-taylor.jpg

I dont know they are both pretty successful actors, it would be nice to be that successful.....

A true gray person though would love Barney Fife and accept him for who he is and respect his views, not find reasons to sneer at him and stick their noses down at him like some people.... He's a character for sure....

(you do know that is a TV show right?)

(if you want to see a true comedy involving the ultimate "rule stickler", you need to go to you tube and search for "The Brittas Empire", start at series 1, episode 1 part 1 of 3, he's a riot!!!!)

JavierLW
05-14-2009, 12:25 PM
OK, but you would tolerate other rules being broken. So then, what if you play someone who tells you (as other here have suggested), you are being unreasonable? Or you catch a ball that is 7 feet out (a rule you would tolerate breaking yourself) , and your opponent tells you, "if you aren't going to tolerate me foot faulting, I'm not going to tolerate you cactching a ball that is 7 feet long"???

Again, when does it stop??? Who decides what is "reasonable", "tolerable", etc??? You?? Your opponent?? Both of you make up rules before the match??? What???

Isn't it much simpler to just play within rules that are already existing?

I'm not knocking on you, I just want to know why people feel it is ok to break some rules, and not others??? And why a particular individual feels entitled to impose thier own set of "rules and what is reasonable"???




Actually, there is "evidence" right here on this board. One of the reasons I started this thread, and I spoke about it in my OP was that there is several posters who in several threads say "they are above" enfrocing certain rules, as they deem them to be "petty".And many other posters agree with them. These same posters say posters who are sticklers by the rules are just jerks. hence the "villain" vs "hero" definitions.

Yes and now they've come up with some scenerio where they are going to label people as Gray or "Black and White" or Barney Fife, or whatever.

Which is stupid. They cant just consider or respect anyone's view on ONE PARTICULAR TOPIC. Instead they have to label everyone because that makes them happier. (and it makes it more simple and black and white for them to comprehend because they are right after all and everyone else is wrong)

(along with throwing in crazy extreme examples like speed tickets, the building inspector, the guy catching the ball from ball hungry mountain goats, etc.... As if that is a defense against using a rule in a specific situation)

Doesn't seem very free flowing and flexible to me.

It's also a false notion because the very same people will pull out the rulebook to no end when they think they are being wronged, or it's something they believe strongly in. They can try to argue that all they want using generic terms like "reasonable", "common sense", "impacts the match", etc... but they cant.

JavierLW
05-14-2009, 12:30 PM
The issue isn't whether the rule itself is or is not important or obscure.

The issue is whether the violation is or is not significant or meaningful. To evaluate that, you have to consider the purpose of the rule and the consequences of its violation.

Our rules say that if someone is 10 or more minutes late to a match, a default must be taken. If someone is 10:01 minutes late to a match, are you being an "honest player" or a "cheater" if you take their default rather than let it go?

Neither, I say. You are being a reasonable and fair-minded good sport.

If someone decided to be a stickler and take the default because the opponent was 1 second late, I would say that person is engaged in poor sportsmanship and is being unreasonable and petty because they have not been harmed in the slightest by the one-second delay.

I wonder what the OP would do if the opponent were 1 second late in the scenario I described. Rules are rules, after all . . . .

Again, here is someone pulling up a whole other example just to defend against someone who is using a rule for a completely different purpose.

Most of us let lateness go because we want to play the match. That's why we are there, to play tennis. (by the rules or however you prefer to do it)

Catching a tennis ball in midair is not really how the game was intended. Some sports you catch the ball (like baseball) and some sports you dont let the ball touch you, that's just the nature of the game.

If someone wants to play some entirely different sort of game out there, that's fine.

It's not reasonable to catch fly balls (in most cases where you only have to go a few feet to get it), so it's not really reasonable that you should think you can win the point when you do it as well.

bad_call
05-14-2009, 12:34 PM
Yes and now they've come up with some scenerio where they are going to label people as Gray or "Black and White" or Barney Fife, or whatever.

Which is stupid. They cant just consider or respect anyone's view on ONE PARTICULAR TOPIC. Instead they have to label everyone because that makes them happier.

(along with throwing in crazy extreme examples like speed tickets, the building inspector, the guy catching the ball from ball hungry mountain goats, etc.... As if that is a defense against using a rule in a specific situation)

Doesn't seem very free flowing and flexible to me.

It's also a false notion because the very same people will pull out the rulebook to no end when they think they are being wronged, or it's something they believe strongly in. They can try to argue that all they want using generic terms like "reasonable", "common sense", "impacts the match", etc... but they cant.

flexible rules? like a politician...

JavierLW
05-14-2009, 12:36 PM
Trick question; the one on the right is dead. Of course, I'd rather be the one on the left. :)

Just funnin' with you.

I thought one of them was dead but wasnt sure which one.

Well that's a good way to get out of paying taxes....

Nevermind, they take half of your estate when you die as well...

It's amazing how people with probably little or no career or life experiences of their own have to look to TV to answer all their questions about how we should deal with life.....

(although that was an awesome show)

Cindysphinx
05-14-2009, 12:52 PM
Again, here is someone pulling up a whole other example just to defend against someone who is using a rule for a completely different purpose.

Mmmm, nope.

The local rule here is explicit: Enforcement of lateness penalties and defaults for lateness is "mandatory." The purpose of the rule is to be sure players are on time (on account of our timed matches). The rule is fine. The question is its enforcement by "sticklers." The black and white folks.

Most of us let lateness go because we want to play the match. That's why we are there, to play tennis. (by the rules or however you prefer to do it)

So it's OK or even advisable or laudable to let some things go because we are there to play tennis.

This, I submit, is progress.

Now. You can let other things go too, if you think it will facilitate playing tennis. Like if someone catches the ball to make sure it won't go in a puddle or interrupt play on the next court, you might let it slide. If someone wishes to be a stickler in that situation, then they are being a black and white. A Barney Fife.

Catching a tennis ball in midair is not really how the game was intended. Some sports you catch the ball (like baseball) and some sports you dont let the ball touch you, that's just the nature of the game.

This totally misses the point. By a lot.

I mean, does your view change if the person uses their racket rather than their hand to deflect the ball so it doesn't go in the puddle or disrupt play on the next court?

raiden031
05-14-2009, 01:03 PM
OK, but you would tolerate other rules being broken. So then, what if you play someone who tells you (as other here have suggested), you are being unreasonable? Or you catch a ball that is 7 feet out (a rule you would tolerate breaking yourself) , and your opponent tells you, "if you aren't going to tolerate me foot faulting, I'm not going to tolerate you cactching a ball that is 7 feet long"???



I wouldn't catch a ball that is sailing long because I know there are people that would enforce the rule and I don't want to lose a point because of it. I would never dispute with an opponent about whether a rule can be enforced or not, but how someone chooses to enforce the rules will certainly state something about their character to me.


Again, when does it stop??? Who decides what is "reasonable", "tolerable", etc??? You?? Your opponent?? Both of you make up rules before the match??? What???

Isn't it much simpler to just play within rules that are already existing?



Common sense to me says there is a balance between being an annoying stickler for rules that are not a big deal and those that actually matter.


I'm not knocking on you, I just want to know why people feel it is ok to break some rules, and not others??? And why a particular individual feels entitled to impose thier own set of "rules and what is reasonable"???

Actually, there is "evidence" right here on this board. One of the reasons I started this thread, and I spoke about it in my OP was that there is several posters who in several threads say "they are above" enfrocing certain rules, as they deem them to be "petty".And many other posters agree with them. These same posters say posters who are sticklers by the rules are just jerks. hence the "villain" vs "hero" definitions.

I just think it is a reflection on someone's character when they are willing to get confrontational over insignificant rules that are not a big deal in a recreational league. For instance, the first or second time I played in a 6.0 mixed match, the opposing woman accused me of receiving coaching from my wife, who had come to the match as a spectator and simply said hi to me. By accusing me and my partner of numerous other rule violations as well, I believe this woman was a jerk on a power trip.

Spokewench
05-14-2009, 01:09 PM
I understand the question perfectly. I play with a lot of people who ONLY play what I call recreational tennis (or have only played rec tennis up until a few weeks ago) They are not familiar with the rules of tennis; they are not familiar with the code of tennis. They just play and do things that they have seen other recreational tennis players do. If someone on a team is confused by a rule or lack of knowledge of a rule, they play the point over. They will argue about a call on the other side even though the other side can and has the right to call the ball in or out. They will ask that the point be played over if they saw the ball in and it was called out. They talk constantly, while the server is getting ready to serve when the other side is hitting, etc.

So, as captain of two 3.0 teams (and for that matter two 3.5 teams), I asked some of these people to play usta league because we needed to put two teams together and sheer numbers of players was the issue.

At my last match, I saw many infractions of the rules and code; I enforced a few as captain and then chose to ignore some of the other things due to way too much ignorance. I had some players respond well to this; since some of the players have played usta tennis and understand the rules. I had some people try to argue with me as to why we should follow the rules. Why can't we play like they want to. I later in the week sent out a copy of the code and pointed out certain infractions in same and asked the players to be more courteous to each other. I know that some of the people on my team appreciated the effort and others think I am a bossy person.

I figure that if they want to continue to play USTA league, they will take the email to heart and if they do not, they will stop playing USTA league after this go-round and continue in their recreational tennis playing ways. I guess there are different strokes for different folks. (pun intended!)

spoke.

JavierLW
05-14-2009, 01:54 PM
I understand the question perfectly. I play with a lot of people who ONLY play what I call recreational tennis (or have only played rec tennis up until a few weeks ago) They are not familiar with the rules of tennis; they are not familiar with the code of tennis. They just play and do things that they have seen other recreational tennis players do. If someone on a team is confused by a rule or lack of knowledge of a rule, they play the point over. They will argue about a call on the other side even though the other side can and has the right to call the ball in or out. They will ask that the point be played over if they saw the ball in and it was called out. They talk constantly, while the server is getting ready to serve when the other side is hitting, etc.

So, as captain of two 3.0 teams (and for that matter two 3.5 teams), I asked some of these people to play usta league because we needed to put two teams together and sheer numbers of players was the issue.

At my last match, I saw many infractions of the rules and code; I enforced a few as captain and then chose to ignore some of the other things due to way too much ignorance. I had some players respond well to this; since some of the players have played usta tennis and understand the rules. I had some people try to argue with me as to why we should follow the rules. Why can't we play like they want to. I later in the week sent out a copy of the code and pointed out certain infractions in same and asked the players to be more courteous to each other. I know that some of the people on my team appreciated the effort and others think I am a bossy person.

I figure that if they want to continue to play USTA league, they will take the email to heart and if they do not, they will stop playing USTA league after this go-round and continue in their recreational tennis playing ways. I guess there are different strokes for different folks. (pun intended!)

spoke.

Ive had similar experiences from when i ran a 3.0 team.

A couple rules that many find meaningless and arbitrary in our area is the switching ends of the court rule, and the rule about how we warm up our serves before the match starts (not as it's our turn to serve).

In both situations I am not being a "stickler" just because it's a rule, but because I have reasons for why I happen to like doing it the way the rule is written.

(ie... Im used to playing that way, it saves time to take all serves at the beginning, and switching ends gives us a quick break to gain momentum, communicate with our partner, etc....)

I played one guy one time, and he just insisted to no end that we take serves as we go. I refused. (again not just because it's a rule but because I dont like doing it the PCT league indoor way)

So for the whole match they complained and called us "rule sticklers", etc... (the same as some of the people on this site are doing because someone doesn't agree with them about the importance of one particular rule....)

The next time we played them, it was on their home courts, and the guy insisted that. "because this is our home courts we have to do it our way"

I still refused and insisted we take our warm ups before the match, and he got really angry and stormed upstairs to talk to his captain. One of our players was up there, and said that as soon as the guy asked his captain, the captain explained "he's right!!! You have to do it that way".

He sheepishly came back down and apologized and we didn't hear a peep out of him for the rest of the match.

I could of just let the baby do it his way, and resolved the argument but that's silly. HE'S CAUSING THE DISAGREEMENT by not knowing the rules and being stubborn about doing it his way.

There are two sides to every argument..... You do actually have two people in these situations arguing about something, that's why we have rules in the first place.

kylebarendrick
05-14-2009, 02:06 PM
It isn't as simple as just B&W vs. grey. I do my best to follow the rules and the code, like any good B&W "jerk", to eliminate the possibility of losing points unnecessarily or getting into can't-win arguments with my opponents. To that end I don't talk to spectators during the match, I ask to leave the court for bathroom breaks or to get more water, I don't catch out balls, I don't footfault, etc.

At the same time, I have never attempted to claim points from opponents that violate these rules. It just isn't worth it to me to argue about it. In the right circumastances I may mention the rules to my opponents so that "someone else doesn't call it on you". Overall I think this is a good approach - do your best to know and abide by the rules but make calls with a reasonable level of restraint.

Cindysphinx
05-14-2009, 02:43 PM
A couple rules that many find meaningless and arbitrary in our area is the switching ends of the court rule, and the rule about how we warm up our serves before the match starts (not as it's our turn to serve).


What is this business about taking warm-up serves before the match starts? Was the fellow proposing that you play "First in," or something? 'Cause that is totally wrong and bogus in USTA league play. I've never heard anyone even propose doing it that way.

FloridaAG
05-14-2009, 03:19 PM
What is this business about taking warm-up serves before the match starts? Was the fellow proposing that you play "First in," or something? 'Cause that is totally wrong and bogus in USTA league play. I've never heard anyone even propose doing it that way.

I believe he means they wanted to hit warm up serves before it was their turn to serve rather than all warming up before the match began.

hrstrat57
05-14-2009, 04:51 PM
What is this business about taking warm-up serves before the match starts? Was the fellow proposing that you play "First in," or something? 'Cause that is totally wrong and bogus in USTA league play. I've never heard anyone even propose doing it that way.

LOL Cindy!

I play in a mixed rec league and these folks play "first ball in"

When I first started playing in this league I couldn't believe it! I fussed and complained but to no avail.....they still do it. I refuse of course to participate in "FBI" tennis....declaring my 1st ball in play. They always stare in amazement when I spin the first serve in with decent pace.....I have gone from annoyed to amused by this stupidity.

So I guess when playing with this group I go from B/W to grey.....it is painful:oops: but otherwise they are a very nice group.

In fairness, a few of the better players no longer engage in "FBI" tennis, following my example.

woodrow1029
05-14-2009, 05:02 PM
When I play with my wife for fun, we use FBI. But in a tournament, or in a league, I would never consider it. I guess you could just call their first serve in regardless of whether it was in or not. Oops, I'm an umpire, I shouldn't be saying that..

hrstrat57
05-14-2009, 07:15 PM
When I play with my wife for fun, we use FBI. But in a tournament, or in a league, I would never consider it. I guess you could just call their first serve in regardless of whether it was in or not. Oops, I'm an umpire, I shouldn't be saying that..

Yep, it is so lame......the crazy part is these folks play strictly by the rules and the code in all other aspects of the game.

I'll take your advice re the FBI tactic.

I like it:idea:

One of my regular partners could not believe the FBI when I told him about it. He was disgusted with me for continuing to play in the league. When I see him for our regular match he says "how was FBI tennis wed night?" with quite a bit of sarcasm.

It is difficult for me......

Jim A
05-14-2009, 07:32 PM
Here's a scenario Drak, interested in your take on this scenario

Jr Tournament: Player has the match time wrong by 30 minutes, you notify opponent, who knows the player and is willing to play. However you let all parties know at that time and again before taking the court that all penalties leading up to default will be in play (loss of toss and down 3-0 in first set)

When you check on match about 20 min later you notice that they are @ 1-1 and didn't put the rules into effect.

Do you go out and make it 4-1? Or at that point since the match is in progress does one let it play out as a tournament official?

Jim A
05-14-2009, 07:35 PM
What is this business about taking warm-up serves before the match starts? Was the fellow proposing that you play "First in," or something? 'Cause that is totally wrong and bogus in USTA league play. I've never heard anyone even propose doing it that way.

We have someone who likes this before some club doubles matches. I can't stand it, we spend like 20 min hitting forehands but 30 seconds on the serve and it disrupts the first 4 games. I just speak for the others normally and say I'd like to warmup all at once before the match starts. I don't ask to take my overheads before the start of the 3rd game?? I think its a little bit of gamesmanship since they require little warmup on their serve

Jim A
05-14-2009, 07:45 PM
B&W is a member of a homeowner's association walking around from yard to yard looking for problems to complain about. They bring their tape measurer and then notify the neighbor that their fence is 3" too high/low. Should this person be considered a villain?

B&W people are rigid. They are set in their ways and not willing to compromise. They completely lack common sense, and everything they do in life is based on some written rule. They are willing to make enemies and be confrontational rather than back down just for the sake of peace. They aren't capable of using their own judgement to make decisions. Because they can't think for themselves, they are followers, not leaders. This type of person would put someone in jail for 20 years for stealing from a grocery store, if that is what is written in an out-dated law. The absolute worst kind of person to have as a judge would be a B&W person.

Gray people are flexible. Gray people use common sense to guide them in decision-making. They know when to use the rules, and when not to in order to maintain peace. They are more likely to rebel against rules that they deem unfair. This type of person is more likely to be a leader. In my opinion, the grays are much better people for society. Go Gray!

Raiden, what I think you may not consider here is that so called Black&White people aren't B&W in all aspects of their life.

I think I'm an example. For nearly a decade I worked large scale sporting events. We'd have over 400 teams at our Finals and bring the equivalent of a spring training team to a city each summer along with 15-30 qualifying events across N. America.

As the Senior employee and decision maker it is my job to enforce the rules. Whether its regarding uniforms, forfeiture procedure, protests or just the overall facility, the letter is the law. In that situation, once you make an exception to a rule it no longer exists. Each offseason we go through the scenarios and input and make changes.

However for me to bring emotion and/or do anything but enforce the rulebook would eliminate fairness from the equation. I'm lucky that we have some of the best officials in the world, including those who work in the highest professional leagues who join us and area equally adept at knowing our rulebook. That way if they believe something doesn't require more than an Game Ejection, they can call it as such. I would say they are the Gray's of the event because they make the calls and control the speed of the game. However when it gets to me it has to be black and white.

Outside of that however, I'm a gray person because I believe personally in letting the situation dictate the response, within the rules of course. I'd never let someone just go on if they dinged my car but if the same person stopped and provided info, etc..it opens it to discussion.

drakulie
05-15-2009, 08:48 AM
Here's a scenario Drak, interested in your take on this scenario

Jr Tournament: Player has the match time wrong by 30 minutes, you notify opponent, who knows the player and is willing to play. However you let all parties know at that time and again before taking the court that all penalties leading up to default will be in play (loss of toss and down 3-0 in first set)

When you check on match about 20 min later you notice that they are @ 1-1 and didn't put the rules into effect.

Do you go out and make it 4-1? Or at that point since the match is in progress does one let it play out as a tournament official?

In this case, I'm going to assume that you are making me the Director of the tournament.

If this is the case, then I do the following:


**If** starting the match 30 minutes late does not mess up the rest of my scheduled mathes, and player A is ok with it, then the match starts at 0-0. (no penalties to either player)
If player A is not OK with it, then he wins by default.
If this will mess up the rest of the days matches, player A wins by default.

JavierLW
05-15-2009, 09:01 AM
What is this business about taking warm-up serves before the match starts? Was the fellow proposing that you play "First in," or something? 'Cause that is totally wrong and bogus in USTA league play. I've never heard anyone even propose doing it that way.

In indoor clubs all over this area (and Im sure others) players are used to warming up their serves when it's their turn to serve.

So before the match starts after you've spun your racquet the first person due to serve warms up, some guy nicely returns them, and two people stand around.

Then you play that game, dont switch sides, 2nd person warms up their serve, someone returns them, 2 people stand around. (drinking water, towel off, chase stray balls, making chit chat, whatever).

Then they play that game, then the 3rd person warms up his serve, someone returns them 2 people stand around and do pretty much nothing.

Then you play the 3rd game, dont switch sides, the final last person gets to warm up their serve, someone returns them, 2 people stand around and then from there you get to play uninteruppted tennis. (for 4 more games or 5 games or however they choose to do it in their private league)

When you get them outside, they will use excuses like. "But, we wont both get to PRACTICE on the side that we're going to serve on!!!"

This is truely the way they want to do it, and if you dont actually say anything you'll find yourself warming up in this manner because at 3.0 and 3.5 a high percentage of the players here are indoor club players that play in this manner.

I happen to HATE doing it that way so I always have to say something, and Im the rule stickler for doing it. But guess what, it doesnt hurt anything does it? (to them it doesnt) Does it really affect the game???? (I think it does, but they dont they are used to doing it their way and they think nothing of why someone would want to do it the normal way even though it's a rule)

I also insist on switching ends in a match (in an actual match, I dont mess with their funtime leagues if Im invited) and they hate doing that as well.

What's funny is they claim it "wastes time", but somehow standing around for 4 different warmups doesnt.....

Cindysphinx
05-15-2009, 10:24 AM
I know what FBI is, but I've never had anyone propose doing it in a USTA match.

I don't like FBI. It's just awful. It rewards the person who fires cannons and misses the first six serves while everyone stands there waiting. It punishes the person who is willing to roll in the first serve so we can start playing already. I don't see how it saves any time at all.

Cindy -- who thinks she will propose First Forehand In also

JavierLW
05-15-2009, 11:46 AM
I know what FBI is, but I've never had anyone propose doing it in a USTA match.

I don't like FBI. It's just awful. It rewards the person who fires cannons and misses the first six serves while everyone stands there waiting. It punishes the person who is willing to roll in the first serve so we can start playing already. I don't see how it saves any time at all.

Cindy -- who thinks she will propose First Forehand In also

Ive never seen "first ball in" in a USTA match.

Just the practice where everyone warms up their serves before their respective service games.

I think you're just noticing that FBI is a combination of the two. (because obviously if you're doing FBI, it's when it's your turn to serve, otherwise it wouldnt work)

No, instead these guys actually warm up. They take as many warmup serves as they want (in or out) until they are done, and then they say "this one's good", sometimes indicated by holding the ball up in the air.

The drawback versus the other way I feel is besides wasting a ton of time, it ruins any momentum you might have over those first 4 games.

(conversely though I feel not switching ends has the opposite effect over the entire match, rushing thru a match without any sort of breaks is a good way to lose quickly if you dont start well)

But the point is they see no problem doing it their way. It supposedly doesnt "affect" the game in any way.

It obviously does but we all have to deal with it. But it's a matter of me wanting to do it one way and them wanting to do it another way. And they make the same silly ignorant comments as anyone else when you try to get them to do it by the book.

And the only real excuse I have for insisting on doing it my way is that it's in the rules. But if I go that far then we might as well follow all of them (not make them up just based on some personal sense of common sense which is not the same for everyone).

hrstrat57
05-15-2009, 04:41 PM
I know what FBI is, but I've never had anyone propose doing it in a USTA match.

I don't like FBI. It's just awful. It rewards the person who fires cannons and misses the first six serves while everyone stands there waiting. It punishes the person who is willing to roll in the first serve so we can start playing already. I don't see how it saves any time at all.

Cindy -- who thinks she will propose First Forehand In also

Agree FBI is stupid. These folks collectively are so pleasant otherwise and abide by all other proper aspects of the game that I made a decision to tolerate it.

...but I don't like it and I refuse to participate personally in FBI.

Sorry Drak, semi thread poach off.....

SteveI
05-16-2009, 01:42 PM
Ive had similar experiences from when i ran a 3.0 team.

A couple rules that many find meaningless and arbitrary in our area is the switching ends of the court rule, and the rule about how we warm up our serves before the match starts (not as it's our turn to serve).

In both situations I am not being a "stickler" just because it's a rule, but because I have reasons for why I happen to like doing it the way the rule is written.

(ie... Im used to playing that way, it saves time to take all serves at the beginning, and switching ends gives us a quick break to gain momentum, communicate with our partner, etc....)

I played one guy one time, and he just insisted to no end that we take serves as we go. I refused. (again not just because it's a rule but because I dont like doing it the PCT league indoor way)

So for the whole match they complained and called us "rule sticklers", etc... (the same as some of the people on this site are doing because someone doesn't agree with them about the importance of one particular rule....)

The next time we played them, it was on their home courts, and the guy insisted that. "because this is our home courts we have to do it our way"

I still refused and insisted we take our warm ups before the match, and he got really angry and stormed upstairs to talk to his captain. One of our players was up there, and said that as soon as the guy asked his captain, the captain explained "he's right!!! You have to do it that way".

He sheepishly came back down and apologized and we didn't hear a peep out of him for the rest of the match.

I could of just let the baby do it his way, and resolved the argument but that's silly. HE'S CAUSING THE DISAGREEMENT by not knowing the rules and being stubborn about doing it his way.

There are two sides to every argument..... You do actually have two people in these situations arguing about something, that's why we have rules in the first place.

Javier,

Thanks for the insights.. all of this in a 3.0 match? I wonder why I gave up playing USTA a few years back and never returned.. oh I remember now it was the fist-fight I witnessed in a 3.5 match. I agree, if you are playing a USTA or tourney just follow the rules to be safe. You are also right that many of the DISAGREEMENTS are caused by not knowing the rules.

Regards...

GS
05-16-2009, 02:18 PM
I also gave up playing USTA tournaments awhile ago---too many weekend warriors are out there, cheating with line calls, just to win, baby---because their friends, girlfriends or wives are watching. Also, the name-calling and near fist-fights made me sick. I'm better off just playing with friends....

SteveI
05-17-2009, 03:17 AM
I also gave up playing USTA tournaments awhile ago---too many weekend warriors are out there, cheating with line calls, just to win, baby---because their friends, girlfriends or wives are watching. Also, the name-calling and near fist-fights made me sick. I'm better off just playing with friends....

Hey GS,

I used to think that most of the problems occured at the higher end of players 4.0 and up. I was wrong, in my experience..it is at the lower level when many folks have problems with rules.. or lack of knowledge of said rules. Better of with playing dbs your buds in the park and having a cold one after :-)

Steve

ACK4wd
05-20-2009, 05:43 PM
To the OP - IMO you are more of an Andy Griffith than a Fife: and little drama playing within the rules than all of the bs a barney fife commits to explain their own personal interpretation.

Why is it that playing by the rules doesn't bother most of the people who play well?

Just to further disseminate the distance between Barney Fife and people who play within the rules - I'll be willing to bet that Drak wouldn't mind wouldn't mind sporting a few points or serve-mulligans in a non-tournament environment to anyone who needs extra points just to keep it interesting.

d-quik
07-25-2009, 03:17 PM
On the other hand, we Shades of Grey people are:

- Inconsistent
- Unreliable
- Weak willed
- Unable to understand and apply rules/laws as written
- Enablers
- Wimps
- Wishy-washy namby-pambies!I love how you made it into list format, and the ending is hilarious. funniest post yet

pmerk34
07-25-2009, 04:07 PM
#1 Ok what if it is the second or third time she did it? Are you giving out warnings and then footfaulting her after that in this setting? I sure am not going to.

#2 ok I''ll phrase it differently you default the match before you play and take the dinner and beer, but you agree to play a practice match for "fun"

The overall point is yes rules in general should be followed. In social matches and practice matches, everyone I know lets things slide a bit in the interest of maintaining your sanity. If a ball is flying 10 ft out and someone catches it so it doesn't bounce over the fence, there is no way I am calling that in a social match and claiming the point. What exactly I am gaining from that?

I believe the USTA rules have leeway on foot faulting basically saying unless it is egregious the match should be played. I beleive that the USTA knows that a large number of players at all levels foot fault simply because (as in my case) they did not receive professional instruction and may not even realize it.

If you were allowed to simply win matches by default by claiming foot faulting the USTA would be full of walk overs.

pmerk34
07-25-2009, 04:20 PM
I also gave up playing USTA tournaments awhile ago---too many weekend warriors are out there, cheating with line calls, just to win, baby---because their friends, girlfriends or wives are watching. Also, the name-calling and near fist-fights made me sick. I'm better off just playing with friends....

I hear ya. I get into enough battles with my brother LOL.