PDA

View Full Version : Please help- who is right?


roundiesee
10-12-2010, 07:21 PM
We were playing 4.5 dubs last night, the score locked at one set all. My partner had to go home early, so for the deciding third set we agreed on sudden-death, no deuces allowed.

However when the set started, all 4 players promptly "forgot" about the no-deuces rule in the very first game. The opposing team played out and won the first point of the deuce. Suddenly the opposing team "remembered" we were supposed to play "no-deuces", and claimed that they had won the game, since they did win the first point of the deuce game. I counter argued, saying that since all 4 players "forgot" to play the no-deuces rule, the game should play out normally, and then for subsequent games the no-deuces rule can re-start.

Who was right?

Djlpenguin
10-12-2010, 07:37 PM
once you have to leave, you forfeit. the opponent wins. even if you forget, tho, they still win the game.

sphinx780
10-12-2010, 07:58 PM
imo, if you remembered in the first game on the point that you planned would be no duece...your opponents won the game and you are right on track...who cares what they called the score as.

roundiesee
10-12-2010, 08:07 PM
imo, if you remembered in the first game on the point that you planned would be no duece...your opponents won the game and you are right on track...who cares what they called the score as.

I understand what you are saying, but in this instance, the opponents completely forgot that we were supposed to play "no-deuces", because if they did they would have asked us which player we want to receive serve when the game reached deuce. So clearly they forgot about that (and so did me and my partner), and I felt that since all 4 players erred, we should play out the game "normally", then re-start the no-deuces rule for the rest of the set.

JavierLW
10-12-2010, 08:19 PM
We were playing 4.5 dubs last night, the score locked at one set all. My partner had to go home early, so for the deciding third set we agreed on sudden-death, no deuces allowed.

However when the set started, all 4 players promptly "forgot" about the no-deuces rule in the very first game. The opposing team played out and won the first point of the deuce. Suddenly the opposing team "remembered" we were supposed to play "no-deuces", and claimed that they had won the game, since they did win the first point of the deuce game. I counter argued, saying that since all 4 players "forgot" to play the no-deuces rule, the game should play out normally, and then for subsequent games the no-deuces rule can re-start.

Who was right?

You've only played one point. Whether you "forgot" or not is irrelevant, you DID all agree to play (it's called "no-ad" btw), then the game should be over. Because it's the same as if you wouldnt of "forgot".

However if you go on to play the 2nd point (a ad point), then you should continue to play under deuce rules.

There is no actual rule for this but if you read the rulebook on almost anything that players "forgot" to do, that's about the jist of how you handle these things.

So anyway, I think you should lose that game.

JavierLW
10-12-2010, 08:25 PM
I understand what you are saying, but in this instance, the opponents completely forgot that we were supposed to play "no-deuces", because if they did they would have asked us which player we want to receive serve when the game reached deuce. So clearly they forgot about that (and so did me and my partner), and I felt that since all 4 players erred, we should play out the game "normally", then re-start the no-deuces rule for the rest of the set.

No, actually they do not have to actually ask you what side to return on. It's your job to tell them if you want to do something different, it's not just theirs to ask you.

They might of just as well assumed that you choose to return on the deuce side.

Also in "no-ad" scoring you still call that point "deuce", so you cant go by that either.

So you really haven't done anything different then had someone remembered it was "no-ad". Ive played where clearly everyone knows it's no-ad but the returners even forget that they can choose a side but still it counts.

Nobody really "erred" in this instance because you played a point out just as you would of in 'no-ad' scoring anyway. Whether you forgot to choose a return side or you choose to play on the deuce side, because clearly you "CHOOSE" to play the deuce side because you forgot to choose a side....

roundiesee
10-12-2010, 08:50 PM
No, actually they do not have to actually ask you what side to return on. It's your job to tell them if you want to do something different, it's not just theirs to ask you.

They might of just as well assumed that you choose to return on the deuce side.

Also in "no-ad" scoring you still call that point "deuce", so you cant go by that either.

So you really haven't done anything different then had someone remembered it was "no-ad". Ive played where clearly everyone knows it's no-ad but the returners even forget that they can choose a side but still it counts.

Nobody really "erred" in this instance because you played a point out just as you would of in 'no-ad' scoring anyway. Whether you forgot to choose a return side or you choose to play on the deuce side, because clearly you "CHOOSE" to play the deuce side because you forgot to choose a side....

Thanks very much! I guess that settles it then. I'll probably not agree to play "no-ad" the next time becuase it is really too darn complcated! :)

spot
10-13-2010, 05:50 AM
The other team was nice enough to accommodate your player by breaking the rules so they didn't have to stay late and you still got into an argument about the made up rules?

roundiesee
10-13-2010, 07:32 AM
The other team was nice enough to accommodate your player by breaking the rules so they didn't have to stay late and you still got into an argument about the made up rules?

Wasn't an argument at all; our team apologised for the mistake and the first game went to them as agreed, so every one was cool :) Anyway they went on to win the decider 6-1 so justice was served for our ignorance with the rules :)

beernutz
10-13-2010, 08:01 AM
We were playing 4.5 dubs last night, the score locked at one set all. My partner had to go home early, so for the deciding third set we agreed on sudden-death, no deuces allowed.

However when the set started, all 4 players promptly "forgot" about the no-deuces rule in the very first game. The opposing team played out and won the first point of the deuce. Suddenly the opposing team "remembered" we were supposed to play "no-deuces", and claimed that they had won the game, since they did win the first point of the deuce game. I counter argued, saying that since all 4 players "forgot" to play the no-deuces rule, the game should play out normally, and then for subsequent games the no-deuces rule can re-start.

Who was right?
Points played in good faith always count. IMO, this is still the case despite the fact that your team didn't specify who on your team was to receive the first point after you reached deuce. Like someone else has answered, they are not under an obligation to ask you which side will receive, it is your team's job to tell them.

Personally I think it was borderline gamesmanship on your part to try and dispute the point they won. It was your team who requested that the no-ad system be used to save time so that you wouldn't forfeit the third set.

roundiesee
10-13-2010, 08:36 AM
Points played in good faith always count. IMO, this is still the case despite the fact that your team didn't specify who on your team was to receive the first point after you reached deuce. Like someone else has answered, they are not under an obligation to ask you which side will receive, it is your team's job to tell them.

Personally I think it was borderline gamesmanship on your part to try and dispute the point they won. It was your team who requested that the no-ad system be used to save time so that you wouldn't forfeit the third set.

Perhaps I should have explained in more detail. This was just a friendly, and my partner said he had to go back early. It was the opposing team who suggested the no ad so that we could complete the third set early. We were just not sure re the rules whether we had to consciously request who to receive serve when deuce was reached, that.s all. There was no malice or gamesmanship intended, and our team did apologize re our mistake. All players were cool re the mix up, and eventually they took the first game as unanimously agreed by all four players. There was never any I'll feeling nor any argument, just a friendly discussion of what should be the right thing to do :)

Bedrock
10-13-2010, 08:49 AM
opposing team is right.

athiker
10-13-2010, 10:02 AM
Perhaps I should have explained in more detail. This was just a friendly, and my partner said he had to go back early. It was the opposing team who suggested the no ad so that we could complete the third set early. We were just not sure re the rules whether we had to consciously request who to receive serve when deuce was reached, that.s all. There was no malice or gamesmanship intended, and our team did apologize re our mistake. All players were cool re the mix up, and eventually they took the first game as unanimously agreed by all four players. There was never any I'll feeling nor any argument, just a friendly discussion of what should be the right thing to do :)

Come on...we all know from reading these boards that all issues that arise on a tennis court result in attempts at intimidation via glares, angry words, items thrown, hooking to get even on future points and a general win at all costs or at least make sure no one has fun attitude. Its a wonder anyone plays this game at all with all the horror stories. ;)

Actually, kudos to your group. I have a regular group I hit with a few times per week for "friendlies" in addition to league type stuff and its not uncommon at all for us to ask each other what rules apply to certain situations...all done in the spirit of learning. We also make up rules when time constraints arise or when we are trying to work extra people in on limited court space and playing variations of Kings of the Court and what not. In 3 years I've never seen a serious disagreement, which I find remarkable. I appreciate the group more and more every time I read some threads on this board...glad you seem to have a similar experience. :)

*I just gotta ad this. The other night we even had one guy on the sidelines mention to another guy that he seems to be footfaulting a fair amount and might want to be careful during league matches. He tends to take a small mini-step right as he tosses the ball. From some of the threads I've seen here you would think total chaos would ensue! How do you suppose the server reacted? He said, "Thanks, I'll move back a few inches, it's one of those things you never know unless someone tells you." Jerk! :lol:

sphinx780
10-13-2010, 11:08 AM
Sounds like our friendly matches, if something out of the blue happens, say 'oops, my bad' and things move on.

My view has always been, if I'm unsure I give the benefit to the opposing team...if we had been in the same situation you found yourself in, I'd give the game to the opponent and move on...glad to hear you're just here for some learning to see what to do if it arose again. That's what this sport is meant to be about, having fun and learning :-)

beernutz
10-13-2010, 01:26 PM
Perhaps I should have explained in more detail. This was just a friendly, and my partner said he had to go back early. It was the opposing team who suggested the no ad so that we could complete the third set early. We were just not sure re the rules whether we had to consciously request who to receive serve when deuce was reached, that.s all. There was no malice or gamesmanship intended, and our team did apologize re our mistake. All players were cool re the mix up, and eventually they took the first game as unanimously agreed by all four players. There was never any I'll feeling nor any argument, just a friendly discussion of what should be the right thing to do :)
Ok maybe gamesmanship was too strong a word to use there. I should just have said that I wouldn't feel right asking for a 'do-over' of the point played in the situation you described. I would award them the point and game and play on.

Cindysphinx
10-13-2010, 01:33 PM
Even if it had been the other team that had requested the no-ad accommodation, the point should still stand.

On a related note . . .

Say you are playing a match and the server announces the score as 30-all rather than 40-15. Everyone plays out the point based on the understanding that it is 30-all.

After the point is concluded, the server says, "Game." Everyone then realizes that the score should have been announced as 40-15; the server made an error.

Does the receiving team have any recourse for having been misled about the score?

I ask, because I had this happen in a match. I was the receiver's partner, and she went completely nuts when the error was discovered. She felt that she would have played the point differently had she known it was game point.

I stayed out of the argument because I think all points played in good faith should stand. I did wonder what "good faith" meant, because we had been misled on the score although I doubt this was done intentionally.

Limpinhitter
10-13-2010, 01:45 PM
We were playing 4.5 dubs last night, the score locked at one set all. My partner had to go home early, so for the deciding third set we agreed on sudden-death, no deuces allowed.

However when the set started, all 4 players promptly "forgot" about the no-deuces rule in the very first game. The opposing team played out and won the first point of the deuce. Suddenly the opposing team "remembered" we were supposed to play "no-deuces", and claimed that they had won the game, since they did win the first point of the deuce game. I counter argued, saying that since all 4 players "forgot" to play the no-deuces rule, the game should play out normally, and then for subsequent games the no-deuces rule can re-start.

Who was right?

If the rule is no-ad, and they won the point at 40-40, then they won the game. If you forgot to pick your receiver, that was your error.

OrangePower
10-13-2010, 01:45 PM
Even if it had been the other team that had requested the no-ad accommodation, the point should still stand.

On a related note . . .

Say you are playing a match and the server announces the score as 30-all rather than 40-15. Everyone plays out the point based on the understanding that it is 30-all.

After the point is concluded, the server says, "Game." Everyone then realizes that the score should have been announced as 40-15; the server made an error.

Does the receiving team have any recourse for having been misled about the score?

I ask, because I had this happen in a match. I was the receiver's partner, and she went completely nuts when the error was discovered. She felt that she would have played the point differently had she known it was game point.

I stayed out of the argument because I think all points played in good faith should stand. I did wonder what "good faith" meant, because we had been misled on the score although I doubt this was done intentionally.

My take on it (not based on rules research): Every player has the responsibility of keeping track of the score. If the server announces an incorrect score, one of the other players should make the correction. If nobody notices at the time, then points played should stand. If everyone agrees to how the points actually played out (i.e., nobody disputes in this example that the correct score before the last point was played was 40-15), then that's that.

OrangePower
10-13-2010, 01:50 PM
I ask, because I had this happen in a match. I was the receiver's partner, and she went completely nuts when the error was discovered. She felt that she would have played the point differently had she known it was game point.

One more comment, specifically directed at the receiver who "went nuts": How come she didn't know the right score, and speak up to correct the server? Seems to me that if she is not going to bother keeping track of the score herself as well, then she has no recourse for complaint.

Cindysphinx
10-13-2010, 02:04 PM
One more comment, specifically directed at the receiver who "went nuts": How come she didn't know the right score, and speak up to correct the server? Seems to me that if she is not going to bother keeping track of the score herself as well, then she has no recourse for complaint.

Well, yeah, I guess so. I kind of viewed it a bit differently:

If your tactics were so carefully based on the score, how come you lost track of the score?

OrangePower
10-13-2010, 02:50 PM
^^^^ that would be the corollary :-)

roundiesee
10-13-2010, 09:57 PM
Come on...we all know from reading these boards that all issues that arise on a tennis court result in attempts at intimidation via glares, angry words, items thrown, hooking to get even on future points and a general win at all costs or at least make sure no one has fun attitude. Its a wonder anyone plays this game at all with all the horror stories. ;)

Actually, kudos to your group. I have a regular group I hit with a few times per week for "friendlies" in addition to league type stuff and its not uncommon at all for us to ask each other what rules apply to certain situations...all done in the spirit of learning. We also make up rules when time constraints arise or when we are trying to work extra people in on limited court space and playing variations of Kings of the Court and what not. In 3 years I've never seen a serious disagreement, which I find remarkable. I appreciate the group more and more every time I read some threads on this board...glad you seem to have a similar experience. :)

*I just gotta ad this. The other night we even had one guy on the sidelines mention to another guy that he seems to be footfaulting a fair amount and might want to be careful during league matches. He tends to take a small mini-step right as he tosses the ball. From some of the threads I've seen here you would think total chaos would ensue! How do you suppose the server reacted? He said, "Thanks, I'll move back a few inches, it's one of those things you never know unless someone tells you." Jerk! :lol:

Ha ha, thanks, great post! That made me laugh :)

You're very kind; our tennis group does try to be civil most of the time, though sometimes in very heated rallies, we may go over-the-board, but thankfully, not too often. In this instance, our team was just confused about the no-ad situation, and we mistakenly queried the point and the game taken by our opponents. All was done in good spirits however and our team gladly gave away the game to our opponents as we were not too sure re the rules. So glad that I got you guys (the experts) to put me right and to put me in my place!

Actually this turned out to be a rather fun place on these boards to post; I think I shall visit more often (the other categories have become rather boring and predictable ala the battle of the Nad and Fed ***** etc <sigh> )

kimbahpnam
10-13-2010, 10:01 PM
yea it's their game. :)

LuckyR
10-14-2010, 07:56 AM
My take on it (not based on rules research): Every player has the responsibility of keeping track of the score. If the server announces an incorrect score, one of the other players should make the correction. If nobody notices at the time, then points played should stand. If everyone agrees to how the points actually played out (i.e., nobody disputes in this example that the correct score before the last point was played was 40-15), then that's that.

I completely agree, and I believe the rules also have this stance on the issue. Therefore by my logic, the OP shouldn't have lost the game since the points played in good faith left the score as "ad in", not "game over". At the point that the correct scoring was remembered, it seems you have no choice but to play that game as "ad" scoring, since you were so far into the game where you would have to cancel points to play "no ad", and the rules don't favor disallowing points played in good faith.

roundiesee
10-14-2010, 09:33 PM
I completely agree, and I believe the rules also have this stance on the issue. Therefore by my logic, the OP shouldn't have lost the game since the points played in good faith left the score as "ad in", not "game over". At the point that the correct scoring was remembered, it seems you have no choice but to play that game as "ad" scoring, since you were so far into the game where you would have to cancel points to play "no ad", and the rules don't favor disallowing points played in good faith.

Thanks, good post. You're the only person so far who actually thought like me at that moment of playing :) That was really my "gut" feel at that moment when it happened, which was why I gently queried the decision when the opponents "claimed" the game based on the no-ad which everyone actually forgot. However because my team wasn't sure what the rule was exactly, we just said "sorry" for the whole thing and agreed to give the game to the opponents. Anyway it was after all a friendly and nothing was at stake, so on hindsight it was better to have let the opponents have the game, especially when there was some doubt involved. But I am glad that you understood my reasoning :) Thanks!

jmnk
10-14-2010, 10:38 PM
I completely agree, and I believe the rules also have this stance on the issue. Therefore by my logic, the OP shouldn't have lost the game since the points played in good faith left the score as "ad in", not "game over". At the point that the correct scoring was remembered, it seems you have no choice but to play that game as "ad" scoring, since you were so far into the game where you would have to cancel points to play "no ad", and the rules don't favor disallowing points played in good faith.
I'm confused. You are agreeing with OrangePower yet you are saying the score should have been ad in? Because if I read OrangePower corectly he is saying the server actually did win the game?

jmnk
10-14-2010, 10:39 PM
I have a pretty similar question about the rules. Please see here:
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=5117884&postcount=257

Anybody has an opinion?

roundiesee
10-14-2010, 10:58 PM
jmnk- thanks for posting your scenario.
I think that since you did inform your opponents that you DID remember all the points you won, and that the correct score should have been 30-40 and not 15-30, you should concede the game (which is what you did- kudos to you :) ) But if let's say that you remembered but then just kept the info to yourself, I think that you could have played on at 30-40. You would not have been wrong I guess to have continued because all players agreed the score of 15-40 when play resumed after your discussion. But I think you REALLY did the right thing to concede the game :)

SweetH2O
10-15-2010, 05:21 AM
In jmnk's scenario, I think they should have gone back to whatever score in the game that they both agreed had been played, even if it's love-love. They didn't do that, but moving on...

I don't think anyone should claim a game unless a point was played in which both players knew it was a game point. The score affects how a point is played out so who knows who would have won a point if the players didn't know it was game point.

Once you both decide to go back to the 15-40 score, that is the score. You shouldn't go back after another point is played and recount points scored and determine a winner. Play out the game from 15-40.

Cindysphinx
10-15-2010, 06:02 AM
Here's JMNK's scenario:

friendly match. Here's what happened:
1. I serve to an ad court thinking the score is 30:40. I do not announce the score loudly, we rarely do.
2. I lose the point.
3. When I'm tossing the balls to the opponent thinking the game is over he says it's 15:40. Meaning he thought it was 15:30 when I was serving.
4. After a brief discussion we can't really recall exactly all the points so we agree to 15:40 score.
5. I win next point (when serving to the deuce court). So now we both assume it is 30:40
6. When I'm about to serve to the ad court I now distinctly remember all the points I won and I'm sure that by now I have won three. Which means that when I was serving to the ad court I was down 30:40 and not 15:30 - so when I lost that point (in step 2) I lost the game.
7. I concede the game to my opponent without playing another point.

Now - if it was an USTA match, what would be the proper ruling? On one hand I definitely lost the game. But we also both agreed to play on after we could not remember the exact score, and we played one point in good faith.

Also, if after step 5 it was my opponent that would be now claiming he has indeed won the game already - would that be any different?

I think that once you decide how to resolve a scoring dispute, that's the end of it. If either party later remembers what happened, you don't do anything about it.

My reasoning is that once there is confusion and a dispute, each player is at equal risk of being cheated out of a point that they earned fair and square. By reaching a compromise, they each are giving up the right to contest the score. Once the compromise has been achieved, neither player ought to be able to go back and claim (or forfeit) the disputed point.

I think your opponent should have declined your offer to give him the game.

jswinf
10-15-2010, 11:09 AM
I know it's not cool, but I prefer it when the server, preparing to serve, announces the score clearly, every time. I do, part of rhythm for me.

JavierLW
10-15-2010, 01:12 PM
I completely agree, and I believe the rules also have this stance on the issue. Therefore by my logic, the OP shouldn't have lost the game since the points played in good faith left the score as "ad in", not "game over". At the point that the correct scoring was remembered, it seems you have no choice but to play that game as "ad" scoring, since you were so far into the game where you would have to cancel points to play "no ad", and the rules don't favor disallowing points played in good faith.

This is somewhat conceptual but "points played in good faith stand" really is a idea that whatever points you play count. I dont think that addresses this issue.

Either way you've played one point. All partys have already agreed that it's no-ad scoring so one point is all it takes to win the game.

Whether they "forgot" or "didnt forget" or called it or not, is besides the point and it just confuses the issue.

Look up the rulebook on mistakes once. If you accidently play a match tiebreak instead of a 3rd set, it clearly says that if you've only played one point, you can easily "change" to playing a 3rd set, since no harm was done at that point. Whether the players "forgot" or not doesnt matter.

This is about the same thing. If you played 2 points however you'd be somewhat more obliged to continue playing a regular ad game.

LuckyR
10-15-2010, 02:16 PM
I'm confused. You are agreeing with OrangePower yet you are saying the score should have been ad in? Because if I read OrangePower corectly he is saying the server actually did win the game?

I agreed with the posting I quoted. If OrangePower concluded from what I quoted from him, that that the OP should have lost the game, IMO that conclusion does not logically flow from the paragraph I quoted. He'd have to answer why it does in his opinion, himself.

LuckyR
10-15-2010, 02:22 PM
This is somewhat conceptual but "points played in good faith stand" really is a idea that whatever points you play count. I dont think that addresses this issue.

Either way you've played one point. All partys have already agreed that it's no-ad scoring so one point is all it takes to win the game.

Whether they "forgot" or "didnt forget" or called it or not, is besides the point and it just confuses the issue.

Look up the rulebook on mistakes once. If you accidently play a match tiebreak instead of a 3rd set, it clearly says that if you've only played one point, you can easily "change" to playing a 3rd set, since no harm was done at that point. Whether the players "forgot" or not doesnt matter.

This is about the same thing. If you played 2 points however you'd be somewhat more obliged to continue playing a regular ad game.


I would agree with your conclusion, but since you mention the "no harm" highlit phrase, I have to differ. Since "no ad" scoring allows the receivers to pick the side of the returner and since all four players, including the server who called the score incorrectly (actually was the one in error), automatically lined up for a called "deuce" point, the OP's case, fails your own test: the "no harm" one you mentioned. Hence "ad in", not "game over".

OrangePower
10-15-2010, 02:32 PM
I agreed with the posting I quoted. If OrangePower concluded from what I quoted from him, that that the OP should have lost the game, IMO that conclusion does not logically flow from the paragraph I quoted. He'd have to answer why it does in his opinion, himself.

Eh? In my original post, I'm saying that the game is over, because the points should stand as actually played. If the points as actually played and won/lost lead to the game being over, which was the case in this scenario, then the game is over.

I think perhaps I caused confusion if my wording was misread as saying that the score *as called out* should stand. But that's not what I meant - I meant if all the players can recollect all the points actually played, and agree on who won which points, then the resultant score should stand, even if different from the score that was called out at some point. But again, only if all players arrive at the same recollection. If there is any dispute about any of the points, then the score as called out should be the basis.

Cindysphinx
10-15-2010, 03:20 PM
I would agree with your conclusion, but since you mention the "no harm" highlit phrase, I have to differ. Since "no ad" scoring allows the receivers to pick the side of the returner and since all four players, including the server who called the score incorrectly (actually was the one in error), automatically lined up for a called "deuce" point, the OP's case, fails your own test: the "no harm" one you mentioned. Hence "ad in", not "game over".

I don't agree, LuckyR.

The thing that was forgotten was receiver's pick of sides. That's all. That alone should not negate the clear agreement that games would be no-ad. The only problem with the no-ad is that the players executed it incorrectly.

Here's a similar example.

In our area, teams play timed matches and the captains must agree on the timepiece beforehand. Say they agree to use a cell phone. As the match wears on, the players forget that the agreement was cell phone so they keep playing by the facility clock on the wall, which is slow. Say one team is barely ahead 3 minutes after time should have been called according to the cell phone, but they then remember that they were using the wrong clock. The match is over, even though the players were momentarily mistaken about the timepiece. And every point played in those last three minutes should count, right?

JavierLW
10-15-2010, 03:36 PM
I would agree with your conclusion, but since you mention the "no harm" highlit phrase, I have to differ. Since "no ad" scoring allows the receivers to pick the side of the returner and since all four players, including the server who called the score incorrectly (actually was the one in error), automatically lined up for a called "deuce" point, the OP's case, fails your own test: the "no harm" one you mentioned. Hence "ad in", not "game over".

Not really because they only lost that "choice" because THEY forgot they were playing no-ad. Whether they pick the deuce side or "forgot" they could play the ad side, they choose to play the deuce side.

Why should they get a second chance at the game just because THEY forgot they were playing no-ad. And it's not reasonably to then point the finger at the server's team for not asking.

The whole argument about how everyone has forgotten and then suddenly remembered is sketchy at best.

For the team that would of otherwise lost the point to stoop to these lame arguments because they cant just stand to lose that game goes against 'played in good faith' as far as Im concerned.

(and Im not saying the OP is doing that, because ultimately they did count the game in the opponents favor and he's merely asking it as a question on this forum)

JavierLW
10-15-2010, 03:39 PM
I would agree with your conclusion, but since you mention the "no harm" highlit phrase, I have to differ. Since "no ad" scoring allows the receivers to pick the side of the returner and since all four players, including the server who called the score incorrectly (actually was the one in error), automatically lined up for a called "deuce" point, the OP's case, fails your own test: the "no harm" one you mentioned. Hence "ad in", not "game over".

Also again if you read the rules and how you fix situations like this, there are TONS of examples like players forget and play on the wrong side, and EVEN that the wrong team or player serves. That can be quite the disadvantage if you should of served but you played a point or even a whole game where the opponent servers.

But guess what? According to the rules those points still stand. Every point "played in good faith" stands....

So clearly just because the receivers didnt play on the side they might of wanted is not all that relevant against "every point played in good faith stands".

LuckyR
10-15-2010, 04:13 PM
Not really because they only lost that "choice" because THEY forgot they were playing no-ad. Whether they pick the deuce side or "forgot" they could play the ad side, they choose to play the deuce side.

Why should they get a second chance at the game just because THEY forgot they were playing no-ad. And it's not reasonably to then point the finger at the server's team for not asking.

The whole argument about how everyone has forgotten and then suddenly remembered is sketchy at best.

For the team that would of otherwise lost the point to stoop to these lame arguments because they cant just stand to lose that game goes against 'played in good faith' as far as Im concerned.

(and Im not saying the OP is doing that, because ultimately they did count the game in the opponents favor and he's merely asking it as a question on this forum)

I guess I am not seeing the OP's situation as the receiving team getting an undeserved second chance since all four players forgot the score, including the server, who actually has the job of knowing the score/scoring. After all, it was the serving team that got the unfair advantage of playing the no ad point AND selecting the side.

I also agree with you that the whole "we just remembered" thing is is quite sketchy sounding. Of course if underhanded play was involved, and you imply there probably was, then it was the serving team who performed it (and profitted from it).

LuckyR
10-15-2010, 04:21 PM
Also again if you read the rules and how you fix situations like this, there are TONS of examples like players forget and play on the wrong side, and EVEN that the wrong team or player serves. That can be quite the disadvantage if you should of served but you played a point or even a whole game where the opponent servers.

But guess what? According to the rules those points still stand. Every point "played in good faith" stands....

So clearly just because the receivers didnt play on the side they might of wanted is not all that relevant against "every point played in good faith stands".

The bolded sentance seems to me, to be a false choice. The point played: deuce in an "ad" game, should stand, that's my point.

Noone is proposing that the deuce point be replayed ie to make that point NOT "stand". So the winner of the point is not in dispute, we all agree the point "stands", the real question is having passed the point of no return in "ad" scoring, do you continue with "ad" scoring or do you go backwards in time and change to "no ad" after the fact? I don't believe the rules support that.

jmnk
10-15-2010, 05:29 PM
thanks to all comments on my rules related question. It appears that there's still no clear conclusion as the rule 'all points played in good faith count' somewhat contradicts (in that scenario) the rule 'once you agree on the score there's no going back'. It is actually very interesting. I would love to hear a certified umpire ruling on this.

roundiesee
10-15-2010, 06:10 PM
The whole argument about how everyone has forgotten and then suddenly remembered is sketchy at best.



No, not at all. This was what actually happened->

We reached deuce on the first game; the server then called "deuce" (so clearly all 4 players forgot about the "no-ad", because normally in the past when we did play no-ad, this same player would normally ask our team to pick sides); we then proceeded to play the first point which our team lost; the server then called, "Ad-in........ oh wait! I thought we were supposed to play no-ad? OK, then it's game to us then"; whereupon the mini discussion started as to what to do, as I politely queried that we should play on as per normal then switch to no-ad in the next game. After a brief consultation with my partner we realised we were mainly at fault for forgetting to remind the server re the no-ad, and it was unanimously decided that the opponents should get that game.

So you see, it was quite clear that all 4 players forgot to institute the no-ad, and none of us "purposely" forgot in order to gain an unfair advantage. Anyway, I would tend to agree that the game should be given to our opponents in this case since we initially agreed on the no-ad rule to begin with.

Is there a rules official amongst us whom we can consult to break this stalemate in our discussion? :)

JavierLW
10-15-2010, 06:18 PM
No, not at all. This was what actually happened->

We reached deuce on the first game; the server then called "deuce" (so clearly all 4 players forgot about the "no-ad", because normally in the past when we did play no-ad, this same player would normally ask our team to pick sides); we then proceeded to play the first point which our team lost; the server then called, "Ad-in........ oh wait! I thought we were supposed to play no-ad? OK, then it's game to us then"; whereupon the mini discussion started as to what to do, as I politely queried that we should play on as per normal then switch to no-ad in the next game. After a brief consultation with my partner we realised we were mainly at fault for forgetting to remind the server re the no-ad, and it was unanimously decided that the opponents should get that game.

So you see, it was quite clear that all 4 players forgot to institute the no-ad, and none of us "purposely" forgot in order to gain an unfair advantage. Anyway, I would tend to agree that the game should be given to our opponents in this case since we initially agreed on the no-ad rule to begin with.

Is there a rules official amongst us whom we can consult to break this stalemate in our discussion? :)

I really meant that just using forgetfulness as a argument is sketchy, not that you didn't truly forget.

There isnt really any stalemate except for LuckyR and he's just plain wrong. :-)

Otherwise someday maybe Woodrow will stop by, he is an official.

JavierLW
10-15-2010, 06:22 PM
After all, it was the serving team that got the unfair advantage of playing the no ad point AND selecting the side.



I don't know if I you can really assume the server chose a side.

The returners are going setup a certain way as well, so it's just as much their responsibility as anyone else. The server is just going to serve to whoever is ready to return, they have no obligation to ask what side the returner want's to serve on.

JavierLW
10-15-2010, 06:27 PM
The bolded sentance seems to me, to be a false choice. The point played: deuce in an "ad" game, should stand, that's my point.

Noone is proposing that the deuce point be replayed ie to make that point NOT "stand". So the winner of the point is not in dispute, we all agree the point "stands", the real question is having passed the point of no return in "ad" scoring, do you continue with "ad" scoring or do you go backwards in time and change to "no ad" after the fact? I don't believe the rules support that.

You're talking about going backwards in time and changing it to "no ad" just because people forgot it was supposed to be "no ad"? That's sketchy...

The point does stand either way, but you seem to think the outcome should stand just based on not what is AGREED UPON but that people "forgot" what they are doing.....

Nobody agreed to play by advantage scoring they just all forgot for a moment.

That's like if it was 40-30, and I win the point and for whatever dumb reason everyone thinks I have to serve another point to win until they manage to catch me before I serve after I call "60-30"? Should we change the rules of the game just because we all went brain dead for a second???

LuckyR
10-18-2010, 08:52 AM
No, not at all. This was what actually happened->

We reached deuce on the first game; the server then called "deuce" (so clearly all 4 players forgot about the "no-ad", because normally in the past when we did play no-ad, this same player would normally ask our team to pick sides); we then proceeded to play the first point which our team lost; the server then called, "Ad-in........ oh wait! I thought we were supposed to play no-ad? OK, then it's game to us then"; whereupon the mini discussion started as to what to do, as I politely queried that we should play on as per normal then switch to no-ad in the next game. After a brief consultation with my partner we realised we were mainly at fault for forgetting to remind the server re the no-ad, and it was unanimously decided that the opponents should get that game.

So you see, it was quite clear that all 4 players forgot to institute the no-ad, and none of us "purposely" forgot in order to gain an unfair advantage.

The bolded part is the answer to post #44

As to #45, I agree with your conclusion on your analogy, though the analogy doesn't fit the OP's situation.

JavierLW
10-18-2010, 10:56 AM
The bolded part is the answer to post #44

As to #45, I agree with your conclusion on your analogy, though the analogy doesn't fit the OP's situation.

It's not the answer because you were not there:

You dont know if the returners setup before the server got there. By the time the server calls the score, then that's already been established and there is no requirement for the server to ask what side to serve on.

Unless you think that somehow "deuce" is not the proper terminology in which case you are wrong because even in no-ad scoring when you pick the ad side, it's still called "deuce". (as defined in the rules which do address no-ad scoring)