To Bend or Not to Bend?

[Hooooon]

Originally Posted by AlpineCadet

LOL. No one in their right mind would stop/hinder a ball like that from landing onto the ground first.

I'm talking about the obvious fly balls that have zero chance of being good, where you are standing many feet behind the baseline. Getting a technical call on the rules from stopping that type of ball is just abuse of the rules, when we ALL know it's long/out. Sour grapes.

i very narrowly agree... the point is that letting a ball go out is easier than stopping it and there are obvious, legitimate reasons for the rule. you're arguing an isolated incident, which is a very small compromise to make for a good rule.

[AlpineCadet]

Originally Posted by Hooooon

i very narrowly agree... the point is that letting a ball go out is easier than stopping it and there are obvious, legitimate reasons for the rule. you're arguing an isolated incident, which is a very small compromise to make for a good rule.

I guess you can narrowly agree, lol. But first off, there are many times where a ball flies long, and there are also many others times where the ball lands very close to the lines. Secondly, what would you do if you and I were playing singles, and I launched a ball that had no chance of going into the court. You are well behind the baseline, and, for some odd reason, you just stop the ball (because both YOU AND I know it's out.) How would you feel if your opponent, me, claims that point? I agree with your other post, that if it's a close call, the you should let it land first. But if the ball is clearly sailing...

Also, did you read post 18? Maybe that will help paint a better picture of why I feel this way.

[fe6250]

Originally Posted by Hooooon

i very narrowly agree... the point is that letting a ball go out is easier than stopping it and there are obvious, legitimate reasons for the rule. you're arguing an isolated incident, which is a very small compromise to make for a good rule.

The point is how one handles the rule - not what the rule states. It isn't about whether the rule is a good rule or not. It's about how tightly does one enforce rules. Do you call it on them or not? It IS ultimately up to you to decide whether or not to enforce that rule - even according to the rules - in most amateur events. Let's face it - at 4.5 and above, I doubt this is much of an issue at all. In the lower levels of tennis - people don't even know the rules sometimes and make honest mistakes.

[Hooooon]

Originally Posted by AlpineCadet

I guess you can narrowly agree, lol. But first off, there are many times where a ball flies long, and there are also many others times where the ball lands very close to the lines. Secondly, what would you do if you and I were playing singles, and I launched a ball that had no chance of going into the court. You are well behind the baseline, and, for some odd reason, you just stop the ball (because both YOU AND I know it's out.) How would you feel if your opponent, me, claims that point? I agree with your other post, that if it's a close call, the you should let it land first. But if the ball is clearly sailing...

Also, did you read post 18? Maybe that will help paint a better picture of why I feel this way.

there is a 0% chance i would stop a ball like that. maybe it's because i play more than you, but if i want to win a point i understand that my opponent has to miss a shot or i have to hit a winner. do you see basketball players stop balls "on their way" out of bounds? someone made a good point about "gimmies" in golf...

[AlpineCadet]

Originally Posted by Hooooon

there is a 0% chance i would stop a ball like that. maybe it's because i play more than you, but if i want to win a point i understand that my opponent has to miss a shot or i have to hit a winner. do you see basketball players stop balls "on their way" out of bounds? someone made a good point about "gimmies" in golf...

I guess it's just pointless to repeat what I mean, haha. BTW, I don't think you play more than 5 times a week.

[Hooooon]

Originally Posted by AlpineCadet

I guess you can narrowly agree, lol. But first off, there are many times where a ball flies long, and there are also many others times where the ball lands very close to the lines. Secondly, what would you do if you and I were playing singles, and I launched a ball that had no chance of going into the court. You are well behind the baseline, and, for some odd reason, you just stop the ball (because both YOU AND I know it's out.) How would you feel if your opponent, me, claims that point? I agree with your other post, that if it's a close call, the you should let it land first. But if the ball is clearly sailing...

Also, did you read post 18? Maybe that will help paint a better picture of why I feel this way.

i'd be mad at myself for breaking the rule, not you for enforcing it

[Hooooon]

Originally Posted by AlpineCadet

I guess it's just pointless to repeat what I mean, haha. BTW, I don't think you play more than 5 times a week.

and if i do will your bottom be sore?

[AlpineCadet]

Originally Posted by Hooooon

i'd be mad at myself for breaking the rule, not you for enforcing it

So when does logic come into play? The rule is there for another reason, like hindrance of a point, and not for abuse.

[Hooooon]

Originally Posted by AlpineCadet

So when does logic come into play? The rule is there for another reason, like hindrance of a point, and not for abuse.

the rule is there to stop cheating. if you can't stick to that rule, find a better use for your 5 days/week

[AlpineCadet]

You obviously have tunnel vision. Though I'm just trying to explain my POV. Thanks for the recommendation though!

[Joeyg]

You either play by the rules or not. They are there for a reason and it is not up to anyone to selectively enforce which rules they like. Especially in USTA league matches.

[kylebarendrick]

The first time someone caught a ball that was sailing way long, I'd say something along the lines of "You really need to let that bounce next time, technically I could claim the point since you touched it before it went out". In that instance I'd let them have the point.

If they respond with "sorry, I didn't know that" then everything is cool. If they respond with "don't be a jerk, it was way out" then I'd know we're in for an unpleasant match.

[Supernatural_Serve]

Originally Posted by Joeyg

You either play by the rules or not. They are there for a reason

Totally agree with that and some of those reasons aren't always obvious or intuitive or based on common sense.

Originally Posted by Joeyg

and it is not up to anyone to selectively enforce which rules they like. Especially in USTA league matches.

No. I don't agree with that.

Several years ago, a guy showed up late to a tournament match, I was offered to take 3-0 in the first set by the tournament organizer, technically according to the time rules, I could have demanded the entire first set. I said, "No" to both of those and I lost and the opponent was very appreciative after sitting in traffic/accident or something. So, what. He got destroyed in the next round anyway, and so would I

Talk about deciding not to enforce the rules and ruling against onself. It just wouldn't have felt right to me not to play the entire match.

You can selectively choose to not enforce rules as long as it isn't to your benefit like the common ones people have talked about: opponents foot faults, catching balls, etc.

As I've said, its opponents who think that they can use whatever rationale they want including common sense to demand or bully someone into rules that don't exist or to expect a rule in their favor and make a stink if they don't get what they want, that I have a problem with. That's wrong.

[10sguy]

Consider this: It's quite apparent YOUR shot will land well beyond the opponent's baseline; your opponent catches it in midair and you let it slide. NOW, this happens several times . . . so have you set a lax/casual precedent by letting it previously slide? Now your opponent may well feel no hesitation to catch ANY ball which COULD conceivably be out. You have potentially created a very uncomfortable situation for yourself by overlooking the letter of the rule.

I like, and have used Kyle's first paragraph example above: "The first time someone caught a ball that was sailing way long, I'd say something along the lines of, 'You really need to let that bounce next time, technically I could claim the point since you touched it before it went out.' In that instance I'd let them have the point."

Personally, I was playing in a National USTA league event many years ago when our opponent caught a ball which looked like it was going long. I didn't hesitate for a second; I claimed the point. The opponent had a short hissy fit but his partner told him I was right. From my perspective (I knew (myself well enough), I knew darned well that had I not (rightfully) claimed that point and had lost that particular game, I would have had a very tough time getting that out of my mind for the rest of the match. (note: my partner and I won the match, our team won that match, 2 - 1 . . . and I never regretted my action, not for one second.

FINAL NOTE: You can probably apply this example to any "technical" rules violation one decides to occasionally ignore. It's really simple; always play by the rules (LEARN THEM) . . . you'll have more fun - and possible help others do the same (by politely educating them).

[AlpineCadet]

Originally Posted by Hooooon

the rule is there to stop cheating. if you can't stick to that rule, find a better use for your 5 days/week

Exactly. If the ball is in FACT going long (10 feet beyond the baseline--think of a lob) and you claim the point just because someone stopped it from hitting the fence, then YOU are cheating--knowing full well that the ball is going LONG, yet enforcing that specific rule. That rule is there to stop hindrances of points, and not for blatant cheating!

[Hooooon]

Originally Posted by AlpineCadet

Exactly. If the ball is in FACT going long (10 feet beyond the baseline--think of a lob) and you claim the point just because someone stopped it from hitting the fence, then YOU are cheating--knowing full well that the ball is going LONG, yet enforcing that specific rule. That rule is there to stop hindrances of points, and not for blatant cheating!

wrong (you are a dense one). by stopping a ball before it lands out you are volleying the ball, therefore playing it. by catching or stopping it you are missing a shot.

[AlpineCadet]

Originally Posted by Hooooon

wrong (you are a dense one). by stopping a ball before it lands out you are volleying the ball, therefore playing it. by catching or stopping it you are missing a shot.

And I'm the one who's dense? There's a lot more to stopping the ball than those reasons. Think about it. (Maybe because the ball is obviously out, and there is no way in h*ll that it will go in?) Use your imagination, certain shots will obviously be out, and stopping them shouldn't be penalized. Period.

I haven't attacked you once, yet you are throwing around insults. Guess the truth hurts.

[Supernatural_Serve]

Originally Posted by AlpineCadet

Use your imagination, certain shots will obviously be out, and stopping them shouldn't be penalized.

You have to agree that its not your decision to violate the rule and expect someone to go along with it. You can request, hope, and ask someone to go along with it. But, they aren't obligated. This is where you are wrong: the expecting others to go along with your rule violation as if their opinion is meaningless is how the game gets cheapened. You also disrespect your opponent by thinking this way and bringing this attitude to the court.

You may not see it this way, but people who thrive on gamesmanship generally probe their opponent in various ways to see what they can get away with, people who like to do irritating things, disrespect their opponent and the game, etc.

Its your opponents decision not yours to overlook you catching the ball. And like most of the people have said, they WILL overlook it the first time but ask that you not do it again.

Last season in USTA, I watched a guy throw a mild fit when I said we weren't going to play a match on hard courts with balls made for clay courts. He thought I was being ridiculous. No, I had a can of balls for hard courts and said we will play with these instead. After some absurd banter, I simply asked, "why would you not want to play with balls made for hard courts? what's so special about those clay court balls?"

Let's say someone hits some incredibly offensive shot, you barely get your racquet on it, send the weakest floater imaginable back and the guy in perfect position, you are way out of position, he trips and falls and can't make a play on the ball.

Is it cheating, gamesmanship, or being a poor sport to claim the point? No. Would it be absurd for the guy who tripped to make a scene? Yes. Would it be absurd for him to ask for a let? Not really, but its not his decision to expect and demand a let. Its his opponent's decision.

Then, imagine that scenario at a tournament at set or match point in a close tie breaker.

[AlpineCadet]

Originally Posted by Supernatural_Serve

You have to agree that its not your decision to violate the rule and expect someone to go along with it. You can request, hope, and ask someone to go along with it. But, they aren't obligated. This is where you are wrong: the expecting others to go along with your rule violation as if their opinion is meaningless is how the game gets cheapened. You also disrespect your opponent by thinking this way and bringing this attitude to the court.

You may not see it this way, but people who thrive on gamesmanship generally probe their opponent in various ways to see what they can get away with, people who like to do irritating things, disrespect their opponent and the game, etc.

Its your opponents decision not yours to overlook you catching the ball. And like most of the people have said, they WILL overlook it the first time but ask that you not do it again.

Last season in USTA, I watched a guy throw a mild fit when I said we weren't going to play a match on hard courts with balls made for clay courts. He thought I was being ridiculous. No, I had a can of balls for hard courts and said we will play with these instead. After some absurd banter, I simply asked, "why would you not want to play with balls made for hard courts? what's so special about those clay court balls?"

Let's say someone hits some incredibly offensive shot, you barely get your racquet on it, send the weakest floater imaginable back and the guy in perfect position, you are way out of position, he trips and falls and can't make a play on the ball.

Is it cheating, gamesmanship, or being a poor sport to claim the point? No. Would it be absurd for the guy who tripped to make a scene? Yes. Would it be absurd for him to ask for a let? Not really, but its not his decision to expect and demand a let. Its his opponent's decision.

Then, imagine that scenario at a tournament at set or match point in a close tie breaker.

Trolling aside, if you and I both (among everyone else on the court) knows that the ball is sailing out by miles (from experience of course) and your opponent stops the "out ball" from landing, then it's generally accepted that it is 100% OKAY to intercept the ball. We all know where that specific ball is going to land, capice? Are you with me so far? Good. (I am talking about an OBVIOUS line-call here, if you are at all confused.)

If you want to strictly talk about the USTA rules, then if the ball is going out, then it should land before a call is made. I agree 100% with that rule. But that specific rule was invented to prevent players from obstructing the ball from bouncing--cheating your opponents out of a decent/fair call. But if everyone knows that the LONG-SAILING NO-CHANCE-IN-H*LL ball is going to land outside the lines, then it is logically/rationally accepted that it is fine to stop a sailing "out" ball. If you want to argue against this, then there is obviously a hitch in your logic. I am talking about out-balls. If you played enough, then you'd surely agree with me. Other than that, and politics aside, I don't see how you can argue against this point and get away with it. Please stroke your ego somewhere else.

[AlpineCadet]

Originally Posted by spiderman123

The question is not bending the rule when it seems reasonable to you but when it seems logical and the advantage lies with your opponent (e.g. when the opponent is standing 4 feet behind the baseline, reaches above his head and catches the ball.)

At that point, do you say "I am going to give you a point this time but this is not allowed." or do you say "(ha-ha) My point."

How does everyone NOT read this post, when it is in fact at the very first page, at the top?