Lesser Known Tennis Rules

[tenniscasey]

Originally Posted by uk_skippy

How many people can answer this Q (correctly)?

I serve a 1st serve fault, and my opponent breaks a string while returning it?

What's my next serve? Another 1st serve, or a 2nd serve?

Actually, without looking at Friend of Court or any other links, I'd think it depends - if he keeps on playing with the same racket, so there's no delay, second serve. If he trades out equipment, first serve.

[Big_Dangerous]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

If any player hears a net cord, that's it. It doesn't matter whether anyone else hears it.

Which is why I don't like it when my partners say, "Did anyone hear a let?" If you heard a let, call it. If not, say nothing.

That's almost as infuriating as jackasses who offer to play a let on the basis of not seeing the ball, or claiming that the lights made it tough on them... I also hate it when on a close call they ask me for my opinion. As if I'm going to call my own shot that's relatively close out...

I'm wondering about the reaching over the net rule. That one I'm not to clear on. I know you can't touch any part of the net until or unless the ball double bounces or is out, but what about reaching over the net. I played a guy a few weeks ago who would play super aggressively at the net. Like he was literally a few inches away from the net, really hugging that *****. I'm pretty sure he reached over a few times. I ended up just lobbing him and won the match in straights.

[jswinf]

^^^Reaching over the net is one of those things a player has to call on themselves, like playing a ball after a second bounce. You can't call it against them. As we know, many players aren't good at calling things against themselves. You can gripe about it, and maybe they won't do it again...

Speaking of calling things on yourself, if you hit a shot that was close but you're sure it was out and your opponent asks your opinion, say it was out! Actually you should do this without being asked, with the exception that you can't call your own first serve out. Of course, many players aren't good at calling things against themselves...

[NTRPolice]

Originally Posted by jswinf

Speaking of calling things on yourself, if you hit a shot that was close but you're sure it was out and your opponent asks your opinion, say it was out! Actually you should do this without being asked, with the exception that you can't call your own first serve out. Of course, many players aren't good at calling things against themselves...

I thought it was a "rule" or "code" that if if they defer the call to you that they have to accept whatever you say? Usually if they ask me what I thought I really think the ball was out, or barely in. When I hit a bad shot I can almost feel it and know its going out/wide and im more surprised when the ball goes in instead of going out. I've had people ask me before and I usually say "I'll believe you if you call it out." and most people dont take that the wrong way.

I've found more people calling good balls as out and being 100% sure of the call than people who are 50% sure and ask/trust their opponent. Whenever someone asks me about what I thought on a ball that I hit I rarely do think that ball went in. I've never been asked my opinion on a line call for a ball that I hit that was obviously in.

Originally Posted by Big_Dangerous

That's almost as infuriating as jackasses who offer to play a let on the basis of not seeing the ball, or claiming that the lights made it tough on them... I also hate it when on a close call they ask me for my opinion. As if I'm going to call my own shot that's relatively close out...

I dont like it when people complain about me playing long serves back over the net because these people are the same ones who want to play a let for a ball they called out but later reversed. I would rather those people just "cheat" and not offer a ridiculous "courtesy let" for a point that they should have lost according to the rules of tennis.

Of course the degree on which I will play a long serve varies on the speed of the serve and how hard I hit it over the net.

[PhrygianDominant]

Originally Posted by Big_Dangerous

I'm wondering about the reaching over the net rule. That one I'm not to clear on. I know you can't touch any part of the net until or unless the ball double bounces or is out, but what about reaching over the net. I played a guy a few weeks ago who would play super aggressively at the net. Like he was literally a few inches away from the net, really hugging that *****. I'm pretty sure he reached over a few times. I ended up just lobbing him and won the match in straights.

I am fairly certain you are allowed to reach over the net. Touching is a foul, but you can cross the net with arm or racquet as long as you do not touch it.

The old British Dude (OBD) on Eurosport once did this to John McEnroe at Wimbledon:

McEnroe hit a dropshot/slice with so much backspin that after bouncing on OBD's side of the net returned to his own. OBD was prepared however, and reached over the net with his racquet, and hit the ball into McEnroe's side of the net. Point OBD. McEnroe was not amused.

EDIT: I don't know OBD's name, but he comments on Eurosport International all the time, I am too lazy to google it. I summarized his account of that anecdote in the post above. Taken from some of his commentary.

EDIT: after googling I am not sure I recounted that story right. If the OBD in question was David Mercer, he may have been talking about a match he officiated, rather than played, in which case the opponent remains a mystery. However, the point about the net stands.

[NTRPolice]

Originally Posted by PhrygianDominant

I am fairly certain you are allowed to reach over the net. Touching is a foul, but you can cross the net with arm or racquet as long as you do not touch it.

The old British Dude (OBD) on Eurosport once did this to John McEnroe at Wimbledon:

McEnroe hit a dropshot/slice with so much backspin that after bouncing on OBD's side of the net returned to his own. OBD was prepared however, and reached over the net with his racquet, and hit the ball into McEnroe's side of the net. Point OBD. McEnroe was not amused.

EDIT: I don't know OBD's name, but he comments on Eurosport International all the time, I am too lazy to google it. I summarized his account of that anecdote in the post above. Taken from some of his commentary.

EDIT: after googling I am not sure I recounted that story right. If the OBD in question was David Mercer, he may have been talking about a match he officiated, rather than played, in which case the opponent remains a mystery. However, the point about the net stands.

I believe you can only reach over the net and play the ball on the opposite side if the ball has already come to your side of the court. A super spin shot close to the net does have the ability to bounce on your side, then spin back to their side. If you do not touch the ball, you lose the point. You would then have to reach over, but not touch the net, touch the ball with your racket and the ball has to land in the court.




Another little known rule in tennis: Your ball does not have to clear the net for you to score a point. You can go around the net as low as you'd like provided you do not hit any permanent fixtures.

In the case above, its possible for the spin to pull the ball way wide and outside of the net post. It's then legit to hit the ball into the court without going over the net itself provided the ball lands in play.

There is no rule that requires the ball to go "over" the net, just restrictions that the ball cannot go "through" the net (broken net tape stitching; hole in the net; squeezing through the net and the net post) ect. The ball can definitely go around the net.

[stapletonj]

The rule, put quite simply, is this.

You CANNOT reachover the net AT ANY TIME, before, during or after contact with the ball, with one exception.

In the proverbial super backspin drop shot which hits, bounces, and comes back over to the other players side before bouncing the second time, you CAN and MUST reach over and at least touch the ball (WITHOUT TOUCHING THE NET) before it bounses the second time.

[McLovin]

Originally Posted by stapletonj

The rule, put quite simply, is this.

You CANNOT reachover the net AT ANY TIME, before, during or after contact with the ball, with one exception.

Bolded part is 100% totally incorrect. You are allowed to 'follow through' over the net, provided contact with the ball happened on your side of the net. Period. Obviously, if you touch the net, or your racquet touches the ground on the other side of the court before the point is over, you lose the point.

But, you are correct in 'reaching over' if the ball bounced on your side & spun back over onto your opponent's side of the net.

[McLovin]

Here's one for you (this happened to me & I looked the answer up, BTW):

Your 1st serve was a fault, but the opponent did not clear the ball from the court and it is sitting inside the lines of play. During the point, your shot hits the ball on the court, and both balls go flying into the air. Your opponent unknowingly plays the wrong ball & hits a winner. Who's point is it?

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by Big_Dangerous

I also hate it when on a close call they ask me for my opinion. As if I'm going to call my own shot that's relatively close out...

The Code:

"Requesting opponent’s help. When an opponent’s opinion is requested and
the opponent gives a positive opinion, it must be accepted. If neither player has an opinion, the ball is considered good. Aid from an opponent is available only on a call that ends a point."

Really, it isn't that complicated. If you saw it out, say so. If you saw it in, say so. If you aren't sure, say so, which means it was good.

No need to worry about how the ball came off your racket or any of that. Just say what you saw.

[Fusker]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

The Code:

"Requesting opponent’s help. When an opponent’s opinion is requested and
the opponent gives a positive opinion, it must be accepted. If neither player has an opinion, the ball is considered good. Aid from an opponent is available only on a call that ends a point."

Really, it isn't that complicated. If you saw it out, say so. If you saw it in, say so. If you aren't sure, say so, which means it was good.

No need to worry about how the ball came off your racket or any of that. Just say what you saw.

Exactly - anything other than that approach is gamesmanship, or worse, cheating.

[spot]

You said 2 different things in one sentence so lets split them out.

Originally Posted by NTRPolice

Of course the degree on which I will play a long serve varies on the speed of the serve.

This is fine if unless you meant that you will play long serves if they are going slow and you think that you can tee off on them. Then you in a grey area between cheating and gamesmanship. But props to you if you think that you play more serves out the harder they are hit.

Originally Posted by NTRPolice

Of course the degree on which I will play a long serve varies on ... how hard I hit it over the net.

This is flat out cheating. You can't decide whether to call a serve out based on how well you make contact.

[NTRPolice]

Originally Posted by spot

You said 2 different things in one sentence so lets split them out.



This is fine if unless you meant that you will play long serves if they are going slow and you think that you can tee off on them. THen its in a grey area between cheating and gamesmanship.



This is flat out cheating. You can't decide whether to call a serve out based on how well you make contact.

You are a clown.

Firstly: You double quoted the same thing, but then offered two responses.

Secondly: When a ball comes over the net at 100 mph and it "looks" like its going 1 ft. long you are going to send the ball back over the net just out of habit. It's too close to just let it go and the ball is too fast to to make a call before your racket hits it. When you play against someone with a 100+ mph serve you'll know exactly what im talking about.

Thirdly: We're not talking about me drilling balls into the net person off a 50 mph serve that went a ft. long and then trying to claim the point.


I know you're trying to look smart my illustrating me as a cheater but its clear you have no idea what im talking about. There is no reason to hit a ball that's going 50 mph and is 1 ft. long back over the net. There is plenty of reason to play a 100+ ball that is 1 ft. long back over the net because that ball is coming over so fast that you cant possibly expect to let it go and make the call every single time.

That's a common practice in high level tennis. I want to be clear that im not talking about drilling a 50 mph 1 ft. long serve and then calling the ball good for a point... im talking about returning a 1 ft. long fast serve (100+ mph) back over and then calling the ball long is common practice and rarely abused.

You keep talking about "i'll know someday" but every post you write tells me otherwise.

[spot]

Firstly: You double quoted the same thing, but then offered two responses.

You need to read more closely. You said 2 very different things. And I did edit before you responded to say that if you were saying that you were playing more serves the harder than they were hit then good for you. It simply wasn't clear from your quote which one you were talking about. There are certainly people who are more willing to play a first serve if they get a ball that they like which is in a grey area between cheating and gamesmanship. Choosing whether to play a ball based on how hard you hit it back over the net is unquestionably cheating.

[Big_Dangerous]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

The Code:

"Requesting opponent’s help. When an opponent’s opinion is requested and
the opponent gives a positive opinion, it must be accepted. If neither player has an opinion, the ball is considered good. Aid from an opponent is available only on a call that ends a point."

Really, it isn't that complicated. If you saw it out, say so. If you saw it in, say so. If you aren't sure, say so, which means it was good.

No need to worry about how the ball came off your racket or any of that. Just say what you saw.

It doesn't say you have to offer an opinion or that if you think it's out you have to say anything. Also, the point is that when you are across the net you really don't have the best vantage point to make a call. There have been plenty of times where I've thought shots I hit were in, and yet were called out, especially along the baseline.

[Big_Dangerous]

Originally Posted by McLovin

Here's one for you (this happened to me & I looked the answer up, BTW):

Your 1st serve was a fault, but the opponent did not clear the ball from the court and it is sitting inside the lines of play. During the point, your shot hits the ball on the court, and both balls go flying into the air. Your opponent unknowingly plays the wrong ball & hits a winner. Who's point is it?

It's your point because it was his responsibility to clear the ball and he had the opportunity to, but he declined.

There's no let for that unless a ball from an adjacent court came into your court during a point in play, but in that case someone has to call a let immediately. Let's say during a point in play, a ball rolls into your opponent's side of the court. You both just keep playing and then your opponent makes an error. Your opponent cannot then claim a let, because he chose to play the point.

[Big_Dangerous]

Originally Posted by NTRPolice

I believe you can only reach over the net and play the ball on the opposite side if the ball has already come to your side of the court. A super spin shot close to the net does have the ability to bounce on your side, then spin back to their side. If you do not touch the ball, you lose the point. You would then have to reach over, but not touch the net, touch the ball with your racket and the ball has to land in the court.




Another little known rule in tennis: Your ball does not have to clear the net for you to score a point. You can go around the net as low as you'd like provided you do not hit any permanent fixtures.

In the case above, its possible for the spin to pull the ball way wide and outside of the net post. It's then legit to hit the ball into the court without going over the net itself provided the ball lands in play.

There is no rule that requires the ball to go "over" the net, just restrictions that the ball cannot go "through" the net (broken net tape stitching; hole in the net; squeezing through the net and the net post) ect. The ball can definitely go around the net.

How come I've seen pro matches where players have hit the net post and it bounces off and lands in, and they call it good?

[NTRPolice]

Originally Posted by Big_Dangerous

How come I've seen pro matches where players have hit the net post and it bounces off and lands in, and they call it good?

If its doubles, its good.

If its singles, its a dead ball and a loss of point provided singles sticks are being used (and in a "pro match" they would be).

What you bolded was not related to your question. What you bolded was about the ball going around the net, lower than the height of the net, which is a good ball.

The ball cannot squeeze through a hole in the net or the side of the net between the net and the net post.

[blakesq]

Server's point as soon as the ball hits the ball on the court. It is receiver's responsibility to clear balls on his side of the net.

Originally Posted by McLovin

Here's one for you (this happened to me & I looked the answer up, BTW):

Your 1st serve was a fault, but the opponent did not clear the ball from the court and it is sitting inside the lines of play. During the point, your shot hits the ball on the court, and both balls go flying into the air. Your opponent unknowingly plays the wrong ball & hits a winner. Who's point is it?

[spot]

Originally Posted by NTRPolice

If its doubles, its good.

If its singles, its a dead ball and a loss of point provided singles sticks are being used (and in a "pro match" they would be).

Here is a singles match at the US Open where Mayer hit the post and the ball is good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-C0KZEG5Z0