When your partner has the better view but you see it as "in"

[tfm1973]

if i hit a shot and my opponents call it OUT or if they call it IN -- doesn't matter. heck it's their call. and yes if they conflict -- tie goes to me.

what infuriates me is when they don't make ANY call. you sit there for a couple of seconds or sometimes til they serve and you're like -- WELL WAS IT IN?! I CAN'T READ YOUR MIND!

even worse if they huddle together and try to discuss how to cheat me out of a point. LOL.

i need to drink less coffee.

[tbini87]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

I dunno, tbini. I see what I see, I call what I see. If I'm looking, I'm more likely to see.

It seems to me that the most important thing is accuracy. If I see it in, I will call it in.

I've played a fair amount of tennis, and this is the first time I have had this issue come up repeatedly. It didn't recur the second time we played. In all instances, we got the calls right. I'm OK with that.

that makes sense that you see what you see, and call it! i also agree that accuracy should come first. however, your posts make it seem as if you are trying to watch the ball all the time, so that you can make a call. at some point i would have a problem with a partner who didn't let me make my calls. thats fine if they see it, but i see it too, so let me make the call. i would also want my partner more worried about being involved in the point and not worried about making my calls, they usually have enough other stuff to worry about. that is all.

[tbini87]

Originally Posted by tfm1973

if i hit a shot and my opponents call it OUT or if they call it IN -- doesn't matter. heck it's their call. and yes if they conflict -- tie goes to me.

what infuriates me is when they don't make ANY call. you sit there for a couple of seconds or sometimes til they serve and you're like -- WELL WAS IT IN?! I CAN'T READ YOUR MIND!

even worse if they huddle together and try to discuss how to cheat me out of a point. LOL.

i need to drink less coffee.

i don't get the first part, what if they call it out but you saw it clearly in?

i totally agree with the second part... if they don't make a call i assume it was in. if they don't make a call, i will ask "that shot was in right?". if they say no, i will let them know that they need to make an out call then, because no call in my book means the ball was good.

and there is no way i am letting people huddle up to make a call! i can't believe people actually do that!

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by tbini87

that makes sense that you see what you see, and call it! i also agree that accuracy should come first. however, your posts make it seem as if you are trying to watch the ball all the time, so that you can make a call. at some point i would have a problem with a partner who didn't let me make my calls. thats fine if they see it, but i see it too, so let me make the call. i would also want my partner more worried about being involved in the point and not worried about making my calls, they usually have enough other stuff to worry about. that is all.

Nah, I'm not watching the ball all the time so I can make a call. That would get me beaned in the back of the head a whole lot, huh?

I might glance toward my partner as the ball travels toward her at the baseline, sometimes. I am hoping to be aware of what is happening on the court at all times, and glancing back or over at her is helpful in some circumstances.

If my partner and I are beaten, I watch where the ball lands so I can help call it, no matter our respective positions on the court. And when the situation is reversed (I am the one struggling to make the shot), I appreciate it when my net partner pays attention to where the ball bounces in case I can't see it.

And yes, people do the "huddle" thing TFM described. It's annoying.

[Steady Eddy]

Originally Posted by tfm1973

what infuriates me is when they don't make ANY call. you sit there for a couple of seconds or sometimes til they serve and you're like -- WELL WAS IT IN?! I CAN'T READ YOUR MIND!

I've given a name for this in the hope that the name might call attention to the method. Sometimes, I think they'd like to call it out, but they've waited too long. It would look real weird to wait 5 seconds and then say, "out". But, if they're the serving team, this thought occurs to them, they don't have to make a call. They'll just add this point to the score when they announce it. Thus, I dub this "server's surprise". I can feel when it's about to happen, so often I'll say, "Score?". That nips it in the bud. But if they say something like "15-30", (when it's really love-40), then I'll interupt to say isn't it love-40. Then they'll say, "We won that point." So I'll say, "Oh, I never heard a call." They still get the point this way, but it will keep them from doing it again. Let's stop "server's surprise".

[blakesq]

Cindy, what if you are that net, and your partner is at the baseline, and the ball lands near the baseline, and your partner is unable to get to the ball. If your partner clearly sees it "out", and you clearly see it "in" (it looks like it caught the edge of the line to you, but remember you are about 35 feet away from the ball, and your partner is about 4 feet away), are you going to call it "in"? Don't you think your partner has a better view of the ball? Could it be possible that even though you think it is in, that since you are 35 feet away, you may be wrong, and your partner may be right?

I think in the above case, you have to let your partner make the call. And if you pipe up and make a signal that it was "in", then you have lost the point based on your calling the ball in from 35 feet away, effectively overruling your partner who is 4 feet away.

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

If my partner and I are beaten, I watch where the ball lands so I can help call it, no matter our respective positions on the court. And when the situation is reversed (I am the one struggling to make the shot), I appreciate it when my net partner pays attention to where the ball bounces in case I can't see it.

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by blakesq

Cindy, what if you are that net, and your partner is at the baseline, and the ball lands near the baseline, and your partner is unable to get to the ball. If your partner clearly sees it "out", and you clearly see it "in" (it looks like it caught the edge of the line to you, but remember you are about 35 feet away from the ball, and your partner is about 4 feet away), are you going to call it "in"? Don't you think your partner has a better view of the ball? Could it be possible that even though you think it is in, that since you are 35 feet away, you may be wrong, and your partner may be right?

I think in the above case, you have to let your partner make the call. And if you pipe up and make a signal that it was "in", then you have lost the point based on your calling the ball in from 35 feet away, effectively overruling your partner who is 4 feet away.

Blake, for me to call a ball in when my partner is closer, I have to be certain it was in. Most times, I do not know, and clipping the outside of the line would be the sort of thing I couldn't see from far away. That seems to be the disconnect you and I are having. It *is* possible to be certain and correct on a good call even if your partner is closer.

I say anyone who says it is always impossible to be certain a baseline ball was in from a position at the net isn't trying hard enough. If such a ball bounces inside the baseline, the net player can sometimes be certain it was in. Being certain it was out is much tougher, because it is hard to exclude the possibility that it caught a bit of the outside line.

I think the Code supports me on this. The Code cautions that players have to be crazy careful about calling balls out when they are in a bad position (looking across a line, far away). But even then, the Code knows it is not impossible for a player in a disadvantageous position to make a line call with certainty and accurately. The Code says any player can call a ball out the player clearly sees as out.

Now, I do not go around calling balls out from a disadvantageous position. That's not cool because you're not giving benefit of the doubt to the opponent, and it's a good way to get into a fight. But if I am certain a ball is in, I will call it in.

As for my partner . . . well, some people are so into the moment that they "wish" a ball out. Some people are just not so hot at calling lines for whatever reason. And some people just . . . well, it's just not in their nature to give the benefit of the doubt like they should, right? Those people must be out there, as people at TW complain about them constantly!

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by Steady Eddy

I've given a name for this in the hope that the name might call attention to the method.

Outstanding!

Let's stop "server's surprise".

Yes, let's.

You know, when I play clinics, the pros will admonish people who ask "Was that out (or in)?" The prevailing wisdom seems to be that a failure to make a call means the ball was good, so you shouldn't ask, you should just assume. But this approach doesn't prevent Server's Surprise, does it?

Me, I ask for the call. Right away. I can't help it. I hate not knowing the score, and I can't mentally prepare for the next point unless I know what happened with the last.

[blakesq]

I wonder Cindy, if you are certain that a ball is in, and your partner is certain it is out, who is correct? Is there any chance, that if you are certain a ball hit the line, that you may be wrong? Any chance at all? Does that chance go up if your partner is certain the ball is out?

Me, I make the best call I can. But if the ball looks on the line to me, it may look 1/2 inch out to my opponent. REasonable people can disagree on call.

The scenario I gave you above (where you are at the net, and your partner is at the baseline), is one reason I think you shouldn't call balls "in", especially if your partner has a better view of the ball, because even though you may be "certain", a reasonable person can realize that she can still be wrong, especially if she is 30 feet away from the ball.

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

Blake, for me to call a ball in when my partner is closer, I have to be certain it was in. Most times, I do not know, and clipping the outside of the line would be the sort of thing I couldn't see from far away. That seems to be the disconnect you and I are having. It *is* possible to be certain and correct on a good call even if your partner is closer.

I say anyone who says it is always impossible to be certain a baseline ball was in from a position at the net isn't trying hard enough. If such a ball bounces inside the baseline, the net player can sometimes be certain it was in. Being certain it was out is much tougher, because it is hard to exclude the possibility that it caught a bit of the outside line.

I think the Code supports me on this. The Code cautions that players have to be crazy careful about calling balls out when they are in a bad position (looking across a line, far away). But even then, the Code knows it is not impossible for a player in a disadvantageous position to make a line call with certainty and accurately. The Code says any player can call a ball out the player clearly sees as out.

Now, I do not go around calling balls out from a disadvantageous position. That's not cool because you're not giving benefit of the doubt to the opponent, and it's a good way to get into a fight. But if I am certain a ball is in, I will call it in.

As for my partner . . . well, some people are so into the moment that they "wish" a ball out. Some people are just not so hot at calling lines for whatever reason. And some people just . . . well, it's just not in their nature to give the benefit of the doubt like they should, right? Those people must be out there, as people at TW complain about them constantly!

[Steady Eddy]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

Me, I ask for the call. Right away. I can't help it. I hate not knowing the score, and I can't mentally prepare for the next point unless I know what happened with the last.

I hate it too. This happens where I play. They don't like to call serves. So I hit a 1st serve that looks out by inches. Silence. I go to the net. Then I'm told, "Serve was out." I believe them but... Okay, this happens alot. Then I hit a 1st serve, just out. I get ready for the 2nd serve, but the ball comes cross court. "Wasn't the serve out?" "Oh, no, that one was good."

BTW, you'll know it's me if you ever play in AZ and some guy announces the score every point whether he's serving or not. It avoids arguments about the score, it keeps my partner into it, and it shows that someone's been paying attention if everyone else forgets the score. Maybe you'd want to try it?

[raiden031]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

Boy, Raiden. If you and I were playing and you signaled good and then tried to take it back, we'd have a real problem. Every time I see it, I stroll toward the net. By the time I get there, I expect my opponents to have given me the point. If they don't, I say something like, "I'm sorry, but Becky saw it good and Susie called it out, so it's our point." Their only escape is for Becky to tell a bald-faced lie, and I haven't met anyone yet who is willing to do it.

It's all academic anyway, though. If you are sure you saw it good but didn't use a hand signal, you'd own up to that and overrule your partner. That's true of everyone here, right?

Why would Becky have to lie? If she didn't see where it landed she might make a signal for good. So if you think the ball is out and one of your opponents is 100% certain it is out and the other opponent made the signal for good and admitted it was only because they didn't see where it hit, you still think they should concede the point?

Anyways, I don't think this situation is documented well in the rules and is open for interpretation.

[Cindysphinx]

OK, Blake. I mean, I meant to explain that in the scenario you provided, it is unlikely that I would call the ball in or out. I would say nothing, 'cause if I'm not sure and my partner is better positioned, I would defer to her call.

The operative words there being "I'm not sure."

Anyway, as you say, it is quite possible that one partner can be absolutely sure the ball was in, while the other partner can be 100% certain it was out. (Especially so at the higher levels when the ball is traveling much faster).

It sounds like your position (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that in that situation, it is best to defer to the closer player and have the ball called out.

Me, I think it is best to defer to whoever is seeing the ball absolutely, clearly, undoubtedly in, regardless of court position. That whole "benefit of the doubt" idea, doncha know.

If either partner is uncertain, that partner shouldn't be calling anything and should instead turn and ask their partner (who hopefully already signaled in or out, so as to avoid The Dreaded Huddle). If neither saw it clearly out, it was good.

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by raiden031

Why would Becky have to lie? If she didn't see where it landed she might make a signal for good.

Raiden, I may be unusual, but I don't make a hand signal for out unless I am sure it was out, and I don't make a hand signal for in unless I am sure it was in. If I make a signal or shout a call, it is because i am making a call, not because i don't know what happened. I've honestly never heard of such a thing.

So if you think the ball is out and one of your opponents is 100% certain it is out and the other opponent made the signal for good and admitted it was only because they didn't see where it hit, you still think they should concede the point?

If I saw the ball as clearly out, I am obligated under the Code to call it out myself regardless of what my opponents do.

But say I didn't get a good look. Now it is up to my two opponents. If one made the signal for good and explained she did this because she didn't see where the ball landed . . . how weird! I'd have to ask her to explain herself, because doubles partners who don't see the ball land usually don't make a call and ask their partners.

Are you talking about a situation where the ball hits and there's a short delay but no call from one player, so the other player signals good because she didn't see her partner wave a finger in the air or they had some other miscommunication?

I'm talking about a real "good" signal: The immediate "safe" signal from baseball or the immediate palm downward.

I'm just confused by your question, maybe . . .

[tbini87]

Originally Posted by Steady Eddy

BTW, you'll know it's me if you ever play in AZ and some guy announces the score every point whether he's serving or not. It avoids arguments about the score, it keeps my partner into it, and it shows that someone's been paying attention if everyone else forgets the score. Maybe you'd want to try it?

i do that sometimes too depending on the game! if those i am playing with don't call the score, or can be forgetful, or try to get free points here and there i don't mind keeping the correct score for everyone. announcing the score every point is a great idea imo. i wish the server always took care of it... but that certainly isn't the case.

[Steady Eddy]

Originally Posted by tbini87

i do that sometimes too depending on the game! if those i am playing with don't call the score, or can be forgetful, or try to get free points here and there i don't mind keeping the correct score for everyone. announcing the score every point is a great idea imo. i wish the server always took care of it... but that certainly isn't the case.

That makes me feel better. I know in baseball the shortstop and catcher are responsible for informing the others on how many outs there are. Sure, there might be a scoreboard, but it's important for everyone to know when there are two outs. Here are situations in which people often get the score wrong: the serving team jumps ahead 30-love, then drops 3 points in a row. If they haven't been announcing the score, they will often say 40-30. When I correct them, they look at me weird, so I'll say, "That's right, you just dropped 3 in a row." That usually convinces them. The other is if they get ahead 3-0 in games. If they proceed to drop the next 4 in a row. After the change, they'll say, "Let's see, 4-3" If losing track of points is bad, what about losing track of entire games?

[alecspade]

Not reading the responses, but its the person who has the better line of sight to make the call. You are making a call from across the court which you should pretty much NEVER do unless you are calling it out and you see it clearly out (meaning you see the green between the ball and line). I pretty much never make IN calls from across the court and always defer to my partner.

This happened on our mixed doubles team when the female called several shots out (which she had the better angle for) and her partner overruled her. She told me later that she felt it made her look like she was either cheating or incompetent in making calls and took her out of her game.

[raiden031]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

Raiden, I may be unusual, but I don't make a hand signal for out unless I am sure it was out, and I don't make a hand signal for in unless I am sure it was in. If I make a signal or shout a call, it is because i am making a call, not because i don't know what happened. I've honestly never heard of such a thing.



If I saw the ball as clearly out, I am obligated under the Code to call it out myself regardless of what my opponents do.

But say I didn't get a good look. Now it is up to my two opponents. If one made the signal for good and explained she did this because she didn't see where the ball landed . . . how weird! I'd have to ask her to explain herself, because doubles partners who don't see the ball land usually don't make a call and ask their partners.

Are you talking about a situation where the ball hits and there's a short delay but no call from one player, so the other player signals good because she didn't see her partner wave a finger in the air or they had some other miscommunication?

I'm talking about a real "good" signal: The immediate "safe" signal from baseball or the immediate palm downward.

I'm just confused by your question, maybe . . .

I guess the issue we are debating is how to interpret the 'good' signal. I treat a good signal different than an 'out' signal because you are required to call the ball out (unless it is completely obvious), wheras saying nothing is equivalent to making a good call. Plus you call a ball out when you are 100% certain, whereas any other level of certainty results in the ball being good. In singles if I do not see where the ball landed and I think it might be close, as a way to prevent confusion by my opponent I will signal a good call. In doubles I will do the same thing, but wait for my partner to make a possible out call first just to prevent any confusion between us. Some people might make the good call without realizing their partner made an out call and that of course can cause problems. I truly think that what is stated in the code does not address this specifically and thats why I disagree with you and a number of other posters and its all because of the difference between an 'out' call and a 'good' call.

I agree 100% that if a partner questions his partner's out call, then the opponents should get the point.

[10sguy]

Originally Posted by Steady Eddy

I hate it too. This happens where I play. They don't like to call serves. So I hit a 1st serve that looks out by inches. Silence. I go to the net. Then I'm told, "Serve was out." I believe them but... Okay, this happens alot. Then I hit a 1st serve, just out. I get ready for the 2nd serve, but the ball comes cross court. "Wasn't the serve out?" "Oh, no, that one was good."

BTW, you'll know it's me if you ever play in AZ and some guy announces the score every point whether he's serving or not. It avoids arguments about the score, it keeps my partner into it, and it shows that someone's been paying attention if everyone else forgets the score. Maybe you'd want to try it?

Steady Eddy, if you and I ever play (as partners or opponents), please don't call the score when I'm serving . . . UNLESS I (or my partner when he/she is serving) fail to call out the score before serving. To do so when others have not demonstrated an unacceptable level of carelessness about calling the score out can be irritating and, to some, can be perceived to border on OCD.
NOTE: I say this respectfully (oh yes, it's "30 - all")

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by raiden031

I guess the issue we are debating is how to interpret the 'good' signal. I treat a good signal different than an 'out' signal because you are required to call the ball out (unless it is completely obvious), wheras saying nothing is equivalent to making a good call. Plus you call a ball out when you are 100% certain, whereas any other level of certainty results in the ball being good. In singles if I do not see where the ball landed and I think it might be close, as a way to prevent confusion by my opponent I will signal a good call. In doubles I will do the same thing, but wait for my partner to make a possible out call first just to prevent any confusion between us. Some people might make the good call without realizing their partner made an out call and that of course can cause problems. I truly think that what is stated in the code does not address this specifically and thats why I disagree with you and a number of other posters and its all because of the difference between an 'out' call and a 'good' call.

I agree 100% that if a partner questions his partner's out call, then the opponents should get the point.

Raiden, you're right that singles and doubles are different on "good" calls. In singles, a prompt good call is perfectly appropriate just to say "I can't call it out, and I want to communicate with you because so there is no miscommunication about my call." I mean, it's very easy to miss an opponent's out call, especially if their back is to you.

Doubles is different. There is no reason for the prompt good call in doubles unless you are affirmatively calling the ball good and plan to stand by your call. If you didn't see the ball clearly in, what are accomplishing by giving a good signal given that you have a partner to help you?

I'd be interested to hear what those with experience as roving officials would do with a situation where a doubles player admits to having given a good signal when partner gave an out signal. Would they take that as evidence of disagreement, or would they allow the player who gave the good signal to take it back or explain it away? Or would they say that good signals are meaningless under the Code?

Anyone?

[Steady Eddy]

Originally Posted by 10sguy

Steady Eddy, if you and I ever play (as partners or opponents), please don't call the score when I'm serving . . . UNLESS I (or my partner when he/she is serving) fail to call out the score before serving. To do so when others have not demonstrated an unacceptable level of carelessness about calling the score out can be irritating and, to some, can be perceived to border on OCD.
NOTE: I say this respectfully (oh yes, it's "30 - all")

You mean like on your toss? No, I don't say the it during the toss. I say it after the point ends, in a conversational voice, to my partner. Ever have a guy say, "What's the score?", then say, "No, that's not it."? That's annoying. Then you have to reconstruct all the points to their satisfaction. Better to agree on the score before each point. Ever have a guy say after the set, "Lets see, if I only lost my serve once, and..." You've won the set, but now have to win it again by reconstructing every game from 0-0 to 6-3? And even if you can do this, they say, "Ok, I'll let you have it." If a player wants to zone out, fine. But then waive your right to argue the score.