2-Players, 1-racquet between them

[Taxvictim]

Originally Posted by OrangePower

...You win the tourney with 4 defaults. Would you consider this a good / desirable result?

No, and something similar happened to me. Bye in the first round, default in the second round, and I lost in the finals 6-0, 6-1. I won only one game, no sets, and no matches, yet came in second place.

[Angle Queen]

Can't find it at the moment, but isn't there some rule about both doubles players having to essentially be "on the court" (so that the guy "standing on the sidelines" wasn't quite correct)?

And, I think you can "leave" the court to ask someone else for a racquet...you're just subject to "time penalties" if you take too long (20 sec between points and 90 seconds on changeovers). I think I'd risk making the opponents assess that penalty to ask someone, anyone for another stick.

But I'm with most of the folks here, if I'd had an extra (and I usually do)...I'd fork it over unless they'd been jerks earlier in the match or on a prior event. Clearly, someone who'd broken their strings/racquet by abuse wouldn't get that courtesy...but an innocent string-break....I doubt I'd give it a second thought.

[gmatheis]

I live my life how I want to live my life and I try not to tell others how to live theirs because I wouldn't want them telling me how to live mine.

In that spirit I would have gladly offered one of my own sticks to my opponent and I have actually done that in the past, But if I were in this person's situation I would perhaps ask if I could borrow a racket but I wouldn't expect it and certainly wouldn't hold anything against them if they didn't want to lend a racket out.

You never know their reasoning ... perhaps they lent one out once and the guy broke it, or maybe they really don't want someone else's sweat on their grip. But does it really matter? it's their racket and I would not feel entitled to use it just because I failed to prepare.

The only thing I agree with this post was the team trying to still play with only one racket ... never give up

[tenniscasey]

I bring two rackets to my matches. I wouldn't loan out my backup. And I've never seen a point to bringing three with me... I don't think I'm powerful enough to break two sets of strings in one day!

[wings56]

honestly, i think it was more poor sportsmanship for the team with the broken strings to have the nerve to ask the other team for a racquet. its like saying a person is wrong for not giving money to a panhandler on the street. series of bad choices that have lead them to their own demise.

[tenniscasey]

Originally Posted by gmatheis

You never know their reasoning ... perhaps they lent one out once and the guy broke it, or maybe they really don't want someone else's sweat on their grip. But does it really matter? it's their racket and I would not feel entitled to use it just because I failed to prepare.

Sounds silly probably, but I agree with this. Those overgrips don't stay tacky for terribly long, and they aren't a 5-second operation to replace.

[Larrysümmers]

i keep a wooden racket in my bag for this reason. if they need to use a racket, thats the only one ill lend out.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by OrangePower

Huh?!? Whether you take the default or not, you are only guaranteed the opportunity to play one match - either this one, or if you take the default, the next one. The opportunity to actually play more than one match requires you to first win a match by non-default. On the other hand, the maximum number of matches you have the chance to play is reduced by one if you take the default.

Sorry I somehow though this match was almost over before the strings broke.

In any case, by taking the default, I am putting myself in a better position of winning the next one and playing more matches.

[tamdoankc]

What would happen if you let an opponent borrow your spare and then you end up popping your string? Curious

[North]

Originally Posted by tamdoankc

What would happen if you let an opponent borrow your spare and then you end up popping your string? Curious

Yeah, would you then have to default cos you didn't have a racquet? Would you take your racquet back & have the opponent default?

One poster mentioned what I've seen many people do - keep a third racquet to lend that is wood, crappy old thing, very demanding heavy racquet with minuscule sweet spot, etc.

[TennisDawg]

The other team should have offerred up a racquet. So, everybody kinda loses as no real match was played, IMO. I thought flex leagues, where supposed to be ......oh yeah flexible.

[Mongolmike]

Originally Posted by OrangePower

See, I don't get that thinking. Not a criticism of you, since others feel the same way as you also. But I just don't get it. We are all rec players. We play to have fun and get excercise. Getting a win without actually playing just seems completely pointless.

Let's take an extreme example: You're in a tourney (USTA NTRP - no prize money). Let's say 16 entries / 4 rounds. By some cosmic coincidence, each opponent you are supposed to face ends up defaulting. You win the tourney with 4 defaults. Would you consider this a good / desirable result?

Not a desirable win.
I understand your point, but I also agree with Brad Gilbert's book and concept- to always be prepared... and this has nothing to do with rec play... but in a league or tourney... be prepared. Extra racquet, hat, sunblock, water, etc.

Let me be more detailed... if I'm in a league or tourney match and the opponent breaks a racquet/string and does not have a replacement, I am not lending mine.... however, I will give him time to get a replacement (within reason). Even if it takes 5 minutes... I'm ok with that. If it is league or tourney, someone will have an extra to lend him.

[Mongolmike]

Originally Posted by OrangePower

See, I don't get that thinking. Not a criticism of you, since others feel the same way as you also. But I just don't get it. We are all rec players. We play to have fun and get excercise. Getting a win without actually playing just seems completely pointless.

Let's take an extreme example: You're in a tourney (USTA NTRP - no prize money). Let's say 16 entries / 4 rounds. By some cosmic coincidence, each opponent you are supposed to face ends up defaulting. You win the tourney with 4 defaults. Would you consider this a good / desirable result?

Again, this is meant as conversational, not criticism... so here's a scenario for you...

Tournament, you're playing doubles. Opponent breaks a string. He uses a light weight racquet. His partner uses a heavy leaded stick. You also use a light racquet. Opponent complains about now having to use an unfamiliar heavy stick. Do you offer your back-up light weight stick? If so, good for you. If not, why not? And if opponent does use an unfamiliar heavy stick, do you "go easy" on him? Why not?

I think part of it is a mindset... I don't play "win at all costs"... because to me that denotes things like calling close shots out, or delay tactics, etc. But I expect an opponent to be properly prepared to play a match... and bringing just one stick is not being prepared. Not bringing water onto a court in hot weather is not being prepared. I don't appreciate that. Bringing two sticks to a match (which is all I bring) is a common level of readiness IMO.

Now, guy brings two sticks, breaks strings in both... again, I'll wait. If it is a league, he has 7 other mates... one of them has an extra. At a tourney... there are hundreds of people there, including the organizers... someone has an extra, and I'm not gonna hold him to a 20 second/90 second timeline.'

You know, I just thought of something else, and here is my defining line... if it is a league or a tourney, and I am playing against a friend... or even a past opponent who I think is a good guy/good opponent.... yes, I will offer my back-up. So for me, I guess the level of relationship with the opponent factors in also.

[volleygirl]

Originally Posted by Larrysümmers

i keep a wooden racket in my bag for this reason. if they need to use a racket, thats the only one ill lend out.

HAHAAH That is hilarious. Dont know if youre serious or not but it made me bust out laughing. Make sure that racquet has a wornout overgrip on it as well.

[sureshs]

Do you think if Nadal broke strings on all his frames Federer would lend him one of his frames? I don't think so. Under these conditions, the player has to default.

[OrangePower]

Originally Posted by Mongolmike

Again, this is meant as conversational, not criticism... so here's a scenario for you...

Tournament, you're playing doubles. Opponent breaks a string. He uses a light weight racquet. His partner uses a heavy leaded stick. You also use a light racquet. Opponent complains about now having to use an unfamiliar heavy stick. Do you offer your back-up light weight stick? If so, good for you. If not, why not? And if opponent does use an unfamiliar heavy stick, do you "go easy" on him? Why not?

I think part of it is a mindset... I don't play "win at all costs"... because to me that denotes things like calling close shots out, or delay tactics, etc. But I expect an opponent to be properly prepared to play a match... and bringing just one stick is not being prepared. Not bringing water onto a court in hot weather is not being prepared. I don't appreciate that. Bringing two sticks to a match (which is all I bring) is a common level of readiness IMO.

Now, guy brings two sticks, breaks strings in both... again, I'll wait. If it is a league, he has 7 other mates... one of them has an extra. At a tourney... there are hundreds of people there, including the organizers... someone has an extra, and I'm not gonna hold him to a 20 second/90 second timeline.'

You know, I just thought of something else, and here is my defining line... if it is a league or a tourney, and I am playing against a friend... or even a past opponent who I think is a good guy/good opponent.... yes, I will offer my back-up. So for me, I guess the level of relationship with the opponent factors in also.

I agree with you that opponent should be better prepared, and that if he breaks a string and has no backup, it's up to him to find a replacement, ideally from a partner or teammate.

So in your scenario, I would expect my opponent to make the adjustment and play with his partner's heavy stick. In this case, he is paying a price for being unprepared, but we still are able to play.

However, if there is no other alternative and it comes down to either lending my stick or having the opponent default, I would lend my stick. There is a degree of selfishness involved here - I want to play a match after all!

[OrangePower]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Do you think if Nadal broke strings on all his frames Federer would lend him one of his frames? I don't think so. Under these conditions, the player has to default.

Nadal and Federer are playing for their livelihood, not for recreation.

Not a good analogy - unless you are a professional player yourself?

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by OrangePower

Nadal and Federer are playing for their livelihood, not for recreation.

Not a good analogy - unless you are a professional player yourself?

I know ... I was exploring the extremes

[anubis]

If its a friendly match, I'd give them one of my backups. If it's a USTA or ladder match, I think I'd also lend them one of mine.

But if it was a tournament, I don't think I would. Tournaments imply future games, and therefore the need for reliable equipment. If I go deep in a tournament, I may play two or three matches in a two day period. I have to consider my future needs.

[smoothtennis]

Originally Posted by OrangePower

See, I don't get that thinking. Not a criticism of you, since others feel the same way as you also. But I just don't get it. We are all rec players. We play to have fun and get excercise. Getting a win without actually playing just seems completely pointless.

Let's take an extreme example: You're in a tourney (USTA NTRP - no prize money). Let's say 16 entries / 4 rounds. By some cosmic coincidence, each opponent you are supposed to face ends up defaulting. You win the tourney with 4 defaults. Would you consider this a good / desirable result?

LOL, funny you should mention this - I own a nice Men's Open consolation piece of hardware that I won this way - first round loss, and defaults all the way to the trophy. Not a good result. But the picture frame is cool.