This thread needs an SQL DELETE statement.No.
This thread needs a poll.
To make tennis immediately better:
No lets. No ad.
Volleys and overheads count for 2 points.
Wood racquets only and no poly strings.
Surely less injuries than on hard courts!have a new surface, uhm carpet?
You don't like good tennis (c)
I love good tennis that's why I want to see more net play.
Wow, all of these are incredibly dumb. Good job!Tennis and new rules
The best idea is this: Services would be allowed from a level with the shoulder at the highest. That was in use in the very beginning of tennis. The overhead serve was unknown. Back to the roots. Players are much taller nowadays!
My 2nd best proposal is smaller service courts like this:
New court
3malli.net
My 3rd best idea "to slow down the game" is to paint service boxes of hard courts with rougher sand paint than the rest of the court. Then slowing would concern only a little while when serving (exactly before returning!). Nothing eise would change but the returner could get hold of the fast serve more easily.
My 4th idea would be to move the service line in the direction of the net with 1 yd. The old service line would be retained for recreational players and women.
1. Only 1 let serve. the next serve that touches net is a live ball.
2. no tossing serve and catching it more than once in a game, and no more than twice in a set (eff the sun and fans)
I can agree with that.1. All lets are faults.
2. Catching a tossed serve is a fault.
Tennis and new rules
The best idea is this: Services would be allowed from a level with the shoulder at the highest. That was in use in the very beginning of tennis. The overhead serve was unknown. Back to the roots. Players are much taller nowadays!
My 2nd best proposal is smaller service courts like this:
New court
3malli.net
My 3rd best idea "to slow down the game" is to paint service boxes of hard courts with rougher sand paint than the rest of the court. Then slowing would concern only a little while when serving (exactly before returning!). Nothing eise would change but the returner could get hold of the fast serve more easily.
My 4th idea would be to move the service line in the direction of the net with 1 yd. The old service line would be retained for recreational players and women.
We could see 30 points more rallies (at least 5 strokes) in a long set. Is it 200 strokes more per set than today? Quite lively death, I would say....These changes will kill tennis. It's great as it is.
We could see 30 points more rallies (at least 5 strokes) in a long set. Is it 200 strokes more per set than today? Quite lively death, I would say....
The tennis court was only a human invention for humans at that time and the result of many compromises 150 years ago.the courts are never going to change.
The tennis court was only a human invention for humans at that time and the result of many compromises 150 years ago.
Rackets and players have changed, balls have changed at least in color, court surfaces have changed. Even the outfits have changed. The rules have also been changed.
All in all, in 150 years the whole world has changed "little". Archimedes once said that everything else changes but not the numbers and the relationships between them. If he were still alive, he would probably be reminded that the dimensions of the service areas of the tennis courts are also unchanged ....
It is possible but only if the service boxes would be moved to the backcourt. Otherwise the one and only serve is too stressing for the server and too easy for the returner!That needs to change. And banishing the 2nd serve.
Of course they can play tennis that way, but worse. Who would be interested in bad tennis?Let's see if people can play a 1HBH.
Maybe some clarification needed:We could see 30 points more rallies (at least 5 strokes) in a long set. Is it 200 strokes more per set than today? Quite lively death, I would say....
We need round robin grand slams and replace all deciding sets with match tiebreaks.
I’d rather see lets being played than be faults if a change is really required. That way they are at least the same as any other point of the match when the ball hits the net and goes over.1. All lets are faults.
2. Catching a tossed serve is a fault.
Why complicate? If the serving is too stressful for the server it will be for the returner too in the next game!It is possible but only if the service boxes would be moved to the backcourt. Otherwise the one and only serve is too stressing for the server and too easy for the returner!
Short review: Yes, you also need to lift the net in that situation, maybe as much as 40 cm.
Of course they can play tennis that way, but worse. Who would be interested in bad tennis?
There should be one 500 level tournament a year where the players must use a wood frame and gut strings. Points double for the tournament to encourage participation.Wood racquets only and no poly strings.
It could not be any GRAND Slam without at least 16 players, which is still only one eighth of the current number of players. Using the Round Robin draw, 16 players should play together 120 matches during two weeks. So there would be eight matches per day and everybody has one match in every day.We need round robin grand slams and replace all deciding sets with match tiebreaks.
The most supported proposal for a rule change seems to be "get rids of lets". That's not a counter-suggestion to my message #1, but one of the NextGen rules.Only good things can happen from removing lets.
@Markus Kaila idea that some slam is going to be decided by a net cord dribble is really far fetched. You almost never see lets dribble over as it is so the chances of it happening specifically on a championship point are going to be very slim.
Eliminating lets will speed the game up a lot and also make it more exciting, to watch and play both. This rule change really needs to happen.
The most supported proposal for a rule change seems to be "get rids of lets". That's not a counter-suggestion to my message #1, but one of the NextGen rules.
I have already expressed my opinion on possible drawbacks concerning at least tennis without the umpire. Besides, and of course, my example about the peculiar ace in the end of the GS final is quite theoretical.
But what are the benefits then? Speeding up the game? Apparently, there is a lot of faith in it. How would the current situation change if there were no lets on serve? Nowadays in the long sets are played maybe 90 points. The second serve begins perhaps one third of the points, something 20-40 times.
The let serve is some kind of "unofficial" second serve (just like that!). How many of them are there? I probably overestimate when writing here five in one set. If the "right" second serves would take five minutes (=30*10s 2nd serves) in a set, accepting the let serve would save time one tiny minute per set and per hour!
I don't think that one minute is worth the rule change. But if that is what some say, then I won't bother resisting such a small thing. No doubt it would be the MNRCOAT (most negligible rule change of all time)!
Im sure someones mentioned not being allowed to catch your ball toss as a potential rule change!? The only issue being loud noises during the toss.
Why don't these speeders want the same solution in the case of the let toss, although it would take less time? If one minute saved time would be fine then 1 min 30 s is still 50% more.
Hey, one moment! But I had an idea here. Doubles need new refreshing innovations. I think that there ought to be differencies as much as possible between doubles and singles. My idea would be to release doubles from its present straitjacket, and removing the let serve would suit well.So it speeds up the game and adds some exciting points as well.