Doubles rules question
- Thread starter joeri888
- Start date
Carolina Racquet
Professional
After the 1st point and every 4 points thereafter.
Thank you. Why do they changeover after 1 point? Doesn't make sense to me really. In the singles they don't change over on uneven points.
Your "legend" status makes me question whether you really need an answer, but.....
changing sides at 1 then every four keeps each player serving in their same location as during the set.
It is the Coman(spelling) tie break.....
legend status has to do with number of posts
has nothing to do with content or knowledge
aphex
Banned
Dr. Fedace has "Guru" status...this should tell you something..
In my case, it's got everything to do with both.
I don't mean changeover as in the service changing over (which is always done at uneven points, which is logical. I don't understand why they change at uneven points. OR I don't understand why they don't do it in singles.
ncgator
Rookie
USTA matches started using the Coman tiebreak rules in 2010 where you change after the first point and then every four points after that. This change was made for both doubles and singles, set tiebreaks and match tiebreaks (10 pointers). The change makes more sense for doubles matches since it keeps players serving from the same side and facing the same conditions (sun, wind) as they did during the set (i.e. if a doubles player served from the 'north' side of the court during the set, the player would continue to serve from only that side during the tiebreak).
Thank you. I thought the person meant common (because he said spelling behind it), and I didn't know a Comman tiebreak.
But thanks for the answer.
W
woodrow1029
Guest
Are you talking about ATP/WTA doubles, or USTA League doubles?
In ATP/WTA and a regular match tiebreak, they switch just like in a set tiebreak, after every 6 points.
In the Coman tiebreak which is used I think pretty exclusively in USTA League play, it is after the first point, then every 4 points from then on.
In ATP/WTA and a regular match tiebreak, they switch just like in a set tiebreak, after every 6 points.
In the Coman tiebreak which is used I think pretty exclusively in USTA League play, it is after the first point, then every 4 points from then on.
Thank you. I was talking about the ATP. i don't play tennis myself, nor am I from the USA. I was wondering, because I was watching the super tiebreak in chennai final. So it's just every six points?
W
woodrow1029
Guest
Yes, just every 6 points just like a regular tiebreak.
I dislike the coman tiebreak. I thought it was coleman. Never saw it in writing before. I just heard it spoken and I misheard.
I understand but disagree with the point that it "makes sense" in doubles if you have a lefty and a righty playing together. I kind of like changing the end I serve from during the tiebreak. Kind of makes it fun. I think coman tiebreak is a huge waste of time. Way too much changing sides.
I understand but disagree with the point that it "makes sense" in doubles if you have a lefty and a righty playing together. I kind of like changing the end I serve from during the tiebreak. Kind of makes it fun. I think coman tiebreak is a huge waste of time. Way too much changing sides.
athiker
Hall of Fame
I agree on days where the sun/wind is not a factor then it does seem pretty silly changing so much during a USTA Coman tiebreak, but on those days where the sun is a factor, it seems unfair to play 6 straight points facing the sun, especially in a 7 point set tiebreaker, and the Coman is more equitable. I don't care if I serve from the same spot, side or whatever, but I do care if I'm serving into the sun or hitting an overhead facing the sun.
I'm kind of surprised the pros haven't changed but I've never heard even a mention of it for ATP/WTA matches. I thought maybe the U.S. Open might institute it as it is so closely tied to the USTA. However the USTA only changed last year as I recall so maybe we'll hear something about it in the next few years.
For the righty playing with lefty advantage, I don't see what's so tough about serving from both ends of the court in the tiebreak only. I play singles and doubles, and singles players don't get to do all their serving from only the end of their choice. I actually ENJOY getting in a long doubles tie break and having to serve from the other end a few times. I think it's pusillanimous to only be able or willing to serve from just one end. I don't care what the conditions are. Adapt. It makes it more fun.
Forget the righty/lefty combo thing for a moment:
As for the change at 1 and then every 4 vs change at 6, I say
I don't really think 6 points in a row from only one end is unfair. It's still hard to win 6 in a row even with wind/sun advantage. Plus, then you change sides for the next six so it even out pretty good. It's really cool when you exceed 12 points and change at least twice. I've played on some really bad courts that face right into the sun at sunrise and sunset. It's pretty terrible on one end. You can still hold serve from that side. You can still break from that side. I can even say there's more pressure to win games and TB points on the good side, because if/when you do lose that mini break and change sides, you're into the sun and in some trouble. It's weird, but the other day I played a match in those conditions and the person on the so called bad end kept winning each game. Maybe it was mental.
Forget the righty/lefty combo thing for a moment:
As for the change at 1 and then every 4 vs change at 6, I say
I don't really think 6 points in a row from only one end is unfair. It's still hard to win 6 in a row even with wind/sun advantage. Plus, then you change sides for the next six so it even out pretty good. It's really cool when you exceed 12 points and change at least twice. I've played on some really bad courts that face right into the sun at sunrise and sunset. It's pretty terrible on one end. You can still hold serve from that side. You can still break from that side. I can even say there's more pressure to win games and TB points on the good side, because if/when you do lose that mini break and change sides, you're into the sun and in some trouble. It's weird, but the other day I played a match in those conditions and the person on the so called bad end kept winning each game. Maybe it was mental.
Sorry. I guess I'm a little confused / old fashioned regarding this "whole internet thing". Why would you bother to chat/reply/post almost 7 times per day t osomething you don't play.
I'm not being flippant here. It just seems odd to me.
Per your own posting - my content is elementary and knowledge is only slightly better....
Joer - not "calling you out" just a surprise.....
W
woodrow1029
Guest
Last time I checked, tennis playing was not a prerequisite to joining this forum.
Whoa.... I'm not trying to be "that guy". I just thought it a bit odd. I'm glad to know that this site holds people who have such a high level of non playing interest.
Let me be more clear: Joelr, I apologize if I offended you in any way. I just thought it odd, as I stated above.
If you've got this level of interest(aal the posts), pick up a racquet! It is a great sport! And, every once in a while, ATP chair umpires keep the discussion focused.....
athiker
Hall of Fame
I'm confused how it can both be better and worse to face the sun at the same time...more pressure on the good side yet in "trouble" on the bad side. I'll take the pressure side.
True one may squander the "good" side but it still doesn't make it advantage to start on the "bad" side IMHO. The bad side is still the bad side. I agree its difficult to win 6 straight points even on the good side, in what to that point had been an even 6-6 match. But even 5-1 or 4-2 is extra pressure...only a few points from a loss. Especially if you switch on your serve and only have one serve on the good side before giving 2 serve opportunities to your opponent. Of course when conditions are neutral, or close to it, all the switching gets to feel pretty silly.
Its not crazy unfair, but in certain conditions I think it is a statistically significant advantage. The Coman helps, but doesn't eliminate everything either. Nothing beats playing it out till one person wins a set by 2 games or playing a 3rd set instead of a match tiebreaker. Unfortunately that's not always practical depending on the situation. Nonetheless, its tough to play 12 games to a draw and then let a 7 point tiebreaker determine the winner...even when the conditions are neutral for that matter. Not the end of the world...just tough!
I'm confused how it can both be better and worse to face the sun at the same time...more pressure on the good side yet in "trouble" on the bad side. I'll take the pressure side.
..........
Well, you not in trouble on the bad side unless you went down a mini break while on the good side. That's what is bad. In extreme conditions, you better win as many points as possible on that better side. It really sucks to go down a late break in the set, or mini break in a TB and then change to the terrible side.
For me in the ONE particular match I mentioned, both me and my opponent seemed to concentrate more while on the bad side and relax on the good side. That's how, strange as it seems, we won more games with the low sun blasting in our eyes and fewer games with it at our backs.
W
woodrow1029
Guest
Whoa.... I'm not trying to be "that guy". I just thought it a bit odd. I'm glad to know that this site holds people who have such a high level of non playing interest.
Let me be more clear: Joelr, I apologize if I offended you in any way. I just thought it odd, as I stated above.
If you've got this level of interest(aal the posts), pick up a racquet! It is a great sport! And, every once in a while, ATP chair umpires keep the discussion focused.....
I was only playing around.
No offense meant.Similar threads
