barringer97
Semi-Pro
I have played tennis my whole life, including in college, and I never, ever thought of this.
Funny.
Funny.
I have played tennis my whole life, including in college, and I never, ever thought of this.
Funny.
exactly; I've never seen anyone want anything different.This might be the issue on which what feels intuitively proper varies the most from "The Code." My thinking is "what will keep play moving the quickest?" Letting the ball hit my back fence or hitting it into the net (in singles) so that I will likely have to further delay the second serve by taking 10 seconds to retrieve it (coupled with the realities of playing on public courts and/or ones without fences between them, so loose balls all over the court can be a hassle....interrupt play on adjacent courts, you risk having your ball stolen/mistaken, etc.) makes "The Code" feel relatively impractical here. When I am playing doubles, I almost always dump a return of an out serve into the net for my partner to pick up. But in singles, bunting it back to the server is generally what I prefer done to me and what I generally do as well.
stapleton- the problem is that people think that they have the skill to bunt the ball directly to the net person or to the server but when they miss it causes a significant delay.
How about this- you can bunt the ball back to the other team but every time you miss and someone has to deal with a stray ball you give the other team 2 serves. That sounds fair- and I think that given those guidelines that no one would think it is a good idea to bunt the ball back to the other team.
As I mentioned earlier, doubles is a different story. Hitting an out ball into your own net to let your partner quickly pick up the ball (or leave it if it stays super-close to the net) is, to me, clearly the most practical move. But when you are playing singles on public courts with no separation, not touching out serves, or letting wide serves hit the back fence will very often lead to their going onto an adjacent court. How about every time someone from another court has to deal with your terrible serve that I didn't stop (because of the Code) you lose your second serve? Why should I be the one to continually apologize to the adjacent court's annoyed players for your inability to put a keep a ball in court?
As I mentioned earlier, doubles is a different story. Hitting an out ball into your own net to let your partner quickly pick up the ball (or leave it if it stays super-close to the net) is, to me, clearly the most practical move. But when you are playing singles on public courts with no separation between courts, not touching out serves, or letting wide serves hit the back fence will very often lead to their going onto an adjacent court. How about every time someone from another court has to deal with your terrible serve that I didn't stop (because of the Code) you lose your second serve? Why should I be the one to continually apologize to the adjacent court's annoyed players for your inability to keep a ball in court?
How about every time someone from another court has to deal with your terrible serve that I didn't stop (because of the Code) you lose your second serve? Why should I be the one to continually apologize to the adjacent court's annoyed players for your inability to keep a ball in court?
I don't have a problem with people hitting the ball back into the net or catching the ball to pocket it. I do have a problem with people who think that they have the control to hit it back to the other team and then it causes a delay because they don't have as much control as they think they do. If you try and hit the ball back to the other team because of your impeccable control but end up causing a delay because of it then I think you should do the right thing and give the other team 2 serves since it was a delay that you voluntarily caused.
Unless the server hits one so shanked that physically impossible to get stick on it you should be able to stop the ball and keep it contained on your court--that's what you do when you're doing warm-up serves don't you? If you keep hitting them back to your opponent, when do you get to hit warm-up serves? If you can "bunt" it back to your opponent, you can "bunt" it to the net--or with some attention and practice you can learn how to do it like any other skill in the game. Watch some tournament players doing it to see how it's done. I wouldn't use college players as an example, the ones I've had playing around me at open's usually act like spoiled brats, cursing, etc. The umpires have given up on controlling them because it's too endemic and they would have to teach them what their parents and "coaches" have failed to do.
I guess it is more of an intuitive thing, depending on how fast and how "out" the serve is. On a serve that is fast and close to the line, I am less likely to react in time to alter my service return at all. On the other end of the spectrum, for a slow very out serve I can probably catch in my hands and then pocket, I will probably do just that. It is the serve in the middle I tend to bunt.
I don't have a problem with people hitting the ball back into the net or catching the ball to pocket it. I do have a problem with people who think that they have the control to hit it back to the other team and then it causes a delay because they don't have as much control as they think they do. If you try and hit the ball back to the other team because of your impeccable control but end up causing a delay because of it then I think you should do the right thing and give the other team 2 serves since it was a delay that you voluntarily caused.
re: "Team". Again, I am not talking about doubles. I am talking about singles, particularly on crowded public courts. And it isn't every out serve. Generally, if I can catch or simply stop a ball, that is what I'll do. But on first serve returns on which I'm already swinging, bunting at the last minute is just the best thing to do in some cases.
I don't think that it matters at allwhether it is singles or doubles- if you try and hit it back to the server and cause a delay they you should give them 2 serves. When is it ever easier to try and hit the ball back to the server rather than just hitting it into the net?
To me, the question is "how can I let the opponent get his or her second serve off the quickest?" In some cases (not all, such as really soft, catchable serves), a bunt back is the answer.
I think the interpretation of "return" may be the real issue. Bunting the ball back to the server to maintain ball control on a busy court, and speed up the game, isn't practicing returns on obvious out serves.The Code says you are not supposed to return obviously out serves. The interpretation of "obvious" is up to the individual player.
And if that is the choice you make, then if you cause a delay by your own choice then you should offer the server 2 serves.
Catch it. Let it go. Hit it into 140 square feet of net. If you think your control is so good that the quickest way to get the second serve in is to hit it to your opponent then that is fine, but you should give them a first serve if you cause the delay by trusting in your skills.
what is this hit into the net for safe keeping nonsense.
why would you want stray ball on the court? it's an obstruction* and can cause injury if stepped on.
* Physical and visual.
I think the interpretation of "return" may be the real issue. Bunting the ball back to the server to maintain ball control on a busy court, and speed up the game, isn't practicing returns on obvious out serves.
what is this hit into the net for safe keeping nonsense.
why would you want stray ball on the court? it's an obstruction* and can cause injury if stepped on.
I think the interpretation of "return" may be the real issue. Bunting the ball back to the server to maintain ball control on a busy court, and speed up the game, isn't practicing returns on obvious out serves.
Any delay caused by a mishit bunt will still be less than the delay from my hitting it into the net, walking to the middle of the service box to pick up the ball once it's bounced off the net and getting back to my ready position.
No.I think the interpretation of "return" may be the real issue. Bunting the ball back to the server to maintain ball control on a busy court, and speed up the game, isn't practicing returns on obvious out serves.
No.
The code says you are not to hit an obviously out serve "over the net."
That includes bunting. Obviously.
If anything, this thread is reinforcing my view of things. Unpragmatic rules, I don't typically enjoy following. When told I must, a defiance mechanism kicks in.
I go after every ball like it is going in, 2 inches out or 2 feet out. You better be ready against me or you might get a ball off your melon. But thats just me, code or no code.
There are lots of people who knowingly choose not to follow the Code. They ask to play lets when they make a bad call. They don't promptly acknowledge double bounces or net touches, etc. They all have an explanation for blowing off the Code.
Go ahead and emulate them off you want.
I just don't understand why you would want to.
And there are those that value the code over common sense or friendships. Emulate them.
hmmm. I don't think it's that obvious unless one has an very pedantic translation. "Put into play or hit" (which is wrong) has a different implication than to give back to serving team.No.
The code says you are not to hit an obviously out serve "over the net."
That includes bunting. Obviously.
The thing is, the rule is IMO very pragmatic.
At least for me, if I can control the ball enough to accurately bunt it to the server, I can just as easily trap it and put it in my pocket. What is the advantage of bunting it in this case?
(Of course we are talking about a 1st serve. Second serve I will often bunt back if a fault since the server would need the ball.)
If the serve is too close to tell whether it's going in or out, I'm taking a full swing at it - neither bunt nor pocket.
If the serve is too fast / wide for me to control and pocket the ball, a bunt attempt would be equally hard to control and would likely cause the server to have to chase it down. So in this situation best is to let it go by, and keep an eye on it to verify that the ball isn't rolling back onto the court.
No, you'd have to give a let.Honestly- If I wanted to engage in gamesmanship I think one of the best ways to do it would be to bunt back the ball to the other side of the court every time to make the opponent go chase the shot in between the first and second serves.
No, you'd have to give a let.
agreed. all about collectively getting the most play time and least disruptions -- ours and adjacent courts. it is up to the returning team to clear the ball in the quickest, safest manner possible. and any time a server must wait for anything out of his team's control, it's a let.As long as the "bunters" give a first serve every time they botch it and the server has to go chase a ball then I'm fine with people bunting it. This isn't how it works in my experience.
If anything, this thread is reinforcing my view of things. Unpragmatic rules, I don't typically enjoy following. When told I must, a defiance mechanism kicks in.
hmmm. I don't think it's that obvious unless one has an very pedantic translation. "Put into play or hit" (which is wrong) has a different implication than to give back to serving team.
Perhaps as a server I just want the ball back and under control. Not bouncing around by the back fence; slowly rolling in the breeze to an adjacent court while point is in play; rebounding deeper back into our court from the net while everyone stares and decides if it's worth retrieving and it's up to me to ensure all are ready.
Or perhaps it's a recognization that our court time is limited and keep things moving. No one follows the code re: game/set breaks or takes the allotted time between serves. Just give the balls to the server and play.
But I will concede that it's the server's call on what they want me to do with obvious faults. Just speak up.
And if it's really that big a deal, it's a wake call for me to improve my first serve.
It is an exceptionally pragmatic rule. The rule is that you keep the ball on your side of the court so that the opposing server doesn't have to deal with it. Whether you let it go, pocket it, or hit it back into the net then you are the one that deals with the consequences and not the server. Any other rule would lend itself to gamesmanship since you can basically make the opposing server go fetch the extra ball between his first and second serves.
Brian, I have an idea.
Next time you play, don't do any bunting. Take full cuts at in serves and close serves.
For obviously out serves, control the ball and pocket it. If one gets away fom you, pick it up if it is in anyone's way, and offer two if you are a huge fumble fingers and cannot do this quickly.
See if anyone asks you to cease and desist and instead bunt the ball over the net after an obviously out first serve.
Report your findings.
Will do.
But again, I have never been called out for bunting either. As I said in my last post, I think our varying positions come from one of us (judging from the entertaining threads you post here) constantly being in confrontational situations (presumably because the USTA is involved) and one that has never had more confrontation on court past a snarky "Really?" after a questionable line call.
Will do.
But again, I have never been called out for bunting either. As I said in my last post, I think our varying positions come from one of us (judging from the entertaining threads you post here) constantly being in confrontational situations (presumably because the USTA is involved) and one that has never had more confrontation on court past a snarky "Really?" after a questionable line call.