Rules question: When is the point of no return?

T

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
This happened today:

Extremely humid evening, 80 degrees F, playing on red clay, right after a heavy rain.

I’m serving ad court. I hit a hard topspin slice serve, aiming near the T. As I’m following through, racquet flies out of my hand.

My serve lands good. My racquet is bouncing toward the net as my opponent prepares to hit a forehand return.

On the one hand, I am racquetless, so my opponent has a free shot and only has to hit the ball anywhere into the court to win the point.

On the other hand, seeing my racquet flying toward the net behind the ball can distract the eye and hinder the ability to play a clean shot.

In this case, my opponent misplayed an inside out forehand return into the net.

He insisted it was my point. I suggested that he wouldn’t have missed the shot had my racquet not hindered his concentration on the ball, and I suggested that he should get the point.

Who was right?
 
Fairhit

Fairhit

Hall of Fame
Both.

I mean, the racquet flying certainly is a distraction but he considered that it didn't affect his shot, so, as I see it he has the last word whether he takes the point or not.
 
esgee48

esgee48

G.O.A.T.
Your opponent is correct. Inadvertent loss of footing or loss of racquet are not considered distractions. Your opponent has to continue to play the point. If your opponent cannot return the ball legally over the net, they lose the point. You did not deliberately lose the racquet, so there is no hindrance. If you treat it any other manner, then losing your racquet would result in a let or a hindrance and neither is right.
 
W

winchestervatennis

Hall of Fame
travlerajm said:
This happened today:

Extremely humid evening, 80 degrees F, playing on red clay, right after a heavy rain.

I’m serving ad court. I hit a hard topspin slice serve, aiming near the T. As I’m following through, racquet flies out of my hand.

My serve lands good. My racquet is bouncing toward the net as my opponent prepares to hit a forehand return.

On the one hand, I am racquetless, so my opponent has a free shot and only has to hit the ball anywhere into the court to win the point.

On the other hand, seeing my racquet flying toward the net behind the ball can distract the eye and hinder the ability to play a clean shot.

In this case, my opponent misplayed an inside out forehand return into the net.

He insisted it was my point. I suggested that he wouldn’t have missed the shot had my racquet not hindered his concentration on the ball, and I suggested that he should get the point.

Who was right?
Click to expand...

Your opponent was correct per the code. But from some of your recent post you may be playing outside the us of a so some other rules may apply. I’m sure it’s happened in an atp match so if you google enough you may find a video clip

I dont think anything in the code stops you from offering your opponent the point (good on you btw) but he or she declined so there you go. If you still feel badly about it you coulda just tanked the next point on an “unforced” error
 
S&V-not_dead_yet

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
Max G. said:
According to what I can find, dropping a racquet is NOT considered a hindrance and play should continue. (Unless the racquet touches the net, net posts, or ball, or goes to the other side of the net. )

www.usta.com

WHAT'S THE CALL? DROPPING YOUR RACQUET

Dropping your racquet
www.usta.com www.usta.com
Click to expand...

Paire dropped his racquet against Tsonga so when the ball came back, he kicked it. They went back and forth a few times doing a hackey sack-like routine; the audience loved it.

Monfils dropped his racquet vs Djokovic and chased after Djokovic's next shot sans racquet. Just to make sure, Djokovic took the other ball out of his pocket and threw that one on Monfils' side as well.
 
S&V-not_dead_yet

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
What happens when one partner lets go of his racquet after a massive FH and it hits the other partner in the ankle bone? Can one call a hindrance? Speaking hypothetically, of course.
 
schmke

schmke

Legend
Just dropping your racquet is certainly not a hindrance for your opponent. I wouldn't think it would be if the racquet was in the air and even traveling towards the opponent either, unless there was a legitimate fear it was going to cross the net.
 
W

winchestervatennis

Hall of Fame
schmke said:
Just dropping your racquet is certainly not a hindrance for your opponent. I wouldn't think it would be if the racquet was in the air and even traveling towards the opponent either, unless there was a legitimate fear it was going to cross the net.
Click to expand...
The code actually says if the servers racquet comes out of his hand and incapacitates the returner to the point he cant play, the server wins by retirement. It also clearly says racquet coming out of hand is not grounds for either player to call hindrance, no exception for fear of being hit.
 
schmke

schmke

Legend
winchestervatennis said:
The code actually says if the servers racquet comes out of his hand and incapacitates the returner to the point he cant play, the server wins by retirement. It also clearly says racquet coming out of hand is not grounds for either player to call hindrance, no exception for fear of being hit.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I used poor language. If the racquet were to come across the net, it is no longer just a dropped racquet on the droppers side of the net and a racquet bouncing on the other side, IMHO, could be considered a hindrance by the player on that side of the net.
 
esgee48

esgee48

G.O.A.T.
schmke said:
Fair enough, I used poor language. If the racquet were to come across the net, it is no longer just a dropped racquet on the droppers side of the net and a racquet bouncing on the other side, IMHO, could be considered a hindrance by the player on that side of the net.
Click to expand...
This is not correct. If the player's racquet flies across the net after he loses it, or it hits the net before the ball is returned, the point goes to his/her opponent. Your racquet cannot touch the opponent's playing area. Neither can anything that you use or is on you. This FWIW includes dampeners. The net is a division of playing areas. You can go over it on a follow thur, but you or anything on you cannot touch it.
 
K

kevrol

Hall of Fame
Your point unless your racquet actually hit the net before his ball was dead. While your racquet was definitely a distraction it most likely was not an intentional hindrance.
 
W

winchestervatennis

Hall of Fame
schmke said:
Fair enough, I used poor language. If the racquet were to come across the net, it is no longer just a dropped racquet on the droppers side of the net and a racquet bouncing on the other side, IMHO, could be considered a hindrance by the player on that side of the net.
Click to expand...
Itf rules seem to be more vague and seems to allow for a player to call let when hindered unintentionally by the opponent. But usta is pretty clear saying racquet coming out of a player’s hand is not grounds for hindrance for either player.
If it were me and my racquet was headed towards the opponent and it clearly hindered them, I’d offer to concede the point. Roving officials are encouraged to let players work it out themselves before getting involved. If the players agreed it was a hindrance and both agree the point should go to the hindered player, i doubt any GOOD official would step in citing the rules per the code. Of course there are the power hungry officials that like to prove they know the rules better than the players...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

V
Rules question: Ball hitting the net and net hitting opponent's racquet
Replies
21
Views
2K
OrangePower
OrangePower
Connor35
Rules question: is “let it!” a hindrance
2
Replies
93
Views
1K
Connor35
Connor35
CHtennis
Rules question
Replies
6
Views
575
OrangePower
OrangePower
T
  • Poll
Question for the Rules Experts?
4 5 6
Replies
272
Views
3K
travlerajm
T
B
rules question
Replies
9
Views
2K
tennisjon
tennisjon
Top