Sudacafan
Talk Tennis Guru
YesNo.
This thread needs a poll.
YesNo.
This thread needs a poll.
i read this a few days ago and thought of it- along with almost every argument i have seen about changing tennis...as ridiculous. love this game...any change to the court dimensions, net, lines, scoring within a game, etc. would create an entirely new and distinct era within the open era...but i do love this idea as fantasy. if adopted in this alternate tennis reality.. it would be very interesting. you could see the player utilize this strategically and would make the game more dramatic.People have advocated for eliminating the second serve entirely, my proposal is a compromise that would to some extent preserve the second serve but add a new level of strategy to the game: in each service game, the server gets one (maybe two) chances to hit a second serve, at his choice when missing a first serve. Do you use it if you're at 0-15, do you save it for deuce, do you use it at your-ad or save it if needed when down a break point. Would add some thinking to this monotonous game.
Fair point. I hadn't thought about the accuracy threshold. What the technology has in consistency, it lacks in a certain accuracy tolerance. What's the proprietary name of that high speed camera system that shows the "body roll" of the ball?From what I understand the issue has been in the accuracy and questions about reliability, which is kind of ironic since the system was created because of human accuracy and issues with their reliability. We are talking a pretty mature technology that has accuracy around +/- 5mm last I checked. I like whatever that newest one is that actually has the high speed cameras too that show how much the ball can roll during impact, and removes any questions of if it really touched the line or not.
On a related side note, I am amazed that baseball hasn't put this in, though the pace of the game is already soooooo slow you prbably only see like 15 minutes of action in a hour of watching, so any challenge system would make that worse. They could just remove the plate umps with high speed cameras too. And TV laready uses the technology to show which pitches are in and out.
But I digress.
Well, I doubt the accuracy is less than people, so not sure why there would be a hold up. And the Next Gen finals uses Hawkeye only, no live line judges.Fair point. I hadn't thought about the accuracy threshold. What the technology has in consistency, it lacks in a certain accuracy tolerance. What's the proprietary name of that high speed camera system that shows the "body roll" of the ball?
Players over 6'5" should have to serve on their knees.Players are much taller nowadays!
Genius. This sounds perfect to me.Some rule changes I would suggest:
- ohbh players should start each game with 15:0 advantage... Beautiful ohbh starts with 30:0 advantage...
- Laver cup to be 5th slam, retroactively
- Dirt is not a surface, ban it from calendar, erase all results retroactively
- frame touch which launches ball on upper part of stadium should be considered winner
- 40:15, with two match point, is auto win... No need for another point...
Never seen this. This would be cool. So they have to serve in the middle one? Or do they use all 3?This is the heart of the matter: “… The absurd effect of the diagonal serve with current equipment is the main reason for this proposal. Tennis today is so fast that if the returner can get hold of the diagonal serve, the only chance is to try and hit a straight point because of being outside the court when returning. Indeed, the essence of the proposition for the change of the rules is a notable loss in the effect of the cross-court serve…..”
But a picture is worth a thousand words:
![]()
Explain...Let players show personality on and off the court without fines.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/metro.co.uk/2019/04/13/serena-williams-coach-patrick-mouratoglou-wants-more-controversy-in-tennis-9192339/amp/Explain...
So they should encourage chair throwing and bullying umpires and cursing?https://www.google.com/amp/s/metro.co.uk/2019/04/13/serena-williams-coach-patrick-mouratoglou-wants-more-controversy-in-tennis-9192339/amp/
He says it better^^
But basically I'd like more things done for viewership and to bring in fans.
Allow players to develop more personality on and off the court. Along with not (potentially) fining and suspending players, better interviews and encourage public appearance more. Play up rivalries somehow (grudge match exhibitions? Idk). Try to get tennis more accessible without cable network access (and in many cases an addition subscription on top).
I agree about and love Medvedev.So they should encourage chair throwing and bullying umpires and cursing?
I get what you are saying about personalities, but that is hard to create, but it can be done without getting fined. Med Bear does it. The fines and suspensions happen because they do something idiotic not because they are showing their "personality" but showing their lack of restraint and lack of character.
Sure it doesGenius. This sounds perfect to me.![]()
1) The dividing line between service courts will be completely abolished. The area will be dividedNever seen this. This would be cool. So they have to serve in the middle one? Or do they use all 3?
would be great if that worked, but with just one, the effect would be too small (serving would still be too small an advantage then, which made the game too boring)People have advocated for eliminating the second serve entirely, my proposal is a compromise that would to some extent preserve the second serve but add a new level of strategy to the game: in each service game, the server gets one (maybe two) chances to hit a second serve, at his choice when missing a first serve. Do you use it if you're at 0-15, do you save it for deuce, do you use it at your-ad or save it if needed when down a break point. Would add some thinking to this monotonous game.
that would eliminate the serve advantage almost entirely and thus make tennis boring (and also look weird and is hard to observe).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.
sounds actually very good to me. one could make the middle box smaller or bigger if needed.Markus Kaila said:My 2nd best proposal is smaller service courts like this:
You can be right with the higher net. That favours tall players even in rallies but only little. Much worse is of course that tall players would suffer from the higher net much less than mid-sized players when serving .that would eliminate the serve advantage almost entirely and thus make tennis boring (and also look weird and is hard to observe).
sounds actually very good to me. one could make the middle box smaller or bigger if needed.
my personal impression is that diagonal/out serves are pretty unattractive to watch, but dunno how others find them.
would an alternative be to simply move the service line closer to the net?
my concern with the "higher net" idea is that it would affect mid sized players in rallies, while the tall ones only very marginally (if i'm not mistaken).
By the way, the phenomenon has a name. it's called development! But at least that evolution is only human and can be corrected by man.The court markings weren't a problem 30 years ago and neither are they now. Same goes for second serves.
The problem with professional tennis today is equipment, specifically the world's best players using oversized heads and spin inducing strings.
Funny as hell...but I couldn't agree more. What's taking so damn long for these changes I'd also throw in erasing any results of anyone that was supposed to be dominant on one side(right hand) but ended up using their other hand as the dominant hand also retro acitve.Some rule changes I would suggest:
- ohbh players should start each game with 15:0 advantage... Beautiful ohbh starts with 30:0 advantage...
- Laver cup to be 5th slam, retroactively
- Dirt is not a surface, ban it from calendar, erase all results retroactively
- frame touch which launches ball on upper part of stadium should be considered winner
- 40:15, with two match point, is auto win... No need for another point...
yeah, but it wouldn't affect them by much if the dimensions wouldn't need to be changed by much.this comment: "Would it make the game more difficult for beginners and unskilled players?" Would get one and only answer in your cases, YES.
personally i like the triple court idea more (at my current level of information),Markus Kaila said:service line closer to the net. That means also smaller sevice courts but in a wrong way.
from what i've read, the justification is that tall players are more dependent on the serve.Markus Kaila said:higher net. That favours tall players even in rallies but only little. Much worse is of course that tall players would suffer from the higher net much less than mid-sized players when serving.
Good points! But as to this:yeah, but it wouldn't affect them by much if the dimensions wouldn't need to be changed by much.
(recreational players are also getting taller today as well.)
personally i like the triple court idea more (at my current level of information),
but technically speaking is it arguably a greater change to the game than the service line shift and net height increase.
maybe that's why it isn't popular yet / i haven't heard about it yet (while there's regularly talk about higher net).
from what i've read, the justification is that tall players are more dependent on the serve.
well, there are also shorter players with a big serve out there, but in the other direction there's a limit: even the greatest movers among the tall players will never move as good as the best mid-sized players.
tall players also tend to getting more tired in rallies than mid-sized players.
my main concern with the higher net is that it may lessen that last aspect.
so the reasoning behind the higher net is that making serving just a little harder for tall players would already affect them significantly and relatively more.
i believe that an argument against a higher net could be that women are not getting so much taller today and that the net was too high for the shorter women of the past.
another counter argument may be that the traditional net height was not perfect in the past in the first place.
if the arguments against the higher net turn out as severe, there may still be the alternative with the service line shift in the room.
but i don't know by how much exactly the dimensions would need to be changed.
and players below 6'5 shall either walk or crawl as fast as they can?Players over 6'5" should have to serve on their knees.
Tennis needs to start enforcing the rules that they have in place. Then they can start thinking if they really need to change anything. I suspect not.
![]()
No, with one serve only, there would only be first serves. There would be no second serves.Reduce the impact? There would be no first serve.
That can happen on any shot other than the serve so why not. Not much different than serve, return, net cord over for a dribbling return winner. Game set and match Mr. Fortuna.There has been two serves from the beginning of tennis. Its greatest disadvantage is that at least on club level it would make the game too stressing and you should try to avoid a solution where top players and amateurs have different rules.
But I don't understand your lets at all. Do you really want to see how the match ball is creeping over the net in Grand Slam finals? "Ace, game, set and match to Mr Fortuna!"
I don’t get this. What does the let serve have to do with this? The same "quarrel" could occur on any close serve without hitting the net cord when the server thinks it’s out and stops playing to make his 2nd serve while the receiver says it’s good.At its worst allowing the let serve can mean more disputes between the server and the returner in matches without the umpire. The server thinks the ball was wrong in the case of 1st serve when the ball has bounced from the net high and easy. He wants the 2nd serve but the returner wants to go on playing because the ball was in. That could mean a big quarrel!