Usually, if I am returning serve and the serve is fast and close to the line, I have to just commit to playing it instead of making a call. Sometimes I see them out as I am playing it, but usually just play it because I would not be able to make a call until very late after I finished the swing (since I committed to swinging). I was playing in a tournament last weekend against a kid, and I played a serve that I saw was out as I was hitting it. The kid hit a huge forehand 4 feet long long off the return then said "you know that serve was way out" like I cost him the point. So, the next time that happened, I instead made the call late after I finished swinging and he complained about that, too. I said "but it was out, you want me to call the ones that are out, right?". He didn't like that either.
JRB,
Thanks for you input on my DQ question. You gave that guy the benefit of the doubt, and he wasn't appreciative in his condescending response to you. Some players are like this. I too seem to get in this position when returning serves. Calling deep, fast serves when returning seems to be the time I evidently get more calls wrong. Like you, I'm playing the ball as good, when the server sometimes thinks the sever was long. Otherwise the "out" call is coming very late.
When an opponent is hitting hard serves near the line, I try to notice the mark quickly, then transition to the ball. If the ball is hitting the back of the line, what more can you do, but play the point? I find this very difficult to do with 100% certainty. If the serve is close, I play the ball as in, when I have any doubt. I think most players do this, and don't attempt to cheat their opponent.
The first time I play a serve that is near the service line and I'm not sure if the ball is in or out:
a) If I lose the point, normally all is well with my opponent. If he questions the serve being out after he wins the point, I will concede the point anyway. At this point, I hope my opponent knows I am a honest player, giving him the benefit of the doubt on his serves.
b) If I win the point, and then my opponent gives me any body language or verbally questions the serve being long, I say "Did you think the serve was long" IF he says "Yes", If offer to replay the point then add "You have very hard serve. If I can't call your serve out with 100% certainty, I play it as good, giving you the benefit of the doubt. If you think the serve is out, overrule me before the point is completed."
This immediately lets my opponent know he is being given the benefit of the doubt on his serve. He may get some free points on serves that are long. If I hit a winner off a serve he thought was out, it is then his responsibility as a player to speak up. I have played the point in good faith.
The Code
6. Opponent gets benefit of doubt. When a match is played without officials, the players are responsible for making decisions, particularly for line calls. There is a subtle difference between player decisions and those of an on-court official. An official impartially resolves a problem involving a call, whereas a player is guided by the unwritten law that any doubt must be resolved in favor of the opponent. A player in attempting to be scrupulously honest on line calls frequently will find himself keeping a ball in play that might have been out or that the player discovers too late was out. Even so, the game is much better played this way.
7. Ball touching any part of line is good. If any part of the ball touches
the line, the ball is good. A ball 99% out is still 100% good.
8. Ball that cannot be called out is good. Any ball that cannot be called out is considered to have been good. A player may not claim a let on the basis of not seeing a ball. One of tennis’ most infuriating moments occurs after a long hard rally when a player makes a clean placement and the opponent says: “I’m not sure if it was good or out. Let’s play a let.” Remember, it is each player’s responsibility to call all balls landing on, or aimed at, the player’s side of the net. If a ball can’t be called out with certainty, it is good. When you say your opponent’s shot was really out but you offer to replay the point to give your opponent a break, you are deluding yourself because you must have had some doubt.
13. Player calls own shots out. With the exception of the first serve, a player should call against himself or herself any ball the player clearly sees out regardless of whether requested to do so by the opponent. The prime objective in making calls is accuracy. All players should cooperate to attain this objective
So with #13, the server has no responsibility to call his first serve out, but #6 dictates the opponent gets the benefit of doubt. If you are playing serves close to the line in good faith, how can any opponent argue you are cheating him? If he wins the point, he keeps it. If he loses the point, and questions the first serve, he gets two more serves. If I play a second serve, that he thinks is long, he didn't get a double-fault. It doesn't get more fair than this.
If the opponent calls a ball I hit as "out", when I think is clearly in, I will ask "Are you sure about the call?" The guy has two choices. a)yes or b)no If he goes with yes, he keeps the point, and I regroup. If he says "No" or "I think it was out", I politely state "If you have any doubt, you must concede the point". The point should not be replayed.
The Code
16. Opponent’s calls questioned. When a player genuinely doubts an opponent’s call, the player may ask: “Are you sure of your call?” If the opponent reaffirms that the ball was out, the call shall be accepted. If the opponent acknowledges uncertainty, the opponent loses the point. There shall be no further delay or discussion.
I thought, I can handle it. :shock: But they are also very good at their game of cheating.
