opponent calling his own serve

[r2473]

My fav though are the guys than silently return close, out serves only to look at you crazy when you continue to play out the point.

Even better is the guy that does this with a stroke that suggests he's calling the ball out, but when you stop play, he looks puzzled and says "WTF, I never called it out".

Of course, the serve before he did the exact same thing, and the scenario you talk about plays out.

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

You do not understand
It is ok for a server to call "net"
It is up to the server to say "let" because it is a 2 stage process
The way it is done in Europe,Canada and North East of US generally the server waits for a receiver to say something
It is generally the issue of efficiency
The original post btw was about non-officiated tournaments, not about it'd
Listening to Suresh is as always a waste of time

Seems as if there is some animosity between you and Suresh. I do not want to get into the middle of that but I believe that he has made some very valid points and do not consider them a waste of time at all.

I understand quite well what The Code and the USTA Rulings that I posted have to say. They actually do not say anything about the server calling "net" rather than "let". As I mentioned, players often use the terms interchangeably. Don't see a reason to make an issue of that since The Code does not say that the server can only call a "net".

 

[SystemicAnomaly]

... Obviously the rules are clear in that anyone can call a let. Just always strikes me as a somewhat meaningless call from the serving team... like calling your own shots in. Sure you can do it but it's meaningless...

Disagree. Not meaningless at all. When any player calls it, it means that they will not continue to play the point. Not everyone hears the ball clipping the net (or sees a ball rolling onto the court). When the serving team calls it, it is to alert the opponents that play should cease -- even if those opponent did not hear it (or see the encroaching ball).

 

[julian]

Seems as if there is some animosity between you and Suresh. I do not want to get into the middle of that but I believe that he has made some very valid points and do not consider them a waste of time at all.

I understand quite well what The Code and the USTA Rulings that I posted have to say. They actually do not say anything about the server calling "net" rather than "let". As I mentioned, players often use the terms interchangeably. Don't see a reason to make an issue of that since The Code does not say that the server can only call a "net".

As you know I have coached a college tennis team
The terms "net" and "let" are not used interchangeably at the college level
As a matter of fact different rules for Div 1 are exactly the result of the sentence above
I used to referee itf tournaments as well
Every tournament in Europe is preceeded by an instruction session for coaches
Basically it is a free country and you may agree with Suresh as much as you want
Your phrase "animosity" is the understatement of a day