Serve Clock Failing?

[Primavera]

A good first step would be to start the clock as soon as the point ends instead of when the chair enters or calls the score. That will be more consistent and take away umpire discretion.

So the public will be roaring, the clock ticking, and what a player is supposed to do? Serve with all the noise and motion around him?

 

[Primavera]

The stalling from players such as Nadal and Djokovic was always intended to be a psychological tactic, rather than a physical one. Consequently, neither are physically inhibited by the shot-clock. Players like them have just been forced to cut-out a part of their serving gamesmanship.

TImHenman nick speaking about gamesmanship What will your next sunject be? Nice manners?

 

[Primavera]

I don't know how they got away with enforcing the time between points without a visible shot clock. How were the players supposed to know when the time was over?

Their next move would be to switch over to alarm clock Players will have to finish their serving before the clock buzzes I propose this tune for a buzz

 

[Bartelby]

You've collected all this data, so why are you keeping it secret?

Answer: you have none because you are talking through your hat.

No. I timed Nadal several times. He was within 25 sec limit in ca.60% service motions, within 30% for about 35 %, over 30 - very few times, never over 40 sec.

I repeated this timing exercise in different years and tournament. The outcome was bearly the same. I can tell the author where he may go and what he may do there, but I am too good for it

 

[Primavera]

This proves yet again that the capacity of a fan to say anything intelligent is extremely limited.

You're too hard on yourself

 

[Bartelby]

People who use their intellect are always hard on themselves.

People who claim things they can't or won't back up are not.

 

[Primavera]

You've collected all this data, so why are you keeping it secret?

Answer: you have none because you are talking through your hat.

Never tried talking through any garments, including hats. I collected this data several years ago, and since I am neither a tennis historian, nor a tennis freak, I didn't keep it.

I posted it once in Rafa Nadal fan forum where my effort was appriciated. I am not going to waste it on the likes of you. Have I made it clear, or is this manner of expression too sophisticated for hat-talkers?

 

[swizzy]

the umpire has to start the clock when he calls the score.. the clock can't start immediately at the conclusion of the point.. the crowd would have to be silent for that to work. the clock is a joke as a means to speed matches along. over the long run players will adapt to the clock and everyone will use most of the time allowed before serving.. radical changes to the rules can shorten matches at the cost of what already is a perfect game.

 

[Slightly D1]

So if we allowed two minutes between points tennis would be more than four times the quality?

Work expands to fill the time available is the so-called Parkinson's Law. It may be at work here as well.

Nice strawman there? Did the point go over your head?

 

[van_Loederen]

It was always a dumb idea. Should have just had the balls to call Rafa out on his time wasting...now they've paved the way for stalling for everyone, something easily foreseeable.

sure, sure.

foreseeable was that they would start with care.

and starting the clock immediately after the point ends would be unfair to the players because they can't control how long the audience take to settle down after a point or how long it takes the balls-kids to get the balls to them.

exactly.
in case they find play too slow, they will simply reduce to 20 seconds instead.

Giving umpires the discretion as to when they start the clock is also very subjective

it's hard for me to imagine an umpire giving Nadal constantly little time after long rallies in important matches.
that would reduce the level of play and the entertainment value.
i think the umpires even have their orders and are supposed to act sensibly.
(some are a bit faster, some a bit slower, but i doubt there will be great fluctuation in the important matches.)

Another huge flaw is that there is no time for 2nd serves or any serves after a let. That's where Nadal eats up the most time, Djokovic also.

spending a lot of time on the 2nd serve is usually not good for that 2nd serve.
some players still do it indeed, but i wouldn't mind it. they are buying that time.

 

[bigserving]

So the public will be roaring, the clock ticking, and what a player is supposed to do? Serve with all the noise and motion around him?

It never happens that applause goes on for twenty five seconds after a point. During any applause, the players can get balls, towel off, and get ready to play the next point. And yes, if there is applause or noise, just play on.

 

[jm1980]

This was already confirmed by participants of the qualifying draws where the shot clock was first implemented

They felt that with clock they could use as much time as possible. In the end it slowed down play

 

[smash hit]

Another huge flaw is that there is no time for 2nd serves or any serves after a let. That's where Nadal eats up the most time, Djokovic also.

What about those players who frequently abort their serve, by throwing up the ball and then letting it bounce. Murray in particular springs to mind. The clock doesn't restart at the time they were at when they started their serving motion, it just doesn't restart.

If this is all about saving time what about TV's for the time taken for a racquet smash and it's replacement.

 

[Gary Duane]

What about those players who frequently abort their serve, by throwing up the ball and then letting it bounce. Murray in particular springs to mind. The clock doesn't restart at the time they were at when they started their serving motion, it just doesn't restart.

If this is all about saving time what about TV's for the time taken for a racquet smash and it's replacement.

You have to make the "punishment" work.

I'd like to see a TV for throwing the ball up and then not completing the serve, but I don't think it is going to happen.

 

[Gary Duane]

The far more important subject to address is the use of hawkeye. Why can't it be used to call the lines instead of expecting the players to challenge?

The answer is that it can be, but for some reason we have to continue to see lines people get it painfully wrong.

But the real torture is watching commercials, and the only way to stop them is to record and start matches a good hour late, which I always do.

 

[Tshooter]

I think I will contract Karlovic to serve for me then take all the credit for the win much as the ceos and executives in all companies (Mitt)

Remember, Tennis Balls are people too — Mitt Romney.

Re the clock, after close to 11 hrs on-site today at the NTC I didn’t really notice it.

 

[Hmgraphite1]

Remember, Tennis Balls are people too — Mitt Romney.

Re the clock, after close to 11 hrs on-site today at the NTC I didn’t really notice it.

Clock seems like a good idea, gives an idea to the player where things are at, but they started it a little early a few times in cinci on novak. Sometimes the most righteous are just plain wrong.

 

[Ann]

I don't think it has failed, just needs some tweaking. If it is carried out fairly, then some of the whining about Djokovic and/or Nadal taking too much time (Cilic too although no one seems to notice) will dissipate and the announcers will just have to find something else meaningless to carry on about.

 

[Bartelby]

The ATP just has to shorten its seconds if it wants to speed up the game. Why must they all be the same?

On the other hand, when it's hot and there's a long rally the seconds should just be long "Nadal seconds".

 

[Primavera]

It never happens that applause goes on for twenty five seconds after a point. During any applause, the players can get balls, towel off, and get ready to play the next point. And yes, if there is applause or noise, just play on.

Have you read tennis rules even if you don't play yourself and don't know from your own experience that everybody should be sitting and silent during serves and rallies?

 

[diggler]

I think it is reasonable to start the clock after the applause dies because a long tiring point usually has long applause. The 25 second rule assumed the clock started immediately after the point finished. 20 seconds after the applause dies would be a reasonable change.

There is an unfairness where outside courts will have less applause. Umpire discretion is required.

 

[diggler]

Let's get back to the main objective. What we want is better entertainment and more crowds. Shorter time between points does not guarantee that. Who wants to watch 2 exhausted players hurry up to play a bad point?

I would like to see more serve volley. Need to regulate strings and racquets.

 

[Hmgraphite1]

Let's get back to the main objective. What we want is better entertainment and more crowds. Shorter time between points does not guarantee that. Who wants to watch 2 exhausted players hurry up to play a bad point?

I would like to see more serve volley. Need to regulate strings and racquets.

Disagree with your last statement. No regulation, other than what we have now. Don't stifle the technology.

 

[Sudacafan]

My subjective stats say that both Nadal and Djokovic did not make any adjustments and are taking the same time to serve.

 

[Hmgraphite1]

My subjective stats say that both Nadal and Djokovic did not make any adjustments and are taking the same time to serve.

It not about the time but rather the appearance of time

 

[Sudacafan]

It not about the time but rather the appearance of time

Yes, like Einstein’s Relativity Theory.

 

[Hmgraphite1]

Notice Nadal hits quite hard and saves mucho time with many shots. 6 of one half dozen of another.

 

[ChaelAZ]

The only people who seem unhappy are those who where Pro SC for the aim of specifically penalising Nadal and it seems to have not done so are bitter.

Exactly. And they will whine and whine to make changes solely for the purpose of penalizing Nadal. All with the pseudo-moral cheater chant going to feel like they have some victory.

It has done nothing really to change pace or player outcomes and won’t.



Probably posting from the court between sets.

 

[cluckcluck]

Biggest gripe I have is that you cannot see the flippen clock on TV! It’s tiny and usually hidden behind the ESPN logo.
It would be great if they could add the countdown next to, or above, the score on the TV.

 

[ChaelAZ]

No. I timed Nadal several times. He was within 25 sec limit in ca.60% service motions, within 30% for about 35 %, over 30 - very few times, never over 40 sec.

I did a couple matches, including a HC final of Nadal v Fed and was about the same timing wise. Posted it here in a shot clock thread a while back. Biggest factor in timing is crowd noise and distractions, but I times from the score call to the serve.


Probably posting from the court between sets.

 

[Bender]

Eye nominate Shapovolov to do it.

Sharapova if you want the clock to recover faster

 

[ChaelAZ]

This was already confirmed by participants of the qualifying draws where the shot clock was first implemented

They felt that with clock they could use as much time as possible. In the end it slowed down play

In all other sports the shot clock, game clock, etc become a tactical part of play, so why wouldn’t tennis start doing exactly the same. They could employ a no huddle offense and try to rush players, or let the clock almost out before the snap to setup patterns of play, rest, or mess with opponents timing. Adding the clock as such gives players another tool in the tool box for sure.


Probably posting from the court between sets.

 

[junior74]

I think it is reasonable to start the clock after the applause dies because a long tiring point usually has long applause. The 25 second rule assumed the clock started immediately after the point finished. 20 seconds after the applause dies would be a reasonable change.

There is an unfairness where outside courts will have less applause. Umpire discretion is required.

So during applause the players should just stand and wait until it dies, before starting their preps for the next point? Ridiculous. I play in several bands. During applause, we tune instruments, tweak effects, drink water and prepare for the next number. We don't just stand there and wait until it's quiet before starting our preps.

Umpire discretion is the problem.

 

[diggler]

So during applause the players should just stand and wait until it dies, before starting their preps for the next point? Ridiculous. I play in several bands. During applause, we tune instruments, tweak effects, drink water and prepare for the next number. We don't just stand there and wait until it's quiet before starting our preps.

So you would be happy to see less time after long points and a decrease in quality in the next point?

So playing in a band is as strenuous as world class tennis?

 

[junior74]

So you would be happy to see less time after long points and a decrease in quality in the next point?

So playing in a band is as strenuous as world class tennis?

I don't understand how some think while the crowd is applauding, time should stop. Being able to recover between points is implied in professional tennis. Being tired most of the time, is also implied. That's a part of the game, just like a good serve or a passing shot.

Tuning your guitar for 30 seconds between songs is equally annoying as a tennis player bouncing the ball 30 times between points.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

In all other sports the shot clock, game clock, etc become a tactical part of play, so why wouldn’t tennis start doing exactly the same. They could employ a no huddle offense and try to rush players, or let the clock almost out before the snap to setup patterns of play, rest, or mess with opponents timing. Adding the clock as such gives players another tool in the tool box for sure.


Probably posting from the court between sets.

Lol

You have no idea and are probably posting from the food court between sets of hamburgers.

 

[diggler]

I don't understand how some think while the crowd is applauding, time should stop. Being able to recover between points is implied in professional tennis. Being tired most of the time, is also implied. That's a part of the game, just like a good serve or a passing shot.

If you want to sacrifice quality of play for speed of play then that is your opinion.

What other sport in the world expects competitors to sprint and smash balls for several hours in the heat while people complain about the pace of play? Pretty laughable when most of you come from America where your football games are a constant series of stoppages. I don't begrudge them a rest between explosive effort but according to the people here they should hurry up.

 

[Benben245]

I actually think the serve clock should not be included in matches where the heat advisory rules are in effect. Additionally, the pace of play is dictated by the server however that free will is negated by this serve clock. I dont like it

 

[Ledigs]

I think the problem is that players really do need the full 20 seconds after strenuous points and most used to only take that time in that situation but now are using that full time on every single point because they are allowed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ChaelAZ]

Lol

You have no idea and are probably posting from the food court between sets of hamburgers.

Sure scooter.


Probably posting from the court between sets.

 

[ChaelAZ]

I think the problem is that players really do need the full 20 seconds after strenuous points and most used to only take that time in that situation but now are using that full time on every single point because they are allowed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is funny when rec players and viewers make assumptions of how something should be played. Most exert less effort in a match than pros do in a game, and rec players certainly don’t hold themselves to a 25 second clock with little and no effort.


Probably posting from the court between sets.

 

[Gemini]

Is it failing? I think it's too early to tell but you won't truly have the effect you desire until you put time restrictions on the overall match. Who cares whether Nadal, Djokovic, etc violates the clock as long as the overall match is not constrained.

With the serve clcok, tennis is taking its cue from baseball and baseball claims that it saves 6 minutes per 9 inning game. But like tennis, the finish line varies within the actual activity of the game itself..even in a 9 inning game. What I can say is that at this year's Open, I think players seem to be more aware of the time they take between points and many were moving quicker between points.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Sure scooter.


Probably posting from the court between sets.

I am not familiar with that reference.

Probably because I didn't receive my education in McDonalds.

 

[Badger]

Can someone tell me the exact progression of penalties for repeated time violations under the shot clock?

I've seen it reported variously as being a mere loss of serve for every violation after the first, and elsewhere that repeated violations result in a loss of point, game, and then the match is defaulted.

Despite all the media coverage it's getting no one has been clear about this from what I've read.

 

[Deon Sanders]

We have already moved in less than a year to chairs intentionally shutting off the shot clock to influence matches

See: Ned today

 

[Sudacafan]

We have already moved in less than a year to chairs intentionally shutting off the shot clock to influence matches

See: Ned today

Hello Berdych!

 

[LETitBE]

Can someone tell me the exact progression of penalties for repeated time violations under the shot clock?

I've seen it reported variously as being a mere loss of serve for every violation after the first, and elsewhere that repeated violations result in a loss of point, game, and then the match is defaulted.

Despite all the media coverage it's getting no one has been clear about this from what I've read.

they do not want you to know

 

[LETitBE]

If you want to sacrifice quality of play for speed of play then that is your opinion.

What other sport in the world expects competitors to sprint and smash balls for several hours in the heat while people complain about the pace of play? Pretty laughable when most of you come from America where your football games are a constant series of stoppages. I don't begrudge them a rest between explosive effort but according to the people here they should hurry up.

they sit down more than they play

 

[Federev]

Economist:

Pace of play in tennis

The new serve clock in tennis appears to backfiring

Matches have become longer, not shorter, since it was introduced

Game theory

Aug 19th 2018

by J.S.

https://www.economist.com/node/21748604/comments
TENNIS was born as a leisurely pastime for the upper class, meant to be played at whatever pace the participants favoured. As a modern spectator sport seeking to attract and hold the attention of impatient audiences, however, it needs to ensure that every minute is as packed with action as possible, and that matches finish within a relatively abbreviated timeframe. Much to the dismay of the keepers of the sport, in recent years match durations have been getting longer rather than shorter. Improvements in racquet technology have ushered out the once-popular aggressive, serve-and-volley style, tilting matches in favor of baseline-centered bludgeoning. Extended rallies take longer, not just during play, but also between points, as players require extra time to recover from their more extreme exertions.

As the sport’s executives took aim at ballooning match times, an early target was match format. A decade ago, the men’s and women’s tours shortened doubles matches by converting the deciding third set to a first-to-ten-point “match tiebreak,” a move that almost guarantees each contest finishes within two hours, though at the cost of some excitement. Around the same time, the men’s Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP) converted its few remaining best-of-five-set matches to best-of-threes, leaving only the four majors and the Davis Cup, the international team competition, with the five-set format. More recently, the Davis Cup, one of the last bastions of the sport’s traditionalists, has shifted most lower-level matches to three sets, and is currently mulling a massive overhaul that would result in a more television-friendly, World Cup-style event.

Players, however, aren’t ready to abandon the traditional format wholesale. Enter the serve clock, the latest attempt to enforce the time limits designed to reduce between-point lulls and keep viewers engaged. This year’s U.S. Open, which begins on August 27th, will be the first major to display a countdown before each point, not unlike the shot clock in basketball. The innovative aspect of the screens, which are visible at both ends of the court, is not the time limit, but the transparency. For years, the rulebooks of the ATP and the Women’s Tennis Association (WTA) have specified that players take no longer than 25 seconds between points. The four grand slams, which operate independently of the tours, have demanded a quicker turnaround of 20 seconds after a point is completed, although this year’s U.S. Open will relax the rule to the tour-standard 25. An offending player is issued a warning on the first violation, followed by the loss of a first serve, the loss of a point, and the loss of a game if he or she continues to serve too slowly. But this was a policy with no teeth: when Wall Street Journal (WSJ) staffers armed with stopwatches clocked more than 1,000 serves at the 2010 U.S. Open, players took longer than the allotted 20 seconds more than half of the time. Yet over more than 40,000 points, a measly eight warnings were issued.

In addition to their unwillingness to enforce the rules, officials often appear to favour some players at the expense of others. Many rank-and-file competitors have complained that umpires fail to apply the rule to the sport’s biggest—and slowest—names. Rafael Nadal, the eleven-time French Open champion and now the world’s top-ranked male player, is known for the elaborate sequence of tics that precede each of his serves. And Novak Djokovic, this year’s Wimbledon champion, responds to increasing pressure by bouncing the ball again, and again…and again, before commencing his service motion. In 2017, Mr Nadal averaged 45.5 seconds per point played—a figure that includes time elapsed during play, as well as breaks between games and sets. That was the most of any top player, and 27% more than the 35.7 seconds per point of Roger Federer, his long-time rival. The lack of available data makes it impossible to precisely audit Mr Nadal’s (or any other player’s) compliance with the time limit, but using these general figures, combined with the WSJ’s stopwatch logs, indicates that time played and longer breaks account for about 15 seconds per point, leaving nearly 30 seconds that must be attributed to Mr Nadal’s serve preparation. Other leading men are nearly as slow; Mr Djokovic, third-ranked Juan Martín del Potro, and former U.S. Open finalist Kei Nishikori also averaged more than 42 seconds per point last season, indicating that their typical serve preparation time exceeded the permitted maximum.

In the run-up to this year’s U.S. Open, several tournaments are using the serve clock, to give players and officials an opportunity to get used to the new technology before the curtain goes up in New York. Earlier this month Canada’s Rogers Cup, with a men’s event in Toronto and a women’s event in Montreal, was the highest-profile test yet. It was also the first meeting between the clock and Mr Nadal. In five matches—the Spaniard won the tournament, defeating Greek prospect Stefanos Tsitsipas in the final on August 12th—Mr Nadal averaged 47.2 seconds per point, including 50.9 seconds per point in the title match against Mr Tsitsipas. The introduction of the serve clock somehow corresponded to Mr Nadal playing even slower than usual: In 24 hard-court matches last summer and fall, all played without a countdown display, he exceeded 47 seconds per point only four times.

The Toronto champion wasn’t the only player who slowed down once on the clock. At each of the completed tournaments where the serve clock has been used—Toronto, Montreal, San Jose, and Washington, D.C.—the average point took longer in 2018 than it did in 2017, without the clock. The differences varied from 0.3 seconds per point at the women’s event San Jose (an event that was held in nearby Stanford last year) to 2.0 seconds at the men’s competition in Washington.

This unintended consequence stems from two main sources. Faster players don’t always intend to rush, and a visible clock helps them set a more comfortable pace. Even Mr Djokovic, who can rarely be accusing of hurrying between points, has said that he feels like the clock gives him more time. At the other end of the spectrum, it is apparent that officials still remain reluctant to lock horns with the players they are charged with monitoring. The 25-second countdown begins when the umpire enters the score on a tablet. After extended rallies, umpires wait longer to start the clock. Canadian teen Denis Shapovalov, one of the few players so far to have griped about the system, pointed to this form of discretion as simply a new way for officials to favor the great and the slow, such as Mr Nishikori, the player who had just defeated him.

The serve clock has succeeded on one count, silencing doubters who feared that a countdown would draw too much attention and create a distraction. As for the stated goals, however, it has yet to speed up the game, and it still allows the umpire too much discretion to be completely transparent. Increasing the pace of play may require shortening the time limit to less than 25 seconds, or implementing a system independent of the chair umpire—or both. Tennis executives will continue looking for ways to turn matches into more saleable media-friendly packages, but they will need to find a solution elsewhere.

Themsa lot a werds

 

[Sudacafan]

Themsa lot a werds

Do I need to read all that? The title is clear enough.