Janet Tupper
New User
I always offer two when a delay of any significant length happens. So does virtually anyone I play with.
Server etiquette disagreement
- Thread starter Janet Tupper
- Start date
Janet Tupper
New User
I know. That’s pretty crazy,right?
Janet Tupper
New User
2-3 quick steps each way. If I took longer I would have given a first serve. Didn’t even have a chance to offer.
It's plausible to me to think someone could be in their service rhythm and oblivious to their surroundings and hit the second serve without looking up. What's implausible is trying to claim the point when you hit a serve and then see your opponent on the other side of the court clearing the first serve ball away. At that point, if I were the server, I think the logical thing to do is apologize for not noticing you weren't ready and hit another second. Trying to claim the point is clearly just being a jackass.
Janet Tupper
New User
When he moved over he said nothing. I was shocked & said “what are you doing?” He didn’t acknowledge I wasn’t there when he served the second time. He was miffed and instead of moving back over, apologizing + just taking another second serve, he said it’s love 15. Then it’s love 30. I guess he still doesn’t know basic rules or certainly manners on a tennis court.
Actual_Professional
New User
Yeah, I'd just stop playing with him at that point. While I enjoy the competition, I play to decompress and have fun; there's no point in doing it at rec level just to get aggravated by unreasonable opponents.
Once he saw his serve hit the box, with the receiver nowhere in sight, etiquette suggests replaying the point. At worst, give him a first serve, depending on how long it took you to retrieve the ball on the ad court.
Once he saw his serve hit the box, with the receiver nowhere in sight, etiquette suggests replaying the point. At worst, give him a first serve, depending on how long it took you to retrieve the ball on the ad court.
tennis tom
Legend
Tunnel vision + lack of situational awareness + self-absorption + poor eyesight + brain fog + vodka + + + etc.
BlueB
Legend
I don't think he needs to give the 1st serve. Returning a serve on reflex before you call it is quite normal. Unsafe ball should be removed. Only a ball (or people) coming from another court should cause a let.
Last edited:
Curtennis
Hall of Fame
As opposed to that obviously out first serve rolling into the next court over, thusly disrupting your neighbors game, and still your own? Or it just hits the fence behind you and rolls back to your own feet (as the receiver).
Without ball boys, no one should be getting their first serve back without some sort of outside actor’s influence or a full on egregious waste of time by the opponent.
kingcheetah
Hall of Fame
Depends on the level, but the faster the ball is travelling the more likely that out serves are returned, it's part of the game. The server has a responsibility to wait until you are ready, and the returner has to play at the server's *reasonable* pace. If server wants better rhythm in this case, stop missing the first serve.
Dartagnan64
G.O.A.T.
Ok. That would have been nice to know in you OP. Agree that that doesn't warrant a first serve and the server should have re-served his second serve once you got into position. Not sure why it even became a thing.
Dartagnan64
G.O.A.T.
Doesn't matter if it's normal. Swinging at "out" first serves can be gamesmanship because if you net it, you say out, if you hit a winner, you take the point. It allows a double opportunity. One way to discourage swinging at "out" first serves is to provide a stick. If you hit an out serve and put it in a dangerous place leading to serve disruption, you should offer a first serve. Which is why it's specifically covered in the code.
Raul_SJ
G.O.A.T.
He has been playing for 10 years but still does not know how to keep score. Amazing...But I have played with a guy that had been playing for years but kept calling "30 all" from the AD side. Had to explain to him, " that cannot be the score from that side..."
And the guy was a Medical Doctor.
Swinging at "out" first serves is perfectly ok, unless the ball is "OBVIOUSLY OUT", then it is frowned upon.
Dartagnan64
G.O.A.T.
Can we define “obviously”? I think any ball that you can call “out“ with certainty is obviously out.
if I’m swinging, I should be playing it. I can’t recall the last time I did a full swing at a serve I was sure was out. Usually once I recognize the ball is out I have the wherewithal to angle my racket face down and roll the ball into the net.
but I guess if you are taking serves early on the rise or SABRing, you might have less time to make the decision.
princemidplus
Semi-Pro
The difference is that the returner disrupted your serve if he is hitting out balls back into the way on your side of the court that you then have to clear. If you have to wait for him to clear a ball that he left and hit the back fence before rolling to his feet/area then you should wait til safe to play. Otherwise I could simply catch each out serve and tap it back to server each time to disrupt him with no penalty. In the first instance the returner caused the disruption and thus the server should get a first serve. Other cases you mention were not caused by the returner. If the other court disrupts your point while in play you should also get a replay of the point.
It's got to be "obviously out" before the point where you need to start your swing, which is well before it's obviously out when it bounces. I try to block it into the net if I have time to adjust my swing, but it's not always that easy. Do you return serve in Nadal land back by the fence? LOL.
Dartagnan64
G.O.A.T.
My return depth is based on the pace of your serve so that I'm basically hitting at the same time point from the bounce. If you serve slow I'm two steps in from the baseline, medium pace I'm at the baseline, fast pace, I'm two steps behind the baseline.
I only face a couple guys where I have to be way back. And to be honest, I'm always playing them in doubles so my partner is making the out call and I'm just hitting freely in that scenario. In my 3.5-4.0 singles crew no one is firing the ball so hard I can't hold back a return once I know it's clearly out.
But I'm sure there are people that are taking balls at a shorter time interval than I do or are facing harder servers and they may struggle with recognizing the serve is out and holding up their swing. But I've faced serve all the way up to 5.0 and it's rarely been an issue.
In my doubles game, there are at least 2 or so serves that I am returning that I have no idea if they are in or out, and I have to look to my partner to see if he can make the call. Those balls are not OBVIOUSLY OUT. In addition, balls that are slightly easier to call, are not OBVIOUSLY OUT either. Then as you go down the spectrum of out balls, they eventually become "OBVIOUSLY OUT".
Dartagnan64
G.O.A.T.
Right. What I'm saying is you should play them as "in" since you aren't certain they are out. In singles I play a lot of "just out" serves as good. I'm supposed to give benefit of the doubt to the opponent. To me "certain" and "obvious" are near equivalent.
In doubles I have a partner making the call and we also have 4 people on the court to quickly clear balls so disrupting the server is never an issue. I view swinging at "out" balls to be purely a singles problem. In doubles, swing away.
GrassCourtFan
Legend
For a fast enough serve, you have to start the swing before the ball bounces.
You cannot be certain that the ball is OUT until it lands out, so not until after it bounces.
So obviously, if balls are coming fast enough, you're going to be swinging at a lot of out serves.
You cannot be certain that the ball is OUT until it lands out, so not until after it bounces.
So obviously, if balls are coming fast enough, you're going to be swinging at a lot of out serves.
Karma Tennis
Legend
If the circumstances described actually occurred, I would have simply walked off he court and Retired from the match. No point wasting time playing with opponents who obviously have no respect for the opponent or the sport itself. Life is too short for such rubbish.
Janet Tupper
New User
It was an inch or two out. I hit it into the net on my side as I didn’t realize it was out until I was already swinging. Just needed to clear it from my side.
Janet Tupper
New User
Me neither. He must not know etiquette or even the rules. He clearly thought he had an ace.
Janet Tupper
New User
Actually, HE walked off the court and refused to play when I asked him what he was doing. I kid you not.
Karma Tennis
Legend
OK. So he did you a favour. If he refused to continue ... then he automatically Defaults the match. YOU WIN!
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
Unless he's got some disorder he's unaware of or was having a really bad day, I'd lose his #. Tennis is supposed to be fun and how can you have fun when your opponent is acting like a spoiled child?
Pitti
Rookie
I always try to look before I serve, even if it’s just to know where is my opponent receiving and where top should I place the serve. I wait for the returner to clear the ball, and if I see a ball that he can step on when playing the point, I tell him before I serve. I have never had any problem with anyone because of this, either serving or returning. When I have to take a ball from the court on return, I tell the server in loud voice, not just a gesture. I don’t want to be hit!!
Janet Tupper
New User
Sounds normal to me. You’re a courteous player with good sportsmanship.
Janet Tupper
New User
Another comment was that this is borderline autistic. At the least, oblivious & self absorbed. Certainly out of it.
Pitti
Rookie
That is what I consider normal and what I expect from other people. Stepping on a ball is very dangerous. Also, people tend to react positively if they see you’re well-behaved and polite, but there’s always some a**holes out there. For those cases, and depending on each particular situation, the best option is not to play anymore, or not to play any other day with them, except if you can’t avoid it (tournaments or leagues).
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
Yeah; that was my comment:
Server etiquette disagreement
I was playing singles. The server missed his first serve on the first point of the game. (called after it bounced + I hit it). It rolled back onto my side of the court. As I gestured + moved over to clear the ball ( clearly unsafe) he didn’t look up, served his second serve from the deuce court...
tt.tennis-warehouse.com
Janet Tupper
New User
Absolutely. I care about the people I play with. At the very least so they’re not injured + off the court for weeks LOL
Janet Tupper
New User
Insightful and spot on.Yeah; that was my comment:
Server etiquette disagreement
I was playing singles. The server missed his first serve on the first point of the game. (called after it bounced + I hit it). It rolled back onto my side of the court. As I gestured + moved over to clear the ball ( clearly unsafe) he didn’t look up, served his second serve from the deuce court...
NTRP_3.75_Patrick_Rafter
Rookie
Played some jabroni in a mixed match that was crying about this. In fairness to him I don't really play a ton of league matches, just mens night/pick up game/messing around stuff so some of the etiquette stuff can be/is blown off but even still I'm usually pretty good about etiquette (calling the score before every point, etc) but this clown said something twice. I mean I get not hitting serves that are like 10 feet out but if it's even remotely close I'm going to make a play on the ball and if it's out it's out, sorry bro.
NTRP_3.75_Patrick_Rafter
Rookie
Like some corches say in football 'play to the echo of the whistle'. When I'm returning well I'm laser focused on the ball, unit turn, preparation, etc. Especially if the guy has a big serve I'm playing it like it's in. Every. Single. Time. If I'm able to consciously bounce it into the net or whatever, fine, but I'm not going to use one iota of effort or brain activity deciding whether or not to hit the ball if it's close so as not to offend the delicate sensibilities of the chump on the other side of the court.
Moon Shooter
Hall of Fame
"30. Delays during service. When the server’s second service motion is interrupted by a ball coming onto the court, the server is entitled to two serves. 40 THE CODETHE CODE 41 When there is a delay between the first and second serves: • The server gets one serve if the server was the cause of the delay; • The server gets two serves if the delay was caused by the receiver or if there was outside interference. The time it takes to clear a ball that comes onto the court between the first and second serves is not considered sufficient time to warrant the server receiving two serves unless this time is so prolonged as to constitute an interruption. The receiver is the judge of whether the delay is sufficiently prolonged to justify giving the server two serves."
This is an interesting rule. If the second serve is interrupted (say by a ball that enters the court from another court) then the server gets a first serve if the ball interrupts the "service motion." But would only get a new first serve if the ball causes a delay that is so prolonged that it "constitute an interruption". "The receiver is the judge of whether the delay is sufficiently prolonged to justify giving the server two serves."
So the first case involves an interruption during the server's "second service motion." The second case involves a delay of beginning the second serve motion.
Honestly, unless the delay was over say 1- 2 minutes I am not sure why it would justify giving me another *first* serve. What is it we are thinking would "justify" giving the server another first serve?
And if your second serve motion is interrupted why would I get another first serve instead of just another second serve?
This is an interesting rule. If the second serve is interrupted (say by a ball that enters the court from another court) then the server gets a first serve if the ball interrupts the "service motion." But would only get a new first serve if the ball causes a delay that is so prolonged that it "constitute an interruption". "The receiver is the judge of whether the delay is sufficiently prolonged to justify giving the server two serves."
So the first case involves an interruption during the server's "second service motion." The second case involves a delay of beginning the second serve motion.
Honestly, unless the delay was over say 1- 2 minutes I am not sure why it would justify giving me another *first* serve. What is it we are thinking would "justify" giving the server another first serve?
And if your second serve motion is interrupted why would I get another first serve instead of just another second serve?
Dartagnan64
G.O.A.T.
I think it's to stop gamesmanship from the receiver who could completely disrupt the server's rhythm if he wanted to take his sweet time returning a ball to the other court.
Why do you think pro players get upset when the opponent takes a medical time out for no apparent injury. Rhythm and momentum are a thing.
That being said, at rec levels, we aren't playing for the same stakes so there is no reason not to be sportsmanlike.
i'm gonna go out on a limb and say he didn't want to lose to a girl... and trying to get away with a fast one
from your story, guy was completely wrong... but to play devil's advocate...
were you slow playing in general (i'd get annoyed if felt folks were generally doing things to disrupt my rhythm (clearing balls that didn't need to be cleared, walking slow to get ready, constantly holding their hand up for me to wait for them, etc... often saw it with old & out of shape guys trying to catch a breather, or just trying to get in the "young impatient kid's head") between 1st and 2nd serve - those kinds of antics happened alot to me in 3.0-3.5). and if i came across someone doing this, and even if in this isloated scenario they were right, i could see myself "fast playing" the 2nd serve "to send a message" (that you have to play to my pace)
these days, as a matter of habit i always peek to make sure returner is ready (those antics no longer happen anyway), and fortunately my 2nd serve is good enough to survive long pauses between 1st and 2nd.
Dartagnan64
G.O.A.T.
That is one of the keys to happiness in rec tennis. Being able to serve two serves more than 10 seconds apart without losing your rhythm.
None of these things happen at higher levels because those players follow a deliberate serve routine that gives the opponent plenty of time to set for the second serve. You only see these shenanigans at the 3.0-3.5 level.
Karma Tennis
Legend
NVM
Morch Us
Hall of Fame
I am pretty sure there is something more to the story that we are missing. Without hearing the other side of the story, there is not way to conclude the etiquette here.
Some of the possibilities (wild assumptions at this point, since we probably may not ever hear the other side of the story, since OP's opponent is not in this forum). I will refer to OP's opponent as B and OP as A.
1. Did B think the "fault" call on first serve was too delayed? Essentially accusing A of trying to return the serve, and calling it "fault" when the return attempt was ineffective ?
2. Did B think the "fault" call was absolutely wrong and a cheating attempt ?
3. Did B think A was purposely trying to delay the point?
I mean did A check his cell phone on the way back to baseline after clearing phone, or chit-chat with someone on the next court or took a drink .. or just walking really slow ?
4. Is there any previous history between A and B ? Did you guy play before? How was that match?
5. Was B infact giving A the pont ? A mentioned the score he called was "love 15" which mean B awarded A the point. Again if that was the case why?
There is something totally fishy about the whole story, and outcome, and just trying to figure out the missing pieces.
What I am 100% sure is that, since B had been playing tennis for sometime, B could not have done this to everyone else (there would be too many issues enough to change his behavior otherwise). So there is definitely something more to the story.
Some of the possibilities (wild assumptions at this point, since we probably may not ever hear the other side of the story, since OP's opponent is not in this forum). I will refer to OP's opponent as B and OP as A.
1. Did B think the "fault" call on first serve was too delayed? Essentially accusing A of trying to return the serve, and calling it "fault" when the return attempt was ineffective ?
2. Did B think the "fault" call was absolutely wrong and a cheating attempt ?
3. Did B think A was purposely trying to delay the point?
I mean did A check his cell phone on the way back to baseline after clearing phone, or chit-chat with someone on the next court or took a drink .. or just walking really slow ?4. Is there any previous history between A and B ? Did you guy play before? How was that match?
5. Was B infact giving A the pont ? A mentioned the score he called was "love 15" which mean B awarded A the point. Again if that was the case why?
There is something totally fishy about the whole story, and outcome, and just trying to figure out the missing pieces.
What I am 100% sure is that, since B had been playing tennis for sometime, B could not have done this to everyone else (there would be too many issues enough to change his behavior otherwise). So there is definitely something more to the story.
Last edited:
