Shot clock observation

Z

zep

Hall of Fame
I watched the second set of the Zverev Tsitsipas match (it was my first tennis match since Wimbledon semis) and the umpire wasn't really starting the shot clock immediately after a point. He was constantly taking a few seconds before starting the clock. The players effectively had almost 30 secs after every point. Now this could be an outlier because I haven't watched other matches but if this is the norm then it's unlikely that the shot clock is going to be a problem for players who tend to play slow. In fact it's better now because they know exactly how much time they are taking. Plus the clock stopped as soon as they started the service motion, so if you toss the ball and say sorry like Murray often does, then you can do it again without any time pressure, there is also no time limit between first and second serves. However the shot clock will definitely remove those 35-40 seconds intervals that players like Nadal Djokovic etc like to take occasionally, especially before important points. Also not all umpires maybe as lenient, I would expect someone like Carlos Bernardes to start the clock a lot quicker.
 
The shot or serve clock is just a mild sort of extra pressure on players to stay within the limits and an external legitimation of an umpire's decision to penalise when necessary.

It's a bit of a 'fake change' and that's probably to the good.
 
You can be rest assured that Nadal Djok will not like umpire calling the score until the entire crowd settles down completely after the previous point
 
The rules are supposed to be "The clock begins when the chair umpire announces the score and turns off when the server lifts the racket to signify the serving motion. After even-numbered games, the clock will start when the balls are in place on the server’s side of the court." Also "The chair umpire will have the discretion to pause the clock or reset the clock to 25 seconds." One of the commentators said that it basically starts after the crowd gets settled down.
 
zep said:
I watched the second set of the Zverev Tsitsipas match (it was my first tennis match since Wimbledon semis) and the umpire wasn't really starting the shot clock immediately after a point. He was constantly taking a few seconds before starting the clock. The players effectively had almost 30 secs after every point. Now this could be an outlier because I haven't watched other matches but if this is the norm then it's unlikely that the shot clock is going to be a problem for players who tend to play slow. In fact it's better now because they know exactly how much time they are taking. Plus the clock stopped as soon as they started the service motion, so if you toss the ball and say sorry like Murray often does, then you can do it again without any time pressure, there is also no time limit between first and second serves. However the shot clock will definitely remove those 35-40 seconds intervals that players like Nadal Djokovic etc like to take occasionally, especially before important points. Also not all umpires maybe as lenient, I would expect someone like Carlos Bernardes to start the clock a lot quicker.
Click to expand...

The rules are:
Djz641SXoAEuqL0.jpg:small
 
Max G. said:
The rules are supposed to be "The clock begins when the chair umpire announces the score and turns off when the server lifts the racket to signify the serving motion. After even-numbered games, the clock will start when the balls are in place on the server’s side of the court." Also "The chair umpire will have the discretion to pause the clock or reset the clock to 25 seconds." One of the commentators said that it basically starts after the crowd gets settled down.
Click to expand...
You are correct.
 
The umpire's discretion bit is definitely necessary. I can imagine a bunch of random things that are out of the control of the player that would prevent them from starting the point on time. So the umpire has to be able to deal with it.
 
I didn't say it was unnecessary. I merely said it created an opportunity for complaint. Complaint should actually be sanctioned with a fine, but the 'talent' will not accept that fact.

Max G. said:
The umpire's discretion bit is definitely necessary. I can imagine a bunch of random things that are out of the control of the player that would prevent them from starting the point on time. So the umpire has to be able to deal with it.
Click to expand...
 
tennisaddict said:
You can be rest assured that Nadal Djok will not like umpire calling the score until the entire crowd settles down completely after the previous point
Click to expand...

That's the rule.

Excerpts from the article in the sport24:
¤¤ The ATP, WTA and US Tennis Association agreed on a protocol that would allow the clocks to be used in pre-US Open events so players could better adjust to the change.

The serve clock will allow 25 seconds for players to begin the service motion, the umpire starting the clock after announcing the score with receivers responsible for playing at the server's place.
"We're going to start the clocks when he starts his motion, not when he's bouncing the ball," Bradshaw [ATP executive rules and competition vice president] said.

Umpires can pause or reset the clock to allow for an interruption and time is allowed for exchanging balls after games.
"We built a protocol that has common sense built into it," Bradshaw said. "The things where they should pause should be obvious to everyone.
"If you have a great point, people go crazy, they'll wait until applause dies down. When players hear the score, they know the clock has started."

After a warning, servers will lose a serve and receivers will lose a point for clock violations.

Don't expect a desperate time-expiring 'toss and no swing' trick to pay off.
"If the guy runs up and throws it up trying to beat the clock, that's not going to work," Bradshaw said. ¤¤

Read more:
https://www.sport24.co.za/Tennis/atp-executive-expects-serve-clock-success-20180731
 
The rule seem clear enough, although it is a deviation from the rule that a point is over when the ball is dead, i.e after the second bounce of the ball. One thing I noted, is the positioning of the clocks.. A right handed server can easily glance across at the clock. A left handed person has his back to the clock, which would, if he wished to observe the time ticking away, cause more disruption to his service routine.
 
MasturB said:
We haven't seen it really tested yet because Rafa and Novak haven't played with it yet.
Click to expand...

The only point on which they have the actual 25 seconds, is the first serve of the game. Because the clock starts when the umpire announces "time", I think. Rafa has towels to distribute.
 
junior74 said:
The only point on which they have the actual 25 seconds, is the first serve of the game. Because the clock starts when the umpire announces "time", I think. Rafa has towels to distribute.
Click to expand...
It's kind of dumb to have the clock now after changing it from 20 seconds to 25 seconds at the beginning of the year. There's no telling how many violations Nadal would've had over the years.
 
True Fanerer said:
It's kind of dumb to have the clock now after changing it from 20 seconds to 25 seconds at the beginning of the year. There's no telling how many violations Nadal would've had over the years.
Click to expand...

I think the stupid thing is that the clock doesn't start when the point is over, but only after the umpire has told the scoreline. That often happens more than 10 seconds after the actual point is over.

A tennis match will consist of more waiting than playing :(
 
junior74 said:
I think the stupid thing is that the clock doesn't start when the point is over, but only after the umpire has told the scoreline. That often happens more than 10 seconds after the actual point is over.

A tennis match now has a lot more time without playing than with playing.
Click to expand...
It's double stupid. Should've just kept it at 20 seconds if they were going to make the clock start after the umpire calls the score.
 
I thought the whole point of the shot clock was to take decision out of umpire's hands. They're actually in a weaker position now, players will argue that umpire is calling score on his serve faster than his opponents. Was going to mention Layhani as someone who waits forever to get his dramatic announcement full attention.
 
junior74 said:
I think the stupid thing is that the clock doesn't start when the point is over, but only after the umpire has told the scoreline. That often happens more than 10 seconds after the actual point is over.

A tennis match will consist of more waiting than playing :(
Click to expand...

The whole thing was expected to be farcical as the will to actually stop players from hurting the rhythm of the game, and put pressure on the opponent in crucial moments, is instrumental for resolving the problem, and it wasn't there until now.

It is overly optimistic to think that a shot clock will remedy the situation just by counting seconds, when the whole counting can be delayed for reasons outside of the absolutely necessary for the natural flow of the match.

The fact that there is no obligation of the umpire to start the shot clock immediately after a point is over, unless for extreme circumstances, speaks for the intention behind the new rules: it is to remove all pressure from the umpire to time anything.

However, the rule will have a desired side effect: in the extreme cases, when the offender intends to put additional pressure on the receiver in crucial moments, the clock will limit that practice by giving the receiver ball park estimate of the time that he has to wait. Nadal's 40 plus seconds will be gone for the most part.

So, they have (or it looks like those are the instructions towards the umpires) sacrificed the "normal" time between the points (made it longer) to limit the extreme gamesmanship in crucial moments, which, while not ideal, will still be an improvement.

:cool:
 
Last edited:
junior74 said:
Layhani awaits so long to tell the score theatrically that guys like Kyrgios, Brown and Federer are ready to serve before the score has even been announced :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yep, people forget that this game is supposed to be played to the pace of the server.

That new situation actually removes that and interrupts the pace of the server, if he serves quickly.

Effectively, what was until now against the rules (that the receiver should not hinder the flow of the server), is now officially part of the umpire's prerogatives.

It is the sad reality.

8-)
 
It's the way that it should be really. It allows for a degree of common sense. If someone hits an ace the shot clock should pretty much be started again straight away, if they play a 30 shot rally, a few moments can be taken before it's reset.
 
ibbi said:
It's the way that it should be really. It allows for a degree of common sense. If someone hits an ace the shot clock should pretty much be started again straight away, if they play a 30 shot rally, a few moments can be taken before it's reset.
Click to expand...

What if the crowd makes some minor noise as a result of a well placed serve in a crucial moment?

:cool:
 
Yes, the shot clock starts when the player takes the balls. Which means that players have on average around 29-30 seconds to serve. It gaves them time to use the towel.

If there is an exceptionally long rally of 40 shots, the umpire will give more than 30 seconds to serve.

The only reason way Fed fans want a paranoid ultra-strict rule application of 25 seconds to serve is because they think that would favor Federer. It is not about an ethical "aplication of the rules" but about favoring Federer.

If the ATP were to apply a new rule to allow only the first serve, Fed fans would be the first to complain, since it would not favor Federer.
 
Last edited:
junior74 said:
The only point on which they have the actual 25 seconds, is the first serve of the game. Because the clock starts when the umpire announces "time", I think. Rafa has towels to distribute.
Click to expand...

The chair umpire must announce to players “Time” after 60 seconds of the changeover break (90 sec) have elapsed. The 25-second clock starts after 65 seconds (of 90) have elapsed.
 
Last edited:
Sport said:
Yes, the shot clock starts when the player takes the balls. Which means that players have on average around 29-30 seconds to serve. It gaves them time to use the towel.

If there is an exceptionally long rally of 40 shots, the umpire will give more than 30 seconds to serve.

The only reason way Fed fans want a paranoic ultra-strict rule application of 25 seconds to serve is because they think that would favor Federer. It is not about an ethical "aplication of the rules" but about favor Federer.

If the ATP were to apply a new rule to allow only the first serve, Fed fans would be the first to complain, since it would not favor Federer.
Click to expand...

Nope it's about tennis being entertainment & endless towelling and ball bouncing isn't.
 
It’s still very subjective because the umpires can take as long as they like to call the score before starting the clock and I have a feeling they will will still target Rafa by calling the score immediately after the end of the point.
 
octobrina10 said:
The rules are:
Djz641SXoAEuqL0.jpg:small
Click to expand...
These rules are designed to disrupt Rafa’s routine - pure and simple. What do they hope to gain by targetting Rafa? Why not just let him be? So trivial - all these changes. How much do they fine them for a ‘Start of match violation’? When I was courtside in Madrid, Rafa was taking an average of 16 seconds when I timed him from the end of the point so now he can enjoy more time.
 
Rafa's routine is designed to disrupt the rules. Let's get the causal sequence right!

clayqueen said:
These rules are designed to disrupt Rafa’s routine - pure and simple. What do they hope to gain by targetting Rafa? Why not just let him be? So trivial - all these changes. How much do they fine them for a ‘Start of match violation’? When I was courtside in Madrid, Rafa was taking an average of 16 seconds when I timed him from the end of the point so now he can enjoy more time.
Click to expand...
 
Sport said:
Yes, the shot clock starts when the player takes the balls. Which means that players have on average around 29-30 seconds to serve. It gaves them time to use the towel.

If there is an exceptionally long rally of 40 shots, the umpire will give more than 30 seconds to serve.

The only reason way Fed fans want a paranoic ultra-strict rule application of 25 seconds to serve is because they think that would favor Federer. It is not about an ethical "aplication of the rules" but about favor Federer.

If the ATP were to apply a new rule to allow only the first serve, Fed fans would be the first to complain, since it would not favor Federer.
Click to expand...
Yep. All this fooferah about the shotclock was from people hoping Nadal would be penalized when the facts are that this really isn't a change from how the umpires have been calling matches for a long time. For ages they have started their own time clocks on their scoring pad on the arm of their chair when they called the score. It's the media who have created much of the problem by having their own clock independent of what the umpire was using and they'd put up their own graphics on the screen and some of the commies would rattle on and on about it. Other than that, the biggest problem is the umpires who aren't consistent with one umpire calling the score quickly and another giving the players loads of time. You can't blame some of the players for getting frustrated over the whole situation.
 
octobrina10 said:
The rules are:
Djz641SXoAEuqL0.jpg:small
Click to expand...

junior74 said:
This change has given the server even more time between points.

Until now, the 25 seconds have started when the point was over - but now applause and announcement are to be waited for... Sad.
Click to expand...
Rules are much better now. To have a strict 20 seconds allowed between when the ball lands out up to when the server strikes the ball was not realistic to apply to each and every point. Because of that, it turned the rule into a joke and allowed umpires to take full control on what they believed was enough time between each point, which is still a better approach than applying the rule like a robot each and every time someone was over the time limit without regard for the context of why that may be. But now that the umpires have the tools to effectively apply the rule WITH the understanding the the players are entitled to more rest under certain conditions, actually legitimizes it.
 
The reality is that officialdom got spooked by TV networks complaining that long matches with long periods where nothing happens is bad television.

I really don't think a few Fed fans on TT have any influence whatsover, so indulging in the usual persecution mania beloved of Nadal fans is a mistake.

vernonbc said:
Yep. All this fooferah about the shotclock was from people hoping Nadal would be penalized when the facts are that this really isn't a change from how the umpires have been calling matches for a long time. For ages they have started their own time clocks on their scoring pad on the arm of their chair when they called the score. It's the media who have created much of the problem by having their own clock independent of what the umpire was using and they'd put up their own graphics on the screen and some of the commies would rattle on and on about it. Other than that, the biggest problem is the umpires who aren't consistent with one umpire calling the score quickly and another giving the players loads of time. You can't blame some of the players for getting frustrated over the whole situation.
Click to expand...
 
True Fanerer said:
Bernardes-et-051410-02.jpg
Click to expand...
The same umpire who allows other players to have a toilet break of up to 11 minutes refused to allow Rafa time to go and turn his shorts the right way round forcing him to do it on court in front of millions of TV viewers around the world. That’s how much Rafa is targetted. He deserved his suspension from Rafa’s matches.
 
clayqueen said:
The same umpire who allows other players to have a toilet break of up to 11 minutes refused to allow Rafa time to go and turn his shorts the right way round forcing him to do it on court in front of millions of TV viewers around the world. He deserved his suspension from Rafa’s matches.
Click to expand...
Think about how many countless times he let Rafa break the rules though. No one mentions that.
 
Bartelby said:
The reality is that officialdom got spooked by TV networks complaining that long matches with long periods where nothing happens is bad television.

I really don't think a few Fed fans on TT have any influence whatsover, so indulging in the usual persecution mania beloved of Nadal fans is a mistake.
Click to expand...

The reality is that Fed started to complain...
 
It should be called The Rafael Nadal Rule. It is all about Rafa. Every single bit of timing is based on Rafa’s routine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

OrangePower
Shot clock rules
Replies
38
Views
4K
diggler
diggler
Z
Ok, Does Nadal ever go beyond zero on the shot clock without warning?
Replies
1
Views
330
zuluzazu
Z
junior74
Shot clock - the point isn't over until the umpire has spoken?
2
Replies
74
Views
4K
Tennis_Hands
T
r2473
  • Poll Poll
Do you support a "shot clock"?
3 4 5
Replies
216
Views
14K
Vrad
V
K
Shot Clock
Replies
24
Views
3K
Backspin1183
Backspin1183
Back
Top