Shot clock observation

Deine VS

Rookie
1-5 shots - 15s ( i read somewhere that 50-70% points finish in that frame )
5-20 shots - 25s
20+ shots - no limit
Clock starts after the ball is dead. Of course it would be flexible to some degree ( crowd cheering, player fell down, bird on a court.....)
That is how I would do it.
 

captainbryce

Hall of Fame
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.
In reality, yes. All players will technically have more time. However, in practice they will end up taking less time than they actually do (since it was rarely ever enforced in the past). The clock being visible to everyone (players and audience alike) will in itself speed the pace of play, and justify the officials penalizing players every time they violate it. There will be less room for complaint, and therefore more players will actually follow the rule.
 

octobrina10

Talk Tennis Guru
Hmm. I'm still curious to know who you are talking to in this post:
Dj6ku_RW0AAMmUY.jpg
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
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.
They know that the 25 seconds from a dead ball is impractical so they’ve finally come to their senses.
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
In reality, yes. All players will technically have more time. However, in practice they will end up taking less time than they actually do (since it was rarely ever enforced in the past). The clock being visible to everyone (players and audience alike) will in itself speed the pace of play, and justify the officials penalizing players every time they violate it. There will be less room for complaint, and therefore more players will actually follow the rule.
Rafa fans have been calling for the shot clock since Fed convinced them to enforce an out of date rule which was brought in to stop players like Nastase interacting with the crowd and engaging in other antics for no reason. The clock is essential if it’s a serious rule which should be enforced against every player every single time from the start of the match to the end not just when the umpire feels like it.

With the clock, justice will be seen to be done.
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
Well if we are going to play childish games, how do you feel about Federer constantly wiping his nose with his fingers? Roddick, who had his own particular 'tic', even commented about Federer's nose wiping habit, because he also does it off court. He said, "Has the guy never heard of tissues"
taking a screen shot
 
Last edited:
They know that the 25 seconds from a dead ball is impractical so they’ve finally come to their senses.

They will see what impractical means, once the matches start taking too long, and it messes up their schedules and those of the broadcasters.

That will be a lot more problematic than a couple of punks slugging it out on court to kill the opponent's rhythm and focus.

:cool:
 

diggler

Hall of Fame
From what I saw, the system is perfect. The clock starts after the applause and score is called. Long point probably has more applause.
 

captainbryce

Hall of Fame
Well if we are going to play childish games, how do you feel about Federer constantly wiping his nose with his fingers? Roddick, who had his own particular 'tic', even commented about Federer's nose wiping habit, because he also does it off court. He said, "Has the guy never heard of tissues"
What was Roddick’s tick?
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru

This is one of the reasons why the time limit between points was introduced when players like Nastase messed about using a spectator’s umbrella pretending to play holding it. It was 30 seconds then and it was not to prevent players playing at their own pace.
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
People think that only Rafa exceeds time limit between points.

Time limit between tennis points under new scrutiny
AP
Published 6:38 p.m. UTC Jan 11, 2013
berdych.jpg

World No. 6 Tomas Berdych was one of the players penalized at Chennai, India, for taking too long between points, and he wasn't happy.
William West, AFP/Getty Images

MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — Australian Open tournament referee Wayne McEwen thinks common sense will prevail in the issue of time taken between points in tennis matches, suggesting the 20-second rule at Grand Slam events is there to be enforced only if needed.

At tournaments in Chennai, Doha, Auckland and Brisbane this month, players received warnings and penalties for exceeding the time limit under a push for stricter enforcement of the ATP World Tour's rules.

McEwen on Friday said the he speaks to the chair umpires before the Australian Open begins, reminding them of the time between points and "to keep it fair, keep it consistent."

Chair umpires can give a warning and then begin imposing penalties points if slow play continues, McEwen says.

"We don't want players out there being penalized after playing a fantastic point, but then again we don't want players deliberately taking too long and that's what we really look at. We focus on that and tell them to use good common sense, good judgment."

The ATP's 25-second rule between points — it differs by five seconds from that in place at Grand Slams — hadn't been strictly enforced in recent years, but players were sent emails in advance of the 2013 season warning them of the crackdown.

Former Wimbledon champion Pat Cash said he sees a need to speed up matches if players are deliberately delaying play, and that the tennis-watching public — either in the stands on TV — have the most to gain.

"I think they need to enforce them (the rules)," Cash said Friday. "As much as we like Novak (Djokovic) bouncing balls between points, I think the fans just want to see some tennis."

There were dozens of warnings or fault penalties imposed on players in pre-Australian Open tournaments, including 36 in the first five days of the Qatar Open in Doha.

The players included Guillermo Garcia-Lopez of Spain, who lost his first-round match in Doha to Lukas Lacko, and 2006 Australian Open finalist Marcos Baghdatis, who was warned and penalized — losing a first serve — in his semifinal loss in Brisbane to Grigor Dimitrov on Saturday. Others were warned, including U.S. Open champion Andy Murray in Brisbane and Gael Monfils in Qatar.

Tomas Berdych was one of the players penalized at Chennai, India for taking too long between points, and he wasn't happy.

"I think there are many question marks around it and I don't see any good reason to have this rule," Berdych said. "The hot conditions, it's almost impossible to make it. In Chennai, where it was really humid, you need the towel every time you finish a rally."

Last year's Australian Open final between Djokovic and Rafael Nadal took 5 hours, 53 minutes to complete, the longest final in the history of Grand Slam tennis. There were complaints that the pair often took longer than 30 seconds between points, and Berdych cautions that strict enforcement of the time rule could see those kind of matches become a thing of the past.

"It's not going to help improve the game, there's going to be no chance to see matches like Rafa and Djoko in the final," Berdych said.

McEwen disagrees, and stresses again the need for common sense.

"The players sometimes need a little time to recover, especially in the heat of the day, or in a long match," McKewen said. "Last year's final was a classic match, the points were lasting incredibly long. In a case like that, you don't want to be killing it for everyone."

Published 6:38 p.m. UTC Jan 11, 2013

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/sport...een-tennis-points-under-new-scrutiny/1825959/
 

steamed

New User
Is there any evidence that this rule implementation speeds up play?

In other words, in comparisons of comparable matches i.e. 6-3/6-3 matches one with one without the clock, that the clocked matches are any faster? Or, perhaps make the comparison really strict and compare matches with the same number of points, or super strict comparisons such as comparisons between matches with the same time elapsed overall during points played?
 

tenisdecente

Hall of Fame
LOL @ the ATP (or USTA, dont know exactly which is the authority to blame) for this farse.
Let's be real - the only way this rule CAN be enforced FAIRLY is with a shot clock like the NBA, with a LOUD buzz sound when the time is up. If it is still at umpìre's discretion, when it starts and when it should be penalized going over the time limit, the clock is useless....
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
People think that only Rafa exceeds time limit between points.

Time limit between tennis points under new scrutiny
AP
Published 6:38 p.m. UTC Jan 11, 2013
berdych.jpg

World No. 6 Tomas Berdych was one of the players penalized at Chennai, India, for taking too long between points, and he wasn't happy.
William West, AFP/Getty Images

MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — Australian Open tournament referee Wayne McEwen thinks common sense will prevail in the issue of time taken between points in tennis matches, suggesting the 20-second rule at Grand Slam events is there to be enforced only if needed.

At tournaments in Chennai, Doha, Auckland and Brisbane this month, players received warnings and penalties for exceeding the time limit under a push for stricter enforcement of the ATP World Tour's rules.

McEwen on Friday said the he speaks to the chair umpires before the Australian Open begins, reminding them of the time between points and "to keep it fair, keep it consistent."

Chair umpires can give a warning and then begin imposing penalties points if slow play continues, McEwen says.

"We don't want players out there being penalized after playing a fantastic point, but then again we don't want players deliberately taking too long and that's what we really look at. We focus on that and tell them to use good common sense, good judgment."

The ATP's 25-second rule between points — it differs by five seconds from that in place at Grand Slams — hadn't been strictly enforced in recent years, but players were sent emails in advance of the 2013 season warning them of the crackdown.

Former Wimbledon champion Pat Cash said he sees a need to speed up matches if players are deliberately delaying play, and that the tennis-watching public — either in the stands on TV — have the most to gain.

"I think they need to enforce them (the rules)," Cash said Friday. "As much as we like Novak (Djokovic) bouncing balls between points, I think the fans just want to see some tennis."

There were dozens of warnings or fault penalties imposed on players in pre-Australian Open tournaments, including 36 in the first five days of the Qatar Open in Doha.

The players included Guillermo Garcia-Lopez of Spain, who lost his first-round match in Doha to Lukas Lacko, and 2006 Australian Open finalist Marcos Baghdatis, who was warned and penalized — losing a first serve — in his semifinal loss in Brisbane to Grigor Dimitrov on Saturday. Others were warned, including U.S. Open champion Andy Murray in Brisbane and Gael Monfils in Qatar.

Tomas Berdych was one of the players penalized at Chennai, India for taking too long between points, and he wasn't happy.

"I think there are many question marks around it and I don't see any good reason to have this rule," Berdych said. "The hot conditions, it's almost impossible to make it. In Chennai, where it was really humid, you need the towel every time you finish a rally."

Last year's Australian Open final between Djokovic and Rafael Nadal took 5 hours, 53 minutes to complete, the longest final in the history of Grand Slam tennis. There were complaints that the pair often took longer than 30 seconds between points, and Berdych cautions that strict enforcement of the time rule could see those kind of matches become a thing of the past.

"It's not going to help improve the game, there's going to be no chance to see matches like Rafa and Djoko in the final," Berdych said.

McEwen disagrees, and stresses again the need for common sense.

"The players sometimes need a little time to recover, especially in the heat of the day, or in a long match," McKewen said. "Last year's final was a classic match, the points were lasting incredibly long. In a case like that, you don't want to be killing it for everyone."

Published 6:38 p.m. UTC Jan 11, 2013

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/sport...een-tennis-points-under-new-scrutiny/1825959/
Nadal is not the only one, but he is by far the worst violator
 
Fed instigated the shot clock after the 2012 AO Final bwtween Nadal & Djokovic which took nearly 6 hrs of gripping tenis.

They stopped enforcing the time limit between points for decades but Fed complained relentlessly and in 2012 when he was the president of the players council he instigated the enforcement of the rule.

The change made in 2012 actually made the penalties more lax - instead of a warning followed by a point penalty, it became warning followed by loss of a serve and then loss of a point. If it was supposed to be strictly enforced the past six years all thanks to Roger, how many times have Nadal and other time violators been docked a serve and subsequent point after abusing the rule repeatedly?

In a slam final no less.

2zsmnmv.png
 
So why did Fed not want a shot clock? Is it because he is not really interested in the actual time taken between points but the imaginary time taken by Rafa?

You live in an echo chamber if you really believe that.

From my previous post, comments he made in 2014. He wanted players to adhere to the limit and umpires to enforce the rule. It didn't happen. Blame Nadal, Djokovic et al. for the shot clock.

"I just think it's important that we, as players, play up to speed," said Federer, adding that the issue has been discussed at player meetings. "And don't exceed the time limit, because what I don't want is that we lose viewers because we play too slow.

"What you're going to see next is all of a sudden a shot clock," Federer said. "We discussed that as well. We said we didn't need to go that far. I wouldn't be surprised if that were to happen all of a sudden. Because you only just need a couple of guys always doing it, and that's when it happens."
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
You are quite right. They have a track record of pretending to fix this issue while legalising time-wasting. A tradition that the shot clock innovation stands foresquare within.

The change made in 2012 actually made the penalties more lax - instead of a warning followed by a point penalty, it became warning followed by loss of a serve and then loss of a point. If it was supposed to be strictly enforced the past six years all thanks to Roger, how many times have Nadal and other time violators been docked a serve and subsequent point after abusing the rule repeatedly?

In a slam final no less.

2zsmnmv.png
 

Raz11

Professional
Has anyone seen a player go over the 25 seconds yet? Curious what actually happens or what the time violation is.
 

steamed

New User
The idea of a shot clock is excellent. I support it. E
Has anyone seen a player go over the 25 seconds yet? Curious what actually happens or what the time violation is.

Aren't they supposed to lose the point? In basketball, you lose the possession. In football, you lose yardage. There has to be a penalty, and unless it's a warning, the only possible penalty is loss of the point.
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
You live in an echo chamber if you really believe that.

From my previous post, comments he made in 2014. He wanted players to adhere to the limit and umpires to enforce the rule. It didn't happen. Blame Nadal, Djokovic et al. for the shot clock.
Rafa fans welcome the shot clock. Fed wanted the rule enforced but he didn’t want the shot clock because he wanted the umpires to target Rafa unfairly.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
I don't welcome the shot clock and numerous other people have laughed at it as any kind of solution to slow play, so you got all that wrong.

Rafa fans welcome the shot clock. Fed wanted the rule enforced but he didn’t want the shot clock because he wanted the umpires to target Rafa unfairly.
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
The change made in 2012 actually made the penalties more lax - instead of a warning followed by a point penalty, it became warning followed by loss of a serve and then loss of a point. If it was supposed to be strictly enforced the past six years all thanks to Roger, how many times have Nadal and other time violators been docked a serve and subsequent point after abusing the rule repeatedly?

In a slam final no less.

2zsmnmv.png
These times are irrelevant. They are not the umpire’s timings because only the umpire knows when he/she starts the clock.
 

octobrina10

Talk Tennis Guru
I am not mistaken the conversation is between octo and poster bartleby. "Rafa, ass, picking, butt" were mentioned. This highly aroused @octobrina10 into a discussion with bartleby about what appears to be rafa, his ass and picking. For some reason federer was mentioned in this. If I am not mistaken federer does not pick his ass. Although I have not seen all his matches. I believe the shotclock isnt much of a factor either for him. However, I dont know for sure. I believe discussion between bart and octo came about due to discussions on the shot clock earlier

This post (quoted) is yet another proof that Rafa bashers' mind revolves around his lower body.
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
LOL @ the ATP (or USTA, dont know exactly which is the authority to blame) for this farse.
Let's be real - the only way this rule CAN be enforced FAIRLY is with a shot clock like the NBA, with a LOUD buzz sound when the time is up. If it is still at umpìre's discretion, when it starts and when it should be penalized going over the time limit, the clock is useless....
Couldn’t agree more.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
'The shot clock that never was' is quite clearly directed at Nadal on one important point.

And that is the point before the game even begins.

The point before a serve is an area where a few people excel at sloth.
 

zep

Hall of Fame
These times are irrelevant. They are not the umpire’s timings because only the umpire knows when he/she starts the clock.

Both armchair timekeepers as well as unofficial timekeepers in the broadcast booths used to start the clock as soon as the point was over. The umpire now starts it after announcing the score, which is after the crowd applause, and that's 5-6 seconds on average. Nadal usually takes 25-26 seconds on average but that's from the moment the previous ball was dead. So on average he would have absolutely no problem with the shot clock. The only adjustment he will have to make is on big points when he tends to take too long at times. It's the same for Djokovic, can't bounce the ball 20-25 times before big points now.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
This is exactly right. In true bureaucratic fashion, they have solved a problem by defining it out of existence with an added dash of technology. Slow play will however continue.

Both armchair timekeepers as well as unofficial timekeepers in the broadcast booths used to start the clock as soon as the point was over. The umpire now starts it after announcing the score, which is after the crowd applause, and that's 5-6 seconds on average. Nadal usually takes 25-26 seconds on average but that's from the moment the previous ball was dead. So on average he would have absolutely no problem with the shot clock. The only adjustment he will have to make is on big points when he tends to take too long at times. It's the same for Djokovic, can't bounce the ball 20-25 times before big points now.
 
Rafa fans welcome the shot clock.

Nadal himself doesn't.

Fed wanted the rule enforced but he didn’t want the shot clock because he wanted the umpires to target Rafa unfairly.

Nadal does it all on his own accord.

These times are irrelevant. They are not the umpire’s timings because only the umpire knows when he/she starts the clock.

He was given a warning so the umpire clearly knew he was exceeding the time limit.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Nadal's dilatory attitude to serving allows the crowd plenty of time to inject itself into the game.

This doesn't happen nearly as much with players who get on with play. They just don't have the opportunity.
 

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
^^^This is it in a nutshell. It’s the most ridiculous rule in tennis.
You say that only because Nadal frequently goes over the limit. Other guys are serving in much better time abiding by the rules, so why can't he? They deal with the same conditions that he does. Why are you drawing even more attention to it? If I were a Nadal fan, there's no way I'd be on here making excuses for him left and right in such a wreckless way.
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
You say that only because Nadal frequently goes over the limit. Other guys are serving in much better time abiding by the rules, so why can't he? They deal with the same conditions that he does. Why are you drawing even more attention to it? If I were a Nadal fan, there's no way I'd be on here making excuses for him left and right in such a wreckless way.
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
The server sets the tempo, within the limit. There's no limit downwards.

It's considered extremely rude and unsportsmanlike if you make the server wait.
It’s extremely rude to rush the receiver by serving too quickly after the previous point.
 
You're wrong.

The server decides.

This is not an opinion.

To be precise, as long as the server doesn't deliberately try to serve without even minimal time for the opponent to get ready, the players play to the server's pace.

Actually, the umpire can call a time violation before the allotted time is up, if the receiver is deliberately stalling the server or appear to not play to his pace.

Trollqueen is wrong as usual.

:cool:
 

junior74

Bionic Poster
To be precise, as long as the server doesn't deliberately try to serve without even minimal time for the opponent to get ready, the players play to the server's pace.

Actually, the umpire can call a time violation before the allotted time is up, if the receiver is deliberately stalling the server or appear to not play to his pace.

Trollqueen is wrong as usual.

:cool:

I remember Novak got a warning once, and Murray stepped up to the umpire and said it was him who should get it, because he made Novak wait... Nicely done by Murray, of course, but this type of time wasting is almost never recognised by the umpires :(
 
I remember Novak got a warning once, and Murray stepped up to the umpire and said it was him who should get it, because he made Novak wait... Nicely done by Murray, of course, but this type of time wasting is almost never recognised by the umpires :(

Yeah, when they have a hard time to enforce even the rules concerning the server, it is pretty hard to do it for a much less frequent event that is even more arbitrary to estimate.

:cool:
 
Top