Should there be a shot clock in tennis?

[Love Game]

Even 5-setters?

good question ... .... i've seen some 5 setters last 5 hours plus. stopping them at 90 minutes is a crackup! Just whoever has the higher score when the time is up wins! :lol:

 

[Love Game]

thank you ........ And do they start those stop watches after every, single point by both players?

does it really matter? It is obvious they are not enforcing it.

all the same, i'd like to hear what woodrow has to say.

 

[marpiw]

This is no chess forum nor a soccer one...Clocks in tennis should never exist...they ruin the game...and I think upires must be less lenient in the courts...they should enforce with all their strength the existing legislation on this sunject...

 

[Love Game]

This is no chess forum nor a soccer one...Clocks in tennis should never exist...they ruin the game...and I think upires must be less lenient in the courts...they should enforce with all their strength the existing legislation on this sunject...

totally agree!

when was the 20 or 22 second rule made anyway? i agree with an earlier poster that these days the outer margin should be 30 seconds.

 

[JennyS]

I just watched the 3rd set tiebreak between Nadal and Djokovic at Madrid and this is how much time they took to serve (I did not include points after change of ends)

0:38
0:41
0:43
0:30
0:38
0:50
0:34
0:48
0:47
0:51
0:52
1:05 (Nadal did this at 7-7)
0:55
0:47
0:45
0:44

I'd call this a good argument for a shot clock!

 

[JennyS]

So that means they wasted 5 minutes, 31 seconds on the non change of ends points in just the tiebreak!

 

[joeri888]

I just watched the 3rd set tiebreak between Nadal and Djokovic at Madrid and this is how much time they took to serve (I did not include points after change of ends)

0:38
0:41
0:43
0:30
0:38
0:50
0:34
0:48
0:47
0:51
0:52
1:05 (Nadal did this at 7-7)
0:55
0:47
0:45
0:44

I'd call this a good argument for a shot clock!

That's absolutely ridiculous. it's not even necessary. I know it would be a disadvantage for them if there was more restrictions, but if they get a point penalty 10 times the first tournament with those rules, I'm sure they'll be quick learners.

 

[ChanceEncounter]

If you put in a shot clock, it makes it black and white. Are you in favor of giving time violations when a player breaks a string and has to change it out? What about after a 25 shot rally with the crowd going crazy?

As an umpire, I'm not disagreeing that it needs to be enforced more; however, a shot clock is not a good idea. There needs to be some judgment involved.

Then they'd enforce a mandatory equipment timeout, just like how basketball/football/baseball have automatic injury or emergency timeouts. The umpire's discretion would be when the shot clock is suspended, otherwise it's always in effect.

 

[deltox]

well, the umps either need to step up and stop the delays otherwise there will be a shot clock on the court buzzing a penalty within 2 years. even the announcers Jmac and Conners have been saying it is coming. im sure they have a little inside info on the subject

 

[zagor]

That's absolutely ridiculous. it's not even necessary. I know it would be a disadvantage for them if there was more restrictions, but if they get a point penalty 10 times the first tournament with those rules, I'm sure they'll be quick learners.

Of course they would,but when umpires aren't enforcing rules some players take advantage.The worst they get from umpire is a warning which doesn't really mean anything,they face no real consequences.

 

[Mungo73]

I just watched the 3rd set tiebreak between Nadal and Djokovic at Madrid and this is how much time they took to serve (I did not include points after change of ends)

0:38
0:41
0:43
0:30
0:38
0:50
0:34
0:48
0:47
0:51
0:52
1:05 (Nadal did this at 7-7)
0:55
0:47
0:45
0:44

I'd call this a good argument for a shot clock!

you are a troll. that was the 3rd set tie break of a 4 hours match on clay. they were exhausted but yeah ignore that and talk like if thats their average time . TROLL

 

[Rippy]

you are a troll. that was the 3rd set tie break of a 4 hours match on clay. they were exhausted but yeah ignore that and talk like if thats their average time . TROLL

The length of that match was largely due to all the timewasting anyway.

 

[veritech]

you are a troll. that was the 3rd set tie break of a 4 hours match on clay. they were exhausted but yeah ignore that and talk like if thats their average time . TROLL

rules are rules. you think roddick vs el aynaoui at the AO years ago took that long? santoro vs clement in the longest match of all time?

1 minute between serves is ridiculous

 

[coloskier]

you are a troll. that was the 3rd set tie break of a 4 hours match on clay. they were exhausted but yeah ignore that and talk like if thats their average time . TROLL

SO WHAT!!!! I don't care if it is match point in the 5th set, 11-10 in the tiebreak. Fitness is just as important in winning a tennis match as anything else. if you are too tired, then maybe you should try to end your points quicker so you won't be tired. To be honest I think it would actually benefit Nadal if he stopped stalling, because his game is primarily running the other player all over the court with his topspin forehand. He should be much more rested, unless his topspin forehand is falling short and he has to scramble to get the return back. Then it is his own fault.

 

[deltox]

SO WHAT!!!! I don't care if it is match point in the 5th set, 11-10 in the tiebreak. Fitness is just as important in winning a tennis match as anything else. if you are too tired, then maybe you should try to end your points quicker so you won't be tired. To be honest I think it would actually benefit Nadal if he stopped stalling, because his game is primarily running the other player all over the court with his topspin forehand. He should be much more rested, unless his topspin forehand is falling short and he has to scramble to get the return back. Then it is his own fault.

i agree, i think nadal is in better shape than almost anyone in the mens field today save 2-5 folks. using the roddick strategy or not letting them rest would benefit him greatly. especially against people like Del Potro

 

[ChanceEncounter]

you are a troll. that was the 3rd set tie break of a 4 hours match on clay. they were exhausted but yeah ignore that and talk like if thats their average time . TROLL

So rules can be violated because it's a long match?

So in the 5th set of a grand slam, the players should be allowed to start hitting it into the doubles alley or foot faulting on serves? Hey, they're tired, after all!

You're the troll, it looks like, for such an absurd post.

 

[JennyS]

you are a troll. that was the 3rd set tie break of a 4 hours match on clay. they were exhausted but yeah ignore that and talk like if thats their average time . TROLL

Apparently they added at least ONE HOUR to the match by wasting time. So the match would have been 3 hours. Huge difference.

 

[JennyS]

2008 Wimbledon final 4th set tiebreak starting after 4-2 point

(obviously the time before the first serve is greater since it includes switching servers)

Nadal serves at 5-2: 44 seconds
Nadal serves at 5-3: 34 seconds

Federer serves at 5-4: 31 seconds
Federer serves at 5-5: 24 seconds

Nadal serves at 5-6: 40 seconds

change of ends through Nadal's serve at 6-6: 1:13

Federer serves at 7-6 (included challenge): 32 seconds
Federer serves at 7-7included challenge): 27 seconds

Nadal serves at 8-7: 48 seconds
Nadal serves at 8-8: 40 seconds

Federer serves at 9-8: 33 seconds

 

[woodrow1029]

2008 Wimbledon final 4th set tiebreak starting after 4-2 point

(obviously the time before the first serve is greater since it includes switching servers)

Nadal serves at 5-2: 44 seconds
Nadal serves at 5-3: 34 seconds

Federer serves at 5-4: 31 seconds
Federer serves at 5-5: 24 seconds

Nadal serves at 5-6: 40 seconds

change of ends through Nadal's serve at 6-6: 1:13

Federer serves at 7-6 (included challenge): 32 seconds
Federer serves at 7-7included challenge): 27 seconds

Nadal serves at 8-7: 48 seconds
Nadal serves at 8-8: 40 seconds

Federer serves at 9-8: 33 seconds

So neither player was within the allowed time the entire tiebreak from when you started counting.

 

[deltox]

So neither player was within the allowed time the entire tiebreak from when you started counting.

i honestly can understand a 5 second or so leeway on tiebreaks due to the importance of every point. play usually seems to lsow down during the tiebreak, its the regular points during a set that bother me at least.

 

[woodrow1029]

Then they'd enforce a mandatory equipment timeout, just like how basketball/football/baseball have automatic injury or emergency timeouts. The umpire's discretion would be when the shot clock is suspended, otherwise it's always in effect.

They do have timeouts for equipment out of adjustment which covers broken glasses, shoes, torn shorts, shirts. The racket is not included in that. If you r racket or strings break, you are on your own time.

 

[OrangePower]

We need a shotclock. For those that argue that there are already time-related rules in effect, well yes, but they don't get enforced. Ok, so those folks would say that the solution is better enforcement. But realistically though, why would umpires suddenly start enforcement when they have not been doing it all this time?

A shotclock would:

* Ensure consistent and fair (read: equal) enforcement of existing time-related rules
* Make it clear to the players and viewers exactly how much time is left
* Make matches shorter / more exciting due to less wasted time
* Allow more predictability regarding length of matches and thus better scheduling
* Add additional excitement of seeing the clock run down in between points

And to cater for occasional circumstances like broken strings, long points, etc...

* Allow each player 3 (or whatever) time-outs per set. Kinda like they get a set number of challenges. That will add extra excitement and strategy (when to use your time-outs, etc)

Traditionalists will hate all this I know.

But let's face it, tennis is not exactly drawing in huge viewership these days. The other day the Pilot Penn finals was bumped from TV by Little League Baseball for crying out loud. Sad sad day when ESPN would rather show a bunch of little kids playing stripped-down baseball rather than the finals of a tennis tournament. So I'm all for changes that could maybe make the game more exciting for casual viewers and easier for TV schedulers.

 

[deltox]

We need a shotclock. For those that argue that there are already time-related rules in effect, well yes, but they don't get enforced. Ok, so those folks would say that the solution is better enforcement. But realistically though, why would umpires suddenly start enforcement when they have not been doing it all this time?

A shotclock would:

* Ensure consistent and fair (read: equal) enforcement of existing time-related rules
* Make it clear to the players and viewers exactly how much time is left
* Make matches shorter / more exciting due to less wasted time
* Allow more predictability regarding length of matches and thus better scheduling
* Add additional excitement of seeing the clock run down in between points

And to cater for occasional circumstances like broken strings, long points, etc...

* Allow each player 3 (or whatever) time-outs per set. Kinda like they get a set number of challenges. That will add extra excitement and strategy (when to use your time-outs, etc)

Traditionalists will hate all this I know.

But let's face it, tennis is not exactly drawing in huge viewership these days. The other day the Pilot Penn finals was bumped from TV by Little League Baseball for crying out loud. Sad sad day when ESPN would rather show a bunch of little kids playing stripped-down baseball rather than the finals of a tennis tournament. So I'm all for changes that could maybe make the game more exciting for casual viewers and easier for TV schedulers.

Please dont bash the LLWS, these kids have worked as hard as any pro tennis player to make it this far. a pro tennis player wins 7 matches to win a slam. the LLWS championship game contenders have had to go thru over 30 games to make it here with no more than 1 loss in them all. These kids arent stripped down, 13 years old and throwing 70 mph fastballs, making next to no errors in a game and hitting like champs. its as good as any pro game you see on tv except they dont get paid millions and this is their chance to shine on TV and make their lifetime experience list, brag to their kids and grandkids and live a dream. The LLWS is a once a year thing, while ATP 250 events happen regularly.

As for the rest of your post i totally agree. and to add to your reasons, it would give the players whho work on fitness and conditioning a bigger advantage and a well deserved one.

 

[pesh]

Something like a shot clock could be useful, but the way it is isn't to bad.

 

[OrangePower]

Please dont bash the LLWS, these kids have worked as hard as any pro tennis player to make it this far. a pro tennis player wins 7 matches to win a slam. the LLWS championship game contenders have had to go thru over 30 games to make it here with no more than 1 loss in them all. These kids arent stripped down, 13 years old and throwing 70 mph fastballs, making next to no errors in a game and hitting like champs. its as good as any pro game you see on tv except they dont get paid millions and this is their chance to shine on TV and make their lifetime experience list, brag to their kids and grandkids and live a dream. The LLWS is a once a year thing, while ATP 250 events happen regularly.

As for the rest of your post i totally agree. and to add to your reasons, it would give the players whho work on fitness and conditioning a bigger advantage and a well deserved one.

I don't mean to bash the kids or the LLWS, I mean to bash the fact that the LLWS has a higher projected viewership than an ATP tournament finals. I bet you that if there was some regular season NFL or NCAA football game on and scheduled to be televised, ESPN would not bump it in order to show LLWS. It just goes to show the current sorry state of tennis as far as TV mass-market appeal goes.

 

[deltox]

I don't mean to bash the kids or the LLWS, I mean to bash the fact that the LLWS has a higher projected viewership than an ATP tournament finals. I bet you that if there was some regular season NFL or NCAA football game on and scheduled to be televised, ESPN would not bump it in order to show LLWS. It just goes to show the current sorry state of tennis as far as TV mass-market appeal goes.

they bump MLB coverage for it. the penant race is HOT right now and it still loses time slots for it. the LLWS gets GREAT ratings just so you understand though.

the wimbledon championships earned a 4.3 neilsen rating this year and a 4.7 last year. the ladies were in the low 3s. most things never see a 4.0 or above rating from this system. the little league world series final game got, and your gonna love this 19.3. better than any regular season game for any sport other than SOME NFL games. so the LLWS championship game was 4 + times more watched than the wimbledon final worldwide.

Sunday's game produced a whopping 19.3 Nielsen rating and 42 share , nearly three times any other major U.S. market. The overnight, or preliminary, national rating for ABC was 2.8.
At the end of the game, the rating on KGTV Channel 10 was 23.3 with a 49 share, meaning almost half the homes watching TV in San Diego County just after 2:30 p.m. were watching the game.
For comparison, Sunday's Padres telecast had a 2.1 rating, about half the season average. The 19.3 rating was higher than for any (major league) World Series game shown in San Diego since 2002, and almost in line with a typical Chargers game (which averaged 26.8 last season).
Saturday's rain-delayed U.S. championship game earned a combined 13.7 rating and 28 share on ABC and ESPN2. The first four games, all on ESPN or ESPN2, averaged a 10.4 rating.

for reference the super bowl gets low 40s ratings. so about 1/4 the amount of viewers of the super bowl watch the llws championship game.

that should help understand why this happens.

for the record, i thought it got ratings around 3-4, the 19.3 blew my mind as well. ill check more on the ratings tomorrow after i get home, but im sure it gets awesome ratings regardless.

 

[theroleoftheunderdog]

did anyone catch the del potro-monaco match?
it was SO PAINFUL to watch just because of the time between points

 

[Deleted member 743561]

OP, wherever you are, I hope you're smiling. The moments are soon to be measured. As Daniel Day-Lewis might put it, There Will Be Clock.

P.S. For posterity's sake, I have placed mine ballot in the dusty box.

 

[Ruark]

No, no shot clock. This isn't football. There are too many "what ifs" that can delay a serve a few seconds. Good grief, imagine a buzzer going off right in the middle of a match point service toss. Just leave it to the umpire. It's an utterly unworkable idea.

 

[Sudacafan]

Tennis shot clock? What would be the max time allowed to return a Karlovic serve?

 

[mika1979]

Yes make it black or white takes pressure of umpires