The "late call" loophole

[Steady Eddy]

You can only do it when you, or your team are serving. Suppose your opponent hits an apparent winner cross-court. You say nothing, but wonder if it was out. After a while you realize you can't call it out after this much time has passed, after all, if it was clearly out, why didn't you speak up. So instead you wait until you announce the score before you serve, (this is why you have to be the serving team). You announce a score that gives you the point, if the opponents say, "Why 40-30? Was that cross-court shot out?" You reply, "Oh yeah, that one was out."

Like as if it was so far out that no call was even necessary. This is why it's better to call or signal ALL shots out as out.

 

[cha cha]

Or just, you know, play fair?

 

[ChaelAZ]

Rec tennis is serious!

 

[FlamingCheeto]

You can only do it when you, or your team are serving. Suppose your opponent hits an apparent winner cross-court. You say nothing, but wonder if it was out. After a while you realize you can't call it out after this much time has passed, after all, if it was clearly out, why didn't you speak up. So instead you wait until you announce the score before you serve, (this is why you have to be the serving team). You announce a score that gives you the point, if the opponents say, "Why 40-30? Was that cross-court shot out?" You reply, "Oh yeah, that one was out."

Like as if it was so far out that no call was even necessary. This is why it's better to call or signal ALL shots out as out.

almost as genius as ordering Water and serving yourself fountain soda loophole? that's pretty sleazy tennis etiquette bruh

 

[Steady Eddy]

Or just, you know, play fair?

I'm not arguing for doing this, I'd just like to make more people aware of it so it won't happen as often. This happens all the time. If I say, "Well, if it was out, why didn't you call it out?", some people get the idea the I'm the poor sport.

I don't like it when I have to wait to hear the score announced in order to know if a ball was in.

 

[cha cha]

I'm not arguing for doing this, I'd just like to make more people aware of it so it won't happen as often. This happens all the time. If I say, "Well, if it was out, why didn't you call it out?", some people get the idea the I'm the poor sport.

I don't like it when I have to wait to hear the score announced in order to know if a ball was in.

Understood.
I have learnt to presume everything I hit close the lines is out, so I always ask.

 

[Steady Eddy]

Rec tennis is serious!

It doesn't have to be very serious in order for it to be played correctly. I mean, why even bother keeping score if it's just going to be a farce. BTW, I'm ok playing without keeping score. I serve 4 points, my hitting partners serves 4 and we keep switching without keeping track of who's ahead. Gives you more leeway for experimenting with stuff.

 

[nochuola]

My friends and I have been implementing a rule where we both just admit our eye sights suck, so if anytime it's just too difficult to call, we just redo the point. Obviously don't work in competitive matches, but saves a lot of arguing in friendlys.

 

[cha cha]

My friends and I have been implementing a rule where we both just admit our eye sights suck, so if anytime it's just too difficult to call, we just redo the point. Obviously don't work in competitive matches, but saves a lot of arguing in friendlys.

We have taken this a step further.
Anything which is not a foot out or the hitting side does not concede enthusiastically is a good ball.
We prefer winners to errors.

 

[Steady Eddy]

My friends and I have been implementing a rule where we both just admit our eye sights suck, so if anytime it's just too difficult to call, we just redo the point. Obviously don't work in competitive matches, but saves a lot of arguing in friendlys.

Since you say that works for you, great! But I can see many not being willing to call an in ball "out", but being willing to call an in ball, "I'm not sure, do over". It doesn't feel so much like a lie. Even if you're 99% sure the ball was good, that's not being 100% sure, so you're not lying.

I can see against some people that every point I won, I'd have to win twice!

 

[Steady Eddy]

We have taken this a step further.
Anything which is not a foot out or the hitting side does not concede enthusiastically is a good ball.
We prefer winners to errors.

Good point! Suppose a video of your long rally showed that 3 out balls were played. It's still good to have the long rally than a short point. I mean you're there to play tennis, right?

For the same reason I think it's good to give your opponent two serves after any interruption between the serves. I want to play tennis, not be a double-fault collector.

 

[Dartagnan64]

You say nothing, but wonder if it was out.

If you are wondering, it's in. /thread.

 

[cha cha]

For the same reason I think it's good to give your opponent two serves after any interruption between the serves. I want to play tennis, not be a double-fault collector.

Absolutely.
I still do not know how you Americans are able to play leagues on hard without assaulting each other. I get robbed so often even playing on clay.

 

[Purestriker]

You can only do it when you, or your team are serving. Suppose your opponent hits an apparent winner cross-court. You say nothing, but wonder if it was out. After a while you realize you can't call it out after this much time has passed, after all, if it was clearly out, why didn't you speak up. So instead you wait until you announce the score before you serve, (this is why you have to be the serving team). You announce a score that gives you the point, if the opponents say, "Why 40-30? Was that cross-court shot out?" You reply, "Oh yeah, that one was out."

Like as if it was so far out that no call was even necessary. This is why it's better to call or signal ALL shots out as out.

Uh...this is terrible. If you miss the call, own it. But waiting to see what your partner does on the return before calling the line is terrible.

 

[Mungo]

Surprised nobody has mentioned SwingVision yet. I am about ready to unleash on my friends and have been wondering whether it will just cause problems of a different nature.

 

[Steady Eddy]

Surprised nobody has mentioned SwingVision yet. I am about ready to unleash on my friends and have been wondering whether it will just cause problems of a different nature.

I bet it will put a stop to a lot of this funny business.

 

[StringSnapper]

I'm not arguing for doing this, I'd just like to make more people aware of it so it won't happen as often. This happens all the time. If I say, "Well, if it was out, why didn't you call it out?", some people get the idea the I'm the poor sport.

I don't like it when I have to wait to hear the score announced in order to know if a ball was in.

then theres the "I did, didnt you hear?" loophole

I think it just comes down to people being fair, at least most of the time cos everyone makes mistakes. And if they arent then dont hit with them!

 

[Morch Us]

This is highly disadvantageous to the the person who hit the ball. Also in practice this allows too many IN balls to be called as "replay".

The correct method is to play some (or a lot of) out balls (as IN) if your eyesight is bad. You just have to get over the entitled feeling of "deserving the point" for a ball 1inch outside the line. In practice the number of out balls you play as IN will still be very small amount, and it does not change the dynamics of the match much.

if anytime it's just too difficult to call, we just redo the point.

 

[Morch Us]

Would be very hard to get away with this. "Prompt calls" is a rule. And if there was no "prompt" and "clear" call, the ball is considered IN as per rules (even if in reality the ball landed outside the line). It will be hard to get away with clear rule violations.

instead you wait until you announce the score before you serve