The tennis shot-clock: reality vs delusions

[intrepidish]

Right on schedule we're back to one of the most sterile debates in tennis: the shot clock.

Of course a lot of people don't seem to realize, the shot clock begins at the discretion of the umpire. And with good reason; if there's noise, a variety of random conditions on court obtain or anything else which might occasion a delay, it obviously falls upon the umpire to decide when it's appropriate to begin the clock. This is in fact, built into the concept of a tennis shot-clock which can not be a basketball shot clock due to the nature of tennis.

There's no getting around an element of subjectivity where this is concerned. When broadcasters show their own internally generated estimates for time, they are not using the same starting point as the umpires. The broadcasters generally simply make their own guesses as to when the point should start and then begin their own count which is why the numbers do not coincide with official counts as represented on shot clocks themselves.

So in the latest soap opera to take TTW by storm, when you see Nadal and Shapovalov with 31 and 29 second averages respectively, that's a broadcaster figure, not an umpire figure from the start of each point and its countdown as officially announced by an umpire.

This should put even more in perspective just how ridiculous it is to draw breathless distinctions when 2 players post virtually identical unofficial averages.

Some are also losing their minds having discovered that one is expected to be 'playing to the pace of the server' without having reflected that this by its very nature can not be a standardized measure and of course involves discretion as well.

 

[Zara]

Nadal fans don't like them much.

 

[weakera]

DELETE

 

[intrepidish]

Nadal fans don't like them much.

I like Nadal and I love having the shot clock as the inability of some of the clock's most vocal champions to understand the very basis for its use provides me with a never-ending source of amusement.

 

[Zara]

I like Nadal and I love having the shot clock as the inability of some of the clock's most vocal champions to understand the very basis for its use provides me with a never-ending source of amusement.

You are easily amused.

 

[jm1980]

Right on schedule we're back to one of the most sterile debates in tennis: the shot clock.

Of course a lot of people don't seem to realize, the shot clock begins at the discretion of the umpire. And with good reason; if there's noise, a variety of random conditions on court obtain or anything else which might occasion a delay, it obviously falls upon the umpire to decide when it's appropriate to begin the clock. This is in fact, built into the concept of a tennis shot-clock which can not be a basketball shot clock due to the nature of tennis.

There's no getting around an element of subjectivity where this is concerned. When broadcasters show their own internally generated estimates for time, they are not using the same starting point as the umpires. The broadcasters generally simply make their own guesses as to when the point should start and then begin their own count which is why the numbers do not coincide with official counts as represented on shot clocks themselves.

So in the latest soap opera to take TTW by storm, when you see Nadal and Shapovalov with 31 and 29 second averages respectively, that's a broadcaster figure, not an umpire figure from the start of each point and its countdown as officially announced by an umpire.

This should put even more in perspective just how ridiculous it is to draw breathless distinctions when 2 players post virtually identical unofficial averages.

Some are also losing their minds having discovered that one is expected to be 'playing to the pace of the server' without having reflected that this by its very nature can not be a standardized measure and of course involves discretion as well.

The rules are quite simple, there is a limit of 25 seconds (already bumped up from the original 20 seconds) to serve. The returner is expected to play to the pace of the server, but the server is still supposed to respect the time limit.

If Nadal and Shapovalov are both breaking the rule, they both deserve to be penalized, it's not that complicated

 

[dapchai]

I like Nadal and I love having the shot clock as the inability of some of the clock's most vocal champions to understand the very basis for its use provides me with a never-ending source of amusement.

Off topic, but I pretty much like the way you lengthen your sentences' subject part without troubling me to read them. As far as I know it's not an easy practice to write sentences with long subjects.

 

[Thriller]

Rafa gets rushed by his opponents in their service games and makes them wait on his. Sounds fair enough to me.

 

[ibbi]

Nadal fans don't like them much.

Rafa won the first ever top level title with a shot clock!

 

[Milanez82]

Right on schedule we're back to one of the most sterile debates in tennis: the shot clock.

Of course a lot of people don't seem to realize, the shot clock begins at the discretion of the umpire. And with good reason; if there's noise, a variety of random conditions on court obtain or anything else which might occasion a delay, it obviously falls upon the umpire to decide when it's appropriate to begin the clock. This is in fact, built into the concept of a tennis shot-clock which can not be a basketball shot clock due to the nature of tennis.

There's no getting around an element of subjectivity where this is concerned. When broadcasters show their own internally generated estimates for time, they are not using the same starting point as the umpires. The broadcasters generally simply make their own guesses as to when the point should start and then begin their own count which is why the numbers do not coincide with official counts as represented on shot clocks themselves.

So in the latest soap opera to take TTW by storm, when you see Nadal and Shapovalov with 31 and 29 second averages respectively, that's a broadcaster figure, not an umpire figure from the start of each point and its countdown as officially announced by an umpire.

This should put even more in perspective just how ridiculous it is to draw breathless distinctions when 2 players post virtually identical unofficial averages.

Some are also losing their minds having discovered that one is expected to be 'playing to the pace of the server' without having reflected that this by its very nature can not be a standardized measure and of course involves discretion as well.

Actually when umpire says the score is when the new point starts
You will notice when there is a big roar in the stands, he won't say the score the same second point is over

Also, a lot of tournaments have official timers on court that are not visible by angle of tv camera but everyone including the player and refs can and do see it

And we all know its a fact Rafa has made a career abusing the time rule.
One wonders if rules were followed how would Federer fare in somof those finals he lost.

 

[intrepidish]

The rules are quite simple, there is a limit of 25 seconds (already bumped up from the original 20 seconds) to serve. The returner is expected to play to the pace of the server, but the server is still supposed to respect the time limit.

If Nadal and Shapovalov are both breaking the rule, they both deserve to be penalized, it's not that complicated

The 'rules are simple' reply is of course missing the entire point. A tennis shot clock and the 'play to the server's pace' are both built with discretion from the very ground up.

Reread the opening post and think before typing.

 

[Kralingen]

Well, the only point you’ve made here is that the umpires are complicit in enabling Nadal, not that the actions of Rafa are correct.

I will never understand how Nadal fans refuse to see what is a ridiculous, intentionally drawn out routine that involves toweling off on both sides then placing it perfectly flat, sometimes taking 2-3 tries, then a slow walk over to serve, then dropping the ball, etc. etc. it’s been going on for 15 years now. You watch nearly every match of his. How can you possibly not see it?

I will concede that he was mostly fine yesterday against Shapo. However against Mannarino especially in the TB the dude was taking 45+ seconds and that’s no exaggeration.

 

[Mustard]

The only reason the shot clock exists is because some people over the years have become annoyed that Nadal can't be driven into dropping his orderly rituals. Nadal will always have rhe rituals. He will adapt them if necessary. Now he tends to take time in between first and second serves rather than before the first serve.

 

[Zara]

Rafa won the first ever top level title with a shot clock!

Anomaly, my friend.

 

[intrepidish]

Actually when umpire says the score is when the new point starts
You will notice when there is a big roar in the stands, he won't say the score the same second point is over

Also, a lot of tournaments have official timers on court that are not visible by angle of tv camera but everyone including the player and refs can and do see it

And we all know its a fact Rafa has made a career abusing the time rule.
One wonders if rules were followed how would Federer fare in somof those finals he lost.

Actually, as I noted, the numbers used by broadcasters are their own and not the shot clock itself. They are not simply reproducing official counts but the averages mistakenly end up getting repeated in forums as if they were official counts.

And 'we all' don't know what you claim in the slightest, actually. However, I do know which people tend to think they 'know' such things.

As I said above, for this reason I absolutely adore the shot clock.

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

 

[jm1980]

The 'rules are simple' reply is of course missing the entire point. A tennis shot clock and the 'play to the server's pace' are both built with discretion from the very ground up.

Reread the opening post and think before typing.

The discretion is already built in to when the umpire starts the shot clock. The matter should be simple from there: if the ball is not served by the time the shot clock reaches zero, then the server is in violation of the rule and should be penalized. No amount of fluff changes that

Play to the server's pace is a different rule altogether, and it does not supersede the time limit rule

 

[Thriller]

Some players like to think about what they are doing before they serve, think about which patterns of play are working, where best to serve to the opponent, gather their breath, calm themselves and serve.
Some just step up without a thought in their head and just hit it.

Maybe that's why Rafa has 20 slams and Shapo has yet to make a GS Final.....

 

[ibbi]

Anomaly, my friend.

Yes, true. Along with the 9 other anomalies since.

 

[Antonio Puente]

Fed wishes he had wasted time, focused and hit a serve at 40-15.

 

[intrepidish]

Well, the only point you’ve made here is that the umpires are complicit in enabling Nadal, not that the actions of Rafa are correct.

I will never understand how Nadal fans refuse to see what is a ridiculous, intentionally drawn out routine that involves toweling off on both sides then placing it perfectly flat, sometimes taking 2-3 tries, then a slow walk over to serve, then dropping the ball, etc. etc. it’s been going on for 15 years now. You watch nearly every match of his. How can you possibly not see it?

I will concede that he was mostly fine yesterday against Shapo. However against Mannarino especially in the TB the dude was taking 45+ seconds and that’s no exaggeration.

Incorrect. The point is that shot clocks and 'pace of the server' are inherently built on discretionary notions, in spite of the illusion of absolute time limits.

A further point is that broadcasters and their figures are still more misleading as they are not even providing official counts to tabulate averages.

Your comments about 'drawn out routines' is neither here nor there. I don't care how many ball bounces Novak prefers as long as it's roughly in line with the official count as announced by the umpire.

And again, that count itself is built on discretion in the first place.

 

[jm1980]

Some players like to think about what they are doing before they serve, think about which patterns of play are working, where best to serve to the opponent, gather their breath, calm themselves and serve.
Some just step up without a thought in their head and just hit it.

Maybe that's why Rafa has 20 slams and Shapo has yet to make a GS Final.....

Or just to catch their breath so they can play 30 shot rallies... The increased time between servers favors players whose playing styles require these breaks

Federer has 20 slams and he serves well under the time limit

 

[jm1980]

I like Nadal and I love having the shot clock as the inability of some of the clock's most vocal champions to understand the very basis for its use provides me with a never-ending source of amusement.

Your statement that you like Nadal already followed logically from the statement that you don't believe the time between serves rule needs to be respected

 

[Zara]

If the time is short or limited then you gotta act quick. Gott act fast under pressure and make quick decisions.

 

[Thriller]

Or just to catch their breath so they can play 30 shot rallies... The increased time between servers favors players whose playing styles require these breaks

Federer has 20 slams and he serves well under the time limit

Perfectly sensible. You have 25 seconds to do that. Would be stupid not to.

Rafa has to put up with being rushed in his opponent's service games. They have to put up with waiting more than they would like to during his. All's fair.

PS Maybe Federer would have a few more slams and fewer 40-15s if he didn't rush so unnecessarily crunch situations?

 

[intrepidish]

Or just to catch their breath so they can play 30 shot rallies... The increased time between servers favors players whose playing styles require these breaks

Federer has 20 slams and he serves well under the time limit

One can choose to ascribe meaning to players' preferences and rituals but this meaning is not objective but rather simply imposed by the subjective onlooker (in this case, you).

Tennis for obvious reasons did not have a shot clock historically. The attempt to impose a shot clock one as if the sport were basketball always included its own set of issues as the discretion is merely shifted to a slightly different point in the decision chain.

 

[Zara]

Yes, true. Along with the 9 other anomalies since.

Any big ones?

 

[Third Serve]

PS Maybe Federer would have a few more slams and fewer 40-15s if he didn't rush so unnecessarily crunch situations?

Maybe he'd actually have fewer Slams if he took things slower. Different methods work for different people and Fed strikes me as someone who likes to move at a rhythmic pace.

 

[jm1980]

Perfectly sensible. You have 25 seconds to do that. Would be stupid not to.

Rafa has to put up with being rushed in his opponent's service games. They have to put up with waiting more than they would like to during his. All's fair.

PS Maybe Federer would have a few more slams and fewer 40-15s if he didn't rush so unnecessarily crunch situations?

The point is, it would be fine if he did only take the allotted 25 seconds to catch his breath, but he very often exceeds this limit

 

[intrepidish]

Your statement that you like Nadal already followed logically from the statement that you don't believe the time between serves rule needs to be respected

Again rather predictably you've missed the actual noteworthy part of my statement i.e. my delight that the clock has been adopted given the inability of some of the clock's most vocal champions to understand the indeterminacy upon which it is necessarily built.

 

[Kralingen]

Incorrect. The point is that shot clocks and 'pace of the server' are inherently built on discretionary notions, in spite of the illusion of absolute time limits.

A further point is that broadcasters and their figures are even more misleading as they are not even providing official counts to tabulate averages.

Your comments about 'drawn out routines' is neither here nor there. I don't care how many ball bounces Novak prefers as long as it's roughly in line with the official count as announced by the umpire.

And again, that count itself is built on discretion in the first place.

Nothing in my post was incorrect. Of course, it is built on discretion and the time when the shot clock starts is the umpire’s decision only. I’m not a casual fan throwing “31 seconds ESPN said so”, just observations.

Your last point agrees with mine that the discretion Rafa receives is more ‘discrete’ than the rules enforced on the rest of the tour. As long as we can agree on that undeniable reality, I have no problem with it. It’s when people attempt to actively gaslight that I take offense. We all see what Nadal does between points.

It’s deemed legal because the umpires intentionally start the shot clock as late as possible. Of course Nadal actively time wastes, and actively needles the umpire (he spent the entire first changeover yelling at the ump in the Mannarino TB) to ensure he will not be penalized for doing so. And this arrangement is simply how it works when you’re a star. It’s no different than “superstar calls” in the NBA, roughing the passer on Peyton and Brady, quick yellow cards on rough tackles on Ronaldo and Messi.

Just as in all sports, there is a vested interest in letting the superstar (Rafa) do what he wants. I think that is acceptable.

 

[IgoatFerlkeVogus]

Right on schedule we're back to one of the most sterile debates in tennis: the shot clock.

Of course a lot of people don't seem to realize, the shot clock begins at the discretion of the umpire. And with good reason; if there's noise, a variety of random conditions on court obtain or anything else which might occasion a delay, it obviously falls upon the umpire to decide when it's appropriate to begin the clock. This is in fact, built into the concept of a tennis shot-clock which can not be a basketball shot clock due to the nature of tennis.

There's no getting around an element of subjectivity where this is concerned. When broadcasters show their own internally generated estimates for time, they are not using the same starting point as the umpires. The broadcasters generally simply make their own guesses as to when the point should start and then begin their own count which is why the numbers do not coincide with official counts as represented on shot clocks themselves.

So in the latest soap opera to take TTW by storm, when you see Nadal and Shapovalov with 31 and 29 second averages respectively, that's a broadcaster figure, not an umpire figure from the start of each point and its countdown as officially announced by an umpire.

This should put even more in perspective just how ridiculous it is to draw breathless distinctions when 2 players post virtually identical unofficial averages.

Some are also losing their minds having discovered that one is expected to be 'playing to the pace of the server' without having reflected that this by its very nature can not be a standardized measure and of course involves discretion as well.

Thoughtful and very well said.

 

[Thriller]

The point is, it would be fine if he did only take the allotted 25 seconds to catch his breath, but he very often exceeds this limit

Not any more. There is a shot clock. He has 25 seconds from when the last point is over, signified by the umpire calling the score. It's the same for all players.

 

[jm1980]

One can choose to ascribe meaning to players' preferences and rituals but this meaning is not objective but rather simply imposed by the subjective onlooker (in this case, you).

Tennis for obvious reasons did not have a shot clock historically. The attempt to impose a shot clock one as if the sport were basketball always included its own set of issues as the discretion is merely shifted to a slightly different point in the decision chain.

Tennis did not need a shot clock historically, in large part because players did not waste everyone's time with their rituals. This was also brought about by the increasingly physical nature of the game, necessitating these breaks

 

[intrepidish]

The point is, it would be fine if he did only take the allotted 25 seconds to catch his breath, but he very often exceeds this limit

I watch Nadal regularly but I don't see the official clock except for a fraction of the points.

So I, an assiduous fan of Nadal, do not actually see his official time counts most of the time and you presumably see those time counts even less often than I do (unless you're an even bigger fan than I thought in which case, my congratulations on your exquisite taste).

The things you assume you 'know' are of course rather different from that which you're able to demonstrate.

 

[jm1980]

Incorrect. The point is that shot clocks and 'pace of the server' are inherently built on discretionary notions, in spite of the illusion of absolute time limits.

The rule book very clearly states:

A maximum of twenty-five (25) seconds shall elapse from the moment the ball goes out of play at the end of the point until the time the ball is struck for the first serve of the next point. If such serve is a fault, then the second serve must be struck by the server without delay.

Please explain how this is an "illusion"

 

[intrepidish]

Tennis did not need a shot clock historically, in large part because players did not waste everyone's time with their rituals. This was also brought about by the increasingly physical nature of the game, necessitating these breaks

Tennis did not use a time clock because it was widely understood to be a sport where discretion was built into the starting of points. All the shot clock does is displace some of that discretion to elsewhere in the decision chain.

 

[Zara]

I Shot the clock!

Bang! Bang!

 

[intrepidish]

The rule book very clearly states:

A maximum of twenty-five (25) seconds shall elapse from the moment the ball goes out of play at the end of the point until the time the ball is struck for the first serve of the next point. If such serve is a fault, then the second serve must be struck by the server without delay.

Please explain how this is an "illusion"

I have multiple times already. The umpire announces the score and that begins the count. Umpires announce the score having taken into consideration the environment i.e. the court, player inquiries, the crowd, noise levels, injuries or health hazards, loose balls etc.

There's simply no way to have a shot clock like what one has in basketball with an automatic count down.

 

[Thriller]

The rule book very clearly states:

A maximum of twenty-five (25) seconds shall elapse from the moment the ball goes out of play at the end of the point until the time the ball is struck for the first serve of the next point. If such serve is a fault, then the second serve must be struck by the server without delay.

Please explain how this is an "illusion"

The umpire decides the ball is out of play when he calls the score. When we had line judges a player could challenge a call leading to a Hawk Eye etc ... in such circumstances the shot-clock would not have started until after the call had been confirmed and the umpire called the score.

 

[jm1980]

I watch Nadal regularly but I don't see the official clock except for a fraction of the points.

So I, an assiduous fan of Nadal, do not actually see his official time counts most of the time and you presumably see those time counts even less often than I do (unless you're an even bigger fan than I thought in which case, my congratulations on your exquisite taste).

The things you assume you 'know' are of course rather different from that which you're able to demonstrate.

The fact that Nadal regularly goes over the limit is well documented

According to an analysis by Melbourne, Australia-based Data Driven Sports Analytics of more than 140 matches each for Nadal, Federer and Djokovic from 2008 through this year, Rafa averaged 26.1 seconds between points when serving — the longest of the so-called “Big 3.”1 Nadal’s average time between points is over the limit — and that’s just an average, which means that he regularly serves beyond the 25-second rule. Chair umpires can use their discretion in starting the clock, so, clearly, Nadal is getting some wiggle room.

Rafael Nadal Is Playing Mind Games With You

He uses three subtle mental maneuvers against his opponents.

fivethirtyeight.com

 

[NeutralFan]

Nadal fans don't like them much.

Yeah , Djokovic never takes time between the points ( unlimited no of bounces)

 

[Zara]

Yeah , Djokovic never takes time between the points ( unlimited no of bounces)

The thread is opened by a Nadal fan - case in point.

 

[Zara]

Nadal's still a timewasting rodentia.

Nadal needs time to think about things. If you put him under pressure where you will have to make quick decisions, he'll struggle.

 

[intrepidish]

The fact that Nadal regularly goes over the limit is well documented

According to an analysis by Melbourne, Australia-based Data Driven Sports Analytics of more than 140 matches each for Nadal, Federer and Djokovic from 2008 through this year, Rafa averaged 26.1 seconds between points when serving — the longest of the so-called “Big 3.”1 Nadal’s average time between points is over the limit — and that’s just an average, which means that he regularly serves beyond the 25-second rule. Chair umpires can use their discretion in starting the clock, so, clearly, Nadal is getting some wiggle room.

Rafael Nadal Is Playing Mind Games With You

He uses three subtle mental maneuvers against his opponents.

fivethirtyeight.com

That 'analysis' is built on unofficial counts in fact, just as with the broadcaster averages. There is no published data for serve times anywhere available from the ITF or ATP.

It's more of the pseudo-knowledge you enjoy and I understand why you enjoy it but it's again another attempt to eliminate the built-in discretion of tennis shot clocks inherent in their design.

We know when someone goes over the limit when an umpire has informed us of that fact, not when someone else counted it out according to his own discretion

 

[Zara]

Has anyone kept track of the time violation by the players since inception?

 

[IgoatFerlkeVogus]

Nothing in my post was incorrect. Of course, it is built on discretion and the time when the shot clock starts is the umpire’s decision only. I’m not a casual fan throwing “31 seconds ESPN said so”, just observations.

Your last point agrees with mine that the discretion Rafa receives is more ‘discrete’ than the rules enforced on the rest of the tour. As long as we can agree on that undeniable reality, I have no problem with it. It’s when people attempt to actively gaslight that I take offense. We all see what Nadal does between points.

The discretion is already built in to when the umpire starts the shot clock. The matter should be simple from there: if the ball is not served by the time the shot clock reaches zero, then the server is in violation of the rule and should be penalized. No amount of fluff changes that

Play to the server's pace is a different rule altogether, and it does not supersede the time limit rule

Nadal walks to net to shut down young gun

After Canadian makes wild umpire claim

wwos.nine.com.au

Rafael Nadal had to use all his experience as a statesman of the tour to calm a situation that was ready to explode as Canadian young gun Denis Shapovalov and chair umpire Carlos Bernardes got in a heated disagreement over the Spanish star's pace of play at the end of the first set of their quarter-final.

Nadal closed out the first set 6-3 and Shapovalov was left peeved at the time the veteran Spaniard was taking in between points ahead of the second set.

Shapovalov approached umpire Bernardes prior to the first game of the set and urged him to call Nadal for a time violation.

"Started the clock so long ago and he's still not ready to play. You've gotta call him," the Canadian told the Brazilian official.
Minutes later, after Shapovalov won his first service game of the second set, the Canadian gestured to the umpire with eight seconds left on Nadal's shot clock, only this time Bernardes was not having any of it.

Shapovalov: He's not ready to play!

Bernardes: You're not ready either.

Shapovalov: What do you mean I'm not ready to play?

Bernardes: Because you're coming to talk to me.

Shapovalov: You guys are all corrupt...

Bernardes: You have eight seconds to play, what do you want? Why are you looking at me like you have to watch, you have the shot clock for this.

After the heated exchange with the chair umpire, Shapovalov and Nadal met at the net to discuss what was annoying the young Canadian so much.


"Rafa walked up with authority as if to say, 'Now son, come here' and put his hand out gently as to say, 'We don't have issues. You just get back there and play and we'll get it all done'," Todd Woodbridge said on commentary for Nine.

"It was like a senior defusing moment. A lot of other players would've gone a lot hotter a lot quicker than Rafa did."

Shapovalov was criticised for his move by US tennis great Jim Courier, who said the 22-year-old was "out of order".


"The shot clock was at seven and he had his hands up in the air like Nadal was doing something wrong," he said on Nine's coverage.

"Here we go, a conversation between the two players, we don't see that too often do we?

"Shapovalov has no business putting his hands up in the air when there's still time on the clock.

"If the clock's zero, then he should say, 'Bernardes, call it'. The frustration from the first set is bubbling over a little bit."

 

[intrepidish]

Has anyone kept track of the time violation by the players since inception?

No. As stated, the ITF and ATP don't even publish time related statistics for a single match much less all matches.

 

[NeutralFan]

The thread is opened by a Nadal fan - case in point.

Your hypocrisy is glaring . Saying Nadal fans don't like it when Djokovic has been doing the the same and as for toilet breaks you called out Nadal but Djokovic claimed to have a tear (lol) in last year AO qf , took break against Tsitispas in final and Musseti when he was 2 sets down ( FO) . How many such breaks Nadal took last year ? Zero ? How many Djokovic took? 3 breaks . i understand Fed fan having a problem with this but Djokovic fans should be the last one to make a fuss about these things when Novak is known to take toilet breaks and MTO whenever he's is going down. Have some objectivity.

 

[jm1980]

The umpire decides the ball is out of play when he calls the score. When we had line judges a player could challenge a call leading to a Hawk Eye etc ... in such circumstances the shot-clock would not have started until after the call had been confirmed and the umpire called the score.

The ball goes out of play when it bounces twice or is hit into the net. That's very easy to determine. According to the actual rules, that's when the 25 second countdown should start. So players are already being given more time than they should have

Hawkeye challenges, ball on the court, excessive crowd noise, etc. are rare, and the umpire can choose to give additional time when appropriate. But the vast majority of the points should start no less than 25 seconds after the previous point ends.