The tennis shot-clock: reality vs delusions

Zara

G.O.A.T.
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.

Yes, but Novak fans aren't complaining about it by opening threads.
 

Kralingen

Bionic Poster

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."
Is this an Octobrina dupe? ignoring my point and then copy and pasting long, non-sequitur articles as a response?

If you think my post was about Shapovalov and not about my experience viewing Rafa in hundreds of tournaments over the past decade, you don't have a clue.
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
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
The rule plainly states the 25 second countdown should start when the ball goes out of play and the point ends. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out precisely when this is
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
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
That is precisely the matter that is being debated here, because players feel that the umpires are not enforcing the rules because Nadal is Nadal, and they are turning a blind eye to his constant rule breaking when it comes to the time limit
 

intrepidish

Hall of Fame
The rule plainly states the 25 second countdown should start when the ball goes out of play and the point ends. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out precisely when this is supposed to start

It does not take a rocket scientist; it takes an umpire i.e. the person who is considered best situated to decide when reasonable conditions are satisfied.

Those reasonable conditions involve the court, player inquiries, the crowd, noise levels, injuries, equipment malfunctions 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.
 

Milanez82

Hall of Fame
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.
???

There is an official on court shot clock at Australian Open since 2018 and it has nothing to do with broadcasters.


Before it used to be 20 seconds and Ref had the right to start the clock later after longer points or whatever.

Don't really care about broadcasters average or whether its right or wrong.
For example in 5th set today Rafa was serving faster then usual after Shapo complained about him combining MTO with clothes change over. The usual time left on the on court clock whenever camera zoomed in on him was 6-7 seconds.

As for him making the career out of it, you denying he took advantage of it on countless times vs Federer?
And i specifically say Federer and not Djokovic who is also a notorious time waster and surely loves every extra second beyond allowed to gather himself.
 

intrepidish

Hall of Fame
That is precisely the matter that is being debated here, because players feel that the umpires are not enforcing the rules because Nadal is Nadal, and they are turning a blind eye to his constant rule breaking when it comes to the time limit

You're close to grasping your incoherence. Yes, it is the umpire who BY DEFINITION is built into any shot clock in tennis. Complaining about the umpire's discretion is to ignore the very basis for the shot clock in tennis in the first instance.
 

NeutralFan

G.O.A.T.
Yes, but Novak fans aren't complaining about it by opening threads.

I am talking about your post whinning about the toilet break in another thread. Tell us how many breaks Novak took last year and how many Rafa took. Go ask Andy Murray who has been victim of Novak's gamemanship in many AO open , ask Tsitispas , Musseti, Feidze ( recent victims in last year ) when was the last time Nadal took a toilet break ?? against Cilic and he retired from that match unlike Djokovic who went on to win the tournament with a tear ( defying science) I'll have to put you on ignore for being blatantly hypocrite. Its not Nadal's problem if Djokovic is so disliked everywhere with his try too hard , needy behaviour.
 
Last edited:

intrepidish

Hall of Fame
???

There is an official on court shot clock at Australian Open since 2018 and it has nothing to do with broadcasters.


Before it used to be 20 seconds and Ref had the right to start the clock later after longer points or whatever.

Don't really care about broadcasters average or whether its right or wrong.
For example in 5th set today Rafa was serving faster then usual after Shapo complained about him combining MTO with clothes change over. The usual time left on the on court clock whenever camera zoomed in on him was 6-7 seconds.

As for him making the career out of it, you denying he took advantage of it on countless times vs Federer?
And i specifically say Federer and not Djokovic who is also a notorious time waster and surely loves every extra second beyond allowed to gather himself.

Of course there is an official clock; please try and keep up. The numbers provided by broadcasters however are not the average of those shot clock numbers.

We are only rarely shown the actual shot clock.
 

Gazelle

G.O.A.T.
"at the discretion of the umpire"

is what's problematic here, cause they're useless

Action against timewasting should be automized:

1) immediate counting as soon as ball bounced twice
2) if clock hits 0, loud beeping starts
3) 5 secs later, recorded boos are played if player hasn't served yet
4) 10 secs later, ball machine shoots tomatoes at server
 

Milanez82

Hall of Fame
It does not take a rocket scientist; it takes an umpire i.e. the person who is considered best situated to decide when reasonable conditions are satisfied.

Those reasonable conditions involve the court, player inquiries, the crowd, noise levels, injuries, equipment malfunctions 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.
And somehow its usually reasonable to give extra time to Rafa who every single time has to get the towel, sort through balls, pick his ar$e or whatever while opposing player has to get ready couple of times for the serve
 

Zara

G.O.A.T.
I am a Sampras fan first so all this time wasting matters to me but I am not too hung up on it either just to make my position clear. I am not a big fan of Novak's ball bouncing either, but as I said before, I am all for the good tennis. If there's no time then slow players will take advantage of it be it Nadal or Djokovic etc. It just doesn't make things right. I just prefer good and somewhat quick tennis.

Having said that, I can also see the challenges of this 25 seconds rule especially after long rallies where you do need a few more seconds to breath and then get back to position. However, you want to also keep the rallies short and maybe take a bit more risk. Otherwise the game suffers when matches become mostly about rallies.
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
It does not take a rocket scientist; it takes an umpire i.e. the person who is considered best situated to decide when reasonable conditions are satisfied.

Those reasonable conditions involve the court, player inquiries, the crowd, noise levels, injuries, equipment malfunctions 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.
You're close to grasping your incoherence. Yes, it is the umpire who BY DEFINITION is built into any shot clock in tennis. Complaining about the umpire's discretion is to ignore the very basis for the shot clock in tennis in the first instance.
There is a way to institute a basketball style countdown... It is, in fact, what the rules state right now! They make no mention of umpire discretion. The countdown starts when the ball goes out of play

The only ones who pretend it's impossible to follow this rule to the letter are Nadal and his fans
 

intrepidish

Hall of Fame
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.


The clock itself is built on discretion in its very nature. You've simply assumed that this discretion is being arbitrarily applied in favor of one player and I have not. You're reading intention into umpires and I am not.

Arguing about umpire intention is a very, very weak place to make some sort of coherent stand. Neither one of us has any clue as to inner motivations beyond those officially stated.
 

Zara

G.O.A.T.
I am talking about your post whinning about the toilet break in another thread. Tell us how many Novak take last year and how many Rafa took. Go ask Andy Murray who has been victim of Novak's gamemanship in many AO open finals, ask Tsitispas , Musseti, Feidze ( recent victims in last year ) when was the last time Nadal took a toilet break ?? against Cilic and he retired from that match unlike Djokovic who went on to win the tournament with a tear ( defying science) I'll have to put you on ignore for being blatantly hypocrite. Its not Nadal's problem is Djokovic is so disliked everywhere with his try too hard , needy behaviour.

I wasn't happy with Novak's toilet break against Andy. But two wrongs don't make it right and from what I have read so far, Rafa's toilet break wasn't a legit one given that he wanted the sun to move a bit but I am not too critical of it either. I'd feel this to be wrong if the intention behind it was to break his opponent's rhythm.
 
Last edited:

intrepidish

Hall of Fame
There is a way to institute a basketball style countdown... It is, in fact, what the rules state right now! They make no mention of umpire discretion. The countdown starts when the ball goes out of play

The only ones who pretend it's impossible to follow this rule to the letter are Nadal and his fans


The umpire necessarily makes a determination literally every time the umpire chooses when to announce the score.

The umpire assesses the state of the court, player inquiries, the crowd, noise levels, injuries, equipment malfunctions or health hazards, loose balls etc.

If the umpire finds any of these things merit attention, then the score announcement may be delayed or stopped entirely for a time.

The fact that you still don't grasp this is endlessly amusing.
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
The clock itself is built on discretion in its very nature. You've simply assumed that this discretion is being arbitrarily applied in favor of one player and I have not. You're reading intention into umpires and I am not.

Arguing about umpire intention is a very, very weak place to make some sort of coherent stand. Neither one of us has any clue as to inner motivations beyond those officially stated.
LMAO, are you now going to argue that it's impossible to argue that those who enforce the rules never choose to ignore them because of some sort of favoritism?
 

intrepidish

Hall of Fame
LMAO, are you now going to argue that it's impossible to argue that those who enforce the rules never choose to ignore them because of some sort of favoritism?

I'm stating that imputing motives to judges is a very weak position from which to argue about a law and merely serves to avoid dealing with the reality of how laws are necessarily applied.
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
The umpire necessarily makes a determination literally every time the umpire chooses when to announce the score.

The umpire assesses the state of the court, player inquiries, the crowd, noise levels, injuries, equipment malfunctions or health hazards, loose balls etc.

If the umpire finds any of these things merit attention, then the score announcement may be delayed or stopped entirely for a time.

The fact that you still don't grasp this is endlessly amusing.
All of these things (injuries, equipment malfunctions, health hazards, loose balls, etc.) exist in basketball. These don't apply to the vast majority of points played.

Then why is it impossible to institute a basketball style shot clock in tennis?
 

Zara

G.O.A.T.
Well, if you are going to insist that size matters I'd say 3 majors, 4 1000's, and a partridge in a pear tree all count??

I think size matters to guys most. But anyway, I don't think Rafa has won anything big since 2020. Now that Novak is out of the picture and Nadal is in a good position, I can see some tactics rising to the the occasion because this event is big for him. Perhaps his greatest opportunity.
 

intrepidish

Hall of Fame
All of these things (injuries, equipment malfunctions, health hazard, loose balls, etc.) exist in basketball. These don't apply to the vast majority of points played.

Then why is it impossible to institute a basketball style shot clock in tennis?

Because tennis comes from a tradition which owes as much or more to a sport like golf as it does to a sport like basketball. Every point in tennis starts with a serve i.e. a stand-alone action initiated by one person in isolation which is deemed to require silence etc.

In short, those wishing for tennis to be something it is not will have a very hard time indeed understanding why it can't be what they would like it to be.
 

mwym

Professional
Just as in all sports, there is a vested interest in letting the superstar (Rafa) do what he wants. I think that is acceptable.
And maybe, just maybe - we can identify additional human (as not profit related) angle to it. Maybe umpires do it partly as benevolent 'leveling the ground' for Nadal.

Let's be objective. His involuntary OCD is the only mind game Rafael Nadal ever did on court. Good or bad - it is a humble range for a player of this era, let alone GOAT candidate. If anyone ever saw a hint of anything resembling a mind game by Nadal other than shot clock, now it's the time to speak.

That easily explains why players rarely react the way too 'young' Shapovalov did today. Right or wrong, inner child also has to behave properly in public.
Hence, this controversy which is not a controversy.
 

AM75

Hall of Fame
On the lowest national semi-pro level, we're always told by officials to be hard with time violations, but soft with all other warnings. Anyway, 8 min. toilet break is a no go.
 
D

Deleted member 748597

Guest
77261.jpg
 

AM75

Hall of Fame
The rule plainly states the 25 second countdown should start when the ball goes out of play and the point ends. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out precisely when this is
And mind you the umpire has to set the chrono even before the score announcement.
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
Because tennis comes from a tradition which owes as much or more to a sport like golf as it does to a sport like basketball. Every point in tennis starts with a serve i.e. a stand-alone action initiated by one person in isolation which is deemed to require silence etc.

In short, those wishing for tennis to be something it is not will have a very hard time indeed understanding why it can't be what they would like it to be.
Ironically the ATP had been experimenting with allowing crowd noise, which would allow for stricter enforcement of the shot clock. All of this in an effort to make the game more appealing to modern audiences. In an era with an abundance of media to consume, who wants to watch a player pick his butt for 30 seconds?

The unfortunate reality is that the discretion built into tennis has been hijacked by some bad actors to gain an upper hand, hence the discontentment from players (other than Nadal) and fans of players other than Nadal over this issue
 
Last edited:

AM75

Hall of Fame
A Time Violation may be issued prior to the expiration of twenty-five (25) seconds if the receiver’s actions are delaying the reasonable pace of the server.
 

wangs78

Legend
I've always thought that the shot clock was a poor solution, although better than nothing. It's not time per se, but rather the excessive ball bouncing some servers do while their opponent is crouched down in the ready position. Anyone who plays tennis knows that, while this position isn't particularly tiring, it does take some energy to have your knees bent and back hunched while the server is bouncing, bouncing and bouncing. The returner does not have the luxury to wait until the last 2-3 bounces to crouch down, bc he does not know when the server will finally initiate their service toss. And trust me, crouching for nearly 10 seconds on an important point is VERY frustrating but that's exactly what Nadal and Djokovic do to their opponents on big points. It's almost like having a 100m sprint where one runner controls the starting gun while the other has to crouch in the ready position for quite a while waiting for the other player to decide. It's simply not fair.

What I would advocate is to allow the server time before coming up to the line (obviously still subject to some kind of time limit), but that once he's at the line, he follows his *normal* routine of X bounces, whatever that is. The difficulty of this measure, of course, is the subjectivity of determining when the server has exceeded his *typical* number of bounces.
 

Zara

G.O.A.T.
And maybe, just maybe - we can identify additional human (as not profit related) angle to it. Maybe umpires do it partly as benevolent 'leveling the ground' for Nadal.

Let's be objective. His involuntary OCD is the only mind game Rafael Nadal ever did on court. Good or bad - it is a humble range for a player of this era, let alone GOAT candidate. If anyone ever saw a hint of anything resembling a mind game by Nadal other than shot clock, now it's the time to speak.

That easily explains why players rarely react the way too 'young' Shapovalov did today. Right or wrong, inner child also has to behave properly in public.
Hence, this controversy which is not a controversy.

Shapo might have reacted a bit fast. Unless this was done more than a couple of times, then I don't see the reason for complaining and saying that everything is corrupt. I still feel he was just frustrated and took it out on the umpire.
 

Milanez82

Hall of Fame
A Time Violation may be issued prior to the expiration of twenty-five (25) seconds if the receiver’s actions are delaying the reasonable pace of the server.
Has Rafa ever been actually hit with a time violation for this
I know Federer and Kyrgios have complained about it to no avail and anyway if against someone like Federer he is allowed to time-waste, what can other nobodies expect
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
On the lowest national semi-pro level, we're always told by officials to be hard with time violations, but soft with all other warnings. Anyway, 8 min. toilet break is a no go.
If a lowly amateur like myself, who has to pick up and clear his own balls off the court, can serve within 25 seconds (usually less than 20), then so can Nadal

There is no excuse for pro players to take more than 25 seconds between serves
 

Milanez82

Hall of Fame
If a lowly amateur like myself, who has to pick up and clear his own balls off the court, can serve within 25 seconds (usually less than 20), then so can Nadal
But do you have to deal with your g string in those 25 seconds
Have some understanding
 

yokied

Hall of Fame
The corruption of Bernardes in particular is one of the most depressing realities of pro tennis.

He went from an enforcer of the rules to a protector of the good tennis.
 
Technically during the fan-less covid matches, the clock should have actually been a, ya know, clock. 25 seconds, "no excuses!"

How many times did our worst offenders pass 30 seconds under those library conditions?
 

Candide

Hall of Fame
People are missing the larger point here - that artistic and creative pre-service rituals and routines are a central way of raising anticipation and tension in a tennis match. The best players understand the psychological and dramatic aspects of the game and are sufficiently in tune with the crowd to be able to lift key moments out of the mundane and infuse them with a transcendental significance by stretching the moment and, as Alfred Hitchcock used to do, create a level of suspense that rivets viewers to the rising action. To paraphrase Hitchcock, "There is no terror in the serve, only the anticipation of it."

Players like Djokovic and Nadal titillate and delight crowds to a pitch far beyond the prosaic pleasures watching a ball being slapped back and forth over a net. They should be lauded for this not scorned.

 
Last edited:

Moose Malloy

G.O.A.T.
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.

There was a shot clock used at 85 RG(you can see it count down behind Chris and Martina in the 85 RG final on youtube) and at 85 AO. I have a tape of Mac playing Nystrom at 85 RG, he yelled several times at the umpire for starting the clock too soon. There are articles in the NY Times about it. I know most here are young, but the amount of time Lendl took before serving was talked about a lot in the mid 80s by the media (and of course another reason for the shot clock was as a possible way to deter Mac from arguing etc)

Also they used a shot clock at WCT Dallas(one of the biggest events at the time) in the late 70s(the big controversy then was Borg and Vilas having endless long rallies - commentators thought the long rallies were boring for viewers - funny how that criticism is now used today as well)
 
Last edited:

Kralingen

Bionic Poster
The corruption of Bernardes in particular is one of the most depressing realities of pro tennis.

He went from an enforcer of the rules to a protector of the good tennis.
Well, after Nadal actively refused to be umpired by Bernardes (and this actually worked), it became immediately clear who has the real power in the situation.
 

mwym

Professional
The corruption of Bernardes in particular is one of the most depressing realities of pro tennis.

He went from an enforcer of the rules to a protector of the good tennis.
He was offered an opportunity to re-think his actions and he over-does it, still. Overcompensation. A proof of lesson learnt and that he's never going back. Removes worries on all sides.

This is how you create zealots. In some eastern European countries before 1991 there was a practice called 'public self-critique'.
 

Thriller

Hall of Fame
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.

By the umpire. Who calls the score when he/she is satisfied that the point is complete and there are no challenges e.g. the ball brushed her arm, clipped her racquet before going out etc.
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
By the umpire. Who calls the score when he/she is satisfied that the point is complete and there are no challenges e.g. the ball brushed her arm, clipped her racquet before going out etc.
How often do these situations arise?
 

AM75

Hall of Fame
Has Rafa ever been actually hit with a time violation for this
I know Federer and Kyrgios have complained about it to no avail and anyway if against someone like Federer he is allowed to time-waste, what can other nobodies expect
I think couple of times. He had point penalties for that too as far as I remember.
 

AM75

Hall of Fame
If a lowly amateur like myself, who has to pick up and clear his own balls off the court, can serve within 25 seconds (usually less than 20), then so can Nadal

There is no excuse for pro players to take more than 25 seconds between serves
From my humle experience I know that on all levels 25 seconds is more than enough.
 

Zara

G.O.A.T.
People are missing the larger point here - that artistic and creative pre-service rituals and routines are a central way of raising anticipation and tension in a tennis match. The best players understand the psychological and dramatic aspects of the game and are sufficiently in tune with the crowd to be able to lift key moments out of the mundane and infuse them with a transcendental significance by stretching the moment and, as Alfred Hitchcock used to do, create a level of suspense that rivets viewers to the rising action. To paraphrase Hitchcock, "There is no terror in the serve, only the anticipation of it."

Players like Djokovic and Nadal titillate and delight crowds to a pitch far beyond the prosaic pleasures watching a ball being slapped back and forth over a net. They should be lauded for this not scorned.


Sometimes I do worry if Rafa is going to forget about his pre-serve rituals because the moment is so tense!
 
Top