I played a guy today who cheated in a way I've never seen before -- after I won a crucial point, he claimed that he had called a ball out 10 shots before my winner, and after that he just hit the ball over the net because I kept doing the same. Unfortunately I didn't process what he was saying quickly enough; if I had, then I would have said I called his ball out 11 shots before my winner, so the point was mine regardless! But I was wondering: is there any USTA rule that can be applied against an opponent who cheats in this manner? Or do you always have the option, after losing a point, to claim that your opponent's first shot of the point was out, and after calling that ball out you continued hitting the ball over the net for the next several shots just for fun? Of course you won't make friends this way, but is it a way of cheating that can always be used to steal you one point you don't deserve?
"You lost the point 10 shots ago"
- Thread starter Zman
- Start date
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
That tactic doesn’t work against players who know the rules.
What rule can be cited to prevent this? Is there actually a rule saying that if you keep playing the point then you can't go back afterwards and claim that you called a ball out a while back? And of course, my opponent claimed he had made the out call verbally but that I just hadn't heard it.
tennis tom
Legend
What's the rule?
Vox Rationis
Professional
Yes.
And if he made the call and you didn't hear it, then it's his responsibility to promptly stop the point and inform you that he had made an out call.
That sounds reasonable, but I just checked that nothing like that is in "The Code". I'm not sure where else to look -- could you tell me a written source of rules that contains the rule you said?
Vox Rationis
Professional
Not every rule of tennis is written in USTA's online codebook. In many cases, The Code, doesn't even explicitly state a rule. It just explains the proper etiquette that they want everyone to abide by. That being said:
15. Audible or visible calls. No matter how obvious it is to a player that an opponent’s ball is out, the opponent is entitled to a prompt audible or visible out call.
17. Prompt calls eliminate two chance option. A player shall make all calls promptly. A call shall be made either before the player’s return shot has gone out of play or before an opponent has had an opportunity to play the return shot. Prompt calls will quickly eliminate the “two chances to win the point” option that some players practice. To illustrate, a player is advancing to the net for an easy put away and sees a ball from an adjoining court rolling toward the court. The player continues to advance and hits the shot, only to have the supposed easy put away fly over the baseline. The player then claims a let. The claim is not valid because the player forfeited the right to call a let by choosing instead to play the ball. The player took a chance to win or lose and is not entitled to a second chance.
If your opponent doesn't properly and promptly inform you of their out call, and they continue to hit the ball back and forth with you with the intention of winning (A.K.A. continuing the point), then for all intents and purposes they have not made an out call at all and they are violating the rule that prevents two chances to win the point.
15. Audible or visible calls. No matter how obvious it is to a player that an opponent’s ball is out, the opponent is entitled to a prompt audible or visible out call.
17. Prompt calls eliminate two chance option. A player shall make all calls promptly. A call shall be made either before the player’s return shot has gone out of play or before an opponent has had an opportunity to play the return shot. Prompt calls will quickly eliminate the “two chances to win the point” option that some players practice. To illustrate, a player is advancing to the net for an easy put away and sees a ball from an adjoining court rolling toward the court. The player continues to advance and hits the shot, only to have the supposed easy put away fly over the baseline. The player then claims a let. The claim is not valid because the player forfeited the right to call a let by choosing instead to play the ball. The player took a chance to win or lose and is not entitled to a second chance.
If your opponent doesn't properly and promptly inform you of their out call, and they continue to hit the ball back and forth with you with the intention of winning (A.K.A. continuing the point), then for all intents and purposes they have not made an out call at all and they are violating the rule that prevents two chances to win the point.
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
Vox explained the Code. There is also Friend at Court:
"11. BALL IN PLAY Unless a fault or a let is called, the ball is in play from the moment the server hits the ball, and remains in play until the point is decided."
If no one makes an out or let call, the ball is in play until the point ends in any number of ways (e.g. , out call, hindrance call, permanent fixture, double bounce, strikes a player, double hit).
"11. BALL IN PLAY Unless a fault or a let is called, the ball is in play from the moment the server hits the ball, and remains in play until the point is decided."
If no one makes an out or let call, the ball is in play until the point ends in any number of ways (e.g. , out call, hindrance call, permanent fixture, double bounce, strikes a player, double hit).
Dartagnan64
G.O.A.T.
He continued to play violating the prompt audible and visual out call. If he sees you continue the point, he must stop playing to enforce the out call. He can't assume you heard or saw him.
Personally I've never witnessed this kind of cheating. I've certainly continued playing on out balls that I realized too late were out. I play out the point and accept I can't make a call after the fact.
The reason this particular situation is not in the rules is that its a preposterous position to take. There are a ton of odd cases that never get explicitly laid out in the rules often because they are just dumb.
Personally I've never witnessed this kind of cheating. I've certainly continued playing on out balls that I realized too late were out. I play out the point and accept I can't make a call after the fact.
The reason this particular situation is not in the rules is that its a preposterous position to take. There are a ton of odd cases that never get explicitly laid out in the rules often because they are just dumb.
tennis tom
Legend
OP, was this a rec match, league or tournament?
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
Tell him he foot faulted every serve in the game that just transpired.
This was in a league match, but in a non-USTA league that doesn't matter to me as much as USTA leagues do.
More than an 11 ball rally???Obviously you guys are WAY WAY above 4.5 NTRA
I wish...
tennis tom
Legend
Thanks for the reply, all I can say is you come across all kinds playing tennis--this guy may be someone good to keep around to try to set the Guinness World Record for longest rally, which stands at 51,283.
Last edited:
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
I thought he was competing for "The Most Retroactive Tennis Call" record, which is currently held by members of Dewey, Cheatham, & Howe at 42 days.
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
It would be highly amusing to see which TT member could sustain the longest cooperative baseline rally . . . .
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
I can say one thing for sure: it won't be me.
golden chicken
Hall of Fame
S&V-not_dead_yet
Talk Tennis Guru
Nor me. Bet we could have a pretty long cooperative volley, though.
Exactly what I thought after I posted!
OnTheLine
Hall of Fame
Not it! ... Longest I have ever done with my fave hitting partner was 41 total hits (hers and mine combined) and that was really trying, ended with me netting what should have been an easy FH ... I am certain there are some folks that can cross 100 without even thinking about it.
TenS_Ace
Professional
SURESH...HANDS DOWN !!
Similar threads
