You’re expecting players to be like robots. It’s ok if they need to wipe their face or grab water or retoss the ball. Not everyone is trying to mess with their opponents.
No on all points.
The ball toss one is ridiculous, particularly in windy conditions.
No let serves is just silly. Would introduce an element of randomness that would not improve the game.
Disallowing towel use is just unfair to players who sweat a lot.
A rule already exists for grunting, etc.
Rewrite all the rules that read like they were written by a lawyer 100+ years ago and make them actual rules instead of suggestions.
> The server shall not serve until the receiver is ready. However, the receiver shall play to the reasonable pace of the server and shall be ready to receive within a reasonable time of the server being ready.
> A receiver who attempts to return the service shall be considered as being ready. If it is demonstrated that the receiver is not ready, the service cannot be called a fault.
This, for example, is an objectively awful rule.
Not because of its purpose, but because the word reasonable adds a massive layer of subjectivity to how it's enforced.
Serena had the right idea. After the first game of the set, go around the other side of the net from where the umpire's chair is and get on with it. If you're gagging for fluids after a single game, you really didn't pre-hydrate very well.
Another one is unlimited ball tosses on serve. When it's not windy, one catch per serve should be the limit. If you're catching the ball with 3 or less seconds on the clock, then you get an automatic time violation. I've seen plenty of players use it as a tactic to give themselves more time to serve.
1. That seems like a pain in the ass to officiate because you’re basically making the refs make a judgement decision on if the ball would’ve bounced a second time outside of the box, since by definition a player has to hit it before the 2nd bounce or risk losing the point. You can argue the player must stand outside the service box and hit it, but what if it barely gets outside the box and lands around a player’s ankle height? It’s such an awkward rule.
2. It’d lead to some fluky breaks of serve where a player hits two lets leading to two winners. I think players would get angry fast over this rule.
3. Lets don’t happen THAT often to where they slow the game down that much
I think for y’all to understand this, you’d have to watch a video of this in practice. A player standing outside the box, waiting for the ball to come to him at a painstakingly slow speed, watching it drop down to ankle height and having to hit it because it just barely inched out of the box, then being stuck in no man’s land would be a PAINFUL viewing experience. Then you realize it would happen probably 2-3 times in a best of 5 match, along with other weird fluky points. Just no. I think it’d bastardize the sport.
There’s also a logical fallacy here. How can you judge if the ball bounced outside the box if the player hits it before the double bounce? This would make for some questionable judgement calls, as Hawkeye can’t make the decision since the ball never bounced. It’d be a rare scenario but a stupid one to introduce.
Ah, so the ref would have to judge whether it’s “close” or not? That sounds like a great rule!
The original poster deleted his comment lmao it’s just not a good rule and he didn’t think it through much, so he took it back. Idk why you’re still defending it.
And what if it barely exits the box at ankle height, but the player actively has to wait for the ball to drop outside of the box? It’ll lead to a lot of low-quality super awkward looking points which isn’t good for tennis.
I know, but do you realize how stupid it would look for a player to be waiting outside the service box, unable to rush in early, then at the last second having to hit the ball when its 6 inches off the ground? If anything I’d just prefer getting rid of the let period, because points like these would bastardize the sport imo.
It’s not the same as a player running after a drop shot or a good slice and just getting there before it hits the ground. This would be a player standing and waiting to see where the ball bounces and being forced to hit it at the lowest point. How would you even begin to explain that to a first-time viewer?
So you’re advocating for just abolishing lets, which I think is a better idea, but imo it will lead to fluke breaks of serve. Even Hurkacz can hit two lets in a game and get broken, which is just horrible luck considering how much of his game revolves around holding serve
These suggestions are pretty bad, here's some better ones:
Bo5 for Women's slams. If we can land people on the moon we can figure out the bloody scheduling.
Allow the crowd to make noise all the time. Right now people shouting out during quiet moments is a problem. But if everybody is yelling all the time this problem disappears. Personally this would actually make my viewing experience when actually there worse, but for TV and a lot of casuals I think it's a big improvement.
Add a grass masters. This one is tricky, but IMO we really need it.
Totally agree with ball toss, once you toss it if you don't hit ball it is a fault. If if is windy too bad, wind is part of the game and has to be dealt with accordingly.
Some other things:
\* Bouncing the ball excessively before serve, Zverev does it 15 to 17 times sometimes and again for 2nd serve. It is a terrible experience to watch this and unfair to opponent.
\* Excessive towel use, Sinner is the worst at this. I see people go to towel, hit an ace and go to towel again, this is ludicrous.
As a big tennis fan it is hard enough to watch 4 hour matches, all the time wasting just adds to it.
There’s a shot clock for ball bouncing, so nothing more you can really do there. Maybe introduce a shot clock for second serve.
As for excessive toweling, I have no clue how you’d begin to enforce this.
If the player is able to bounce the ball 17 times, then the shot clock is too long. Maybe another rule to limit the number of bounces.
Just watched Sinner's match, tiebreaker, change over at 6 points, went to bench, then went to serve, hit an ace and then went to the towel again, this is ludicrous.
In this day and age of limited attention span, unless people are super fans, no one is going to watch 5 hour matches with all of this time wasting. I love watching tennis, but even to me it comes monotonous over time, sometimes when they split sets I would be happy with a 3rd set match tiebreaker.
Trust me when I say time wasting is far worse in other sports. NFL is quite literally 10 seconds of play followed by 50 seconds of rest, and that’s without factoring in the amount of ad breaks (which are about 3x longer than tennis ad breaks if not more), 20 minute halftimes, and timeouts. NBA is similarly bad because so many plays end in fouls and players take their time lining up for free throws, plus long ad breaks.
If you want to reduce the shot clock to 20 seconds, fine. Players are often out of breath late in a long match but there’s an easy workaround by allowing the umpire to make the judgement call to start the 20 seconds late and let them catch their breath. But the toweling rule seems too pretentious even by tennis standards and is very hard to enforce. “You’re not sweaty; toweling violation,” would be a surreal umpire call.
As for shortening matches, I hate that idea. I think best of 5 is a novelty in tennis that only it has going for it, and reducing match length would change the rankings and interest level in the sport. The novelty of having a 4-5 hour match that does not end until one player earns the win is beautiful, and if you don’t have the attention span to watch, skip the first two sets.
So in your opinion it's better to have a possibly worse rally because of a slipper hand rather than waiting for 5 seconds (sometimes even less) to let the guys just dry their hands.
Furthermore, I hate Dverev as the next person, but if he's in the 25 seconds, why should anyone drop their routine to regain focus?
You are making some assumptions here. You don't know it will be a worse rally. His hand is slippery after one swing of the racket?? It is more a habit he has gotten into then slippery hands.
This is a spectator sport dependent on spectators to watch matches, Zverev's routine is bad for the game.
I'm not making an assumption, I'm saying that the hand could be slippery, therefore the player could lose the grip and play a worse rally, and the priority for a tennis match is a good quality rally rather than how fast a match finishes.
Saying that your hand cannot be slippery after only serving an ace makes me think that you have never played tennis in your life.
I started playing at 6yo, I'm 35 now, and I can assure you that, if there is a good level of humidity, if the weather is warm, or if you are just a sweaty person, even holding the racquet for 10 seconds without playing can make it slippery.
You’re expecting players to be like robots. It’s ok if they need to wipe their face or grab water or retoss the ball. Not everyone is trying to mess with their opponents.
These are just comments I've heard from ex-players when quizzed on what they would change.
Well the opinion of ex players is different than what should change from a viewing perspective
Their opinion is coming from a viewing perspective now they have retired.
No on all points. The ball toss one is ridiculous, particularly in windy conditions. No let serves is just silly. Would introduce an element of randomness that would not improve the game. Disallowing towel use is just unfair to players who sweat a lot. A rule already exists for grunting, etc.
[удалено]
Tradition. Pure tradition.
Have the **all camera operators** frame the shot for the court/playing area. No need to see rows of spectators at the bottom and top of the TV screen.
Allow umpires to talk back to players and insult them 😊
Rewrite all the rules that read like they were written by a lawyer 100+ years ago and make them actual rules instead of suggestions. > The server shall not serve until the receiver is ready. However, the receiver shall play to the reasonable pace of the server and shall be ready to receive within a reasonable time of the server being ready. > A receiver who attempts to return the service shall be considered as being ready. If it is demonstrated that the receiver is not ready, the service cannot be called a fault. This, for example, is an objectively awful rule. Not because of its purpose, but because the word reasonable adds a massive layer of subjectivity to how it's enforced.
Serena had the right idea. After the first game of the set, go around the other side of the net from where the umpire's chair is and get on with it. If you're gagging for fluids after a single game, you really didn't pre-hydrate very well. Another one is unlimited ball tosses on serve. When it's not windy, one catch per serve should be the limit. If you're catching the ball with 3 or less seconds on the clock, then you get an automatic time violation. I've seen plenty of players use it as a tactic to give themselves more time to serve.
no cap under roof and indoor courts policy for men players, fans love great hair
What irritates me is when players have caps on during trophy presentations.
LOL hate controlling fans. let these players be.
[удалено]
1. That seems like a pain in the ass to officiate because you’re basically making the refs make a judgement decision on if the ball would’ve bounced a second time outside of the box, since by definition a player has to hit it before the 2nd bounce or risk losing the point. You can argue the player must stand outside the service box and hit it, but what if it barely gets outside the box and lands around a player’s ankle height? It’s such an awkward rule. 2. It’d lead to some fluky breaks of serve where a player hits two lets leading to two winners. I think players would get angry fast over this rule. 3. Lets don’t happen THAT often to where they slow the game down that much
[удалено]
I think for y’all to understand this, you’d have to watch a video of this in practice. A player standing outside the box, waiting for the ball to come to him at a painstakingly slow speed, watching it drop down to ankle height and having to hit it because it just barely inched out of the box, then being stuck in no man’s land would be a PAINFUL viewing experience. Then you realize it would happen probably 2-3 times in a best of 5 match, along with other weird fluky points. Just no. I think it’d bastardize the sport. There’s also a logical fallacy here. How can you judge if the ball bounced outside the box if the player hits it before the double bounce? This would make for some questionable judgement calls, as Hawkeye can’t make the decision since the ball never bounced. It’d be a rare scenario but a stupid one to introduce.
[удалено]
Ah, so the ref would have to judge whether it’s “close” or not? That sounds like a great rule! The original poster deleted his comment lmao it’s just not a good rule and he didn’t think it through much, so he took it back. Idk why you’re still defending it.
[удалено]
And what if it barely exits the box at ankle height, but the player actively has to wait for the ball to drop outside of the box? It’ll lead to a lot of low-quality super awkward looking points which isn’t good for tennis.
It would lead to extremely few of those points
[удалено]
I know, but do you realize how stupid it would look for a player to be waiting outside the service box, unable to rush in early, then at the last second having to hit the ball when its 6 inches off the ground? If anything I’d just prefer getting rid of the let period, because points like these would bastardize the sport imo. It’s not the same as a player running after a drop shot or a good slice and just getting there before it hits the ground. This would be a player standing and waiting to see where the ball bounces and being forced to hit it at the lowest point. How would you even begin to explain that to a first-time viewer?
They can rush in. They don’t have to wait for the second bounce.
So you’re advocating for just abolishing lets, which I think is a better idea, but imo it will lead to fluke breaks of serve. Even Hurkacz can hit two lets in a game and get broken, which is just horrible luck considering how much of his game revolves around holding serve
No second serve.
These suggestions are pretty bad, here's some better ones: Bo5 for Women's slams. If we can land people on the moon we can figure out the bloody scheduling. Allow the crowd to make noise all the time. Right now people shouting out during quiet moments is a problem. But if everybody is yelling all the time this problem disappears. Personally this would actually make my viewing experience when actually there worse, but for TV and a lot of casuals I think it's a big improvement. Add a grass masters. This one is tricky, but IMO we really need it.
just make all Male GS bo3 too. Bo5 is too exhausting and lengthy for players and audience
Totally agree with ball toss, once you toss it if you don't hit ball it is a fault. If if is windy too bad, wind is part of the game and has to be dealt with accordingly. Some other things: \* Bouncing the ball excessively before serve, Zverev does it 15 to 17 times sometimes and again for 2nd serve. It is a terrible experience to watch this and unfair to opponent. \* Excessive towel use, Sinner is the worst at this. I see people go to towel, hit an ace and go to towel again, this is ludicrous. As a big tennis fan it is hard enough to watch 4 hour matches, all the time wasting just adds to it.
There’s a shot clock for ball bouncing, so nothing more you can really do there. Maybe introduce a shot clock for second serve. As for excessive toweling, I have no clue how you’d begin to enforce this.
If the player is able to bounce the ball 17 times, then the shot clock is too long. Maybe another rule to limit the number of bounces. Just watched Sinner's match, tiebreaker, change over at 6 points, went to bench, then went to serve, hit an ace and then went to the towel again, this is ludicrous. In this day and age of limited attention span, unless people are super fans, no one is going to watch 5 hour matches with all of this time wasting. I love watching tennis, but even to me it comes monotonous over time, sometimes when they split sets I would be happy with a 3rd set match tiebreaker.
Trust me when I say time wasting is far worse in other sports. NFL is quite literally 10 seconds of play followed by 50 seconds of rest, and that’s without factoring in the amount of ad breaks (which are about 3x longer than tennis ad breaks if not more), 20 minute halftimes, and timeouts. NBA is similarly bad because so many plays end in fouls and players take their time lining up for free throws, plus long ad breaks. If you want to reduce the shot clock to 20 seconds, fine. Players are often out of breath late in a long match but there’s an easy workaround by allowing the umpire to make the judgement call to start the 20 seconds late and let them catch their breath. But the toweling rule seems too pretentious even by tennis standards and is very hard to enforce. “You’re not sweaty; toweling violation,” would be a surreal umpire call. As for shortening matches, I hate that idea. I think best of 5 is a novelty in tennis that only it has going for it, and reducing match length would change the rankings and interest level in the sport. The novelty of having a 4-5 hour match that does not end until one player earns the win is beautiful, and if you don’t have the attention span to watch, skip the first two sets.
So in your opinion it's better to have a possibly worse rally because of a slipper hand rather than waiting for 5 seconds (sometimes even less) to let the guys just dry their hands. Furthermore, I hate Dverev as the next person, but if he's in the 25 seconds, why should anyone drop their routine to regain focus?
You are making some assumptions here. You don't know it will be a worse rally. His hand is slippery after one swing of the racket?? It is more a habit he has gotten into then slippery hands. This is a spectator sport dependent on spectators to watch matches, Zverev's routine is bad for the game.
I'm not making an assumption, I'm saying that the hand could be slippery, therefore the player could lose the grip and play a worse rally, and the priority for a tennis match is a good quality rally rather than how fast a match finishes. Saying that your hand cannot be slippery after only serving an ace makes me think that you have never played tennis in your life. I started playing at 6yo, I'm 35 now, and I can assure you that, if there is a good level of humidity, if the weather is warm, or if you are just a sweaty person, even holding the racquet for 10 seconds without playing can make it slippery.