Have you ever had a dispute with a fellow player over a call on the court that you couldn’t settle? Or have you ever wondered why a certain ruling was made during a match you were watching? Maybe you’re just curious about how some scenarios, from the common to the ridiculous, are resolved.
The USTA constantly receives these types of questions from players and fans, so we figured it’s about time we provided a forum in which queries about rules can be answered. Thus, we present to you The Final Word.
Readers can send their burning questions about the rules of tennis along with their name and town to FinalWord@USTA.com. Each week, we will select submissions and supply the definitive rulings though a Q&A with USTA Director of Officials Richard Kaufman.
On to this week's questions and responses...
Naomi L. (from Sausalito, CA)
During a doubles match, my partner and I were leading 3 - 0 and one of our opponents left the court without explanation. When we asked her partner where she was going, she told us that her partner was going to wrap her hand which had been injured prior to the match. Our opponent returned to the court 10 minutes later with a wrapped hand and we resumed play. (When confronted later, she claimed that she had gone to the bathroom) Is this a rules violation?
KAUFMAN: Players do have the right to take a break to go to the bathroom (reasonable time for most amateur events) or take a Medical Time Out for an injury. There are time limits when taking a Medical Time Out. However, it is inappropriate to walk off the court and say nothing or not be truthful. The opponents could make the assumption that one is retiring from the match if no clear explanation is given.
Tom O.
OK, you answered questions regarding who serves after a tie break is finished and what court the first tie break serve goes to, but I get confused about what court the players take following completion of a tie break. The tie break is an odd-numbered game, so it seems that there should be a changeover, but is that based on where the players began the tiebreak or where they finished it, or maybe on something else entirely.
Thanks, I enjoy your column.
KAUFMAN: During the Tiebreak players change ends every 6 points. Once the tiebreak is complete, there is a set break and the players change ends from the side that they ended the tiebreak.
Trent W. (from Frankin, TN)
What is the rule if the player hits a shot at a player at the net and it strikes the player in the body and careens back over the net. Is the ball considered to still be in play, or does the point end when it strikes a player somewhere besides the racket?
KAUFMAN: If the ball touches any part of the player’s body, including the hand, they lose the point immediately.
Timothy E.
I would expect that in most cases the answer to this question should be “no”. However, what is the proper etiquette for a spectator who believes a player’s health to be in danger? Specifically, if a ball is rolling over from an adjacent court to a spot behind a player, and you see that player backing up toward the ball with a good likelihood of stepping on it and potentially twisting an ankle or knee? Does safety outweigh normal etiquette in this case? Should the ball be a let or should the player from the spectator’s team automatically forfeit the point for a rules infraction?
KAUFMAN: A player from another court may not stop play on someone else’s court even if a ball from their court may interfere with play on adjacent courts.
R. V. Vulanovic
You've recently answered a question about who should serve first after a tiebreak. What side of the court should they serve from?
KAUFMAN: As noted above in a similar question, when the tiebreak is complete there is a set break and the players change ends to start the next set.
As for the question recently on the origin of scoring, a reader has offered another possible explanation. They write:
“I read somewhere that long time ago in France they had a coin worth 15 whatever the monetary unit was at that time. Now, this coin was used in a gambling game (with cards or dice) so that the amounts were 15, 30, 45, 60. This counting system was adopted in tennis (45 was later simplified to 40 and 60 was replaced with "game"). I am not sure if this is true and I read so long ago that I do not remember the source (it's good that I remember this story at all)" |
|
Past Articles:
Since 1997, Richard Kaufman has served as Director of Officials for the USTA and Chief Umpire of the US Open. He's an ITF Certified Gold Badge Chief Umpire and an ITF Certified Silver Badge Referee, and has been a USTA Certified Official since 1977. Kaufman has also worked as the Chair Umpire for the US Open men's final (1983, 1987, 1996), US Open women's final (1988, 1995), the Australian Open men's final (1987), the Wimbledon men's doubles final (1987), the French Open men's doubles final (1988), and the Masters Cup final (1985-96). |
| The Final Word - Past Articles |
|