Rule Change Proposal

[Murat Baslamisli]

Yay or Nay?

The person who loses in the previous round to a player that pulls out of the tournament without stepping on the court gets to play the next round as some sort of "lucky looser". Example, Katchanov would have played Roger in the semis since Nadal pulled out .

Downsides, upsides?

For me, Upside:

-For the most part, no free ride to the next round for anyone. Of course , it is possible someone can just step on the court and retire quickly but that is what it is.

Downside:

-Payers need to stay around a day or two longer at the tournaments they lost, in case the person who beat them pulls out. That can be expensive.
-Could this be manipulated somehow? Not too sure.

Thoughts?

 

[Federberg]

ha! You were listening on Amazon Prime yesterday I'm guessing. They discussed that.

I absolutely loathe the idea. This is tennis. You lose, you're out. What would happen if Karen replaced Rafa and beat Roger and won the tournament. Not for me..

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

ha! You were listening on Amazon Prime yesterday I'm guessing. They discussed that.

I absolutely loathe the idea. This is tennis. You lose, you're out. What would happen if Karen replaced Rafa and beat Roger and won the tournament. Not for me..

No idea what Amazon Prime is but I am glad someone else was debating the idea
Sure Karen maybe could have beaten Roger. Rafa could have too. But he did not have to play to advance.
I am not sold on any idea by the way. I am just asking folks.

 

[Federberg]

No idea what Amazon Prime is but I am glad someone else was debating the idea
Sure Karen maybe could have beaten Roger. Rafa could have too. But he did not have to play to advance.
I am not sold on any idea by the way. I am just asking folks.

I hear you. Call me old fashioned. This thing in the world today (and I'm not directing this at you in anyway so please don't misunderstand) where people are always trying to change things drives me nuts. I think tennis as it is today is fantastic. I'm still bummed out that Masters series finals aren't best of 5 anymore. If it ain't broke don't fix it I say We run the risk of losing all reference points if we do

 

[10isfan]

The one rule I want changed, and I’m not sure why it hasn’t been yet is to instruct lines people to silently signal an out ball. In every single match, a player hits the ball and confusion ensues whether he made contact before or after the call. Most of the time, the interference robs a player of a point. This drives me crazy. If anyone can explain to me why lines people must yell out immediately, I would be grateful.

 

[10isfan]

I also would love to see let serves count. There are too many phantom let serves, in my opinion.

I think we have to accept that players get lucky if they get a retirement or walkover. It’s not fair to the person who had to play every round, but I can’t think of a good way to work around this issue.

 

[Federberg]

I also would love to see let serves count. There are too many phantom let serves, in my opinion.

I think we have to accept that players get lucky if they get a retirement or walkover. It’s not fair to the person who had to play every round, but I can’t think of a good way to work around this issue.

I wouldn't have a problem with doing away with the let rule. It wastes time, and in my view has limited utility. There are times of course when the ball bounces off the tape and bounces in. Those could end up being gimme balls for the receiver, but I guess that's only the case if the receiver isn't standing really far back

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I also would love to see let serves count. There are too many phantom let serves, in my opinion.

I would like to keep the let rule as is. But, I agree with you that there are too many phantom let serves. They need to change the technology that they use to determine whether a serve is let or not. Currently, I think some sort of a mike attached to the net makes some noise or something like that. It should be possible to improve that technology.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

ha! You were listening on Amazon Prime yesterday I'm guessing. They discussed that.

I absolutely loathe the idea. This is tennis. You lose, you're out. What would happen if Karen replaced Rafa and beat Roger and won the tournament. Not for me..

A mere like won't do and so I am officially seconding it.

Having said that, I don't mind a mock match, if both the loser of the previous round and the player getting a walkover agree to it on a case by case situation. It is only a mock match and the player who got walkover should move on to the next round, even if he loses the mock match.
In order to provide some incentive to the loser of the previous round, perhaps some money (but no points) given to him if he manages to beat the player who got walkover.

Upside of My Proposal: 1. The player who got walkover can get serious match practice, if he thinks he needs it.
2. The fans won't have to go home (sometimes) with empty eyes.

Downside of My Proposal: If the player who got walkover loses the mock match and then wins the tourney, there will be a sort of an asterisk lingering over that tournament win.

 

[mrzz]

Have you ever played "no let"? Is a nightmare... you simply watch the ball bouncing, and then, 5 seconds later, you remember "oh, it is no let...", then you run like an idiot, but it is too late. I would love to see that happening to pros...

 

[Federberg]

Have you ever played "no let"? Is a nightmare... you simply watch the ball bouncing, and then, 5 seconds later, you remember "oh, it is no let...", then you run like an idiot, but it is too late. I would love to see that happening to pros...

lol! No question it would take some getting used to, but once they do... why not? It's one thing with the quick servers but the slow guys... jeepers they steal a part of your life as you watch them set up for their first serve again

 

[tented]

-Could this be manipulated somehow? Not too sure.

This is a concern I heard commentators on Tennis Channel mention. There is the possibility of a kind of match fixing, with a player purposely dropping out to allow someone else to get back in.

 

[Moxie]

lol! No question it would take some getting used to, but once they do... why not? It's one thing with the quick servers but the slow guys... jeepers they steal a part of your life as you watch them set up for their first serve again

I agree they would get used to it, and there seems to be a lot of support for it. Navratilova has definitely said more than once she's in favor. And tennis is trying to quicken up the game, so why not? @GameSetAndMath: there is an electronic device on the net, so it gives off a beep when touched. I don't know that it also needs a microphone.
As to the original rule change proposal, I'm also with you: it's part of the game to respect the results as they are, and the retirements and walk-overs as they happen. If you play it as a real match, then you do put in a "lucky loser" who could win it all, which would be too weird. If you play it as an exhibition, I think you ask too much of the player who lost in the previous round, unless you award some money and points (like half-points.) Roger mentioned that he was happy to have the day off. In this case, it didn't help him win the match, but it keeps the old-timers in the game to have a break.

I agree that they should go back to 5-setters in the finals of MS 1000s, and have women play them in the Premier Mandatories. We're losing them...they've taken them out of DC, too. I think you could make Majors b/o 3 for the early rounds, and then men and women play b/o 5 from QFs on.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I agree they would get used to it, and there seems to be a lot of support for it. Navratilova has definitely said more than once she's in favor. And tennis is trying to quicken up the game, so why not? @GameSetAndMath: there is an electronic device on the net, so it gives off a beep when touched. I don't know that it also needs a microphone.
.

The problem is that sometime it beeps even when the ball does not touch the net. Perhaps due to the net moving a bit due to breeze or something like that. They need to make that sensing mechanism better so that there is no phantom let.

 

[Moxie]

The problem is that sometime it beeps even when the ball does not touch the net. Perhaps due to the net moving a bit due to breeze or something like that. They need to make that sensing mechanism better so that there is no phantom let.

I get that, but do you really happens often enough, controversially, to require additional technology?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I get that, but do you really happens often enough, controversially, to require additional technology?

Depends on your definition of "often". Anyway, in this world of technology, there ought to be a better solution for this problem.

 

[mrzz]

Depends on your definition of "often". Anyway, in this world of technology, there ought to be a better solution for this problem.

Well, they could easily calibrate some threshold in the sensors... the problem would be to translate this all around the world. A lot of places would use older technology (including hand on the net), so it would be hard to have consistency.

 

[Moxie]

Well, they could easily calibrate some threshold in the sensors... the problem would be to translate this all around the world. A lot of places would use older technology (including hand on the net), so it would be hard to have consistency.

I did used to love the person sitting there with the hand on the net.

 

[mrzz]

I did used to love the person sitting there with the hand on the net.

Don't tell me you guys broke up!

 

[atttomole]

This is a concern I heard commentators on Tennis Channel mention. There is the possibility of a kind of match fixing, with a player purposely dropping out to allow someone else to get back in.

I agree with this. Such changes could result in serious corruption.