Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

[ponchi101]

Servers have already lost any advantage over the receivers. Adding 5, 6 double faults to some players' games would not be good for the sport.

[Owendonovan]

I'm not endorsing any change, just articulating how some might see it. Although, it might be fun to see how Kyrgios reacts when he misses one.

[ponchi101]

He is pretty accurate with his serve. I can't recall him catching one errand one.
Patrick Rafter would have suffered tremendously.

[Deuce]

The simple - and fair - solution would be to put a limit on the number of service tosses one is permitted to catch (or not hit). Like 3 per game. Or 10 per set.

An added bonus to this is that counting the number would actually give the chair umpires something to do, other than to press the button starting the serve clock .

[meganfernandez]

The simple - and fair - solution would be to put a limit on the number of service tosses one is permitted to catch (or not hit). Like 3 per game. Or 10 per set.

An added bonus to this is that counting the number would actually give the chair umpires something to do, other than to press the button starting the serve clock .

Yeah I"m not opposed to it, if it's a problem. Definitely need a freebie or two per set. I wish amateurs had some limit. A couple opponents this summer drove me insane catching at least every other toss... for three sets... wore me out resetting for the return. It was out of control.

[ashkor87]

I would want the second serve eliminated entirely...in which sport do you get 2 chances just to get the ball into play,?

[ponchi101]

Padel. Which is a variation of this one.
Baseball has fouls. You swing, not quite hit, you get a foul, not a strike (after the first two).
Basketball. When throwing free throws, you don't throw one free throw for two points, you throw two, one for one point each.
Table tennis. You get two serves too.
All jump competitions allow for several fouls before you are eliminated.

I would like to see one tournament played with only one serve. When people would see how many times you would be broken, I can guarantee everybody going back to two serves.
And: I need three.

[Suliso]

Is getting broken a lot bad? With only one serve smaller players would gain an advantage.

[ponchi101]

As one of the objectives of the game is NOT to be broken, making breaks of serve way easier would seem to go against that.
Even the very best players only win about 50-55% of their 2nd serves. So, you could say that you would be broken about every other service game. Of course, it would work both ways, so it would still be even.
Remember also that, by definition, the serve is a SHORT BALL; after all, it lands inside the service box. Having only one serve would mean that serving would be a defensive position.

[ashkor87]

Padel. Which is a variation of this one.
Baseball has fouls. You swing, not quite hit, you get a foul, not a strike (after the first two).
Basketball. When throwing free throws, you don't throw one free throw for two points, you throw two, one for one point each.
Table tennis. You get two serves too.
All jump competitions allow for several fouls before you are eliminated.

I would like to see one tournament played with only one serve. When people would see how many times you would be broken, I can guarantee everybody going back to two serves.
And: I need three.

Foul in baseball is not comparable..if a pitcher got two shots at every pitch, that would be..
Table tennis, no, they get 2 serves for 2 points, not per point
Jump competitions are not comparable either, I don't think.
Basketball, you get 2 throws for 2 points, not for every point.

[Suliso]

As one of the objectives of the game is NOT to be broken, making breaks of serve way easier would seem to go against that.

Said who? The objective of the game is to win points by hitting the ball in on the opponents side on the court in such a way that he/she can't return it. Nowhere does it say that a win achieved by mostly breaking is less valid.

Of course it would be a very DIFFERENT game to what we're seeing now. If I had huge amounts of money I'd convince two or more highly ranked pros to try it out in an exho (played seriously) to see how it works out. I'm surprised no one has done so already.

[ponchi101]

Says everybody. You know of any player that goes out there with the objective of BEING BROKEN? That is one of your goals.
I said ONE of the objectives. You could boil it all the way down to a simple rule: the person that wins the last point, wins. Of course, how you get to that last point involves a lot playing.
Phillip Chatrier floated the idea in the 1980's-90's, when it seemed like servers were going to rule the sport with nothing but big serves. It was not "not welcomed", it was totally rejected. Pat Cash was almost angry, saying "that lets me know how he used to play".
Sure, such an exo would be very interesting. But it would have to be a tournament; a sample of one match would tell us nothing.

[ti-amie]

[ashkor87]

I like Kyrgios but I can't stand his destroying his own rackets...the instruments of your game, your livelihood..how can you not respect them,? I was brought up to almost worship them, let alone respect them! Very disappointing..

[ponchi101]

I like Kyrgios but I can't stand his destroying his own rackets...the instruments of your game, your livelihood..how can you not respect them,? I was brought up to almost worship them, let alone respect them! Very disappointing..

Remember how old we are? My dad made it clear: you break your racquets, you buy your next one. Which, for a 10 yo, was impossible.
But those were old times.
I had never thought of this issue through that lens. It is interesting.