So many times in this project I have made a plan on how to cover material, only to veer off onto a rabbit trail or discover that I don’t have as much to write about a given topic as I anticipate. With that backdrop, let me outline my intended content over the next three days.
A part of this project is to completely go through the ITF Rules of Tennis as published in the USTA Friend at Court. There are a couple of things left in the rules that I feel have already been thoroughly driven into the ground. The focus of today’s post will be to quickly tidy those items up for the sake of completeness.
Looking ahead to the weekend, Saturday’s topic will be a jaw dropping part of “A Good Return” that I completely misunderstood. For Sunday, I plan on writing about a new side project that I am launching that is loosely associated with this project. You see my issue with focus? Even my side projects have side projects.
Onward to the housekeeping!
It is a good return if:
e. The player’s racket passes over the net after hitting the ball on the player’s own side of the net and the ball hits the ground in the correct court.
USTA Friend at Court, ITF Rules of Tennis, Section 25
I previously touched on this rule in “How to Lose a Point: Hitting the Ball too Early” That post featured a clip of a match between Djokovic and Murray where the umpire incorrectly believed that only the follow through passed over the net.
Temporarily skipping over the last lettered subsection of “A Good Return” to the first ITF Case Decision, brings us back to the singles sticks.
Case 1: A player returns a ball which then hits a singles stick and hits the ground in the correct court. Is this is a good return?
Decision: Yes. However, if the ball is served and hits the singles stick, it is a service fault.
USTA Friend at Court, ITF Rules of Tennis, Section 25
I regret not including this Case Decision when the first lettered subsection of this rule was covered in “A Good Return.” I find nothing in the Case Decision that was not previously explicitly covered in 25 (a). Ordinarily I would rail on the repetition of this case ruling, but I find that I am not in the mood for that today.
There is one subsection of the “A Good Return” remaining and a related ITF case decision. Those will be covered in tandem tomorrow.
