Fiend at Court Unplugged
Yesterday I wrote about how the USTA foists regular duty tennis balls on female tournament players. The next obvious question is when and why the policy started in the first place. It is a sordid tale of how tennis is a victim of the forces of technology and marketing. It is also a testament that complaining about the balls is an indelible part of the culture of tennis.
My initial searches for source material on the origins of the USTA policy and practice came up empty. Eventually I stumbled across a quote that revealed that I was searching for the wrong branding terms. The Wilson product that has evolved into the extra duty ball was originally marketed as heavy-duty. Leading into the US Open in 1980, the players were energetically complaining about the heavy-duty ball.
The grumbling has begun — over heavy-duty balls, smaller officiating crews, last-minute withdrawals. The United States Open is the tennis tournament players love to hate.
Neil Amdur, The New York Times, August 24, 1980.
To put that sentiment in the context of time, in 1975 the court surface for the US Open was transitioned from grass to clay. Billie Jean King was one of the more prominent players who complained about the change. The US Open moved to the hard courts at Flushing Meadows in 1978. Many of the players didn’t like that surface either. Stop me if you see a pattern.
The product marketed as “heavy-duty” balls were developed to be better on hard court surfaces. Regardless of the adjective, a certain number of tennis players are pre-disposed to grumble about the change. However, “heavy” has a negative connotation in tennis. “Extra” is viewed more positively.
The following year, the New York Times carried included one tantalizing statement about the balls to be used in women’s play in 1981.
Yesterday, Open officials were unprepared to guess how the air traffic controllers’ strike would affect the noise from jet planes at nearby La Guardia Airport. But the decision to use the regular duty Wilson ball over the heavy-duty brand may yield some controvesy as another concession to the women.
Neil Amdur, New York Times, September 1, 1981
This seems to suggest that the usage of regular duty tennis balls for the women was in direct response to the complaints about the heavy-duty balls the previous year. In essence, some of the women asked for it and the USTA complied. I don’t think that is a valid reason to punish all women with less durable balls until the end of time.
In 2019, A writer for the Wall Street Journal suggested that the usage of regular duty tennis balls in women’s tournaments was codified into the WTA Rulebook. The problem with that claim is that any stipulation of the ball type to be used was completely absent from the rulebook when that article was written in 2019. (It wasn’t in the 2018 version either.)
In 1980, the majority of professional players were still using wooden racquets. The hard court surface for the US Open was a relatively new innovation. The balls themselves subsequently evolved from heavy-duty to extra duty. It was hardly the backdrop for a binding decision.
It is time to revisit the USTA ball allocation policy for tournaments that don’t enjoy the luxury of new balls every 7-9 games.
- U.S. Open Tennis, a Contrast With Wimbledon, Starts Tuesday, Neil Amdur, New York Times, August 24, 1980.
- Mayer In Spotlight As U.S. Open Starts, Neil Amdur, New York Times, September 1, 1981.
- At U.S. Open, Do Women Play With Faster Tennis Balls?, Jo Craven McGinty, Wall Street Journal, August 16, 2019.
- WTA Official Rulebook, WTA, 2019.
