An engineer overthinks tennis in a daily journal.
In 1971 the USTA created an educational advisory committee which quickly morphed into the Education and Research (E&R) office. The focus of E&R was expanding public participation in tennis. The ideas generated from this office included scholastic programs, a film lending library, a publications department, and clinics for tennis teachers. E&R was also the first unit to focus on player development.
When I first came across this snippet, I viewed it through my distinctly modern eyes. My tennis community involves a lot of players who are obsessive about playing tennis. I totally understand the insatiable desire to play the game.
1 response
A mere two weeks after the stock market crash that heralded the start of the Great Depression, the Maryborough Chronicle in Australia carried an editorial on net cord strokes credited to the pseudonym “Court.” The author was strongly in favor of the net-cord shot being declared a let, though conceded that the majority of players preferred inaction on alteration of the rule.
This seems like a good time to inject a topic that is not in the ITF Rules of Tennis, but nevertheless is apparently debated from time to time. We have recently discussed the fact that if a service clips the net cord and falls in, then a let is played. On all other shots, a net-cord strike is basically tough luck. Once again… wait for it… we really don’t know why the distinction even exists.
In the “History of the Service Let” we discussed that there really isn’t a satisfactory reason recorded as to why the service let even exists. One speculative reason is that the rule is in place because the server already has too much of an advantage with two opportunities at first strike of the ball. This brings us to the obvious question as to why the server is granted two serves at all.
The first usage of the word let in lawn tennis appeared in 1878, but that was not specific to the serve, but rather outside obstruction or interference, such as “an obtrusive dog running across the court, or anything of that kind.” I need to pause here for a moment to note that containing such specific examples would certainly spice up the modern ITF rules of tennis.
When I was looking for a media source of the events described in the “An Inconvenient Truth” post, I mentioned that a random twitter userRead More
I think that I would have skipped on past the nuance that the WTA Age eligibility rules emerged from the insane summer of 1994, butRead More
Yesterday in Part 1 of the Crazy Summer of 1994, I wrote about how turmoil in many of the WTA star player’s lives were dominatingRead More
Context is important to fully understand any historical event. Today I want to take us back in time to the summer of 1994 as bracketedRead More