The Rules of Tennis
Our weekly march through the ITF Rules of Tennis as presented in the USTA Friend at Court is currently in the middle of section 27, “Correcting Errors.” Today we are covering subsection “d.” As a refresher, this rule start outs with the general principle that once an error in respect to the Rules of Tennis is discovered, that all points previously played shall stand.
If a player serves out of turn during a tie-break game and the error is discovered after an even number of points have been played, the error is corrected immediately. If the error is discovered after an odd number of points have been played, the order of service shall remain as altered.
USTA Friend at Court, ITF Rules of Tennis, 27d
I understand what this rule is conveying as a general principle. Confusion sets in over exactly how to correct the error immediately once detected. As a simple example, if a player serves the first point and incorrectly also serves the second point of a tie-break game, how exactly would the error be “immediately” corrected?
With “once a point is played that it should stand,” as overarching guidance, I have trouble finding a simple and equitable solution that does not discard the second point. If the second point is preserved, then my opponent is permanently robbed of a service point in the tie-break. I believe that is the solution that is “correct” per this wording.
My opponent would serve the third point from the correct side, and then I would serve the following two points. In ladies tennis, that probably isn’t a big deal. That would be a horrible inequity if John Isner was involved.
It is not any better if the error is discovered after an odd point. Extending my original example where I served the first two points of a tie-break game there are two scenarios from that point. If I served a third consecutive point and then the error was detected, then the service order would remain as altered and my opponent would serve the next two points.
In the same scenario where my opponent served the third point before detection, then the serve would revert back to the original server.
All this begs the question… exactly how much alcohol was involved to bring the match to this point?
Pending another official inquiry to the recent @USTATexas call for rules questions, the official Fiend at Court answer is that everyone should promptly adjourn to the bar if this situation is encountered in friendly play.
For tournament play, my strategy would most likely revolve on a claim confusion on the score, which is also entirely probable in this scenario. If the players can’t agree on the score, then the tie-break game would be rolled back to the point where agreement exists. That is probably the most equitable resolution.
Just like the rule we covered last week, if order of service errors are made between partners and there is a service fault before the error is detected, the fault stands and the corrected server will be granted only one serve. If the order of service error was from an opponent, any faults served do not stand.
Until doubles was added to the mix on this rule, I have been envisioning only the singles scenario where two players temporarily lose their minds. The idea that four players could foul up a tie-break game to this extent, hurts my head.
- United States Tennis Association (2020) Friend at Court. White Plains, NY
