Is Retiring a Match Against The Rules of Tennis or “The Code”?

We’re in the midst of overthinking an incident that occurred earlier this year at the Tom Fey Tri-Level National Invitational Championships. This has turned out to be a lengthy examination of the history, context, and culture surrounding retiring from matches. The Tri-Level informational page asserts that the “USTA Rules and League Regulations and Friend at Court will be enforced during championships.” [sic] Yesterday, we examined what the USTA League Regulations say about retiring matches. Today, we are turning our focus to what the USTA’s Friend at Court has to say about the situation.

Part 1 of the USTA’s Friend at Court is a direct reprint of the ITF Rules of Tennis. The USTA has annotated the rules with comments on how the rules are interpreted in USTA-sanctioned events. Both the ITF Rules of Tennis and the USTA comments are completely silent on retired matches. That should not surprise anyone as that document specifies the rules of the sport at the fundamental level.

Part 2 of the Friend at Court is “THE CODE,” subtitled “The Player’s Guide to Fair Play and the Unwritten Rules of Tennis.” That document is the foundation of sportsmanship and the etiquette of the sport. While THE CODE in the Friend at Court only applies to matches under the USTA’s jurisdiction, its contents are globally ubiquitous.

Any question of sportsmanship is planned for a future post in this series. However, it is still useful to review “THE CODE” to see if any unwritten rules apply to the situation. As it turns out, there is only one explicit reference to retired matches in that part of the rules.

Injury caused by player. When a player accidentally injures an opponent, the opponent suffers the consequences. Consider the situation where the server’s racket accidentally strikes the receiver and incapacitates the receiver. The receiver is unable to resume play within the time limit. Even though the server caused the injury, the server wins the match by retirement.

THE CODE, USTA Friend at Court, Principle 38

Principle 38 applies when a player is injured by their opponent. It is not applicable to the situation at Tri-Level, which is the basis for this case study. While that is the only direct mention of retired matches in THE CODE, Principle 41 contains a clause that could potentially be a precursor to a retired match.

Requesting officials during play. While normally a player may not leave the playing area, the player may contact an official for assistance. Some reasons for contacting an official include:

• Stalling
• Flagrant foot faults;
• Extreme grunting;
• A medical or bleeding timeout;
• A scoring dispute; or
• A pattern of bad calls. A player may refuse to play until an official responds.

THE CODE, USTA Friend at Court, Principle 41

While this part of THE CODE clearly states that an official should be called to the court for a medical timeout, a timeout is not required before a match is retired.

Nothing within the first two parts of the USTA Friend at Court prohibits a player from retiring from a match. That means our exploration has to slide down the slippery slope of potentially applying the USTA Regulations in Part 3 to USTA League or National Invitational Events. I will start into that aspect tomorrow.

---

1. USTA Tri-Level National Invitational Welcome Page, USTA SoCal Hosted Informational Page, last viewed April 6, 2024.
2. 2024 USTA League National Regulations, USTA Resource Document, March 14, 2024.
3. Friend at Court: The Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations, USTA, 2024
4. USTA Adult and Family Tournament, Ranking, & Sanctioning Regulations, USTA Regulation, as amended December 14, 2023.
5. USTA League Suspension Point System Calculation Tables, USTA Resource Document, February 6, 2024.
6. USTA League Suspension Point System 2024, USTA Resource Document, February 6, 2024.
7. USTA League Suspension Point System Frequently Asked Questions, USTA Resource Document, March 23, 2023.