Another reason that I am convinced that the USTA comments originated from something that happened on court that escalated into formal rulings is because of how oddly specific some of the comments are. Today we come to the first of two places in the Friend at Court where material changes to the ball are covered.
USTA Comment 3.1: May a player cause a ball to become wet by using the ball to wipe perspiration from the player’s body? No. A player may not take any action that materially changes the condition of the ball; therefore, a player may not use a ball to wipe off perspiration.
USTA Friend at Court
I am sure that the original framers of the rules of tennis never could have imagined that such a restriction would ever be needed. The fact that it is codified via a USTA comment suggests a regional basis of occurrence. The ugly American rears his head. As a side note, I am trying to be mostly gender neutral with my pronouns, but in this case the male selection was intentional. I am sure that the event that precipitated this comment was committed by a dude.
This visualization in USTA Comment 3.1 completely grosses me out. Intentionally soaking a ball with bodily excretions is just sick. As anyone who has ever hit a damp or wet ball knows, striking a ball ejects a shower of mist in the immediate vicinity of the player that hit it. I personally would not want to be on the sending or receiving end of that ball.
Additionally, I don’t even know why a player would want to do this in the first place. The felt of the ball is pretty abrasive. The thought of voluntarily rubbing a ball on exposed skin is kind of like nails on a chalkboard. It gives me the heebie-jeebies. Maybe this is the reason that a towel is the de facto swag for unimaginative event organizers.
Moving past the hygienic issues associated with this specific comment, what would be the advantage of materially altering the ball? A wet ball would be heavier and play slower, which may favor some playing styles. Other ways that the ball could be modified would be to spit on it (hey to baseball) or to shave the fuzz off it. All things considered, the restriction on material modification is a pretty good rule.
When I am playing my matches, I intentionally and systematically rotate through the balls. A large part of the motivation is to balance the play across balls, but another consideration is to make sure that a ball does not stay in my pocket or tucked under my compression shorts for too long so as to absorb sweat. I am polite that way.
In the good news department, this post marks the conclusion of examination of the Section 3, “The Ball.” Tomorrow we move to section 4, “The Racket.”
- United States Tennis Association (2020) Friend at Court. White Plains, NY
