The Order if Service in tennis is the rule that specifies the server and the receiver in standard games of tennis. There is verbiage in the rule that makes it clear that once the Order of Service is established that it remains in effect until the conclusion of the set.
This rotation shall continue until the end of the set.
USTA Friend at Court, ITF Rules of Tennis, Section 14.
This sentence is the apparent anchor for why the USTA decided to insert the following comment into the rules at this location in the Rules of Tennis. “The ITF, USTA Overlord” described the mechanics of USTA Comments and how they relate to the ITF Rules of Tennis.
May a doubles team switch its serving order at the beginning of a Match Tiebreak?
Yes.
USTA Friend at Court, USTA Comment 14.1
If the flow of the rules seems convoluted, it is because the Order of Service rules in Section 14 do not include Order of Service for the tie-break game which is in Section 5, and USTA piled onto the confusion by placing a comment on a tie-break game Order of Service scenario in Section 14. In other words, the organization seems convoluted because it is.
I have a masters degree in software engineering and have spent a significant amount of time in my career writing computer programs. “Spaghetti code” is a derisive term for software that is not well structured and organized. The USTA Friend at Court/ITF Rules of tennis are littered with the rules equivalent of spaghetti code. The traditional nature of tennis probably means that it will be that way until the end of time.
The Match Tiebreak is the usage of a tie-break game in place of a final deciding set. As a substitution for a set, it is clearly a new set thus both Order of Service and Order of Receiving in doubles can be modified by either team.
From a strategic perspective, it is almost always a universally bad idea to make a change. While changing service end or receiving side can certainly shake things up, it places the players on the team that made the change in a situation of adapting to the new situation with very few points available to settle in.
The only exception I can see is if the team lost the final full set played in a rout, or if serving conditions had dramatically changed during the course of the match. In that case it would be a desperation move to change the momentum that could potentially be justified. I would still be leery of making a change in the Match Tiebreak.
I want to believe that this concludes Order of Service discussion, but I have no confidence that I will not encounter another fragment of this rule as I continue to progress through the Rules of Tennis. It is the nature of this project.
- United States Tennis Association (2020) Friend at Court. White Plains, NY
