An engineer overthinks tennis in a daily journal.
Since it is 2021, I started looking around for the updated USTA Friend at Court for the current year. As (eventually) confirmed by whoever is behind the USTA Officiating email address, it is not out yet. Long time readers of may recall that the 2020 rules discussion started out using the 2019 version of the USTA Friend at Court. There apparently is a little lag at the first of each year.
Since I tangentially mentioned the Wilson Triniti tennis ball over the weekend, now seems like the perfect time to discuss this new innovative ball. As I started in on my coverage for today, I stumbled across a great mystery. What is the approval status of the ball?
Effective January 1, 2021, the Fair Oaks Tennis Center in Dallas is permanently closed. To the best of my knowledge, the only place where the closure notification has been published is on the Facebook page for the facility. The announcement of the impending shut down was first shared on December 6.
When reviewing posts from 2020, I had two realizations. First, I somehow still do not yet own a set of singles sticks. Second, I missed a subtle detail of the rule in my initial pass through that section. I wrote more than I would have anticipated about the singles sticks last year.
In the earliest days of this site, I posed the rhetorical question, “How do I not routinely carry a socket wrench in my bag to adjust net tension?” That quote came from “I just can’t handle the tension!” which was published on January 9, 2020 and discussed the rules around the proper tension for the net. At the time, I lamented that I had never seen a USTA umpire check the tension of the net prior to the match.
A short time after I wrote extensively about the ITF tennis ball testing procedures in 2020, I learned that both the USTA and Tennis Australia also have testing facilities and procedures for tennis ball testing. In fact, both of those national associations publish a list of approved balls that is divergent from the ITF list.
On this final day of 2020, I wanted to take a moment to reflect on the past year. This site emerged from a goal that I set for myself on New Year’s Eve in 2019. Specifically I wanted to write a page a day about tennis in 2020. The fact that this was done publicly via a blog was an accountability afterthought. Today I am celebrating successful achievement of that goal.
The final discussion point in the Rules surrounding the use of Player Analysis Technology is over how the allowability of various devices is litigated. Last week we discussed that the ultimate authority over these devices is the ITF. There are detailed policies and procedures that define how the determination is made.
There is an odd psychology in hitting the overhead. The majority of recreational players seem to regard what should be an easy “put away” with a mixture of apprehension and fear. The simple fact of the matter is that it is embarrassing to miss an overhead. For the same reason, some players are reluctant to practice the shot.
The NSMTA site has an undated post that has been up for at least a month that provides a summary of the problems that the USTA Adult Competition Committee (ACC) has been trying to solve for National Senior Tennis. I find this summary to be insightful as to the challenges faced by the ACC. Additionally, it illuminates the perception of the problems from the NSMTA perspective.