Take Two or Not Take Two: That is the Question

Yesterday, we discussed the principles underpinning situations when a server should be granted a second first serve after they have already delivered a fault. “The Code” within the USTA’s Friend at Court outlines how a first serve isn’t warranted when the server causes excessive delay before the second serve is put into play. All other scenarios are up to the discretion of the receiver. Today, we are looking at some real examples that have transpired in a couple of my recent matches.

One of the most straightforward scenarios is when the server nets the first serve and slowly ambles up to the net to clear the ball before eventually returning to the baseline to deliver a second serve. Since that pause is entirely created by the server, I never award a second serve in that scenario. Nor should it be expected.

Last summer, I played a USTA League match on a day with a strong crosswind at a facility built in the late 1970s. That was before the advent of modern racquets, so the spacing between courts at that site is much closer than what is now the construction standard. Under those conditions, there were going to be a lot of lets.

Indeed, on the very first point, our opponents served a fault that the net player quickly cleared. While the server was ready to deliver the second serve, a ball from the adjacent court came careening into our court and had to be cleared before our point could start. I quickly offered two serves. In this case, there was excessive delay that was not the fault of the serving team.

As the game progressed, I felt like the other team intentionally started dilly-dallying after each missed first serve. The player’s first serve is aptly described as a “loose cannon.” It was hard to play when it scudded off her racquet into the service box, which fortunately did not happen with great regularity. Her second serve can be characterized as a “cream puff.” I can hardly blame them for trying to get as many chances at a first serve as possible.

We quickly had the scenario where a first serve was missed, followed by what I perceived to be an excessive delay on the part of the serving team to clear the ball. As the server returned to the baseline, a ball from the adjacent court infringed into our space, which the serving team cleared with a great show of delay.

I did not offer “take two” in that situation because the serving team was responsible for the initial time lapsed between the serves. We most likely would have played the entire point before the ball from the adjacent court rolled over if the serve had been promptly cleared. From a practical standpoint, if points were not played promptly, we would have been out there all day clearing balls from the next court.

Recently at the Texas Sectional Championship Tournament, we had a situation late during a tight second set when our opponents served a fault, and we failed to promptly corral that ball. With our opponent set to deliver a second serve, a ball from the adjacent court rolled across our court. I granted a “take two” in that scenario because we had caused the initial delay. If that same scenario was flipped and the serving team had taken a long time to secure the first ball, I would not have granted a first serve.

My doubles partner was a little miffed at me, especially since she was the one who had to face a great first serve that was played on the do-over. That illustrates that there will always be some variation in the thresholds of what is reasonable and what is excessive from player to player.

Additionally, whether or not I grant a first-serve is definitely influenced by how my opponent responds when faced with that decision as the receiver. If they don’t offer the “take two” when I think it is warranted, then my generosity definitely tightens up a bit from that point forward.

The etiquette and behavioral norms of granting a first serve following a fault are a great example of one of the unwritten rules of tennis. While “The Code” provides good guidance, it is ultimately up to the discretion of the receiver. It is a great opportunity to treat the other player the way you would want to be treated.