The ITF is the arbiter of compliance to the Rules of Tennis for racquet and racquet technology. The ITF “Product Conformity” pamphlet for this aspect of the game indicates that the interpretation is performed in a manner that preserves the “traditional character of tennis” as well as the skills traditionally required to play the game. Tennis is a game based largely on tradition.
Unlike the testing and endorsement process in place for the ball, a list of approved racquets for tennis is not published by the ITF. Manufacturers are encouraged to engage with the ITF prior to the production phase to ensure that equipment is in compliance with the rules and it is made clear that communication between the manufacturer and the ITF is held in the strictest confidence. This is a necessity because equipment under development by manufacturers would include proprietary information about new products and technologies. Preserving the secrecy of this information is a necessary condition for preproduction communication to occur.
Here is how I imagine that conversation might have gone down with the manufacturer of my particular racquet:
Manufacturer: Here is our new line of racquets. It’s exactly the same as last year with a new name and a new paint job.
ITF: You’re good.
Manufacturer: We also added a letter to the “technology” used in the racquet. There is no actual change in materials or said technology.
ITF: Still good.
Fiend at Court speculated conversation.
For products that have reached the market, the ITF will respond to requests for rulings. A list of non-conforming equipment that cannot be used in sanctioned play is listed in the ITF Product Conformity page. That will be the topic of a future post.
The ITF also publishes a list of equipment for which a ruling has been requested where the item in question has been determined to be compliant. The ITF makes it clear that the confirming equipment list only includes items for which a ruling was officially requested. I perceive that the ITF would prefer to not publish the compliance list, but that the list exists as a necessity to deter repetitive requests for some of the items.
- Product Conformity, ITF, November 2019.
