I am entertained by the idea of removing second serve.

I'll explain why but first let's talk about the change they actually brought.


ATP has been experimenting with different format in their Next Gen Finals, best of 7 sets, sets until 4 games, and advantage is a game-point.

I think that is horrible. It negates the tennis, the entire game is based on "winning 2 pts more than your opponent, or two games" and here it is no longer the case. It also destroys the drama of long deuce games.


Their reason for this being is that zoomers lack concentration so they won't watch long matches with long deuce games, and that set endings being the sort of climax periods in the match, it's better to have 4 of those, than 3 or 2 in the match.

Basically the beginning of the sets are "low intensity or low risk periods" so they wanted to get rid of it, by brining the high intensity and risk sooner.

In their Next Gen Finals format, you can start being nervous already at 2-2 as someone could serve for the set next game.

In that particular case, maybe they're onto something, bur too much is lost and btw it's good to have calmer and more intense periods within match.

As I said, if sets end early, at 4, you miss out on that struggle that happens later on, plus inevitably you end up with too many tiebreaks as 3-3 would get you in tiebreak, which is bad.


I say ditch that format completely and try experimenting with abolishing second serve. That is a total time saver, as you would get rid of endless serve repeats.

I'm a conservative and I am not saying I would remove second serve, but if anything is worth experimenting, this is it.

If they had just one attempt to serve, players would serve less risky if they lack confidence or quality so you'd actually get more returned serves and more play.

That would then remove the need for surfaces to be slow. We all know they slowed down the surfaces to facilitate rallying.

Basically if someone has an off day on his serve, and especially if it's a serve bot type, he will bore us with attempts to hig big, hit aces, find his groove and so on. Yet ultimately if he's so off, we would end up watching him after his second serves
only.

So by second serve, we would already force him to tone if down and serve more safer if he has an off day? For him nothing would change, he'd serve slower on his first serve, and for the viewers it would be more interesting.

And if he has an ON day, hitting aces all over the place, then he won't need second serve at all.


Basically to summarize it, we would lost part of tennis as we know it, but maybe overall we would gain something better?

Second serves are total time wasters.


--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 8/4/23 7:21 AM, *skriptis wrote:

I am entertained by the idea of removing second serve.

I'll explain why but first let's talk about the change they actually brought.

ATP has been experimenting with different format in their Next Gen Finals, best of 7 sets, sets until 4 games, and advantage is a game-point.

I think that is horrible. It negates the tennis, the entire game is based on "winning 2 pts more than your opponent, or two games" and here it is no longer the case. It also destroys the drama of long deuce games.

In serious competition, tenacity in long deuce games separates the
greats from the also-rans.

The 26 min deuce at Wimbledon was a great, great example of what a long
deuce game can be. Neither guy would let go. It got to the point that
for many pros, they'd just chuck the game, get it over with, and move
on. But these kinds of guys--Alcaraz and Djok--they do not by default
let things go, surrender anything. And when the contest becomes one of
will as much as of athleticism, and they perceive this, they just will
not give in.

They can often mentally break a very talented player who lacks backbone
and resolve. Right there in that one game. You can see the air go out of
them. Just like when I watched Rune in a recent match--might have been Wimbledon--and after a tight, close 1st set, all the air was gone. He
did not give up, but that extra something special was gone. You could
see it as clearly as you could see that Nadal was scared of Djok at the
AO final some years back.

Their reason for this being is that zoomers lack concentration so they won't watch long matches with long deuce games, and that set endings being the sort of climax periods in the match, it's better to have 4 of those, than 3 or 2 in the match.

Basically the beginning of the sets are "low intensity or low risk periods" so they wanted to get rid of it, by brining the high intensity and risk sooner.

Who invented this? Court1?

In their Next Gen Finals format, you can start being nervous already at 2-2 as someone could serve for the set next game.

In that particular case, maybe they're onto something, bur too much is lost and btw it's good to have calmer and more intense periods within match.

Yes. It woks like comic relief in a drama.

As I said, if sets end early, at 4, you miss out on that struggle that happens later on, plus inevitably you end up with too many tiebreaks as 3-3 would get you in tiebreak, which is bad.

Oh, but *struggle* is bad, skript!

Now, *talking*  passionately about struggle is *good*, but actual
struggle is not.

That's what you need to know about zoomers.

I say ditch that format completely and try experimenting with abolishing second serve. That is a total time saver, as you would get rid of endless serve repeats.

Reflexively I say no, but you know, it could change strategy a great deal--perhaps for the better.

I'm a conservative and I am not saying I would remove second serve, but if anything is worth experimenting, this is it.

Yes. An experiment like allowing direct coaching during a match, like
they did in women's a few years back.

If they had just one attempt to serve, players would serve less risky if they lack confidence or quality so you'd actually get more returned serves and more play.

And yet when a player with balls felt that he could sneak one past, he'd
pull it out of the bag. A lot like when some guys go for an ace on the
2nd serve.

That would then remove the need for surfaces to be slow. We all know they slowed down the surfaces to facilitate rallying.

Actually, that didn't bother me *so far as quality of play*. The biggest negative was that it made previous eras less comparable to the era of
slow surfaces.

Basically if someone has an off day on his serve, and especially if it's a serve bot type, he will bore us with attempts to hig big, hit aces, find his groove and so on. Yet ultimately if he's so off, we would end up watching him after his second

serves only.
Very often. And those who had excellent 2nd serves would have an advantage.

So by second serve, we would already force him to tone if down and serve more safer if he has an off day? For him nothing would change, he'd serve slower on his first serve, and for the viewers it would be more interesting.

Unsure at this point if I agree.

And if he has an ON day, hitting aces all over the place, then he won't need second serve at all.

Basically to summarize it, we would lost part of tennis as we know it, but maybe overall we would gain something better?

Second serves are total time wasters.

Well, I don't agree with that statement, but it would be an interesting experiment to try your suggestion.



--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"If we use Occam's Razor, whose razor will *he* use?" --Sawfish ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

T24gOC80LzIzIDg6NDMgQU0sICpza3JpcHRpcyB3cm90ZToNCj4gU2F3ZmlzaCA8c2F3Zmlz aDY2NkBnbWFpbC5jb20+IFdyb3RlIGluIG1lc3NhZ2U6cg0KPj4gT24gOC80LzIzIDc6MjEg QU0sICpza3JpcHRpcyB3cm90ZTo+IEkgYW0gZW50ZXJ0YWluZWQgYnkgdGhlIGlkZWEgb2Yg cmVtb3Zpbmcgc2Vjb25kIHNlcnZlLj4+IEknbGwgZXhwbGFpbiB3aHkgYnV0IGZpcnN0IGxl dCdzIHRhbGsgYWJvdXQgdGhlIGNoYW5nZSB0aGV5IGFjdHVhbGx5IGJyb3VnaHQuPj4+IEFU UCBoYXMgYmVlbiBleHBlcmltZW50aW5nIHdpdGggZGlmZmVyZW50IGZvcm1hdCBpbiB0aGVp ciBOZXh0IEdlbiBGaW5hbHMsIGJlc3Qgb2YgNyBzZXRzLCBzZXRzIHVudGlsIDQgZ2FtZXMs IGFuZCBhZHZhbnRhZ2UgaXMgYSBnYW1lLXBvaW50Lj4+IEkgdGhpbmsgdGhhdCBpcyBob3Jy aWJsZS4gSXQgbmVnYXRlcyB0aGUgdGVubmlzLCB0aGUgZW50aXJlIGdhbWUgaXMgYmFzZWQg b24gIndpbm5pbmcgMiBwdHMgbW9yZSB0aGFuIHlvdXIgb3Bwb25lbnQsIG9yIHR3byBnYW1l cyIgYW5kIGhlcmUgaXQgaXMgbm8gbG9uZ2VyIHRoZSBjYXNlLiBJdCBhbHNvIGRlc3Ryb3lz IHRoZSBkcmFtYSBvZiBsb25nIGRldWNlIGdhbWVzLkluIHNlcmlvdXMgY29tcGV0aXRpb24s IHRlbmFjaXR5IGluIGxvbmcgZGV1Y2UgZ2FtZXMgc2VwYXJhdGVzIHRoZSBncmVhdHMgZnJv bSB0aGUgYWxzby1yYW5zLlRoZSAyNiBtaW4gZGV1Y2UgYXQgV2ltYmxlZG9uIHdhcyBhIGdy ZWF0LCBncmVhdCBleGFtcGxlIG9mIHdoYXQgYSBsb25nIGRldWNlIGdhbWUgY2FuIGJlLiBO ZWl0aGVyIGd1eSB3b3VsZCBsZXQgZ28uIEl0IGdvdCB0byB0aGUgcG9pbnQgdGhhdCBmb3Ig bWFueSBwcm9zLCB0aGV5J2QganVzdCBjaHVjayB0aGUgZ2FtZSwgZ2V0IGl0IG92ZXIgd2l0 aCwgYW5kIG1vdmUgb24uIEJ1dCB0aGVzZSBraW5kcyBvZiBndXlzLS1BbGNhcmF6IGFuZCBE am9rLS10aGV5IGRvIG5vdCBieSBkZWZhdWx0IGxldCB0aGluZ3MgZ28sIHN1cnJlbmRlciBh bnl0aGluZy4gQW5kIHdoZW4gdGhlIGNvbnRlc3QgYmVjb21lcyBvbmUgb2Ygd2lsbCBhcyBt dWNoIGFzIG9mIGF0aGxldGljaXNtLCBhbmQgdGhleSBwZXJjZWl2ZSB0aGlzLCB0aGV5IGp1 c3Qgd2lsbCBub3QgZ2l2ZSBpbi5UaGV5IGNhbiBvZnRlbiBtZW50YWxseSBicmVhayBhIHZl cnkgdGFsZW50ZWQgcGxheWVyIHdobyBsYWNrcyBiYWNrYm9uZSBhbmQgcmVzb2x2ZS4gUmln aHQgdGhlcmUgaW4gdGhhdCBvbmUgZ2FtZS4gWW91IGNhbiBzZWUgdGhlIGFpciBnbyBvdXQg b2YgdGhlbS4gSnVzdCBsaWtlIHdoZW4gSSB3YXRjaGVkIFJ1bmUgaW4gYSByZWNlbnQgbWF0 Y2gtLW1pZ2h0IGhhdmUgYmVlbiBXaW1ibGVkb24tLWFuZCBhZnRlciBhIHRpZ2h0LCBjbG9z ZSAxc3Qgc2V0LCBhbGwgdGhlIGFpciB3YXMgZ29uZS4gSGUgZGlkIG5vdCBnaXZlIHVwLCBi dXQgdGhhdCBleHRyYSBzb21ldGhpbmcgc3BlY2lhbCB3YXMgZ29uZS4gWW91IGNvdWxkIHNl ZSBpdCBhcyBjbGVhcmx5IGFzIHlvdSBjb3VsZCBzZWUgdGhhdCBOYWRhbCB3YXMgc2NhcmVk IG9mIERqb2sgYXQgdGhlIEFPIGZpbmFsIHNvbWUgeWVhcnMgYmFjay4+Pj4gVGhlaXIgcmVh c29uIGZvciB0aGlzIGJlaW5nIGlzIHRoYXQgem9vbWVycyBsYWNrIGNvbmNlbnRyYXRpb24g c28gdGhleSB3b24ndCB3YXRjaCBsb25nIG1hdGNoZXMgd2l0aCBsb25nIGRldWNlIGdhbWVz LCBhbmQgdGhhdCBzZXQgZW5kaW5ncyBiZWluZyB0aGUgc29ydCBvZiBjbGltYXggcGVyaW9k cyBpbiB0aGUgbWF0Y2gsIGl0J3MgYmV0dGVyIHRvIGhhdmUgNCBvZiB0aG9zZSwgdGhhbiAz IG9yIDIgaW4gdGhlIG1hdGNoLj4+IEJhc2ljYWxseSB0aGUgYmVnaW5uaW5nIG9mIHRoZSBz ZXRzIGFyZSAibG93IGludGVuc2l0eSBvciBsb3cgcmlzayBwZXJpb2RzIiBzbyB0aGV5IHdh bnRlZCB0byBnZXQgcmlkIG9mIGl0LCBieSBicmluaW5nIHRoZSBoaWdoIGludGVuc2l0eSBh bmQgcmlzayBzb29uZXIuV2hvIGludmVudGVkIHRoaXM/IENvdXJ0MT8+PiBJbiB0aGVpciBO ZXh0IEdlbiBGaW5hbHMgZm9ybWF0LCB5b3UgY2FuIHN0YXJ0IGJlaW5nIG5lcnZvdXMgYWxy ZWFkeSBhdCAyLTIgYXMgc29tZW9uZSBjb3VsZCBzZXJ2ZSBmb3IgdGhlIHNldCBuZXh0IGdh bWUuPj4gSW4gdGhhdCBwYXJ0aWN1bGFyIGNhc2UsIG1heWJlIHRoZXkncmUgb250byBzb21l dGhpbmcsIGJ1ciB0b28gbXVjaCBpcyBsb3N0IGFuZCBidHcgaXQncyBnb29kIHRvIGhhdmUg Y2FsbWVyIGFuZCBtb3JlIGludGVuc2UgcGVyaW9kcyB3aXRoaW4gbWF0Y2guWWVzLiBJdCB3 b2tzIGxpa2UgY29taWMgcmVsaWVmIGluIGEgZHJhbWEuPj4gQXMgSSBzYWlkLCBpZiBzZXRz IGVuZCBlYXJseSwgYXQgNCwgeW91IG1pc3Mgb3V0IG9uIHRoYXQgc3RydWdnbGUgdGhhdCBo YXBwZW5zIGxhdGVyIG9uLCBwbHVzIGluZXZpdGFibHkgeW91IGVuZCB1cCB3aXRoIHRvbyBt YW55IHRpZWJyZWFrcyBhcyAzLTMgd291bGQgZ2V0IHlvdSBpbiB0aWVicmVhaywgd2hpY2gg aXMgYmFkLk9oLCBidXQgKnN0cnVnZ2xlKiBpcyBiYWQsIHNrcmlwdCFOb3csICp0YWxraW5n KiAgcGFzc2lvbmF0ZWx5IGFib3V0IHN0cnVnZ2xlIGlzICpnb29kKiwgYnV0IGFjdHVhbCBz dHJ1Z2dsZSBpcyBub3QuVGhhdCdzIHdoYXQgeW91IG5lZWQgdG8ga25vdyBhYm91dCB6b29t ZXJzLj4+PiBJIHNheSBkaXRjaCB0aGF0IGZvcm1hdCBjb21wbGV0ZWx5IGFuZCB0cnkgZXhw ZXJpbWVudGluZyB3aXRoIGFib2xpc2hpbmcgc2Vjb25kIHNlcnZlLiBUaGF0IGlzIGEgdG90 YWwgdGltZSBzYXZlciwgYXMgeW91IHdvdWxkIGdldCByaWQgb2YgZW5kbGVzcyBzZXJ2ZSBy ZXBlYXRzLlJlZmxleGl2ZWx5IEkgc2F5IG5vLCBidXQgeW91IGtub3csIGl0IGNvdWxkIGNo YW5nZSBzdHJhdGVneSBhIGdyZWF0IGRlYWwtLXBlcmhhcHMgZm9yIHRoZSBiZXR0ZXIuPj4g SSdtIGEgY29uc2VydmF0aXZlIGFuZCBJIGFtIG5vdCBzYXlpbmcgSSB3b3VsZCByZW1vdmUg c2Vjb25kIHNlcnZlLCBidXQgaWYgYW55dGhpbmcgaXMgd29ydGggZXhwZXJpbWVudGluZywg dGhpcyBpcyBpdC5ZZXMuIEFuIGV4cGVyaW1lbnQgbGlrZSBhbGxvd2luZyBkaXJlY3QgY29h Y2hpbmcgZHVyaW5nIGEgbWF0Y2gsIGxpa2UgdGhleSBkaWQgaW4gd29tZW4ncyBhIGZldyB5 ZWFycyBiYWNrLj4+IElmIHRoZXkgaGFkIGp1c3Qgb25lIGF0dGVtcHQgdG8gc2VydmUsIHBs YXllcnMgd291bGQgc2VydmUgbGVzcyByaXNreSBpZiB0aGV5IGxhY2sgY29uZmlkZW5jZSBv ciBxdWFsaXR5IHNvIHlvdSdkIGFjdHVhbGx5IGdldCBtb3JlIHJldHVybmVkIHNlcnZlcyBh bmQgbW9yZSBwbGF5LkFuZCB5ZXQgd2hlbiBhIHBsYXllciB3aXRoIGJhbGxzIGZlbHQgdGhh dCBoZSBjb3VsZCBzbmVhayBvbmUgcGFzdCwgaGUnZCBwdWxsIGl0IG91dCBvZiB0aGUgYmFn LiBBIGxvdCBsaWtlIHdoZW4gc29tZSBndXlzIGdvIGZvciBhbiBhY2Ugb24gdGhlIDJuZCBz ZXJ2ZS4+PiBUaGF0IHdvdWxkIHRoZW4gcmVtb3ZlIHRoZSBuZWVkIGZvciBzdXJmYWNlcyB0 byBiZSBzbG93LiBXZSBhbGwga25vdyB0aGV5IHNsb3dlZCBkb3duIHRoZSBzdXJmYWNlcyB0 byBmYWNpbGl0YXRlIHJhbGx5aW5nLkFjdHVhbGx5LCB0aGF0IGRpZG4ndCBib3RoZXIgbWUg KnNvIGZhciBhcyBxdWFsaXR5IG9mIHBsYXkqLiBUaGUgYmlnZ2VzdCBuZWdhdGl2ZSB3YXMg dGhhdCBpdCBtYWRlIHByZXZpb3VzIGVyYXMgbGVzcyBjb21wYXJhYmxlIHRvIHRoZSBlcmEg b2Ygc2xvdyBzdXJmYWNlcy4+PiBCYXNpY2FsbHkgaWYgc29tZW9uZSBoYXMgYW4gb2ZmIGRh eSBvbiBoaXMgc2VydmUsIGFuZCBlc3BlY2lhbGx5IGlmIGl0J3MgYSBzZXJ2ZSBib3QgdHlw ZSwgaGUgd2lsbCBib3JlIHVzIHdpdGggYXR0ZW1wdHMgdG8gaGlnIGJpZywgaGl0IGFjZXMs IGZpbmQgaGlzIGdyb292ZSBhbmQgc28gb24uIFlldCB1bHRpbWF0ZWx5IGlmIGhlJ3Mgc28g b2ZmLCB3ZSB3b3VsZCBlbmQgdXAgd2F0Y2hpbmcgaGltIGFmdGVyIGhpcyBzZWNvbmQgc2Vy dmVzIG9ubHkuVmVyeSBvZnRlbi4gQW5kIHRob3NlIHdobyBoYWQgZXhjZWxsZW50IDJuZCBz ZXJ2ZXMgd291bGQgaGF2ZSBhbiBhZHZhbnRhZ2UuPj4gU28gYnkgc2Vjb25kIHNlcnZlLCB3 ZSB3b3VsZCBhbHJlYWR5IGZvcmNlIGhpbSB0byB0b25lIGlmIGRvd24gYW5kIHNlcnZlIG1v cmUgc2FmZXIgaWYgaGUgaGFzIGFuIG9mZiBkYXk/IEZvciBoaW0gbm90aGluZyB3b3VsZCBj aGFuZ2UsIGhlJ2Qgc2VydmUgc2xvd2VyIG9uIGhpcyBmaXJzdCBzZXJ2ZSwgYW5kIGZvciB0 aGUgdmlld2VycyBpdCB3b3VsZCBiZSBtb3JlIGludGVyZXN0aW5nLlVuc3VyZSBhdCB0aGlz IHBvaW50IGlmIEkgYWdyZWUuPj4gQW5kIGlmIGhlIGhhcyBhbiBPTiBkYXksIGhpdHRpbmcg YWNlcyBhbGwgb3ZlciB0aGUgcGxhY2UsIHRoZW4gaGUgd29uJ3QgbmVlZCBzZWNvbmQgc2Vy dmUgYXQgYWxsLj4+PiBCYXNpY2FsbHkgdG8gc3VtbWFyaXplIGl0LCB3ZSB3b3VsZCBsb3N0 IHBhcnQgb2YgdGVubmlzIGFzIHdlIGtub3cgaXQsIGJ1dCBtYXliZSBvdmVyYWxsIHdlIHdv dWxkIGdhaW4gc29tZXRoaW5nIGJldHRlcj8+PiBTZWNvbmQgc2VydmVzIGFyZSB0b3RhbCB0 aW1lIHdhc3RlcnMuV2VsbCwgSSBkb24ndCBhZ3JlZSB3aXRoIHRoYXQgc3RhdGVtZW50LCBi dXQgaXQgd291bGQgYmUgYW4gaW50ZXJlc3RpbmcgZXhwZXJpbWVudCB0byB0cnkgeW91ciBz dWdnZXN0aW9uLj4+LS0gfn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+ fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+IklmIHdlIHVzZSBPY2NhbSdz IFJhem9yLCB3aG9zZSByYXpvciB3aWxsICpoZSogdXNlPyIgIC0tU2F3ZmlzaH5+fn5+fn5+ fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+ fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fg0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPiBMZXQncyBqdXN0IGFncmVlIHRoYXQgbXkgcHJv cG9zYWwgZm9yIGV4cGVyaW1lbnQgaXMgYmV0dGVyIHRoYW4gdGhlaXIgY3VycmVudCBleHBl cmltZW50Pw0KQnkgZmFyIQ0KPg0KPiBUaGUgc3RhbmRhcmQgc2V0cyB1bnRpbCA2LCBvciBh ZC9kZXVjZSBmaWdodHMgaW1vIGFyZSBub3QgYm9yaW5nIHBlciBzZSwgaXQgd2FzIG5ldmVy IGJvcmluZyBpZiBtZSwgbGVuZ2h0IGlzbid0IGFuIGlzc3VlLCB3aGVyZWFzIHdhdGNoaW5n IHNvbWVvbmUgdHJ5aW5nIHRvIGhpdCBiaWcgc2VydmUgb24gYSBzZXJ2aW5nIGRheSB3aXRo IDQwJSBmaXJzdCBzZXJ2ZXMgaW4gY2FuIGJlIGJvcmluZy4NCj4NCj4NCj4gU28gaWYgd2Un cmUgaW50byBleHBlcmltZW50cywgd2Ugc2hvdWxkIGdldCByaWQgb2YgdGhlIHN0dWZmIHRo YXQncyBtb3N0IGxpa2VseSB0byBiZSBib3JpbmcNCg0KV2hpbGUgSSBjYW4gc2VlIHlvdXIg cG9pbnQsICJib3JpbmciIGlzIHN1YmplY3RpdmUuDQoNCkkgZG8gYWdyZWUsIGhvd2V2ZXIs IHRoYXQgbWFueS9tb3N0IHdvdWxkIGFncmVlIHdpdGggeW91Lg0KDQo+ICAgZm9yIG1vc3Qg ZmFucyBpZSB0aGV5IHNob3VsZCBhYm9saXNoIHNlY29uZCBzZXJ2ZXMuDQpZZXMuDQo+DQo+ IE9UT0ggdGhlaXIgY3VycmVudCBleHBlcmltZW50IGF0IE5leHQgR2VuIEZpbmFscyBpcyBh IHRvdGFsIGZhbnRhc3ksIGJlc3Qgb2YgNyBzZXRzLCBzZXRzIHBsYXllZCB1bnRpbCA0LCBu byBhZC9kZXVjZS4NClRoaXMgaXMgbm90ICJ0ZW5uaXMiLiBJdCB3b3VsZCBuZWVkIGEgbmV3 IG5hbWUuDQo+DQo+IFRoYXQncyBub3QgdGVubmlzIGF0IGFsbCBpbW8NCkhhaCEgSSBqdXN0 IHJlYWQgZG93biB0aGlzIGZhciENCj4gICBhbmQgaXQgaXNuJ3Qgd29ydGggZXhwZXJpbWVu dGluZyB3aXRoIGl0IHNpbmNlIHRob3NlIGNoYW5nZXMgd29uJ3QgZXZlciBiZSBpbnRyb2R1 Y2VkLiBJdCdzIGEgZGVhZCBlbmQgYW5kIHRvbyBhYnN1cmQgYW5kIG1ha2VzIEdlbiBHZW4g RmluYWwgYW4gZXhoaWJpdGlvbiBwbGF5LiBZZXMgaXQgaXMgYW4gZXhvLCBidXQgc3RpbGwu IEl0IGlzIGEgY2xvd24gZXhvPw0KPg0KPg0KPiBPbiB0aGUgb3RoZXIgc2lkZSwgcmVtb3Zp bmcgc2Vjb25kIHNlcnZlIHdvdWxkIGJlIGFuIGV4cGVyaW1lbnQgd2l0aGluIHJlYWxtIG9m IHdoYXQncyBwb3NzaWJsZSB0byBoYXBwZW4uIEl0J3Mgc29tZXRoaW5nIEknZCBsaWtlIHRv IHNlZSwgbm8gc2Vjb25kIHNlcnZlcyBpbiBhICpub3JtYWwgdGVubmlzKiBmb3JtYXQuDQpH aXZlIGEgaHlwb3RoZXRpY2FsIGNob2ljZSBiZXR3ZWVuIG5vIGxldHMgYW5kIG5vIHNlY29u ZCBzZXJ2ZXMsIEkgd291bGQgDQpwcmVmZXIgdGhlIGxhdHRlci4NCj4NCj4NCj4NCj4gQWxz bywgSSB3b3VsZCBsaWtlIHRvIGVtcGhhc2lzZSwgSSdtIG5vdCBoZXJlIHRvIGRlbWFuZCAi bW9yZSBwbGF5IiBvciAidG8gbWFrZSBpdCBlYXNpZXIgZm9yIHRoZSByZXR1cm5lcnMiLg0K Pg0KPiBJIGFtIGZpbmUgd2l0aCBiaWcgc2VydmVzLCBhY2VzLCB1bnJldHVybmVkIHNlcnZl cywgYWxsIG9mIHRoYXQgYXJlIHdpbm5lcnMuIEl0J3MgYSBqb3kgdG8gd2F0Y2ggaXQuIEFu ZCBpZiBLYXJsb3ZpYyBjYW4gd2luIGEgbWF0Y2ggYnkgaGlzIHNlcnZlIGFsb25lLCBJIGxp a2UgaXQuDQo+DQo+IEJ1dCBpdCdzIGhpcyBzZWNvbmQgY2hhbmNlIHRoYXQgYW5ub3lzIG1l Lg0KPiBJdCdzIGtpbmRhIGxpa2UgSGF3a2V5ZSBhbmQgaWYgeW91IHlvdSBjb3VsZCBjaGFs bGVuZ2UgaXQgb24gYW55IHBvaW50Pw0KPg0KPiBUaGF0IHdvdWxkIGNvbnN1bWUgdGhlIGdh bWUganVzdCB3YXkgdG9vIG11Y2guIFRoZXJlJ3MgYSByZWFzb24gd2h5IHRoZXkgYWxsb3dl ZCBvbmx5IDMgY2hhbGxlbmdlcyBwZXIgc2V0Lg0KPg0KPg0KPiBOb3cgdGhhdCBIYXdrZXll IGlzIGdvbmUgc29vbiBhbmQgbWFjaGluZXMgdGFrZSBvdmVyIGVudGlyZWx5LCBpZSBhbGwg cG9pbnRzIHdpbGwgYmUgaGF3ay1leWVkLCBzbyBubyBuZWVkIGZvciBwbGF5ZXJzIHRvIGNo YWxsZW5nZSwNCg0KTm8sIGJ1dCBJIHRoaW5rIHRoZXkgKHBybyBvcmdhbml6YXRpb25zKSB3 aWxsIGxlYXZlIHRoZSBjaGFsbGVuZ2VzIA0KYmVjYXVzZS0tZmFjZSBpdC0taXQncyAqZnVu KiB0byBzZWUganVzdCBob3cgY2xvc2UgdGhlIGJhbGwgd2FzIHRvIHRoZSBsaW5lLg0KDQpU aW55IGxpdHRsZSBoaXQgb2Ygc3VzcGVuc2UuLi4gOl4pDQoNCm1heWJlIHdlIGNvdWxkIHJl bW92ZSBzZWNvbmQgc2VydmUgYW5kIGdpdmUgcGxheWVycyAzIHNlY29uZCBzZXJ2ZXMgcGVy IA0Kc2V0LCBpbiBsaW5lIHdpdGggaG93IHRoZXkgdXNlZCBIYXdrZXllIGNoYWxsZW5nZXM/ DQoNCk5PT09PISENCg0KTk8hIE5PIQ0KDQozIGNoYW5jZXMgZm9yIHRoZW0gdG8gYXBwbHkg dGFjdGljYWxseSBvdmVyIHRoZSBjb3Vyc2Ugb2YgdGhlIHNldC4NCg0KTk8sIE5PLi4uDQoN Cj4NCj4gSSByZWFsaXNlZCBvdmVyIHRoZSB5ZWFycyB0aGF0IHdoYXQncyBiZXR0ZXIgaW4g Rk8gYXMgb3Bwb3NlZCB0byBXaW1ibGVkb24gb3Igb3RoZXIgc2xhbXMgaXMgdGhhdCBwbGF5 ZXJzIHJvbGwgaW4gdGhlaXIgc2VydmVzIGEgbG90IG1vcmUsDQoNCi5hbmQgd2h5IHdvdWxk IHRoYXQgYmU/DQoNCkkgbWVhbiwgSSBoYXZlIHNvbWV0aGluZyBpbiBtaW5kIGFuZCBJIHdh bnQgdG8gaGF2ZSBhIGJsaW5kIGluZGVwZW5kZW50IA0KY29uZmlybWF0aW9uIChvciByZWJ1 dHRhbCkuDQoNCkkgbWVhbiwgbXkgZmlyc3QgdGhvdWdodCB3YXMgIldoeSBpbiB0aGUgaGVs bCB3b3VsZCB0aGV5IGRvIHRoYXQ/IiBhbmQgDQp0aGVuIEkgdGhvdWdodCAiT2gsIHllYWgu IEkgY2FuIHNlZSB3aHkgdGhleSAqbWlnaHQqIi4NCg0KPiB0aGVyZSdzIG5vIGFubm95YW5j ZSB3aXRoIHNlY29uZCBzZXJ2ZXMuDQo+DQo+IFdpdGggc2Vjb25kIHNlcnZlIGdvbmUgaW1v IHdlIHdvdWxkIGdldCBtb3JlIG9mIHBvd2VyZnVsIGtpY2sgc2VydmVzIGFuZCBjb25zZXF1 ZW50bHkgbW9yZSBzZXJ2ZSBhbmQgdm9sbGV5aW5nIHRvbyB3aGljaCB3b3VsZCBiZSBhd2Vz b21lPw0KDQpZb3Ugd291bGQgZ2V0IGFsbCBraW5kcyBvZiBiaXphcnJlIGtpY2tzIQ0KDQpU aGVyZSBhdCB0aGUgZW5kIG9mIHdoZW4gSSB3YXMgc3RpbGwgcGxheWluZywgZm9yIGFib3V0 IHRoZSBsYXN0IDMtNSANCnllYXJzLCBJIHdvcmtlZCB1cCBraWNrcyB0byBjb21wZW5zYXRl IGZvciBsYWNrIG9mIHJhdyB2ZWxvY2l0eS4NCg0KSSBjYW4gbGl0ZXJhbGx5IHJlY2FsbCBz ZXZlcmFsIGluc3RhbmNlcyB3aGVuIHRoZSByZXR1cm5lciBsZWFuZWQgaW4gdGhlIA0KKm9w cG9zaXRlKiBkaXJlY3Rpb24gZnJvbSB3aGVyZSB0aGUgYmFsbCBraWNrZWQtLWxpa2UgdGhl eSB3ZXJlIGF2b2lkaW5nIA0KdGhlIGJhbGwuIFRoZXkgd2VyZSBub3QgYXZvaWRpbmcgaXQs IGJ1dCB0aGV5IGhvbmVzdGx5IHRob3VnaHQgdGhhdCBmcm9tIA0KdGhlIHRyYWplY3Rvcnkg b2YgdGhlIGJhbGwgY29taW5nIGluLCBpdCB3b3VsZCBib3VuY2UgdG8gdGhlaXIgcmlnaHQs IA0Kd2hlbiBpbiBmYWN0IGl0IGJvdW5jZWQgdG8gdGhlaXIgbGVmdCBzaG91bGRlciBvciBo aWdoZXIuDQoNClByZXR0eSBmdWNraW4nIGdyYXRpZnlpbmcgdG8gYW4gYWdpbmcgZmFydCwg SSBhc3N1cmUgeW91Li4uDQoNClJlbWluZHMgbWUgb2YgYW4gb2xkIEJ1ZGR5IEhhY2tldHQg am9rZS4uLg0KDQoNCg0KLS0gDQp+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+ fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn4NCiJXaGVuIEkgd2Fz IGJhY2sgdGhlcmUgaW4gc2VtaW5hcnkgc2Nob29sLCB0aGVyZSB3YXMgYSBwZXJzb24gdGhl cmUgd2hvIHB1dCBmb3J0aCB0aGUgcHJvcG9zaXRpb24gdGhhdCB5b3UgY2FuIHBldGl0aW9u IHRoZSBMb3JkIHdpdGggcHJheWVyLi4uDQoNCiJQZXRpdGlvbiB0aGUgbG9yZCB3aXRoIHBy YXllci4uLg0KDQoiUGV0aXRpb24gdGhlIGxvcmQgd2l0aCBwcmF5ZXIuLi4NCg0KIllPVSBD QU5OT1QgUEVUSVRJT04gVEhFIExPUkQgV0lUSCBQUkFZRVIhIg0KDQotLVNhd2Zpc2gNCg0K

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r

On 8/4/23 7:21 AM, *skriptis wrote:> I am entertained by the idea of removing second serve.>> I'll explain why but first let's talk about the change they actually brought.>>> ATP has been experimenting with different format in their Next Gen Finals,

best of 7 sets, sets until 4 games, and advantage is a game-point.>> I think that is horrible. It negates the tennis, the entire game is based on "winning 2 pts more than your opponent, or two games" and here it is no longer the case. It also destroys
the drama of long deuce games.In serious competition, tenacity in long deuce games separates the greats from the also-rans.The 26 min deuce at Wimbledon was a great, great example of what a long deuce game can be. Neither guy would let go. It got to the
point that for many pros, they'd just chuck the game, get it over with, and move on. But these kinds of guys--Alcaraz and Djok--they do not by default let things go, surrender anything. And when the contest becomes one of will as much as of athleticism,
and they perceive this, they just will not give in.They can often mentally break a very talented player who lacks backbone and resolve. Right there in that one game. You can see the air go out of them. Just like when I watched Rune in a recent match--
might have been Wimbledon--and after a tight, close 1st set, all the air was gone. He did not give up, but that extra something special was gone. You could see it as clearly as you could see that Nadal was scared of Djok at the AO final some years back.>>

Their reason for this being is that zoomers lack concentration so they won't watch long matches with long deuce games, and that set endings being the sort of climax periods in the match, it's better to have 4 of those, than 3 or 2 in the match.>>

Basically the beginning of the sets are "low intensity or low risk periods" so they wanted to get rid of it, by brining the high intensity and risk sooner.Who invented this? Court1?>> In their Next Gen Finals format, you can start being nervous already
at 2-2 as someone could serve for the set next game.>> In that particular case, maybe they're onto something, bur too much is lost and btw it's good to have calmer and more intense periods within match.Yes. It woks like comic relief in a drama.>> As I
said, if sets end early, at 4, you miss out on that struggle that happens later on, plus inevitably you end up with too many tiebreaks as 3-3 would get you in tiebreak, which is bad.Oh, but *struggle* is bad, skript!Now, *talking* passionately about
struggle is *good*, but actual struggle is not.That's what you need to know about zoomers.>>> I say ditch that format completely and try experimenting with abolishing second serve. That is a total time saver, as you would get rid of endless serve repeats.
Reflexively I say no, but you know, it could change strategy a great deal--perhaps for the better.>> I'm a conservative and I am not saying I would remove second serve, but if anything is worth experimenting, this is it.Yes. An experiment like allowing
direct coaching during a match, like they did in women's a few years back.>> If they had just one attempt to serve, players would serve less risky if they lack confidence or quality so you'd actually get more returned serves and more play.And yet when a
player with balls felt that he could sneak one past, he'd pull it out of the bag. A lot like when some guys go for an ace on the 2nd serve.>> That would then remove the need for surfaces to be slow. We all know they slowed down the surfaces to facilitate
rallying.Actually, that didn't bother me *so far as quality of play*. The biggest negative was that it made previous eras less comparable to the era of slow surfaces.>> Basically if someone has an off day on his serve, and especially if it's a serve bot
type, he will bore us with attempts to hig big, hit aces, find his groove and so on. Yet ultimately if he's so off, we would end up watching him after his second serves only.Very often. And those who had excellent 2nd serves would have an advantage.>> So
by second serve, we would already force him to tone if down and serve more safer if he has an off day? For him nothing would change, he'd serve slower on his first serve, and for the viewers it would be more interesting.Unsure at this point if I agree.>>
And if he has an ON day, hitting aces all over the place, then he won't need second serve at all.>>> Basically to summarize it, we would lost part of tennis as we know it, but maybe overall we would gain something better?>> Second serves are total time
wasters.Well, I don't agree with that statement, but it would be an interesting experiment to try your suggestion.>>-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"If we use Occam's Razor, whose razor will *he* use?" --
Sawfish~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




Let's just agree that my proposal for experiment is better than their current experiment?

The standard sets until 6, or ad/deuce fights imo are not boring per se, it was never boring if me, lenght isn't an issue, whereas watching someone trying to hit big serve on a serving day with 40% first serves in can be boring.


So if we're into experiments, we should get rid of the stuff that's most likely to be boring for most fans ie they should abolish second serves.

OTOH their current experiment at Next Gen Finals is a total fantasy, best of 7 sets, sets played until 4, no ad/deuce.

That's not tennis at all imo and it isn't worth experimenting with it since those changes won't ever be introduced. It's a dead end and too absurd and makes Gen Gen Final an exhibition play. Yes it is an exo, but still. It is a clown exo?


On the other side, removing second serve would be an experiment within realm of what's possible to happen. It's something I'd like to see, no second serves in a *normal tennis* format.



Also, I would like to emphasise, I'm not here to demand "more play" or "to make it easier for the returners".

I am fine with big serves, aces, unreturned serves, all of that are winners. It's a joy to watch it. And if Karlovic can win a match by his serve alone, I like it.

But it's his second chance that annoys me.
It's kinda like Hawkeye and if you you could challenge it on any point?

That would consume the game just way too much. There's a reason why they allowed only 3 challenges per set.


Now that Hawkeye is gone soon and machines take over entirely, ie all points will be hawk-eyed, so no need for players to challenge, maybe we could remove second serve and give players 3 second serves per set, in line with how they used Hawkeye
challenges? 3 chances for them to apply tactically over the course of the set.


I realised over the years that what's better in FO as opposed to Wimbledon or other slams is that players roll in their serves a lot more, there's no annoyance with second serves.

With second serve gone imo we would get more of powerful kick serves and consequently more serve and volleying too which would be awesome?

--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr> Wrote in message:r

I am entertained by the idea of removing second serve.I'll explain why but first let's talk about the change they actually brought.ATP has been experimenting with different format in their Next Gen Finals, best of 7 sets, sets until 4 games, and

advantage is a game-point.I think that is horrible. It negates the tennis, the entire game is based on "winning 2 pts more than your opponent, or two games" and here it is no longer the case. It also destroys the drama of long deuce games.Their reason
for this being is that zoomers lack concentration so they won't watch long matches with long deuce games, and that set endings being the sort of climax periods in the match, it's better to have 4 of those, than 3 or 2 in the match.Basically the beginning
of the sets are "low intensity or low risk periods" so they wanted to get rid of it, by brining the high intensity and risk sooner.In their Next Gen Finals format, you can start being nervous already at 2-2 as someone could serve for the set next game.In
that particular case, maybe they're onto something, bur too much is lost and btw it's good to have calmer and more intense periods within match.As I said, if sets end early, at 4, you miss out on that struggle that happens later on, plus inevitably you
end up with too many tiebreaks as 3-3 would get you in tiebreak, which is bad.I say ditch that format completely and try experimenting with abolishing second serve. That is a total time saver, as you would get rid of endless serve repeats.I'm a
conservative and I am not saying I would remove second serve, but if anything is worth experimenting, this is it. If they had just one attempt to serve, players would serve less risky if they lack confidence or quality so you'd actually get more returned
serves and more play. That would then remove the need for surfaces to be slow. We all know they slowed down the surfaces to facilitate rallying.Basically if someone has an off day on his serve, and especially if it's a serve bot type, he will bore us
with attempts to hig big, hit aces, find his groove and so on. Yet ultimately if he's so off, we would end up watching him after his second serves only.So by second serve, we would already force him to tone if down and serve more safer if he has an off
day? For him nothing would change, he'd serve slower on his first serve, and for the viewers it would be more interesting.And if he has an ON day, hitting aces all over the place, then he won't need second serve at all.Basically to summarize it, we would
lost part of tennis as we know it, but maybe overall we would gain something better?Second serves are total time wasters.-- ----Android NewsGroup Reader----https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

I would not mess with the two serves rule, it's a major force in tennis.

But I would eliminate the net/let rule, it's stupid. Why would we replay the serve if it touches the net? Because the net altered its path? Then why is it a fault if it touches the net and goes out? :)
--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

T24gOC80LzIzIDk6NTkgQU0sIFBldGVXYXNMdWNreSB3cm90ZToNCj4gKnNrcmlwdGlzIDxz a3JpcHRpc0Bwb3N0LnQtY29tLmhyPiBXcm90ZSBpbiBtZXNzYWdlOnINCj4+IEkgYW0gZW50 ZXJ0YWluZWQgYnkgdGhlIGlkZWEgb2YgcmVtb3Zpbmcgc2Vjb25kIHNlcnZlLkknbGwgZXhw bGFpbiB3aHkgYnV0IGZpcnN0IGxldCdzIHRhbGsgYWJvdXQgdGhlIGNoYW5nZSB0aGV5IGFj dHVhbGx5IGJyb3VnaHQuQVRQIGhhcyBiZWVuIGV4cGVyaW1lbnRpbmcgd2l0aCBkaWZmZXJl bnQgZm9ybWF0IGluIHRoZWlyIE5leHQgR2VuIEZpbmFscywgYmVzdCBvZiA3IHNldHMsIHNl dHMgdW50aWwgNCBnYW1lcywgYW5kIGFkdmFudGFnZSBpcyBhIGdhbWUtcG9pbnQuSSB0aGlu ayB0aGF0IGlzIGhvcnJpYmxlLiBJdCBuZWdhdGVzIHRoZSB0ZW5uaXMsIHRoZSBlbnRpcmUg Z2FtZSBpcyBiYXNlZCBvbiAid2lubmluZyAyIHB0cyBtb3JlIHRoYW4geW91ciBvcHBvbmVu dCwgb3IgdHdvIGdhbWVzIiBhbmQgaGVyZSBpdCBpcyBubyBsb25nZXIgdGhlIGNhc2UuIEl0 IGFsc28gZGVzdHJveXMgdGhlIGRyYW1hIG9mIGxvbmcgZGV1Y2UgZ2FtZXMuVGhlaXIgcmVh c29uIGZvciB0aGlzIGJlaW5nIGlzIHRoYXQgem9vbWVycyBsYWNrIGNvbmNlbnRyYXRpb24g c28gdGhleSB3b24ndCB3YXRjaCBsb25nIG1hdGNoZXMgd2l0aCBsb25nIGRldWNlIGdhbWVz LCBhbmQgdGhhdCBzZXQgZW5kaW5ncyBiZWluZyB0aGUgc29ydCBvZiBjbGltYXggcGVyaW9k cyBpbiB0aGUgbWF0Y2gsIGl0J3MgYmV0dGVyIHRvIGhhdmUgNCBvZiB0aG9zZSwgdGhhbiAz IG9yIDIgaW4gdGhlIG1hdGNoLkJhc2ljYWxseSB0aGUgYmVnaW5uaW5nIG9mIHRoZSBzZXRz IGFyZSAibG93IGludGVuc2l0eSBvciBsb3cgcmlzayBwZXJpb2RzIiBzbyB0aGV5IHdhbnRl ZCB0byBnZXQgcmlkIG9mIGl0LCBieSBicmluaW5nIHRoZSBoaWdoIGludGVuc2l0eSBhbmQg cmlzayBzb29uZXIuSW4gdGhlaXIgTmV4dCBHZW4gRmluYWxzIGZvcm1hdCwgeW91IGNhbiBz dGFydCBiZWluZyBuZXJ2b3VzIGFscmVhZHkgYXQgMi0yIGFzIHNvbWVvbmUgY291bGQgc2Vy dmUgZm9yIHRoZSBzZXQgbmV4dCBnYW1lLkluIHRoYXQgcGFydGljdWxhciBjYXNlLCBtYXli ZSB0aGV5J3JlIG9udG8gc29tZXRoaW5nLCBidXIgdG9vIG11Y2ggaXMgbG9zdCBhbmQgYnR3 IGl0J3MgZ29vZCB0byBoYXZlIGNhbG1lciBhbmQgbW9yZSBpbnRlbnNlIHBlcmlvZHMgd2l0 aGluIG1hdGNoLkFzIEkgc2FpZCwgaWYgc2V0cyBlbmQgZWFybHksIGF0IDQsIHlvdSBtaXNz IG91dCBvbiB0aGF0IHN0cnVnZ2xlIHRoYXQgaGFwcGVucyBsYXRlciBvbiwgcGx1cyBpbmV2 aXRhYmx5IHlvdSBlbmQgdXAgd2l0aCB0b28gbWFueSB0aWVicmVha3MgYXMgMy0zIHdvdWxk IGdldCB5b3UgaW4gdGllYnJlYWssIHdoaWNoIGlzIGJhZC5JIHNheSBkaXRjaCB0aGF0IGZv cm1hdCBjb21wbGV0ZWx5IGFuZCB0cnkgZXhwZXJpbWVudGluZyB3aXRoIGFib2xpc2hpbmcg c2Vjb25kIHNlcnZlLiBUaGF0IGlzIGEgdG90YWwgdGltZSBzYXZlciwgYXMgeW91IHdvdWxk IGdldCByaWQgb2YgZW5kbGVzcyBzZXJ2ZSByZXBlYXRzLkknbSBhIGNvbnNlcnZhdGl2ZSBh bmQgSSBhbSBub3Qgc2F5aW5nIEkgd291bGQgcmVtb3ZlIHNlY29uZCBzZXJ2ZSwgYnV0IGlm IGFueXRoaW5nIGlzIHdvcnRoIGV4cGVyaW1lbnRpbmcsIHRoaXMgaXMgaXQuIElmIHRoZXkg aGFkIGp1c3Qgb25lIGF0dGVtcHQgdG8gc2VydmUsIHBsYXllcnMgd291bGQgc2VydmUgbGVz cyByaXNreSBpZiB0aGV5IGxhY2sgY29uZmlkZW5jZSBvciBxdWFsaXR5IHNvIHlvdSdkIGFj dHVhbGx5IGdldCBtb3JlIHJldHVybmVkIHNlcnZlcyBhbmQgbW9yZSBwbGF5LiBUaGF0IHdv dWxkIHRoZW4gcmVtb3ZlIHRoZSBuZWVkIGZvciBzdXJmYWNlcyB0byBiZSBzbG93LiBXZSBh bGwga25vdyB0aGV5IHNsb3dlZCBkb3duIHRoZSBzdXJmYWNlcyB0byBmYWNpbGl0YXRlIHJh bGx5aW5nLkJhc2ljYWxseSBpZiBzb21lb25lIGhhcyBhbiBvZmYgZGF5IG9uIGhpcyBzZXJ2 ZSwgYW5kIGVzcGVjaWFsbHkgaWYgaXQncyBhIHNlcnZlIGJvdCB0eXBlLCBoZSB3aWxsIGJv cmUgdXMgd2l0aCBhdHRlbXB0cyB0byBoaWcgYmlnLCBoaXQgYWNlcywgZmluZCBoaXMgZ3Jv b3ZlIGFuZCBzbyBvbi4gWWV0IHVsdGltYXRlbHkgaWYgaGUncyBzbyBvZmYsIHdlIHdvdWxk IGVuZCB1cCB3YXRjaGluZyBoaW0gYWZ0ZXIgaGlzIHNlY29uZCBzZXJ2ZXMgb25seS5TbyBi eSBzZWNvbmQgc2VydmUsIHdlIHdvdWxkIGFscmVhZHkgZm9yY2UgaGltIHRvIHRvbmUgaWYg ZG93biBhbmQgc2VydmUgbW9yZSBzYWZlciBpZiBoZSBoYXMgYW4gb2ZmIGRheT8gRm9yIGhp bSBub3RoaW5nIHdvdWxkIGNoYW5nZSwgaGUnZCBzZXJ2ZSBzbG93ZXIgb24gaGlzIGZpcnN0 IHNlcnZlLCBhbmQgZm9yIHRoZSB2aWV3ZXJzIGl0IHdvdWxkIGJlIG1vcmUgaW50ZXJlc3Rp bmcuQW5kIGlmIGhlIGhhcyBhbiBPTiBkYXksIGhpdHRpbmcgYWNlcyBhbGwgb3ZlciB0aGUg cGxhY2UsIHRoZW4gaGUgd29uJ3QgbmVlZCBzZWNvbmQgc2VydmUgYXQgYWxsLkJhc2ljYWxs eSB0byBzdW1tYXJpemUgaXQsIHdlIHdvdWxkIGxvc3QgcGFydCBvZiB0ZW5uaXMgYXMgd2Ug a25vdyBpdCwgYnV0IG1heWJlIG92ZXJhbGwgd2Ugd291bGQgZ2FpbiBzb21ldGhpbmcgYnR0 ZXI/U2Vjb25kIHNlcnZlcyBhcmUgdG90YWwgdGltZSB3YXN0ZXJzLi0tIC0tLS1BbmRyb2lk IE5ld3NHcm91cCBSZWFkZXItLS0taHR0cHM6Ly9waWFvaG9uZy5zMy11cy13ZXN0LTIuYW1h em9uYXdzLmNvbS91c2VuZXQvaW5kZXguaHRtbA0KPiBJIHdvdWxkIG5vdCBtZXNzIHdpdGgg dGhlIHR3byBzZXJ2ZXMgcnVsZSwgaXQncyBhIG1ham9yIGZvcmNlIGluIHRlbm5pcy4NCj4N Cj4gQnV0IEkgd291bGQgZWxpbWluYXRlIHRoZSBuZXQvbGV0IHJ1bGUsIGl0J3Mgc3R1cGlk LiBXaHkgd291bGQgd2UgcmVwbGF5IHRoZSBzZXJ2ZSBpZiBpdCB0b3VjaGVzIHRoZSBuZXQ/ IEJlY2F1c2UgdGhlIG5ldCBhbHRlcmVkIGl0cyBwYXRoPyBUaGVuIHdoeSBpcyBpdCBhIGZh dWx0IGlmIGl0IHRvdWNoZXMgdGhlIG5ldCBhbmQgZ29lcyBvdXQ/IDopDQoNClBvc3NpYmx5 IHRoZSBsb2dpYyBpcyB0aGlzLi4uDQoNClRoZSBmaXJzdCBhbmQgdW5kZXJseWluZyBwcmlv cml0eSBpcyB0aGF0IGFueSBwb2ludCBpcyBpbml0aWF0ZWQgDQpjbGVhbmx5LCB3aXRoIG1p bmltYWwgYWR2YW50YWdlcy9kaXNhZHZhbnRhZ2VzIGFzIGFmZmVjdGVkIGJ5IGx1Y2sgb3Ig DQpjaXJjdW1zdGFuY2UuIFNvIGF1dGhvcml0eSBpcyBicm91Z2h0IGludG8gcGxheSBpbiBz aXR1YXRpb25zIHdoZXJlIGEpIA0KYW55IGNpcmN1bXN0YW5jZSB0aGF0IGNvbmZlcnMgYW4g YWR2YW50YWdlL2Rpc2FkdmFudGFnZSB0aGF0IGNhbiBiZSANCipkZXRlY3RlZCo7IEFORCBj YW4gYmUgY29udHJvbGxlZCBhbmQgdGhlcmVmb3JlICJub3JtYWxpemVkIi4NCg0KU28gc3Rh cnRpbmcgYSBwb2ludCBtaW5pbWl6aW5nIGx1Y2svY2lyY3Vtc3RhbmNlIGlzIHRoZSBwcmlt YXJ5IGdvYWwgaW4gDQp0aGUgZXRoaWNzIG9mIHRlbm5pcywgaXQgc2VlbXMuDQoNCk5vdywg d2UgY2FuIGRldGVjdCB3aW5kIGJ1dCBjYW5ub3QgY29udHJvbCBpdCwgaG93ZXZlciB3ZSBj YW4gYXR0ZW1wdCB0byANCiJub3JtYWxpemUiIHRoZSBjb250ZXh0IGJ5IGNoYW5naW5nIGVu ZHMuIFNhbWUgZm9yIHN1biwgZXRjLg0KDQpBcyB0byBhIGxldCBzZXJ2ZSB0aGF0IGdvZXMg aW4gb3Igb3V0LCBteSBndWVzcyBpcyB0aGF0IHRoZSBsb2dpYyBpcyANCnRoYXQgYW55IGdy b3NzIGVycm9yIG9uIHNlcnZlLCBsaWtlIGhpdHRpbmcgc3F1YXJlbHkgbWlkLW5ldCBhbmQg ZmFsbGluZyANCm9uIHlvdXIgc2lkZSBPUiBoaXR0aW5nIHRoZSB0b3Agb2YgdGhlIG5ldCBz b2xpZGx5IGVub3VnaCBzbyB0aGF0IGl0IA0KbGFuZHMgb3V0IG9mIHRoZSBzZXJ2aWNlIGJv eCwgaXQgaXMgdmlld2VkIHRoZSBzYW1lIGFzIGEgcmFsbHkgc3Ryb2tlIA0KdGhhdCBnb2Vz IG91dCBvZiBwbGF5LS1ncm9zcyBlcnJvciwgbW92ZSBvbi4NCg0KQnV0IGEgc2VydmUgdGhh dCBoaXRzIHRoZSBuZXQgKGRldGVjdGFibGUpIGFuZCBnb2VzIGludG8gdGhlIHNlcnZpY2Ug Ym94IA0KaXMgbm90IGNvbnNpZGVyZWQgdG8gYmUgYSBncm9zcyBlcnJvciwgaXQgaXMgYSBi YWxsIHRoYXQgbGFuZHMgbGVnYWxseSANCmluIHBsYXksIGJ1dCB2aW9sYXRlcyB0aGUgRmly c3QgRGljdHVtIG9mIFRlbm5pczogbGV0IGVhY2ggcG9pbnQgc3RhcnQgDQp3aXRob3V0IHRo ZSBlbGVtZW50IG9mIGx1Y2sgb3IgY2lyY3Vtc3RhbmNlLiBTbywgaXQncyBhIHJlcGxheSwg anVzdCANCmxpa2UgdGhlIHRpbWUsIGJhY2sgaW4gMTk3Mywgd2FzIGl0LCB3aGVuIHRoZXJl IHdhcyBsb3VkIGZsYXR1bGVuY2UgZnJvbSANCnRoZSByb3lhbCBib3ggZHVyaW5nIGEgc2Vj b25kIHNlcnZlIGF0IG1hdGNoIHBvaW50LiBUaGlzIHdhcyByaWdodGx5IA0KY2FsbGVkIGEg ImxldCIuDQoNCjteKQ0KDQpBbnl3YXksIHRoYXQncyBteSBndWVzcy4NCg0KLS0gDQotLVNh d2Zpc2gNCn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+ fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fg0KIkkgd291bGRuJ3Qgd2FudCB0byBiZWxv bmcgdG8gYSBjbHViIHRoYXQgd291bGQgYWNjZXB0IHNvbWVvbmUgbGlrZSBtZQ0KYXMgYSBt ZW1iZXIuIiAtLUcuIE1hcngNCg0K

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r

*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr> Wrote in message:r> I am entertained by the idea of removing second serve.I'll explain why but first let's talk about the change they actually brought.ATP has been experimenting with different format in their Next Gen

Finals, best of 7 sets, sets until 4 games, and advantage is a game-point.I think that is horrible. It negates the tennis, the entire game is based on "winning 2 pts more than your opponent, or two games" and here it is no longer the case. It also
destroys the drama of long deuce games.Their reason for this being is that zoomers lack concentration so they won't watch long matches with long deuce games, and that set endings being the sort of climax periods in the match, it's better to have 4 of
those, than 3 or 2 in the match.Basically the beginning of the sets are "low intensity or low risk periods" so they wanted to get rid of it, by brining the high intensity and risk sooner.In their Next Gen Finals format, you can start being nervous
already at 2-2 as someone could serve for the set next game.In that particular case, maybe they're onto something, bur too much is lost and btw it's good to have calmer and more intense periods within match.As I said, if sets end early, at 4, you miss
out on that struggle that happens later on, plus inevitably you end up with too many tiebreaks as 3-3 would get you in tiebreak, which is bad.I say ditch that format completely and try experimenting with abolishing second serve. That is a total time
saver, as you would get rid of endless serve repeats.I'm a conservative and I am not saying I would remove second serve, but if anything is worth experimenting, this is it. If they had just one attempt to serve, players would serve less risky if they
lack confidence or quality so you'd actually get more returned serves and more play. That would then remove the need for surfaces to be slow. We all know they slowed down the surfaces to facilitate rallying.Basically if someone has an off day on his
serve, and especially if it's a serve bot type, he will bore us with attempts to hig big, hit aces, find his groove and so on. Yet ultimately if he's so off, we would end up watching him after his second serves only.So by second serve, we would already
force him to tone if down and serve more safer if he has an off day? For him nothing would change, he'd serve slower on his first serve, and for the viewers it would be more interesting.And if he has an ON day, hitting aces all over the place, then he
won't need second serve at all.Basically to summarize it, we would lost part of tennis as we know it, but maybe overall we would gain something better?Second serves are total time wasters.-- ----Android NewsGroup Reader----https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.
amazonaws.com/usenet/index.htmlI would not mess with the two serves rule, it's a major force in tennis.But I would eliminate the net/let rule, it's stupid. Why would we replay the serve if it touches the net? Because the net altered its path? Then why is
it a fault if it touches the net and goes out? :)



I don't find that relevant. It happens way too rarely. It happens but it's simply not on the radar for me. It doesn't prolong the game or interrupt the dynamics of the game the way second serves do.

You could argue if the server deserves 2 chances to hit his serve, the returner deserves to receive normal and not a freak ball? That's in favour of current rule. Yet you could argue both way, if let during play is accepted so why not during serve?

Also you could even argue that let (and out) should give a server another chance? I get that.


But overall, let doesn't happen often enough. Second serve does.

Even double serve mistakes are rare these days, so basically when 1st serve is low, you're just waiting for the guy to roll in his second serve, the one you know he's going to make it.

So you ask yourself, why do I have to watch him attempting his first serve?






--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

T24gOC80LzIzIDEwOjI1IEFNLCAqc2tyaXB0aXMgd3JvdGU6DQo+IFBldGVXYXNMdWNreSA8 d2FsZWVkLmtoZWRyQGdtYWlsLmNvbT4gV3JvdGUgaW4gbWVzc2FnZTpyDQo+PiAqc2tyaXB0 aXMgPHNrcmlwdGlzQHBvc3QudC1jb20uaHI+IFdyb3RlIGluIG1lc3NhZ2U6cj4gSSBhbSBl bnRlcnRhaW5lZCBieSB0aGUgaWRlYSBvZiByZW1vdmluZyBzZWNvbmQgc2VydmUuSSdsbCBl eHBsYWluIHdoeSBidXQgZmlyc3QgbGV0J3MgdGFsayBhYm91dCB0aGUgY2hhbmdlIHRoZXkg YWN0dWFsbHkgYnJvdWdodC5BVFAgaGFzIGJlZW4gZXhwZXJpbWVudGluZyB3aXRoIGRpZmZl cmVudCBmb3JtYXQgaW4gdGhlaXIgTmV4dCBHZW4gRmluYWxzLCBiZXN0IG9mIDcgc2V0cywg c2V0cyB1bnRpbCA0IGdhbWVzLCBhbmQgYWR2YW50YWdlIGlzIGEgZ2FtZS1wb2ludC5JIHRo aW5rIHRoYXQgaXMgaG9ycmlibGUuIEl0IG5lZ2F0ZXMgdGhlIHRlbm5pcywgdGhlIGVudGly ZSBnYW1lIGlzIGJhc2VkIG9uICJ3aW5uaW5nIDIgcHRzIG1vcmUgdGhhbiB5b3VyIG9wcG9u ZW50LCBvciB0d28gZ2FtZXMiIGFuZCBoZXJlIGl0IGlzIG5vIGxvbmdlciB0aGUgY2FzZS4g SXQgYWxzbyBkZXN0cm95cyB0aGUgZHJhbWEgb2YgbG9uZyBkZXVjZSBnYW1lcy5UaGVpciBy ZWFzb24gZm9yIHRoaXMgYmVpbmcgaXMgdGhhdCB6b29tZXJzIGxhY2sgY29uY2VudHJhdGlv biBzbyB0aGV5IHdvbid0IHdhdGNoIGxvbmcgbWF0Y2hlcyB3aXRoIGxvbmcgZGV1Y2UgZ2Ft ZXMsIGFuZCB0aGF0IHNldCBlbmRpbmdzIGJlaW5nIHRoZSBzb3J0IG9mIGNsaW1heCBwZXJp b2RzIGluIHRoZSBtYXRjaCwgaXQncyBiZXR0ZXIgdG8gaGF2ZSA0IG9mIHRob3NlLCB0aGFu IDMgb3IgMiBpbiB0aGUgbWF0Y2guQmFzaWNhbGx5IHRoZSBiZWdpbm5pbmcgb2YgdGhlIHNl dHMgYXJlICJsb3cgaW50ZW5zaXR5IG9yIGxvdyByaXNrIHBlcmlvZHMiIHNvIHRoZXkgd2Fu dGVkIHRvIGdldCByaWQgb2YgaXQsIGJ5IGJyaW5pbmcgdGhlIGhpZ2ggaW50ZW5zaXR5IGFu ZCByaXNrIHNvb25lci5JbiB0aGVpciBOZXh0IEdlbiBGaW5hbHMgZm9ybWF0LCB5b3UgY2Fu IHN0YXJ0IGJlaW5nIG5lcnZvdXMgYWxyZWFkeSBhdCAyLTIgYXMgc29tZW9uZSBjb3VsZCBz ZXJ2ZSBmb3IgdGhlIHNldCBuZXh0IGdhbWUuSW4gdGhhdCBwYXJ0aWN1bGFyIGNhc2UsIG1h eWJlIHRoZXkncmUgb250byBzb21ldGhpbmcsIGJ1ciB0b28gbXVjaCBpcyBsb3N0IGFuZCBi dHcgaXQncyBnb29kIHRvIGhhdmUgY2FsbWVyIGFuZCBtb3JlIGludGVuc2UgcGVyaW9kcyB3 aXRoaW4gbWF0Y2guQXMgSSBzYWlkLCBpZiBzZXRzIGVuZCBlYXJseSwgYXQgNCwgeW91IG1p c3Mgb3V0IG9uIHRoYXQgc3RydWdnbGUgdGhhdCBoYXBwZW5zIGxhdGVyIG9uLCBwbHVzIGlu ZXZpdGFibHkgeW91IGVuZCB1cCB3aXRoIHRvbyBtYW55IHRpZWJyZWFrcyBhcyAzLTMgd291 bGQgZ2V0IHlvdSBpbiB0aWVicmVhaywgd2hpY2ggaXMgYmFkLkkgc2F5IGRpdGNoIHRoYXQg Zm9ybWF0IGNvbXBsZXRlbHkgYW5kIHRyeSBleHBlcmltZW50aW5nIHdpdGggYWJvbGlzaGlu ZyBzZWNvbmQgc2VydmUuIFRoYXQgaXMgYSB0b3RhbCB0aW1lIHNhdmVyLCBhcyB5b3Ugd291 bGQgZ2V0IHJpZCBvZiBlbmRsZXNzIHNlcnZlIHJlcGVhdHMuSSdtIGEgY29uc2VydmF0aXZl IGFuZCBJIGFtIG5vdCBzYXlpbmcgSSB3b3VsZCByZW1vdmUgc2Vjb25kIHNlcnZlLCBidXQg aWYgYW55dGhpbmcgaXMgd29ydGggZXhwZXJpbWVudGluZywgdGhpcyBpcyBpdC4gSWYgdGhl eSBoYWQganVzdCBvbmUgYXR0ZW1wdCB0byBzZXJ2ZSwgcGxheWVycyB3b3VsZCBzZXJ2ZSBs ZXNzIHJpc2t5IGlmIHRoZXkgbGFjayBjb25maWRlbmNlIG9yIHF1YWxpdHkgc28geW91J2Qg YWN0dWFsbHkgZ2V0IG1vcmUgcmV0dXJuZWQgc2VydmVzIGFuZCBtb3JlIHBsYXkuIFRoYXQg d291bGQgdGhlbiByZW1vdmUgdGhlIG5lZWQgZm9yIHN1cmZhY2VzIHRvIGJlIHNsb3cuIFdl IGFsbCBrbm93IHRoZXkgc2xvd2VkIGRvd24gdGhlIHN1cmZhY2VzIHRvIGZhY2lsaXRhdGUg cmFsbHlpbmcuQmFzaWNhbGx5IGlmIHNvbWVvbmUgaGFzIGFuIG9mZiBkYXkgb24gaGlzIHNl cnZlLCBhbmQgZXNwZWNpYWxseSBpZiBpdCdzIGEgc2VydmUgYm90IHR5cGUsIGhlIHdpbGwg Ym9yZSB1cyB3aXRoIGF0dGVtcHRzIHRvIGhpZyBiaWcsIGhpdCBhY2VzLCBmaW5kIGhpcyBn cm9vdmUgYW5kIHNvIG9uLiBZZXQgdWx0aW1hdGVseSBpZiBoZSdzIHNvIG9mZiwgd2Ugd291 bGQgZW5kIHVwIHdhdGNoaW5nIGhpbSBhZnRlciBoaXMgc2Vjb25kIHNlcnZlcyBvbmx5LlNv IGJ5IHNlY29uZCBzZXJ2ZSwgd2Ugd291bGQgYWxyZWFkeSBmb3JjZSBoaW0gdG8gdG9uZSBp ZiBkb3duIGFuZCBzZXJ2ZSBtb3JlIHNhZmVyIGlmIGhlIGhhcyBhbiBvZmYgZGF5PyBGb3Ig aGltIG5vdGhpbmcgd291bGQgY2hhbmdlLCBoZSdkIHNlcnZlIHNsb3dlciBvbiBoaXMgZmly c3Qgc2VydmUsIGFuZCBmb3IgdGhlIHZpZXdlcnMgaXQgd291bGQgYmUgbW9yZSBpbnRlcmVz dGluZy5BbmQgaWYgaGUgaGFzIGFuIE9OIGRheSwgaGl0dGluZyBhY2VzIGFsbCBvdmVyIHRo ZSBwbGFjZSwgdGhlbiBoZSB3b24ndCBuZWVkIHNlY29uZCBzZXJ2ZSBhdCBhbGwuQmFzaWNh bGx5IHRvIHN1bW1hcml6ZSBpdCwgd2Ugd291bGQgbG9zdCBwYXJ0IG9mIHRlbm5pcyBhcyB3 ZSBrbm93IGl0LCBidXQgbWF5YmUgb3ZlcmFsbCB3ZSB3b3VsZCBnYWluIHNvbWV0aGluZyBi ZXR0ZXI/U2Vjb25kIHNlcnZlcyBhcmUgdG90YWwgdGltZSB3YXN0ZXJzLi0tIC0tLS1BbmRy b2lkIE5ld3NHcm91cCBSZWFkZXItLS0taHR0cHM6Ly9waWFvaG9uZy5zMy11cy13ZXN0LTIu YW1hem9uYXdzLmNvbS91c2VuZXQvaW5kZXguaHRtbEkgd291bGQgbm90IG1lc3Mgd2l0aCB0 aGUgdHdvIHNlcnZlcyBydWxlLCBpdCdzIGEgbWFqb3IgZm9yY2UgaW4gdGVubmlzLkJ1dCBJ IHdvdWxkIGVsaW1pbmF0ZSB0aGUgbmV0L2xldCBydWxlLCBpdCdzIHN0dXBpZC4gV2h5IHdv dWxkIHdlIHJlcGxheSB0aGUgc2VydmUgaWYgaXQgdG91Y2hlcyB0aGUgbmV0PyBCZWNhdXNl IHRoZSBuZXQgYWx0ZXJlZCBpdHMgcGF0aD8gVGhlbiB3aHkgaXMgaXQgYSBmYXVsdCBpZiBp dCB0b3VjaGVzIHRoZSBuZXQgYW5kIGdvZXMgb3V0PyA6KQ0KPg0KPg0KPiBJIGRvbid0IGZp bmQgdGhhdCByZWxldmFudC4gSXQgaGFwcGVucyB3YXkgdG9vIHJhcmVseS4gSXQgaGFwcGVu cyBidXQgaXQncyBzaW1wbHkgbm90IG9uIHRoZSByYWRhciBmb3IgbWUuIEl0IGRvZXNuJ3Qg cHJvbG9uZyB0aGUgZ2FtZSBvciBpbnRlcnJ1cHQgdGhlIGR5bmFtaWNzIG9mIHRoZSBnYW1l IHRoZSB3YXkgc2Vjb25kIHNlcnZlcyBkby4NCj4NCj4gWW91IGNvdWxkIGFyZ3VlIGlmIHRo ZSBzZXJ2ZXIgZGVzZXJ2ZXMgMiBjaGFuY2VzIHRvIGhpdCBoaXMgc2VydmUsIHRoZSByZXR1 cm5lciBkZXNlcnZlcyB0byByZWNlaXZlIG5vcm1hbCBhbmQgbm90IGEgZnJlYWsgYmFsbD8N CkVsaW1pbmF0aW9uIG9mICJmcmVhayIgYmFsbCBpcyB0aGUga2V5LCBJIHRoaW5rLiBTdGFy dGluZyB0aGUgcG9pbnQgDQp3aXRob3V0IHRoZSBpbmplY3Rpb24gb2YgbHVjay9jaXJjdW1z dGFuY2UuDQo+ICAgVGhhdCdzIGluIGZhdm91ciBvZiBjdXJyZW50IHJ1bGUuIFlldCB5b3Ug Y291bGQgYXJndWUgYm90aCB3YXksIGlmIGxldCBkdXJpbmcgcGxheSBpcyBhY2NlcHRlZCBz byB3aHkgbm90IGR1cmluZyBzZXJ2ZT8NCg0KVGhlIGFuc3dlciBpcyB0aGF0IHRoZSBzZXJ2 ZSBpbml0aWF0ZXMgcGxheSwgYW5kIHRoZXkgd2FudCBpdCANCnVuYmxlbWlzaGVkLCBhbmQg YWxzbyB0aGV5IGNhbiBzdG9wIHRoZSBwb2ludCBhbmQgcmVwbGF5IGl0IGVhc2lseSBhbmQg DQp3aXRob3V0IGdpdmluZyBhZHZhbnRhZ2UgdG8gZWl0aGVyIHBsYXllciBhdCB0aGF0IHBv aW50Lg0KDQpCdXQgbWlkLXBvaW50LMKgIGNvbnNpZGVyIHRoZXNlIHBvc3NpYmxlIGNhc2Vz IHlvdSdkIGhhdmU6DQoNCjEpIE9uZSBwbGF5ZXIgaGFzIHdvcmtlZCBoaXMgd2F5IHRvIHRo ZSBuZXQgaXMgcmVhZHkgdG8gdm9sbGV5LCBhbmQgdGhlIA0Kb3Bwb25lbnQgc3RyaWtlIGEg YmFsbCB0aGF0IGhpdHMgdGhlIHRvcCBvZiB0aGUgbmV0LCB0aGVuIGdvZXMgaW4uIERvIHdl IA0KcmVwbGF5Pw0KDQoyKSBBZnRlciBhIDE2IGJhbGwgcmFsbHksIG9uZSBwbGF5ZXIgaXMg dGFjdGljYWxseSB3ZWxsIHNldCB0byBkbyBhIGRyb3AgDQpzaG90LCB3aGljaCBoaXRzIHRo ZSBuZXh0IGFuZCBnb2VzIGluLCB3aW5uaW5nIHRoZSBwb2ludC4gRG8gd2UgdGFrZSANCnRo YXQgYmFjaz8gUmVwbGF5Pw0KDQozKSBMaWtlIG51bWJlciAyIGJ1dCB0aGUgYmFsbCBzdGF5 cyBvbiB0aGUgc2FtZSBzaWRlIGFzIHRoZSANCmRyb3Atc2hvdHRlci4gUmVwbGF5Pw0KDQpU aGF0J3Mgd2h5IGNvbnRhY3Qgd2l0aCB0aGUgbmV0ICphZnRlciBpbml0aWF0aW9uIG9mIHRo ZSBwb2ludCogcmVtYWlucyANCmluIHBsYXkuDQoNCj4NCj4gQWxzbyB5b3UgY291bGQgZXZl biBhcmd1ZSB0aGF0IGxldCAoYW5kIG91dCkgc2hvdWxkIGdpdmUgYSBzZXJ2ZXIgYW5vdGhl ciBjaGFuY2U/IEkgZ2V0IHRoYXQuDQo+DQo+DQo+IEJ1dCBvdmVyYWxsLCBsZXQgZG9lc24n dCBoYXBwZW4gb2Z0ZW4gZW5vdWdoLiBTZWNvbmQgc2VydmUgZG9lcy4NCj4NCj4gRXZlbiBk b3VibGUgc2VydmUgbWlzdGFrZXMgYXJlIHJhcmUgdGhlc2UgZGF5cywgc28gYmFzaWNhbGx5 IHdoZW4gMXN0IHNlcnZlIGlzIGxvdywgeW91J3JlIGp1c3Qgd2FpdGluZyBmb3IgdGhlIGd1 eSB0byByb2xsIGluIGhpcyBzZWNvbmQgc2VydmUsIHRoZSBvbmUgeW91IGtub3cgaGUncyBn b2luZyB0byBtYWtlIGl0Lg0KPg0KPiBTbyB5b3UgYXNrIHlvdXJzZWxmLCB3aHkgZG8gSSBo YXZlIHRvIHdhdGNoIGhpbSBhdHRlbXB0aW5nIGhpcyBmaXJzdCBzZXJ2ZT8NCj4NCj4NCj4N Cj4NCj4NCj4NCg0KLS0gDQp+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+ fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn5+fn4NCiJHaXZlIGEgbWFuIGEg ZmlzaCwgYW5kIHlvdSBmZWVkIGhpbSBmb3IgYSBkYXkuICBCdXQgZ2l2ZSBhIG1hbiBhIGJv YXQsDQphIGNhc2Ugb2YgYmVlciwgYW5kIGEgZmV3IHN0aWNrcyBvZiBkeW5hbWl0ZS4uLiIg IC0tIFNhd2Zpc2gNCg0K

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r

On 8/4/23 9:59 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:> *skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr> Wrote in message:r>> I am entertained by the idea of removing second serve.I'll explain why but first let's talk about the change they actually brought.ATP has been

experimenting with different format in their Next Gen Finals, best of 7 sets, sets until 4 games, and advantage is a game-point.I think that is horrible. It negates the tennis, the entire game is based on "winning 2 pts more than your opponent, or two
games" and here it is no longer the case. It also destroys the drama of long deuce games.Their reason for this being is that zoomers lack concentration so they won't watch long matches with long deuce games, and that set endings being the sort of climax
periods in the match, it's better to have 4 of those, than 3 or 2 in the match.Basically the beginning of the sets are "low intensity or low risk periods" so they wanted to get rid of it, by brining the high intensity and risk sooner.In their Next Gen
Finals format, you can start being nervous already at 2-2 as someone could serve for the set next game.In that particular case, maybe they're onto something, bur too much is lost and btw it's good to have calmer and more intense periods within match.As I
said, if sets end early, at 4, you miss out on that struggle that happens later on, plus inevitably you end up with too many tiebreaks as 3-3 would get you in tiebreak, which is bad.I say ditch that format completely and try experimenting with abolishing
second serve. That is a total time saver, as you would get rid of endless serve repeats.I'm a conservative and I am not saying I would remove second serve, but if anything is worth experimenting, this is it. If they had just one attempt to serve, players
would serve less risky if they lack confidence or quality so you'd actually get more returned serves and more play. That would then remove the need for surfaces to be slow. We all know they slowed down the surfaces to facilitate rallying.Basically if
someone has an off day on his serve, and especially if it's a serve bot type, he will bore us with attempts to hig big, hit aces, find his groove and so on. Yet ultimately if he's so off, we would end up watching him after his second serves only.So by
second serve, we would already force him to tone if down and serve more safer if he has an off day? For him nothing would change, he'd serve slower on his first serve, and for the viewers it would be more interesting.And if he has an ON day, hitting aces
all over the place, then he won't need second serve at all.Basically to summarize it, we would lost part of tennis as we know it, but maybe overall we would gain something btter?Second serves are total time wasters.-- ----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html> I would not mess with the two serves rule, it's a major force in tennis.>> But I would eliminate the net/let rule, it's stupid. Why would we replay the serve if it touches the net? Because
the net altered its path? Then why is it a fault if it touches the net and goes out? :)Possibly the logic is this...The first and underlying priority is that any point is initiated cleanly, with minimal advantages/disadvantages as affected by luck or
circumstance. So authority is brought into play in situations where a) any circumstance that confers an advantage/disadvantage that can be *detected*; AND can be controlled and therefore "normalized".So starting a point minimizing luck/circumstance is
the primary goal in the ethics of tennis, it seems.Now, we can detect wind but cannot control it, however we can attempt to "normalize" the context by changing ends. Same for sun, etc.As to a let serve that goes in or out, my guess is that the logic is
that any gross error on serve, like hitting squarely mid-net and falling on your side OR hitting the top of the net solidly enough so that it lands out of the service box, it is viewed the same as a rally stroke that goes out of play--gross error, move
on.But a serve that hits the net (detectable) and goes into the service box is not considered to be a gross error, it is a ball that lands legally in play, but violates the First Dictum of Tennis: let each point start without the element of luck or
circumstance. So, it's a replay, just like the time, back in 1973, was it, when there was loud flatulence from the royal box during a second serve at match point. This was rightly called a "let".;^)Anyway, that's my guess.-- --Sawfish~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"I wouldn't want to belong to a club that would accept someone like meas a member." --G. Marx

Thanks for trying to guess the reasons for the net/let rule, this is why I find it (in addition to the reasons you mentioned to skript in your other message) to be very acceptable to eliminate this rule :)
--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 8/4/2023 9:21 AM, *skriptis wrote:

I am entertained by the idea of removing second serve.

I am NOT "entertained" by the idea of removing one's second serve. Allow
the players to go for a strong first serve knowing they have the luxury
of a second serve. It makes the games go much faster, not shorter. Aces
end the point immediately.

I'll explain why but first let's talk about the change they actually brought.

ATP has been experimenting with different format in their Next Gen Finals, best of 7 sets, sets until 4 games, and advantage is a game-point.

I think that is horrible. It negates the tennis, the entire game is based on "winning 2 pts more than your opponent, or two games" and here it is no longer the case. It also destroys the drama of long deuce games.

Agreed.

Their reason for this being is that zoomers lack concentration so they won't watch long matches with long deuce games, and that set endings being the sort of climax periods in the match, it's better to have 4 of those, than 3 or 2 in the match.

Who cares? "Zoomers" have the concentration of a fly on the window. They
follow one fancy and then quickly bolt for another fancy item. Look at
NASCAR for example, they had a VERY strong and loyal group of fans until
NASCAR decided to follow the 'Zoomer' crowd. That lasted about a decade
and now NASCAR has lost both the "Zoomers' and it's loyal long term
fans. Don't believe me? Just watch any NASCAR race and see the empty stands.

Basically the beginning of the sets are "low intensity or low risk periods" so they wanted to get rid of it, by brining the high intensity and risk sooner.

Some matches perhaps, but not many or most.

[snip]

Second serves are total time wasters.

Nope, totally disagree.

To answer your header, what would I consider changing in tennis? Not
much. But I would disallow on-court coaching (shouts from the coaching
stands are OK, IMHO) and make sure bathroom breaks don't last more than
three minutes. That is long enough to change clothes, pee, and get back
on the court.
--
---------------
Scall5

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

Reminds me of an old Buddy Hackett joke...

Which is...?



--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Scall5 <nospam@home.net> Wrote in message:

I am NOT "entertained" by the idea of removing one's second serve. Allow the players to go for a strong first serve knowing they have the luxury of a second serve. It makes the games go much faster, not shorter. Aces end the point immediately.

Look, don't get me wrong. I'm a very conservative guy. I'm against changes. I am always shocked at changes, I was shocked that Wimbledon allowed this.

https://www.euronews.com/culture/2022/11/08/wimbledon-to-ease-rules-on-white-underwear-for-female-players

I'm all for tradition. They need to wear white, if they bleed, let everyone see it.


But OTOH I see what's going on. Zoomers are taking over and they threaten to destroy everything.

ATP Next Gen Finals is a testing ground. Do you see what is it that they do? What they test? What is possible future?

Best of 7 sets, sets until 4, no ad/deuce?
Do you really want that? If it's tested it can be implemented at some point.

My idea is perhaps that if we preempt them, we can force a change that would be *on our terms*, if the change is inevitable in the first place.

Basically we shouldn't even test the idea of best of 7 sets, sets until 4, no ad/deuce. We should test better stuff addressing the issues and complaints. That's far from implementing even our test as a rule but we should at least test on our terms.

Slow or long game/play is a legitimate concern that has been addressed over history even before arrival of zoomers. Couple of changes have been introduced:

1. Tiebreak

2. Roofs over central (main) courts in explicitly *outdoor* events

3. Anti-bouncing rule (max 25 seconds in between serves)


All of that happened because they wanted to speed up the game/coverage.


So if we are looking where to save more time, it's not in abolishing ad/deuce, or in the removing those couple of games towards the end of the set (ending at 4 instead of 6) or abolishing let rule during serve or even bathroom breaks. The latter is
negligible.

Most time is lost on second serve (first serve mistakes). Period.

It's not just time, it's a quality time. You can calculate it yourself.

Aces/winners on first serve happen roughly at the same rate as first serve mistakes.

So on the first serve, basically 40% of the time you watch player hit a good serve, 20% of the time perhaps reciever returns well and you have a rally, and up to 40% of the time you just watch server hitting in the net or sending it out and then you wait
him to hit a second serve. (This is if he hits 60% first serves in).


Let's be conservative in our assessment, make it 33% each, but it's still a lot of time that's wasted on nothing.

Aces and serve winners are good stuff, it's quality won points, but they're totally negated by the same/similar amount of first serve mistakes.

I watched tennis with people unfamiliar with it and second serve (or first serve mistakes) has been most confusing and boring thing for them. Just saying.


Again, my proposal is that we test this removing second serve, so that zoomers can't test their stuff.

Who cares? "Zoomers" have the concentration of a fly on the window. They follow one fancy and then quickly bolt for another fancy item. Look at NASCAR for example, they had a VERY strong and loyal group of fans until NASCAR decided to follow the '

Zoomer' crowd. That lasted about a decade and now NASCAR has lost both the "Zoomers' and it's loyal long term fans. Don't believe me? Just watch any NASCAR race and see the empty stands.


I am not familiar with NASCAR but I get your point.

But as I warned everyone. If we sense the change is inevitable, it's better that we do it, than let zoomers do it on their own terms.

And sometimes change is inevitable.

Look at volleyball?

They used to have rules best of 5 sets, sets until 15 pts, but you can only win a point on your serve.

So if your opponent was serving at 14:13 and had a set point, and you win it, you don't equal to 14-14, you merely "broke" him and retook his serve. So it's still 14-13 for your opponent and now it's your serve. If you don't win a point, still no change
in the score, it's simply that serve goes to them.

You get the idea that you could end up with lots of play with scores not changing at all. In tennis ad/deuce at least there is some change.

So they've changed to to remove this "break" rule, and they've extended the sets to 25.

So now every time you win a point, whether it's on your own or on opponent's serve, you've won a point. And of course the serve rule is still in place, winning a point gets you to serve next.

I don't find this a particularly bad change?
You could have ended with worse if you had let zoomers do the change.

Nope, totally disagree.To answer your header, what would I consider changing in tennis? Not much. But I would disallow on-court coaching (shouts from the coaching stands are OK, IMHO) and make sure bathroom breaks don't last more than three minutes.

That is long enough to change clothes, pee, and get back on the court.


Yes I agree with the coaching. No need for coaches to sit on the bench fuck that, and as you say, let the coach scream from the stands if he wants. Other fans, viewers and crowd in general scream and speak to the players and give their advices, so coach
should be able to do it as well.

As for the bathroom breaks, I don't have problem with that. I also feel 3 minutes is sometimes not enough. What if you have to do #2?

#2 should be at least 10 minutes.

Maybe we could reduce bathroom break to 3 minutes as you say, but imo we should still let the players to have a right to ask for #2 bathroom breaks, at least couple of times in the season.



--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

*skriptis kirjoitti 4.8.2023 klo 17.21:

I am entertained by the idea of removing second serve.

Dumb idea. Removing first serve is better.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 8/5/23 3:09 AM, *skriptis wrote:

Sawfish <sawfish666@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

Reminds me of an old Buddy Hackett joke...

Which is...?

Something like this...

Hackett is in his mid-70s and goes in for a routine physical.

His doctor asks what he's doing for exercise and Hackett responds:

"I'm having an affair with a 19-year old woman."

The doctor looks concerned. He then tells Hackett...

"You know there are serious health risks--possible death--if you're not careful. It's the age difference."

Hackett says:

"Oh, I make sure that she gets a rest break between sessions."

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make Woke."

--Sawfish ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

TT <TT@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:r

*skriptis kirjoitti 4.8.2023 klo 17.21:> I am entertained by the idea of removing second serve.Dumb idea. Removing first serve is better.

lol :)
--


----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 9:24:30 PM UTC-4, Scall5 wrote:

On 8/4/2023 9:21 AM, *skriptis wrote:

I am entertained by the idea of removing second serve.

I am NOT "entertained" by the idea of removing one's second serve. Allow
the players to go for a strong first serve knowing they have the luxury
of a second serve. It makes the games go much faster, not shorter. Aces
end the point immediately.

I'll explain why but first let's talk about the change they actually brought.

ATP has been experimenting with different format in their Next Gen Finals, best of 7 sets, sets until 4 games, and advantage is a game-point.

I think that is horrible. It negates the tennis, the entire game is based on "winning 2 pts more than your opponent, or two games" and here it is no longer the case. It also destroys the drama of long deuce games.

Agreed.

Their reason for this being is that zoomers lack concentration so they won't watch long matches with long deuce games, and that set endings being the sort of climax periods in the match, it's better to have 4 of those, than 3 or 2 in the match.

Who cares? "Zoomers" have the concentration of a fly on the window. They follow one fancy and then quickly bolt for another fancy item. Look at NASCAR for example, they had a VERY strong and loyal group of fans until NASCAR decided to follow the 'Zoomer' crowd. That lasted about a decade
and now NASCAR has lost both the "Zoomers' and it's loyal long term
fans. Don't believe me? Just watch any NASCAR race and see the empty stands.

Basically the beginning of the sets are "low intensity or low risk periods" so they wanted to get rid of it, by brining the high intensity and risk sooner.

Some matches perhaps, but not many or most.

[snip]

Second serves are total time wasters.

Nope, totally disagree.

To answer your header, what would I consider changing in tennis? Not
much. But I would disallow on-court coaching (shouts from the coaching stands are OK, IMHO) and make sure bathroom breaks don't last more than three minutes. That is long enough to change clothes, pee, and get back
on the court.
--
---------------
Scall5

ten years ago the zoomers were pre-teens. not sure your logic applies here

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Not a rule but overall picture...

Somehow tennis has to be more "fast"

1) two weeks for Grand Slams - decades ago they did run whole Olympics with thousands of athletes in less than two weeks.
2) Matches last too long for today's standards....
- 1st eliminate all change over stops for play. After each set this is ok but not at each 2-1, 3-2 etc...
- Maybe even tinker the scoring system? Going to 4 instead of 6 as piloted in next-gen finals....? (table tennis and volley ball did this)

But I would allow coaching during matches, it is already been done for decades with sign marks, symbols and other markings.....

.mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr> wrote:

I am entertained by the idea of removing second serve.

I would not remove or add anything. Now that all the
Grand Slams have match tiebreak at 6-6 in the fifth
set, everything is in order.

I hope that Hawk Eye Live will be used everywhere
in the future. I also hope that Hawk Eye could be
improved so that it would detect double bounces.

br,
KK

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 8/7/2023 5:59 PM, undecided wrote:

On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 9:24:30 PM UTC-4, Scall5 wrote:

On 8/4/2023 9:21 AM, *skriptis wrote:

I am entertained by the idea of removing second serve.

I am NOT "entertained" by the idea of removing one's second serve. Allow
the players to go for a strong first serve knowing they have the luxury
of a second serve. It makes the games go much faster, not shorter. Aces
end the point immediately.

I'll explain why but first let's talk about the change they actually brought.

ATP has been experimenting with different format in their Next Gen Finals, best of 7 sets, sets until 4 games, and advantage is a game-point.

I think that is horrible. It negates the tennis, the entire game is based on "winning 2 pts more than your opponent, or two games" and here it is no longer the case. It also destroys the drama of long deuce games.

Agreed.

Their reason for this being is that zoomers lack concentration so they won't watch long matches with long deuce games, and that set endings being the sort of climax periods in the match, it's better to have 4 of those, than 3 or 2 in the match.

Who cares? "Zoomers" have the concentration of a fly on the window. They
follow one fancy and then quickly bolt for another fancy item. Look at
NASCAR for example, they had a VERY strong and loyal group of fans until
NASCAR decided to follow the 'Zoomer' crowd. That lasted about a decade
and now NASCAR has lost both the "Zoomers' and it's loyal long term
fans. Don't believe me? Just watch any NASCAR race and see the empty stands. >>> Basically the beginning of the sets are "low intensity or low risk periods" so they wanted to get rid of it, by brining the high intensity and risk sooner.
Some matches perhaps, but not many or most.

[snip]

Second serves are total time wasters.

Nope, totally disagree.

To answer your header, what would I consider changing in tennis? Not
much. But I would disallow on-court coaching (shouts from the coaching
stands are OK, IMHO) and make sure bathroom breaks don't last more than
three minutes. That is long enough to change clothes, pee, and get back
on the court.
--
---------------
Scall5

ten years ago the zoomers were pre-teens. not sure your logic applies here

That is why I used quotation marks (" or ') with the word zoomers. I
didn't specifically mean zoomers regarding my example with NASCAR.

My train of thought prevails regarding NASCAR and et al; anytime a
long-term sport decides to devalue their long-term fans while chasing
the current "IT" crowd they are at a risk of becoming irrelevant. It
happened to NASCAR and I would hate to see it happen to tennis.
--
---------------
Scall5

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 8/5/2023 6:12 AM, *skriptis wrote:

Scall5 <nospam@home.net> Wrote in message:

I am NOT "entertained" by the idea of removing one's second serve. Allow the players to go for a strong first serve knowing they have the luxury of a second serve. It makes the games go much faster, not shorter. Aces end the point immediately.

Look, don't get me wrong. I'm a very conservative guy. I'm against changes. I am always shocked at changes, I was shocked that Wimbledon allowed this.

https://www.euronews.com/culture/2022/11/08/wimbledon-to-ease-rules-on-white-underwear-for-female-players

I'm all for tradition. They need to wear white, if they bleed, let everyone see it.

Don't be an ass when you are trying to make your point(s). Enough said
on your above 'example'.

[snip]
--
---------------
Scall5

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 8/7/2023 8:34 PM, MBDunc wrote:

Not a rule but overall picture...

Somehow tennis has to be more "fast"

1) two weeks for Grand Slams - decades ago they did run whole Olympics with thousands of athletes in less than two weeks.
2) Matches last too long for today's standards....
- 1st eliminate all change over stops for play. After each set this is ok but not at each 2-1, 3-2 etc...
- Maybe even tinker the scoring system? Going to 4 instead of 6 as piloted in next-gen finals....? (table tennis and volley ball did this)

But I would allow coaching during matches, it is already been done for decades with sign marks, symbols and other markings.....

.mikko

Disagree with everything you posted except for your last point. Those
players need breaks between points to recover - they can't ask for a substitute. With the stings and racquets they now have, points can often
be *much* longer than ever before (which viewers LOVE).

I don't mind players getting verbal advice from the stands; be it from
their coach, parent, fan, or etc.

But I don't like the idea of a coach coming down to the court.
--
---------------
Scall5

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)