Start the Clock?

[stotty]

Nadal and Djokovic take an age to serve. Connors and McEnroe did too. Federer gets on with it. So did Borg and Sampras. Clearly, certain temperaments prefer more time than others.

Most spectators would prefer to watch matches at Federer's tempo than Nadal's. Do we need to draw a strict line in the sand on this one? I say yes. Players should take no more than twenty seconds between points no matter what...whatever the stage or scenario of the match. Players must concede the point if they breach the twenty second mark...no grey areas...twenty seconds, that's it.

Having a bloody great clock ticking away would make things more exciting. Come to think of it let's make it 15 seconds...maybe 12 even.

Anyone got a better idea or strongly disagree with my one?

[klacr]

No argument from me. Shot clock is much needed

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[lobndropshot]

There already is clock in between point during a match. The real issue is how the rule is being enforced; and we all know that it is not really being enforced unless the opponent is making it an issue.

But, here is my theory on this issue. If you put a point clock on the court it will slow down play across the board. All players will take the time they are allowed to take. So players like Federer who play quickly will slow down and players who play slow will speed up a little but not much over all.

How about this approach to the issue. Instead of the server setting the pace of a game. Let the returner have a more control over the pace of the game. Set up the rules so that once the server or return are ready and in position the point must start within 5 seconds. If the other player is not ready within 5 sec. they lose the point. That would allow one player to really impose their fitness level on their opponent and speed up play as a result.

However, I agree that Rafa and Novak take way too long to start points epically after an ace, service winner, or a 3rd ball winner. But, I am not convinced that a point clock will speed things up.

[stotty]

There already is clock in between point during a match. The real issue is how the rule is being enforced; and we all know that it is not really being enforced unless the opponent is making it an issue.

But, here is my theory on this issue. If you put a point clock on the court it will slow down play across the board. All players will take the time they are allowed to take. So players like Federer who play quickly will slow down and players who play slow will speed up a little but not much over all.

How about this approach to the issue. Instead of the server setting the pace of a game. Let the returner have a more control over the pace of the game. Set up the rules so that once the server or return are ready and in position the point must start within 5 seconds. If the other player is not ready within 5 sec. they lose the point. That would allow one player to really impose their fitness level on their opponent and speed up play as a result.

However, I agree that Rafa and Novak take way too long to start points epically after an ace, service winner, or a 3rd ball winner. But, I am not convinced that a point clock will speed things up.

I mean a BIG clock. One that is ticking in front of the audience. And even if a rally finishes leaving a player at the furthest reaches of the court, he still has to get back to serve or return within twenty seconds...or less.

I don't see how it can be at the pace of the returner as they are not hitting the first ball. Going with the pace of the server would still work best. At the pace of the returner could become farcical and open to gamesmanship.

The thing with the twenty second rule is it gets abused. Having a BIG clock ticking away could become a feature if you like. The audience would be more directly involved with the time setting. I can see it working well in today's climate of players...the spectators would be gaining some control. I like that.

[lobndropshot]

Could it be a supersized sand timer instead? I would be all for that!

[klacr]

A visible shot clock to the audience would keep the umpires consistent on their calls, keep Rafa from arguing about getting called for time violations as it offers proof and keep all players accountable.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[GeoffWilliams]

I don't like it, being a staller myself, as that can really psych dumb young in shape guys into blowing up. Also works against any guy who is losing to you due to rhythm issues. Only the very best in shape guys can get their breath back, and what about serve routines? Some of these guys take 20 sec. alone in their routines: Joker, with the bouncing, Rafa with his butt picking.

[johnyandell]

I say the Clock would be fabulous. Big. Visible like the radar gun. Absolutely hate what Nadal does.

[gzhpcu]

Should be controlled by the umpire. Gongs if exceeded. Ref disables it as server starts

[stotty]

Good to see the support for my BIG clock. I think the spectators would like it because it would draw them into the tempo (or at least make them more aware) of the match and make them feel more involved, especially when players start getting penalised points. It would take a little power away from players a little because the BIG clock would dictate, not the other way round as today with the clock you don't see.

I would make it 15 second, though, not 20 seconds.

Now, where do I go to this pushed through? Anyone got friends in high places?

[klacr]

Good to see the support for my BIG clock. I think the spectators would like it because it would draw them into the tempo (or at least make them more aware) of the match and make them feel more involved, especially when players start getting penalised points. It would take a little power away from players a little because the BIG clock would dictate, not the other way round as today with the clock you don't see.

I would make it 15 second, though, not 20 seconds.

Now, where do I go to this pushed through? Anyone got friends in high places?

ATP Tour already has discussed it. Problem is the ATP player council would have to unanimously approve it. If they did approve it, it would be tested at the lower tier or 250 events before it got to the big stage.

It would be crazy if, much like basketball, when the shot clock winds down, the crowd then starts chanting 5...4...3...2...1...
Putting more pressure on server.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[GeoffWilliams]

Rotten idea for the players, who are the ones suffering out there. Tough enough to play well, let alone running up to serve before you get penalized like some high school parking ticket.

[stotty]

It would be crazy if, much like basketball, when the shot clock winds down, the crowd then starts chanting 5...4...3...2...1...
Putting more pressure on server.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Doubt that would happen in tennis. The clock would be there but would soon fade to the background once players learn they have to adhere to it. The players aren't stupid. Players who stall would complain for a while but things would quickly become standard. What you have to remember is that tennis was once played far more quickly than it is now. Players in the fifties and sixties just walked up and served...it took seconds. Yes, yes players are fitter and faster, rallies are more punishing...I know all that. But Federer doesn't see to have a problem...

The game would benefit greatly from being speeded up to a more normal pace.

Hawkeye is popular. It engages the audience and reaches them. The BIG clock would do much the same.

[tennis_chiro]

Doubt that would happen in tennis. The clock would be there but would soon fade to the background once players learn they have to adhere to it. The players aren't stupid. Players who stall would complain for a while but things would quickly become standard. What you have to remember is that tennis was once played far more quickly than it is now. Players in the fifties and sixties just walked up and served...it took seconds. Yes, yes players are fitter and faster, rallies are more punishing...I know all that. But Federer doesn't see to have a problem...

The game would benefit greatly from being speeded up to a more normal pace.

Hawkeye is popular. It engages the audience and reaches them. The BIG clock would do much the same.

I'm in total agreement with Stotty on this one.

don

[klacr]

like I said, it would be crazy. Not realistic.

The shot clock idea may not be around for this current generation, but I certainly see it happening in the next generation as their is a need to quicken things up to meet the demands, needs and attention span of a time/convenience centric society. People want to know when "x" will happen up to the second. Although I'm a traditionalist, I would welcome this new idea.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton