Simple question - MensTennisForums.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 05:45 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,396
                     
Simple question

A tiebreak is considered a service game for the player who serves first, right? Therefore, his opponent should be serving first in the next set, is that correct?
Farenhajt is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 05:50 PM
Registered User
 
ezekiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Age: 37
Posts: 4,023
                     
Re: Simple question

the last player serving receives in the next set
ezekiel is offline  
post #3 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 05:51 PM
_._._._._._
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Age: 32
Posts: 72,524
                     
Re: Simple question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Farenhajt View Post
A tiebreak is considered a service game for the player who serves first, right? Therefore, his opponent should be serving first in the next set, is that correct?
Yes.
adee-gee is offline  
post #4 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 05:52 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 939
                     
Re: Simple question

It is the player who serves first in a tiebreak who recieves in the first game of the next set. But I don't consider a tiebreak as a service game for any player.
David Kenzie is offline  
post #5 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 05:55 PM
Fed Fo Mod
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: On vacation...
Age: 45
Posts: 11,233
                     
Re: Simple question

Yes, but the TB is not considered a service game for either player.
NYCtennisfan is offline  
post #6 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 05:56 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,396
                     
Re: Simple question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gouzo View Post
It is the player who serves first in a tiebreak who recieves in the first game of the next set. But I don't consider a tiebreak as a service game for any player.
In the serving order sense, it is (the 12th game server gets to serve again in the 1st game of the next set, so technically, the tiebreak is his opponent's service game). In the scoring sense, of course it isn't.
Farenhajt is offline  
post #7 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 06:03 PM
Registered User
 
ezekiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Age: 37
Posts: 4,023
                     
Red face Re: Simple question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gouzo View Post
It is the player who serves first in a tiebreak who recieves in the first game of the next set. But I don't consider a tiebreak as a service game for any player.
The last player serving in the tiebreak receives in the next set. It doesn't matter who starts serving in the tiebreak , tiebreak is neutral in the sense of serve which is why we have 1-2-2-1 format
ezekiel is offline  
post #8 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 06:07 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,396
                     
Re: Simple question

Quote:
Originally Posted by ezekiel View Post
The last player serving in the tiebreak receives in the next set. It doesn't matter who starts serving in the tiebreak , tiebreak is neutral in the sense of serve which is why we have 1-2-2-1 format
Then explain this Wikipedia sentence, which contradicts what you say: "The player who would normally be serving after 6-6 is the one to serve first in the tie-break, and the tie-break is considered a service game for this player." (The implication of the last part is that the first-server's opponent will be serving first in the next set, no matter who serves last in the tiebreak.)
Farenhajt is offline  
post #9 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 06:31 PM
Registered User
 
ezekiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Age: 37
Posts: 4,023
                     
Re: Simple question

I have always assumed the last player serving is receiving the next set and it never came out differently . You can't trust wikipedia on such issues though
ezekiel is offline  
post #10 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 06:57 PM
Registered User
 
Jelena_78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,393
                     
Re: Simple question

Quote:
Originally Posted by ezekiel View Post
The last player serving in the tiebreak receives in the next set. It doesn't matter who starts serving in the tiebreak , tiebreak is neutral in the sense of serve which is why we have 1-2-2-1 format
I thought the same until yesterday,but Kiefer was the last to serve in the tiebreak and served first in the next set.
I was confused,but Farenhajt explained it later...-> Kiefer served first because Novak opened tiebreak with the serve.
I thought it was important who served last in the tiebreak,but it turned out to be other way round...

I think I saw the question on eurosport site,in their tennis quiz,and the right answer on the question: if a player is on serve in the last point of the tiebreak,who's serving first in the next set...? (or sth.like that) that player,opponent,...?
Jelena_78 is offline  
post #11 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 07:23 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 939
                     
Re: Simple question

Quote:
Originally Posted by ezekiel View Post
The last player serving in the tiebreak receives in the next set. It doesn't matter who starts serving in the tiebreak , tiebreak is neutral in the sense of serve which is why we have 1-2-2-1 format
I'm afraid you are wrong on this one, it's the other way round : it doesn't matter who the last player to serve in a tiebreak is.

The reason for this is that if a whole match goes on serve (each set is deceided by a tiebreak) then each player has a go at serving first in the set one after the other.
David Kenzie is offline  
post #12 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 07:26 PM
Fed Fo Mod
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: On vacation...
Age: 45
Posts: 11,233
                     
Re: Simple question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gouzo View Post
I'm afraid you are wrong on this one, it's the other way round : it doesn't matter who the last player to serve in a tiebreak is.

The reason for this is that if a whole match goes on serve (each set is deceided by a tiebreak) then each player has a go at serving first in the set one after the other.
correct.
NYCtennisfan is offline  
post #13 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 07:30 PM
Registered User
 
alansk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Age: 35
Posts: 5,345
                     
Re: Simple question

Quote:
Originally Posted by ezekiel View Post
I have always assumed the last player serving is receiving the next set and it never came out differently . You can't trust wikipedia on such issues though
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jelena_78 View Post
I thought the same until yesterday,but Kiefer was the last to serve in the tiebreak and served first in the next set.
I was confused,but Farenhajt explained it later...-> Kiefer served first because Novak opened tiebreak with the serve.
I thought it was important who served last in the tiebreak,but it turned out to be other way round...

I think I saw the question on eurosport site,in their tennis quiz,and the right answer on the question: if a player is on serve in the last point of the tiebreak,who's serving first in the next set...? (or sth.like that) that player,opponent,...?

alansk is offline  
post #14 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 07:35 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Age: 41
Posts: 278
                     
Re: Simple question

The thing which cleared this tiebreak rule to me was to consider the whole set that ends in a tiebreak. The player served first in that set will receive first in the next one that follows the tiebreak. Otherwise a tiebreaker set would result in the same player having the first serve in the next set as well, which would seem a bit unfair to me (though some guys choose to receive if they win the coin toss, I consider serving first in a set a distinct advantage).

Here's something for the stat geeks: how many percent of sets are won by the player serving first? I'd guess somewhere around 53-57%

Best of luck for:
| Fat Dave |
| Santoro |
| Jarkko Eminem |
Seneca is offline  
post #15 of 17 (permalink) Old 07-04-2007, 07:43 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,396
                     
Re: Simple question

Quote:
Originally Posted by ezekiel View Post
You can't trust wikipedia on such issues though
On what issues then you CAN trust Wikipedia? Would a color-blind person be entitled "not to trust Wikipedia on such issues" if it stated that the uppermost color on the traffic lights is red and the lowermost is green?

I guess it would be more prudent to admit you were wrong (just my two cents)
Farenhajt is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome