Simple question [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Simple question

Farenhajt
07-04-2007, 05:45 PM
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?

ezekiel
07-04-2007, 05:50 PM
the last player serving receives in the next set

adee-gee
07-04-2007, 05:51 PM
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.

David Kenzie
07-04-2007, 05:52 PM
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.

NYCtennisfan
07-04-2007, 05:55 PM
Yes, but the TB is not considered a service game for either player.

Farenhajt
07-04-2007, 05:56 PM
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.

ezekiel
07-04-2007, 06:03 PM
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

Farenhajt
07-04-2007, 06:07 PM
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.)

ezekiel
07-04-2007, 06:31 PM
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

Jelena_78
07-04-2007, 06:57 PM
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,...?
:confused: :shrug:

David Kenzie
07-04-2007, 07:23 PM
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.

NYCtennisfan
07-04-2007, 07:26 PM
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.

alansk
07-04-2007, 07:30 PM
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

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,...?
:confused: :shrug:


:tape:

Seneca
07-04-2007, 07:35 PM
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%

Farenhajt
07-04-2007, 07:43 PM
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) :)

Geniey2g
07-04-2007, 10:53 PM
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?
Lol, are you remembering the Mauresmo/Vaidisova fiasco yesterday when the umpire had to ask them whose turn it was to serve? :D Ridiculous.

Farenhajt
07-04-2007, 11:10 PM
LOL, true :D I thought an umpire would check such a thing with an official logkeeper before coming out on the court, but hey, nobody's perfect ;)