Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,156 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Right now i'm having a discussion with someone about this thing and i want to know your opinion :lol: I told him that yes a player can concede a point if he wants to but the person i'm talking to is telling me that he can't do it, only the original call stands

Oh and also i gave him some examples like :

http://deadspin.com/novak-djokovic-gives-point-to-his-opponent-instead-of-r-1596005440

or


You can delete this thread right after but i would like some replies. Appreciate it :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,412 Posts
not sure what the rules say. I don't think they can just say out of the blue, "let my opponent have that point", but they can admit to doing something that would give their opponent the point, like say they touched the net, or that it was a double bounce on their side, etc, and the umpire will usually agree and give the point to the opponent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,412 Posts
If I were playing I'd concede the first 2 points on every game just for fun to try and challenge myself a little.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,412 Posts
when servebots play they should each concede 6 games to their opponent so they can start the tiebreak right away, save time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,095 Posts
ROME, Italy -- A fair-play gesture backfired for Andy Roddick as Fernando Verdasco came back from the brink of defeat to oust the top seed 6-7 7-6 6-4 in the third round of the Rome Masters.

One set down and serving at 3-5 and 0-40 in the second, a linesman called Verdasco's second serve out and the umpire announced Roddick the winner.

Roddick, however, corrected the call, telling the umpire the ball was in.

Verdasco went on to hold serve and then break his distracted-looking opponent in the following game.

The set went to a tiebreak, which the Spaniard won easily by whipping crosscourt winners off both wings.

Roddick then put a forehand wide to drop serve in the opening game of the decider and the unseeded Verdasco, now playing with increasing confidence, went on to claim victory.

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/SPORT/05/05/tennis.rome/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,156 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Thanks :yeah:
 

·
-Lifetime Scientist-
Joined
·
12,199 Posts
I don't know if there's anything in the rules about it, but I'm pretty confident you can't do it without a good reason as that would be the equivalent to tanking.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,122 Posts
I don't know if there's anything in the rules about it, but I'm pretty confident you can't do it without a good reason as that would be the equivalent to tanking.
I think it's implied in the question that they are talking about cases in which there's some kind of dispute over a point, it's not like you can say before serving 'I wanna give my opponent a point'.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,469 Posts
I think it's implied in the question that they are talking about cases in which there's some kind of dispute over a point, it's not like you can say before serving 'I wanna give my opponent a point'.
I'm trying to think of cases in which you would want to just straight up give your opponent the point before even playing it.

Maybe it's just me, but when I have a situation where my opponent has nothing (i.e 5-0 up in the set, 6-0 up in a TB, or say 4-0 up having won all 16 points), I tend to play cautiously in order to not mess up their 'zero'. So maybe if I was up 6-0 in a TB I would want to give my opponent a point in order to: a. fuck with their mind and b. quell the pressure of trying to get the bagel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,825 Posts
not sure what the rules say. I don't think they can just say out of the blue, "let my opponent have that point", but they can admit to doing something that would give their opponent the point, like say they touched the net, or that it was a double bounce on their side, etc, and the umpire will usually agree and give the point to the opponent.
Shots fired?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,627 Posts
yes they can however I think if they didn't have a justified reason (aka doing it just randomly) then the umpire could and would overrule
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26,080 Posts
ROME, Italy -- A fair-play gesture backfired for Andy Roddick as Fernando Verdasco came back from the brink of defeat to oust the top seed 6-7 7-6 6-4 in the third round of the Rome Masters.

One set down and serving at 3-5 and 0-40 in the second, a linesman called Verdasco's second serve out and the umpire announced Roddick the winner.

Roddick, however, corrected the call, telling the umpire the ball was in.

Verdasco went on to hold serve and then break his distracted-looking opponent in the following game.

The set went to a tiebreak, which the Spaniard won easily by whipping crosscourt winners off both wings.

Roddick then put a forehand wide to drop serve in the opening game of the decider and the unseeded Verdasco, now playing with increasing confidence, went on to claim victory.

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/SPORT/05/05/tennis.rome/
This was a clay court tournament...it's not like the umpire was down on court and said the ball was out. So please...
 

·
Ace Loveforty
Joined
·
83,393 Posts
Yes. After mark checking it would have been verdasco's point anyway

dont make it like roddick is the king of generosity
 

·
Rankings Master
Joined
·
15,649 Posts
Rules of tennis:

24. PLAYER LOSES POINT
The point is lost if:
a. The player serves two consecutive faults; or
b. The player does not return the ball in play before it bounces twice
consecutively; or
c. The player returns the ball in play so that it hits the ground, or before it
bounces, an object, outside the correct court; or
d. The player returns the ball in play so that, before it bounces, it hits a
permanent fixture; or
e. The receiver returns the service before it bounces; or
f. The player deliberately carries or catches the ball in play on the racket or
deliberately touches it with the racket more than once; or

g. The player or the racket, whether in the player’s hand or not, or anything
which the player is wearing or carrying touches the net, net posts/singles
sticks, cord or metal cable, strap or band, or the opponent’s court at any time
while the ball is in play; or
h. The player hits the ball before it has passed the net; or
i. The ball in play touches the player or anything that the player is wearing or
carrying, except the racket; or

j. The ball in play touches the racket when the player is not holding it; or
k. The player deliberately and materially changes the shape of the racket when
the ball is in play; or

l. In doubles, both players touch the ball when returning it.
Unless he can justify one of the above, the player is not allowed to concede the point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,632 Posts
This was a clay court tournament...it's not like the umpire was down on court and said the ball was out. So please...
However, reading the article, it does not seem as if Verdasco challenged the call and the umpire would seem, from the report, to have awarded the point to Roddick, to have accepted the linesman's call and therefore was not about to go down on court and check it. Therefore, the only way Verdasco would have won the point at that juncture, would have been for Roddick to have corrected the call himself.
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top