Home Search Calendar Help Login Register
Did you miss your activation email?
Andy Murray vs Grigor Dimitrov, Thursday, Estimated time - 1:30pm GMT - Discuss the match
MurraysWorld Discussions  >  General Community  >  Tennis Talk  >  One serve only in tennis? 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Reply
Author

One serve only in tennis?

 (Read 3531 times)
David
Satellite Level
**
Posts: 364

Location: Torquay UK


One serve only in tennis? « on: October 22, 2005, 07:30 PM »
Reply

Interesting debate. What do you think?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbfivelive/F2148567?thread=1253260






// Moved to Chit Chat. (Mark)
IP Logged
Mark
Murraymaniac
*
Posts: 53,066

Gender: Male
Location: London


One serve only in tennis? « Reply #1 on: October 22, 2005, 07:47 PM »
Reply

That is very interesting and I'm finding it hard to pick a side here. Having two serves means the players can risk things on the first serve and be brave and fast. But, if there was one serve, the tension in a match would be greater and you'd have more rallies and I like that even though they can sometimes be nail-biting but on the other hand the serves would be slower and probably boring. Anyone agree?
IP Logged
top_spin
Murraymaniac
**********
Posts: 22,270

Gender: Female
Location: UK


One serve only in tennis? « Reply #2 on: October 22, 2005, 08:27 PM »
Reply

hmn...yea very interesting debate that!!
...its something that is very hard to decide on and i think the easiest thing is to just stick with the rules of the game...2 serves, as usual
although i think maybe, in some of the trouneys they could try it out....the tension would be amazing, and the players would really start to count each and every point...
but on the other hand, 1 serve means MANY misses - when it's like 5th set the players could just loose a game on 5 serves going out and stupid mistakes - that's just giving points away...
and, people like Andy Roddick (huge serves) will have such an advantage over the not-so-good serves....for example daniela huntuchova would REALLY struggle against some one like Davenport who has good serves...
dunno really, interesting issue!  Very Happy
IP Logged
Elly
Murraymaniac
**********
Posts: 28,803

Gender: Female
Location: The Heart of Shallowville


The mind doubts, but the heart never does.

One serve only in tennis? « Reply #3 on: October 22, 2005, 09:19 PM »
Reply

Wow, yes it is really hard to come down on one side of this debate, but I'd really like to see what the effect of one serve would be.  Good if they could try it out out in a tournament and see how it pans out.  But can't help but think it'd put the big servers at a huge advantage.  In fact, while typing this out, am thinking I'm more in favour of leaving things as they stand.  :?   I think..... Exclamation
IP Logged
hulahoop
Seed
****
Posts: 4,468

Gender: Female
Location: Beside the sea


Home is where the heart is!

One serve only in tennis? « Reply #4 on: October 22, 2005, 09:27 PM »
Reply

I'm on your wave length, elly.

I think the tie break was a huge improvement ( I'm guessing a lot of you wont remember there was a time when tie breaks weren't heard of!  Very Happy ) but nope. Tennis would be impoverished if only one service was allowed.

Definitely agin it.
IP Logged
Elly
Murraymaniac
**********
Posts: 28,803

Gender: Female
Location: The Heart of Shallowville


The mind doubts, but the heart never does.

Tally « Reply #5 on: October 22, 2005, 09:31 PM »
Reply

Gosh, I never realised that tie breaks weren't always the norm... so did sets just go on and on until someone won by the two clear games?  Tough going Exclamation
IP Logged
David
Satellite Level
**
Posts: 364

Location: Torquay UK


Elly « Reply #6 on: October 23, 2005, 12:15 PM »
Reply

The tie-break was brought in, as long games were becoming the norm (5 hours for some matches) I think they add more excitement to the game.

Left handers would have an advantage if one service only was allowed, as their serves are naturally served into the right handers bankhand....also players like Roddick would lose a tremendous weapon, with their first serve. When he gets his first serve in, he must win a huge majority of his games.
IP Logged
Elly
Murraymaniac
**********
Posts: 28,803

Gender: Female
Location: The Heart of Shallowville


The mind doubts, but the heart never does.

One serve only in tennis? « Reply #7 on: October 23, 2005, 12:27 PM »
Reply

5 hour matches Shock What an absolute grind that must have been.  Tie breaks definitely add excitement.

I hope they don't change the rules to one serve only, I think the game would be the worse for it.
IP Logged
hulahoop
Seed
****
Posts: 4,468

Gender: Female
Location: Beside the sea


Home is where the heart is!

One serve only in tennis? « Reply #8 on: October 23, 2005, 12:31 PM »
Reply

Quote from: "ellyb"
Gosh, I never realised that tie breaks weren't always the norm... so did sets just go on and on until someone won by the two clear games?  Tough going Exclamation


Yup, one Wimbledon epic (played over 2 days) between Pancho Gonzales and Charlie Paserel ended 24-22 6-1 14-16 3-6 9-11  Shock

And there were no breaks between changes of ends or chairs for them.


Seems unbelievable now, doesn't it?
IP Logged
eira_arian
John McEnroe
*********
Posts: 17,962

Gender: Female


Re: Tally « Reply #9 on: October 23, 2005, 12:33 PM »
Reply

Quote from: "Tally"


Yup, one Wimbledon epic (played over 2 days) between Pancho Gonzales and Charlie Paserel ended 24-22 6-1 14-16 3-6 9-11  Shock



lordy. epic is definately the word. that is insane.  Shock  Shock  Shock
IP Logged
Elly
Murraymaniac
**********
Posts: 28,803

Gender: Female
Location: The Heart of Shallowville


The mind doubts, but the heart never does.

One serve only in tennis? « Reply #10 on: October 23, 2005, 12:47 PM »
Reply

Quote
Yup, one Wimbledon epic (played over 2 days) between Pancho Gonzales and Charlie Paserel ended 24-22 6-1 14-16 3-6 9-11


 jaw
IP Logged
eira_arian
John McEnroe
*********
Posts: 17,962

Gender: Female


One serve only in tennis? « Reply #11 on: October 23, 2005, 01:09 PM »
Reply

it would suck to be the guy that lost that one.....
IP Logged
hulahoop
Seed
****
Posts: 4,468

Gender: Female
Location: Beside the sea


Home is where the heart is!

One serve only in tennis? « Reply #12 on: October 23, 2005, 07:23 PM »
Reply

Quote from: "eira_arian"
it would suck to be the guy that lost that one.....


He's the main organiser of the Indian Wells Masters Tournament now. (Charlie Pasarell, that is. He was just starting his career when he lost that match while Gonzales was a legend) Charlie was really PHWOAR back then,  but now he's got really fat and jowly. Frown How illusions are shattered.


 Rolling Eyes @self. I am a mine of useless trivia.  Very Happy
IP Logged
David
Satellite Level
**
Posts: 364

Location: Torquay UK


Elly « Reply #13 on: October 23, 2005, 08:17 PM »
Reply

Yes Tally and I even remember, when the ladies at Wimbledon wore long dresses down to their ankles and Sue Barker wasn't around!! Shock
IP Logged
Elly
Murraymaniac
**********
Posts: 28,803

Gender: Female
Location: The Heart of Shallowville


The mind doubts, but the heart never does.

David « Reply #14 on: October 23, 2005, 10:22 PM »
Reply

Don't know what's more shocking - the long dresses, or fact Sue Barker wasn't around :yawinkle:
IP Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Reply 
« previous next »