View Full Version : No Let or Let? Let's Make a Decision.

Jul 8th, 2009, 11:52 PM
Lets really suck. "Let's" (I know, that wasn't intentional) face it. We don't want to see a great serve skim the net but still travel normally have to be called "let". Why can't we just have the let play on???? It should be like the rest of a tennis point, where hitting the net and letting it go over counts. I personally think it's boring when players double let, then double fault, then let again in the next point, then fault again. Letting is a waste of time. Besides, when there are cheap lets, such as when the ball was going out but hit the net and then slid into the service box, that could happen during a point also. Lets make the returners not have to run. If hitting the net with the ball and letting it skim over were valid, it would make points more exciting

What are your thoughts on this?

Jul 8th, 2009, 11:55 PM
The let system is fine. It makes sense too.

End of topic.

Jul 8th, 2009, 11:55 PM
get a life...

Jul 8th, 2009, 11:58 PM
Because one person might see the ball touch the net, whilst the other might not. Isn't that a bit unfair?
And the ball touching the net also reduces the speed of the ball travelling. Isn't that unfair too?

Jul 8th, 2009, 11:59 PM

Jul 9th, 2009, 12:01 AM
I like the let rule, but you expand it further to say if that ball hits the net and goes over mid-point then that point should be replayed. :shrug:

Jul 9th, 2009, 12:07 AM
I agree. Lets are pointless. It's dumb that for the serve it can't touch the net, but during a rally it's okay.

No more lets!

Jul 9th, 2009, 12:12 AM
I don't go for the "play the let" idea. I think it's unfair.

Nonetheless, there are so many phantom lets (and seemingly more in recent years) where it is imperceptible to anyone except the umpire that the ball hit the net. Don't know how you would enforce it, but I think the trajectory of the ball should have to change for it to count as a let.

Jul 9th, 2009, 12:16 AM
What are your thoughts on this?

My thoughts are that some womens' matches are short enough without taking lets away.

Jul 9th, 2009, 01:24 AM
I say get rid of the lets. They just slow down the game. It would end the controversy of that machine randomly going off sometimes, and it would lead to less confusion. I think no matter what, if the ball touches the net and goes over, it should be played.

Jul 9th, 2009, 01:36 AM
I like the let rule, but you expand it further to say if that ball hits the net and goes over mid-point then that point should be replayed. :shrug:

I agree. Randomness should be taken out of deciding tennis matches.

The principle is simple. If you hit the ball erroneously so that it touches the net, but goes over, replay the serve or the point. The worst thing in tennis is a tight match decided by a badly hit ball that creeps over the net and drops dead.

Service lets disturb the flight of the ball and offer a reward to the player who made the error unless they are replayed with a proper serve. Admittedly there are occasions when the opponent plays a winner off a let service. But that's rare.

Jul 9th, 2009, 01:51 AM
The let system is fine. It makes sense too.

End of topic.


Jul 9th, 2009, 01:52 AM
To the people saying that lets don't matter: do you play tennis? I do, and if the ball skims the net, it makes a difference.

Jul 9th, 2009, 02:10 AM
It can also bounce high and turn into an easy winner for the receiver. It would just add more excitement to the game.

Jul 9th, 2009, 02:12 AM
Are womens tennis matches really that long that we have to speed them up with taking lets out of the game?

Jul 9th, 2009, 02:42 AM
there are to many holds of serve as it is in the mens game, no way do we want to increase it!

Jul 9th, 2009, 04:23 AM
Lots of high school and college tennis matches in the US use the "no let" rule to speed play. It's not a particularly new idea. Maybe it's just because I'm an stubborn old fart, but I don't like it. I don't like no-ad scoring either, but you see a lot of that in tournaments, too.

In The Zone
Jul 9th, 2009, 04:57 AM
I like the lets.

Jul 9th, 2009, 04:57 AM
Let's make a decision? :scratch:

The decision has long been made. If you don't like the rule, too bad. :shrug:

Jul 9th, 2009, 06:18 AM
Leave let alone

Jul 9th, 2009, 07:31 AM
I actually would be very happy to get rid of lets. I certainly wouldn't suggest a light netcord doesn't affect the course of the ball, some do, some don't, it really depends on how light. And of course some lets affect the course of the ball greatly. But, as said by others, players have to deal with netcords during the rest of the point, so why not the serve too. Sure it would bring in an additional element of luck but luck is already very much a part of the game, even though this isn't often acknowledged by fans. Additionally I think this would favour the players with the quickest reactions and improvisational skills which isn't a bad thing. It could make for some quite surprising, fun and amusing points too. Bring it on I say.

Jul 9th, 2009, 07:56 AM
I like lets.
A point should not start with a ball dribbling over the net and impossibly out of reach.

Jul 9th, 2009, 11:35 AM
why do people keep assuming that when a serve touches the net it just drops right in front.

more often first serves that hit the net get slowed down and bounces higher, making it easier for the returner.

however, having said that, i still am in support of the let rule

ms. double fault
Jul 9th, 2009, 11:41 AM
lets are annoying and slow down the progress! so i wouldn't mind if the let calls were banned, but in my eyes it's also okay to not ban them..

Jul 9th, 2009, 12:16 PM
get rid of them

Jul 9th, 2009, 12:49 PM
I agree...let's do take away a little from a really exciting, dramatic match...

it might be 6-6 final set, with both player playing great tennis, then the server hits 2 let's and it just takes away a bit of that drama...

don't like lets, especially if a player hits a fantastic serve which hits 0.01mm of the net, they should win the point but they could go on to double fault because it was a "let"

so yes let's should be done with, if it so happens that the serve hits and net and JUST bounces over to the other side then so be it, unlucky for the other player; just as it would be if it happened during a normal rally

Jul 9th, 2009, 12:54 PM
image someone on a match point winning the match by serving and seeing the ball touch the net and die on the other side, how HORRIBLE would that be *barf*

this is Prince of Tennis, don't give Larry anymore ideas :(

Jul 9th, 2009, 04:43 PM
Are womens tennis matches really that long that we have to speed them up with taking lets out of the game?

would you rather watch a three hour womens match with a dozen lets? i would rather speed up the game (but make fifth and third sets have no tiebreaks) with interesting points, not a lot of lets. I want to speed up the matches so the people i want to see can start playing.

Jul 9th, 2009, 07:20 PM
Then watch high school tennis.

Jul 9th, 2009, 07:28 PM
leave the lets alone!!

Jul 9th, 2009, 08:18 PM
No lets! Matches could be so much more dramatic without them.

Jul 12th, 2009, 07:45 AM
keep the lets.

its not fair lucky shots win. :(:(:(

Jul 12th, 2009, 10:37 AM
lets are boring and ridiculous and it makes no sense at all. if u can do without it in rest of the rally then why not with the serve also? of course sometime the server will be lucky, sometime the returner will have the advantage and that's it like rest of the game. so what's the problem?
the most embarrassing thing of it when the umpire calls it let and there is a half a foot gap :haha:

Jul 12th, 2009, 11:41 AM
I think lets are a good thing. They make things slightly more difficult for the server and slight easier for returners, which theoretically should lead to more close games and more breaks which should theoretically make matches more exciting.

I also don't support the idea of making 2 lets a fault. I think this would be too unfair to the server since most of the time the ball only slightly grazes the net.

Jul 13th, 2009, 12:09 AM
Get a life.