Probably Should Be In Sport But Tennis

[lankeela]

- I have questions. Why do commentators assume we know what it all means? Why don't they explain what is happening and what the different phrases/words mean? What is break? What is a grand slam? What is a calendar grand slam (never heard it mentioned before but they all seem to be saying it this year). Why don't they use artificial grass to keep a constant playing surface? Do they get prize money if they get knocked out in the earlier rounds, otherwise how do they make a living? Why don't they have a caddy to carry their bag? After 40 points what do they get if they win the next point? Why do they get another go if they mess up the first service? Or hit the net? Why don't they have floodlights for when it gets dark? I'll be back if I think of any more.

[choux]

Hi Lankeela. The light from floodlights would be too bright, distracting the players when they look up. The lights in the closed roofs are more subtle to emulate daylight.

In the finals ballgirls/ballboys carry their cases onto court for them. Very civilised ;)

[Hopkirk]

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/jun/28/wimbledon-tests-plastic-grass-in-bid-to-take-lawn-tennis-global

[jourdain2]

I gradually learned the rules of tennis by watching. Rugby League now.. I'm still often baffled; but so, I think are a lot of the players.

[ToraToraTora]

if you think Lawn tennis is difficult, try real tennis!

[THECORBYLOON]

It used be just a Grand Slam when winning the four major championships in the same year and then they began being called Grand Slam events.

That meant that unless you won the first of those four championship in that year, you could not win the Grand Slam.

Later, it became a target to be the current holder of all four championships at the same time, meaning it could cross into a second year.

To differentiate between the two, the much harder achievement of winning all four in the same year is called a Calendar Grand Slam

[choux]

Your questions are perfectly sensible on an entry-level for someone watching their first tennis tournament. But I might just say that anyone not into dogs would, no doubt, have a similar lengthy set of questions about Crufts, probably asking "How does a dog win entry to Crufts? How can you possibly have a supreme champion when the finalists range from Chihuahua size to Great Dane? Why is it just the opinion of one single judge when another judge might have picked another dog? How can you compare working dogs to lap dogs? It is not fair."

[lankeela]

When Crufts is on the commentators do indeed explain the path from entering a show to winning at Crufts - and repeat certain bits during the coverage. There are also separate sections where they explain different disciplines and show films on different owners/breeders in the run up to the main event.

Thanks to all who answered, I now know more about tennis that I did before this week and will be able to follow the game easier should I decide to.

[FoxLee2]

I can't see that anyone has answered your question about the points after deuce. The next point is advantage to whoever won the point and if that person wins the following point, then the game is won. However if the opponent wins the point after advantage, it goes back to deuce. And can continue that way until someone wins adv and the next point. If the games go to 6-6, then the tie-break comes into play where a player has to win by two points after achieving six points so a score could be 8-6, 7-5, 7-4 etc.

[ichkeria]

I think a lot of those questions would be answered by watching it for a short while.
Some are realted to the rules, which you can surely pick up pretty quickly and it would be really irritating if they were constantly spelled out.
Tennis is a pretty straightforward game really.
Others relate to the history of the game and other oddities and aren't really appropriate to be gone into in any detail by commentators.
The question I always had re Wimbledon (once they extended to the second Sunday) was why on earth not play both Sundays. Common sense has now prevailed.
And also why on earth are players allowed to sit and rest for a minute after a single game (that used to annoy Fred Perry when he was a commentator)
The Men's final used to be on the Friday.
As for the caddy question, perhaps when they have to walk round playing a few games on each court with a multitide of heavy equipment they'll think of it

[ichkeria]

"If the games go to 6-6, then the tie-break comes into play where a player has to win by two points after achieving six points so a score could be 8-6, 7-5, 7-4 etc. "

Unless it's the final set in which case it's first to 10 points :-)
For years in the Wimbledon tie break Dan Maskell always used to hand over to John Barrett, who would explain how it worked and then commentate, as if it was all too new-fangled for the older man (!)

[ToraToraTora]

ich: "Unless it's the final set in which case it's first to 10 points :-) " - when did they introduce a final set tie break? I remember the 2010 match between Isner/Mahut 70-68!

[Hopkirk]

Why do you get 15 for the first and second ball, then 10?

Were they in drink when they drew up the rules?

[Ken4155]

^
In 2018 after the Isner/Anderson semi.

[Ken4155]

Hoppy;

https://www.thesun.co.uk/living/3920476/this-is-why-the-scores-in-tennis-are-1530-and-40-and-the-real-reason-zero-is-love/

[ToraToraTora]

some theories here hoppy:
https://thetennisbros.com/tennis-tips/rules/why-is-tennis-scored-the-way-it-is/

[lankeela]

But the point after 40 should surely be 50 - I am not talking about when it is 40 - 40 I am talking about say it being 40 - 15 then the one on 40 wins the next point - it doesn't seem to have a score. So would you say they won the game 40 - 15 because they actually won another point after the '40' point.

[THECORBYLOON]

It was used from 2019 at 12-12 in the final set at Wimbledon with the normal tie-break rules.

There were different rules in the four Majors but now they all use a tie break at 6-6 with first to ten points and a two-point margin.

[THECORBYLOON]

"So would you say they won the game 40 - 15 because they actually won another point after the '40' point."

The winning point is "Game" so I think it would be "Game-15".

If a player scored no points in a game, the winner is often said to have "won it to love" so in your example they might possibly say, "won it to fifteen"

[Cloverjo]

I get irritated by Andrew Castle when he’s commentating. He always explains what grand slams are etc. and even tells us who Andy Murray is.

I end up shouting at the telly ‘Yes, we know, Andrew. Shut up!’

You get the hang of it as you go along.