Talk:Point (tennis)

Returning under or through the net?
What? Is this vandalism? A joke? Or have I missed an important rule all these years? --El Ingles (talk) 20:02, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps it's (D), poor writing. Looking at it now, it seems that I must have been tired when I finished the massive edit I was making. I meant "under the net cord", not under the net, and "through the net" doesn't even make sense to me (and I wrote it!) because that is supposed to be impossible, and the rules say that it can't touch the net anyway.
 * Just as a reference, rule 25d, which I was reading at the time, says: "[It is a good return if:] The ball passes under the net cord between the singles stick and the adjacent net post without touching either net, net cord or net post and hits the ground in the correct court"; hopefully my new phrasing is in agreement with that now. Anyway, thanks for getting me to re-examine this, as it was a rather embarrassing mistake of mine. I wish more people actually paid attention to these basic tennis articles like you did! --Iritscen (talk) 22:55, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up. I was really glad to note that volleying a service return is illegal -- I've often wondered about that. --El Ingles (talk) 00:16, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Hawke-Eye errors
I find the footnote about Hawke-Eye error ridiculous and irrelevant. Why single out this event here? It may be a valid point if sourced. But it really does not belong here. If anything, it can belong to the Hawke-Eye article.BorisG (talk) 05:42, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Good heavens, man, it's only a footnote! The event was singled out because it's relevant and interesting. Downgraded to a footnote because it's not absolutely, unquestionably, on-topic. --El Ingles (talk) 22:00, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Records
What was the longest point in Grand Slam or tournament history, or a point with the most number of returns? 66.108.223.179 (talk) 23:34, 8 May 2011 (UTC)


 * See Longest tennis match records for a 29-minute, 643-shot rally. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:24, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

let service
In describing a legal serve to start a tennis point, should there be a reference to a let serve? It is a serve that is not a fault, but it isn't a legal serve. I see there is an article Serve (tennis) that describes/explains the serve component of the game in more detail, including a let serve, so maybe this article on a tennis point could be modified simply to refer to a serve that is not a fault and not a let serve with a link to the Serve (tennis) article.

My first time raising a discussion for a possible revision and hope it meets the guidelines. Any advice is welcome. Hope this isn't seen as splitting hairs, but I think it makes the Point (tennis) entry more complete. --Smzwetch (talk) 04:50, 5 September 2011 (UTC)