| 513 | June 20, 2022 | CHRIS | 1) ELIMINATE ALL SIDE OUT SCORING, AS SOME ONE WHO HAS PLAYED BOTH WAYS, RALLY SCORING IS WAY BETTER. SIDE OUT SCORING CAUSES MATCHES TO GO WAY LONGER THEN THEY SHOULD.
2) HAVE ALL MATCHES PLAYED TO 21, AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO WIN BY 2 POINTS, FIRST ONE OR TEAM TO 21 WINS.
3) ELIMINATE ALL TIME OUTS, PLAY SHOULD BE CONTINUOUS, INSTEAD ALLOW FOR TWO CHALLENGES PER GAME ON LINE CALLS OR OTHER CALLS EXAMPLE DID THE OPPOSING PLAYER STEP ON THE KITCHEN LINE, AND AS SOON AS A PLAYER OR TEAM REACHES 11, THERE SHOULD BE A TWO MINUTE INTERVAL TO DRINK FLUIDS. COACHING IS ALSO PERMITTED DURING THE INTERVAL.
4) SWITCH SIDES DURING THE INTERVAL IN EVERY GAME, THAT WAY NO ONE GETS STUCK ON A TERRIBLE SIDE AND WHICH CAUSES THEM TO LOSE A GAME. ALL GAMES SHOULD BE EQUAL, AND MAY THE BEST PLAYER WIN.
5) DURING DOUBLES PLAY UNDER RALLY SCORING EACH SIDE GETS ONE SERVE, THE UMPIRE WILL ONLY HAVE TO CALL THE SCORE AND NOT WHO'S SERVING.
6) IN THE EVENT OF EXTREME HEAT AND HIGH HUMIDITY, THE UMPIRE NEEDS TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO ALLOW PLAYERS TO TAKE FLUIDS, JUST DON'T TAKE A BREAK TO BREAK ONE PLAYERS MOMENTUM. THIS SHOULD BE DONE DURING A CHANGE OF SERVES.
|
| 513 | June 23, 2022 | Anthony | Are large group had tried rally scoring and, with the exception of 2 people with physical limitations, do not how rally scoring changes the game. We are asking that the USAP keep side out scoring as the official recommended scoring methodology with rally scoring as an alternate methodology.
For empirical data sake: In the recent past, portions of our group were watching MLP. The matches were even being discussed with some excitement. After trying rally scoring, our viewership of MLP seems to have stopped, and there are no longer any discussions of the matches when we meet.
Truthfully, I believe that many would abandon the USAP for, either another standards group, or would use it own set of rules as we plan our future tournaments.
With the current Mrs caused by the various pro tours and the IFP, this is something that should be handled very carefully.
|
| 513 | July 12, 2022 | Darla | I agree with Brien's assessment and thoughts. Please do not change the very nature of pickleball with this fundamental change. The change seems to often be directed at benefiting those who might do a lot of tournament play, and especially at pros who will be televised. So many MORE people play in neither of these situations and this would be a huge change that, I agree, could cause a lot of schism in our beloved sport.
I would ALSO ask that this issue be put to rest once and for all -- please when defending side-out scoring if/when making this decision this year, please state that side-out scoring is permanent and will not be changed in the future. Thank you.
|
| 513 | July 27, 2022 | Dick | Rally Scoring (RS) is a bad idea. It fails to deliver its alleged benefits. It fundamentally changes the game, and not for the better. Side-out-scoring (SOS) should be the only acceptable scoring system for pickleball.
First, RS fundamentally changes the game. In a typical game to 11, ignoring the occasional service ace, with SOS scoring the winning team must complete a successful third shot (drop?, drive?, lob?) 11 times to win. With RS, they must solve that riddle only 1-2 times. This favors players who want to play pickleball like tennis, relying solely on the drive. Lost is the third shot drop, an essential aspect of the game.
Second, RS proponents claim that it shortens games and reduces waiting time and increases playing time on crowded courts. The first and second statements are true, the third (and most important one) is false. RS does shorten games, without question. One claim I have heard is that RS shortens the average game time by 20%. So, courts will turn over more quickly with RS and waiting players will get back out on the court more quickly. Let's assume 10 courts, 3 hours of open court time, or 7,200 minutes of available court time. If the average game to 11 with SOS takes 15 minutes, 120 games can be played in 3 hours. And if RS games are 20% shorter, 150 games can be played in that same time. It appears the RS delivers what it promises. What is missed is the unintended consequence of shorter games: they reduce total playing time and increase time spent transitioning between games. Between games there is a certain transition time as players exit the court and new players enter. Let's assume it takes 1 minute to transition between games.That time is the same whether SOS or RS is used. With SOS, 120 games produce 120 minutes of transition time. With RS, 150 games produce 150 minutes of transition time. The total time when players are actually playing is reduced by 30 minutes.
Third, there is the claim that RS increases the predictability of the length of games, which is particularly important in formats like round robins where you want all games to end at roughly the same time. With SOS, a game can go on past 11, but with RS it is going to end at 11. That would appear to be an advantage for RS. But there are simpler ways to improve predictability without destroying the essence of the game. Simply allow the win-by-one format in round robin or pool play. Or, put a cap on a game to 11, where if you get to 12-12 or 13-13 (or some other number) the next point wins.
In summary, Rally Scoring is a bad idea. The founders of the game made Side Out Scoring, along with the Underhand Serve, the Two Bounce Rule, and the Non-Volley Zone distinctive characteristics of the sport of pickleball. Rules Committee and Board: please do not sacrifice those unique aspects of the game!
|
