Service question for you clever umpires

[Cheung]

OK. I played a tournament and was a bit cheeky.

It was singles.

Prepared to play backhand serve.

Then switched body around to forehand side and with a continuous motion played a foreahnd high serve.

My opponent just stood there wondering what was going on.

The umpire called a let

I asked for the point(!) but got waved away.

Asked another umpire at the end of the match who said I should only used two movements. I said I did but withdrawing the racquet was across my body and forward in one continuous motion.

Legal or illegal serve?

[Mag]

I'd say that's legal, if you moved your racquet in one continuous motion as you say, and if your feet didn't move.

[Winex West Can]

How did you switch from a backhand serve to a forehand serve by switching your body?

Not having seen it but based on what you described, I would have to say that it is a fault since your feet are probably not stationary (according to law 9.1.3, your feet has to remain in contact and stationary during serve).

The question becomes more of when did your serve stroke starts. Did it start when you prepare to serve backhand or when you switch your body around to serve forehand.

If it is the latter, it could be a let probably because the receiver can be considered not having been in a ready position to receive.

Regardless, that's pretty cheeky of you to do that in a tournament :D

[Californian]

I'm not an umpire, but I would refer to rule 9.4:

"Once the players have taken their positions, the first forward movement of the server's racket head is the start of the service."

and 9.1.7:

"The movement of the server's racket must continue forwards after the start of the service (Law 9.4) until the service is delivered..."

As I interpret the rule, the actual serve doesn't start until there is forward movement of the racket from the serving position. Therefore, assuming you made no forward movement with the racket from the backhand position or during your switch, anything would be technically permissible--including movement of your feet--until you actually initiated the forward swing. "Forward movement" is subjective, however, and would depend on the ruling of the service judge or umpire.

I don't see any advantage to doing this.

[cooler]

it is a touchy call. If cheung had prepared the BH serve position but DID NOT start to serve but in continuous motion switch to a FH serve, then i would see it as legal. However, in a BH serve, the service foot is usually in front and by going to the FH serve, the normal one have to move the racket foot to the back . If the foot moved while doing the switch than the serve is illegal in my opinion.

A let call was fair, legal or not, as the receiver can alway declare that he wasn't ready.

[viver]

Originally posted by cooler
... However, in a BH serve, the service foot is usually in front and by going to the FH serve, the normal one have to move the racket foot to the back . If the foot moved while doing the switch than the serve is illegal in my opinion...


Saw players, when using bk service in doubles the non racquet foot is in front. Don't remember clearly but a few from UK doubles team (during the early 80's) adopted this stance.

[Cheung]

Cooler,

Definately I agree, you can't get a perfect FH serve in the position you stated.

But was able to play a forehand serve without my body position in the proper stance using wrist and fingers.


However, it was mainly the surprise factor that counts.

[Cheung]

Here's another question about stationary feet

9.1.3 some part of both feet of the server and receiver must remain in contact with the surface of the court in a stationary position from the start of the service until the service is delivered (Law 9.6);


Now for forehand high serve, the racquet foot maybe planted on the floor. Then, with the follow through, the back of the foot lifts off and only the toe remains on the floor (like the toe of a ballerina). Is that a fault?

[wilfredlgf]

Perhaps not. Your foot is still in contact with the floor, via your toes.

[Cheung]

The point that is confusing me is as follows:

"some part of foot......stationary position"

So if one does the forehand serve, the backfoot comes up on to the point of the toe area and that might be considered a fault.

Also the back foot may rotate as well whilst still in contact with the ground....technically a fault right?

Not sure about it myself..:confused:

[yonexfanatic]

Originally posted by Cheung
The point that is confusing me is as follows:

"some part of foot......stationary position"

So if one does the forehand serve, the backfoot comes up on to the point of the toe area and that might be considered a fault.

Also the back foot may rotate as well whilst still in contact with the ground....technically a fault right?

Not sure about it myself..:confused:
I've observed many A players and have noticed that many of them do rotate their back foot as they contact the shuttle. I myself do that myself (just doing the serving movement to see if I was a culprit of this rule) as it seems like a natural "habit".

I guess it technically would be a fault if you think about it, but I would think it's a rule that's a bit eased off.

[Neil Nicholls]

I think it means that the parts of your feet which remain in contact with the floor must be stationary. Not that the whole foot must be stationary.

So you can lift part of the foot because the toes remain in contact and stationary.

But you could not let that foot slide on the floor because then no part would be in contact AND stationary.

[Cheung]

Neil, what about the tip of the front part of the shoe?

That isn't initially in contact with the floor but might be so when in contact with the shuttle. i.e. the foot rocks forward that the sole no longer is in contact with the floor, but the tip of the shoe is. (assuming the foot doesn't slide).

[Neil Nicholls]

I was thinking about that just after I posted, and I would say that technically that it would be a fault, if you do it before you hit the shuttle.

But it is hard to tell whether the foot rolls up on the tip of the shoe between start and delivery of the service, or whether it happens in the follow through after you have struck the shuttle. I think it happens more in the follow through, so it would be legal.

[Dzgdz]

At least a part of the foot should remain in-touch with the floor during the serve, therefore there is no fault if you raise your heel during the serve. You just can’t move or raise the whole foot. In practice service judges hardly watch your feet and they concentrate rather on the racket head, waist and racket motion.

In the Cheung’s example from the tournament I find the decision pretty difficult. Frankly, I cannot imagine how you were able to switch from backhand serve to forehand serve without starting the serve (moving the racket forward)… If you were able to do this without starting the serve, then its correct and assuming that the shuttle hit proper half of the court you should score.

I think the reason of announcing the let by the umpire could be his judgment that your opponent was not prepared, because he waited until you finish switching to forehand serve and get ready for delivery.

Anyway, difficult decision.

regards
dzgdz

[AKFT]

Originally posted by Cheung

9.1.3 some part of both feet of the server and receiver must remain in contact with the surface of the court in a stationary position from the start of the service until the service is delivered (Law 9.6);

until the service is delivered I think is the key. The moment you strike the bird is when the serve is delivered. Any follow through is after the delivery and therefore not subject to the rule, IMHO

[Pointfore.Ca]

I believe your backhand to forehand serve would be considered illegal because it consists of two motions. Regardless if your feet move, you would require one motion to bring the backhand to a forehand cocked position, and then a second motion to swing forward into the shuttle.

[Aotis]

can someone ask the judge at badders.com ?

IMO, the only relavence is, when did Cheung service begin?

according to the rule, it begins after Cheung takes up position and at the moment his racquet moves FORWARD. So, Cheung's serve is illegal only if after he'd taken up the backhand service position, moves the racquet forward, but then changes back to the forehand service. On the other hand, if after Cheung have taken up the backhand service but did not move his raquaet forward, then the service have not started and therefore it's still legal to change to the forehand service.

So it's up to Cheung to tell us which was the case.

[nSmash]

It's a fault since it is not a smooth motion as the racquet needs to be
rotated to the forehand position. I find it hard to imagine that enough
power can be generated for a high serve because of the awkward
position of the body and the limited distance between the body and
the shuttle, more than half of which was "wasted" during the rotation
from backhand to forehand. Even though the arm is continuously brought
forward, the wrist will have to be repositioned to bend the other way
to generate enough power which means the racquet must have been
moved backward at some point!

In addition, the motion of rotation involves some part of the racquet
moving FORWARD while the other part moving backward.

Isn't there another rule about illegal distraction i.e. shouting or waving
during a serve? I would consider such a service distraction rather than
deception. If we need to resort to questionable tactics to buy us significant
advantage over our opponents, where is our confidence in our basic skills?

[Cheung]

"9.4 Once the players have taken their positions, the first forward movement of the server's racket head is the start of the service."

For Dzgdz, Aotis, nSmash regarding the switching from backhand position to forehand serve.

Here's what I did to comply with the one continuous motion rule;)

1) prepare backhand position - right foot forward, shoulders leaning forward, racquet arm extended fully at elbow, racquet grip held in fingers, racquet pointing almost vertically downwards.

This position is essential.

2) place the shuttle in front of the racquet

3) withdraw the racquet backwards and out to the side, manoevering the grip with the fingers.

4) using the extended circular motion gradually bring the racquet round in a circle.

5) slightly readjust the hand holding the shuttle

6) hit the shuttle using the forehand.

Number 1 is essential because it gives enough room in front of the body to withdraw the racquet.

so here, the serve I produced, IMHO, was one continuous smooth motion, and one forward motion as well - just a large motion, but not much larger than a typical forehand high serve.


If you use mainly your fingers to hold the racquet, it gives "a lot" of freedom to change the grip. Granted it is difficult to do the very, very high serve, but there is the "surprise" factor as well.

Racquet pronation is important in the shuttle being lifted high. The timing of the pronation and contact with the shuttle is crucial. Use of the first finger is important as well in this pronation movement (a detail not mentioned often).

[nSmash]

I suggest taping yourself making that serve to see if it really looks as smooth
as you think.

[yonexfanatic]

This is getting interesting. From what I've read, I have troubles believing it's a legal serve. Please don't take any offence, this is just what I've come up with by reading the previous posts.

Firstly. After setting up your backhand, you presented the shuttle (from my knowledge you can only do once). You mentioned this for your 5th point, "slightly readjust the hand holding the shuttle". Did you readjust it so to some people, they might have thought the shuttle was being re-presented? Would that be considered anotehr movement?

And secondly. You mentioned that you change the grip with your fingers, saying it's very difficult to do. Unless you've practiced it many times, maybe switching the grips might add extra movement of the racket head which would make it more than the allowed movements if all are added up.

Yes, perhaps get someone to tape you and watch if the serve is as smooth as you think. I'm not saying it's not, but I know myself that sometimes I think I'm doing something right in my mind, but my friends tell me that I'm actually late for the shot or something...I go to the video and I find out they're right.:confused: good luck

[Cheung]

Some singles players play a forehand serve with their racquet arm taking a circular motion. The hand with the shuttle may also 'readjust' its position slightly before releasing the shuttle. That's the amount of readjustment referred to.

I didn't write it is difficult to change the grip with the fingers, I wrote "it is difficult to do the very, very high serve". Read again carefully;)

Maybe another time I can show another BFer and they can give their opinion on the serve itself. In fact just after that match, I discussed the serve with an umpire. They conceded that there didn't seem to be anything at odds with the serve. (but that was only one umpire).




Just last week, I sought the opinion of another umpire but not about the serve but about the situation - i.e. the opponent refusing to hit the shuttle even though they had got into the preparatory position. The first time, the umpire would call a let, however, if it happened a 2nd time with the receiver refusing to move, the umpire could caution the receiver. I guess by the 3rd time, the receiver would have been savvy enough not to get caught out!!

[nSmash]

Seems like this discussion is degrading from whether it is clearly legal to
whether we can get away with it. Umpires are just as fallible as court (law)
judges when it comes to gray areas which are not unequivocally defined.
Why not post a vid of this to make it easier for us?

[Cheung]

Originally posted by nSmash
Why not post a vid of this to make it easier for us?
a) BF doesn't allow posting videos up due to bandwidth limitations
b) I don't have a website myself that I could do this
c) Even with the software facility to build a website, it would be no use because I don't know frontpage/dreamweaver...
d) If you think I can convert frames into pictures like some other people have done, I don't have those skills either

So you can see the amount of computer literacy I have:(
I have only a very elementary amount of computer literacy - all the signs of a mispent youth on a badminton court;)


Plus, why is the discussion degrading?:confused:

Legal means within the rules. Also one would expect a certain amount of reasonable preparation. My point is I faked the oppponent and surprised him. Similar to faking a low serve and then playing a flick serve.

Or changing the service action midway through the game - e.g. For doubles, I usually look at the opponent first before actually striking the shuttle in a low serve. Sometimes, I deliberately don't look at the opponent and then strike the shuttle playing a flickserve. Two things happen
1) the opponent has used my looking up as a signal to when the shuttle is being struck, therefore becomes caught out in timing
or
2) the opponent thinks that they can rush my serve because I'm not looking at them and will definately play a short serve - however, I play the flick serve...

Just an example of how changing a service action can confuse the opponent.

If you want an international player's example; see the AE semifinal between Gopichand and Peter Gade. (2001) Gopichand used an large an unorthodox motion to play high serve. He used this serve a few times. He then played a LOW serve with the same action and has Gade running the wrong way. Still legal.

[Loh]

Unless somebody can convince me otherwise, I tend to agree with Aotis that Cheung's preliminary backhand stance without hitting the shuttle with a forward motion is a non-issue, ie. it was not a service to begin with and therefore there is nothing illegal about it.

Cheung's subsequent transferring his BH to a forehand serve is legal, and is within the framework of the law on service.

His opponent receiver also has the right not to attempt to return the service as he is not prepared for it and is therefore not in a ready position, probably distracted by the unusual change of service style by Cheung. But as Cheung has said later, the receiver cannot give the same excuse repeatedly without a warning from the umpire.

A 'cheeky' umpire can also remind Cheung not to repeat his cheeky service and to commit to a straight forward and orthodox service instead.

[RealMad]

Sounds fair to me if it was performed in one motion. You are allowed a backswing during your serve, if I'm not mistaken, so whether the backswing starts from the forehand or backhand side, it should be fair. The only question is if you "stutter" somewhere in the serve, which I don't see why you should. It's not particularly difficult to hit a high serve with your feet in the backhand stance.

What it really just is, I think, is that a lot of people don't like sneaky servers. When you're a bad server yourself, you're always at the end of shuttles being smashed right back at you and so you want to do the same when you're receiving serve. Also, some people think that such "trick serves" are a cheap way to play but that's their problem. If I win 15-13 and know that I picked up 3 points on my serve, then I'll take it.

But, barring when you're playing a top tier player who can receive any serve while standing right at the edge of the receving line near the net, you can really "own" your opponent when you serve if you serve well. If you can get your opponent to have to keep guessing where he needs to stand, you're well on your way to picking up quite a few easy points.

[taneepak]

Is it a service fault if your body or legs move slightly in a forward direction, but with both feet on the floor at all times, as you serve? Transferring your bodyweight from the back foot to the front foot does entail moving the body and also the back foot, the latter changing from a fully planted back foot to standing on your toes. Some people find such slight movement, even if fluid, annoying and claim its a fault. I cannot find anything in the rules that say it is a fault. Or have I missed out something?

[kwun]

let's review the law book regarding what you've said:



9.1.3 some part of both feet of the server and receiver shall remain in contact with the surface of the court in a stationary position from the start of the service (Law 9.4) until the service is delivered (Law 9.5);


i have seen pros do what you said, a weight shifting from the rear to the front foot, and then lifting the ankle of the rear foot and then proceed to serve.

if my interpretation of the law is correct, then what it says is that some part of the feet needs to be touching the floor during the forward swing.

now, if i visualize correctly, the rear foot going from flat on the ground until tip-toed, no part of the foot remains in contact with the ground. so technically, if you serve during the weight shift, then it is a fault.

however, if you do the weight shift, and then forward swings your racket, it is legal.

[Loh]

Somehow I view the movement of the rear foot differently.

Yes, your heel may have left the ground but the front part of the foot (the balls of the foot) up till the toes remains in contact during the swing of your racket. This being the case, some part of your rear foot is still touching the surface of the court throughout and therefore the service is considered good.

For most of us, it seems that the forward momentum of your body including the slight forward movement of the rear leg and foot, is a natural consequence of the serve, especially the long singles serve.

Unless our interpretation is different, I would not fault such an action during the serve. :rolleyes:

[kwun]

i struggled with the definition a little bit.

there are two ways in which one can shift weight. and if we follow with the definition in a strict manner, then one of them is legal and one is not.

what you said i agree with, if someone shifts their weight and their toe/balls of the feet remains in contact, then it is legal per the laws.

what i was refering to, and i apologize as i wasn't clear in my previous post, is when someone shifts their weight and ended up with only the tip of their toe touching the ground, kind of like a ballet dancer. in other words, the whole of the flat part of the sole is off the ground. in this situation, imho, the service is illegal if the forward stroke started before the weight shift.

[Neil Nicholls]

Also discussed here (post #8 onwards)
www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7280

come on, who didn't do a search :p

[kwun]

Also discussed here (post #8 onwards)
www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7280

come on, who didn't do a search :p

threads merged. :)

[Loh]

Also discussed here (post #8 onwards)
www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7280

come on, who didn't do a search :p

You can't FAULT taneepak on this. Cheung's ealier post was a bit 'confusing' as he touched more on his "cheeky" service than on the movement of his feet! ;)

[taneepak]

The rules say some part of both feet......must remain in contact with the surface of the court in a stationary position from the start of the service until the service is delivered. It is my understanding that the toes or forefoot do qualify as belonging to some part of both feet, simply because they cannot be part of anything else. The meaning of stationary means the feet must be in a fixed station. In other words, you cannot change the boundaries of the footprint of your feet. Raising your toes or your heels or even moving your body, whilst still staying within the fixed boundaries of your footprint, is within the meaning of "in a stationary position" insofar as your footprint is concerned. However, if any of part of your feet move away, ever so slightly, from the footprint, then it is not "in a stationary position" even if any part of your legs or body were to be as still as a rock. On the other hand, moving any part of your upper extremities with your feet still in the same station is not moving away from a fixed station, as you are not moving the goal post. For example, the very act of serving constitutes a movement of the upper extremities. Is this any different from moving your body forward or transferring your bodyweight from the rear foot to the front foot, resulting in your rear foot rising on its toes or forefoot, when you are serving?
The confusion lies in the word stationary. The way I look at "stationary" does seem to make the confusion go away. Or have I got it wrong?

[Neil Nicholls]

Or have I got it wrong?
I don't think you are wrong.

[__Lam]

After playing 2 months of straight badminton, i can admit that i'm obsessed. And i know the rules pretty well :D and that indeed was an illegal serve. It states that your only allowed one forward motion of your racquet per serve. So by move youre raqcuet forward, even if its only slightly is an illegal serve. :D