Rules were made to be broken, no, what???
In Tuesday's post, I wrote about the redefinition of "underhand" and my interpretation of what it meant to the service rules. I also mentioned that it was unconfirmed and I was not ready to state that the serve would change. While it remains unconfirmed from anyone on the USAPA rules committee, there is another interpretation gaining traction. It is also one that made sense to me as soon as I heard it.
That interpretation is that the underhand definition was changed to clarify that the backhand serve is legal. Many debated whether the backhand serve fit the previous rules. This redefinition removes that argument. So, the serve rule implementation remains unchanged from previously, again, though, unconfirmed as of now. Luckily we have until January 31 to figure this out. I just wish the wording was clear to begin with - a simple "Serve may be made with a backhand or forehand" would have been clear.
That interpretation is that the underhand definition was changed to clarify that the backhand serve is legal. Many debated whether the backhand serve fit the previous rules. This redefinition removes that argument. So, the serve rule implementation remains unchanged from previously, again, though, unconfirmed as of now. Luckily we have until January 31 to figure this out. I just wish the wording was clear to begin with - a simple "Serve may be made with a backhand or forehand" would have been clear.
I am wondering given the rule on the serve that the paddle must be rising up to meet the ball if it is physically possible to undercut a serve that comes off the paddle as a drive that skips low with backspin when it lands as opposed to an arced shot that lands more gently. I feel an undercut driving serve would have to have the paddle descending through the ball.
ReplyDeleteThe Jan 31st2018 revision makes it clear . Upward forward motion...
ReplyDeletePALM UP / Forehand....PALM DOWN / Backhand