Are big servers ruining tennis?

Goran Ivanisevic, Greg Rusedski and Mark Phillippoussis, are three names synonymous with a big first serve. Greg has recorded 149mph and Goran not far behind.

Such players often win games in four shots, with the returnee standing no chance of getting anywhere near the ball.

In the women's game too, power and hard hitting, with few rallies, increasingly seem to be the order of the day,

With some complaining that the game is becoming dull, former champion John McEnroe has suggested making the service box smaller to slow the big serves down.

But would this make a positive difference to the game?

It was entertaining, and took nothing from the game. A return to the small headed racquet would be the best move that the game could make - it would reward skill and practice, and force the players to be more precise. The real problem that I see with the modern game is the ability of players to totally fluff a shot, but still get the ball back because of the enormous tightly strung racquet they wield.
Brian, UK

This statement is inaccurate. While there are a lot of big servers, the mens' game is also being invaded by 'boring' baseline players (who's the current World Number One?) To master a fast, accurate serve is much harder than mastering baseline rallies where points are won on unforced errors.
Elvis Pack, UK

Grass court tennis is only played at the top level for a fraction of the tennis calender year. The debate, if there is one, should be "Are big servers ruining grass court tennis?"

The French Open final this year was contested between Albert Costa and Juan Carlos Ferrero, two Spaniards who don't have power serves. Lleyton Hewitt won last year's US Open and he doesn't have a power serve.
Chi, England

Reducing the game to one serve will not encourage new young players, most need a second chance. Altering the court in size would be too much to expect with the number of courts arround the world. I think keeping one foot on the ground when the ball is struck is a good option and should reduce the serve by 10mph, to reduce it further you could make it so both feet need to be in contact with the ground.
Rory Lynas, UK

How about changing the foot fault rule so the server has to keep one foot on the ground? This would certainly slow down the big servers!
Peter Shearer, UK

I had the misfortune to be at the final on Centre Court the day tennis died. This was the match between Pete Sampras and Goran where for three mind numbing sets they just blasted serves at one another until Goran gave up and lost. This was not tennis. We have just seen Philippoussis serve a set and a half of aces. If something isn't done to bring some skill back into the game then tennis will cease to be a spectator sport.
Trevor Vaughan, UK

If the net was raised, instead of the service box being reduced, then the dominance of the serve would be reduced, but also the return would not be able to then become dominant. The speed of the ball would be reduced across the whole game allowing players to avoid being overpowered. What the problem seems to be is that, despite players' extra fitness and speed across the court, the ball can be hit out of the opponent's reach too easily.
Daniel Simmons, England

I believe it high time that the service area is reduced to give the opportunity for players to play tennis. Crushing serves have taken the quality out of the game. Up and coming stars are all trained in the same techniques and much of the interest and variety is now lacking. The game has been developed to such a fine degree that every one seems to play the same.
Tom Wright, Guernsey, Channel islands

I have waited a long time for a serious suggestion of eliminating the 2nd serve. Matches won on aces, because the players know that they always have their second service is no fun for spectators. This will eventually mean less spectators (at home and in the living rooms), which mean less sponsors, less money for players, less tennis. SO I hope that the rule will change to only one service!
Marc Jorgensen, Belgium/Denmark

I see Rob & Frank have beaten me to it - the obvious answer is to allow only one serve, as per most other racquet sports. This will require a balance of power v accuracy, will speed up the game, will mean more rallies, and will not mean that the tens of thousands of courts have to be tampered with in any way.
Chris Leftley, UK

It's like thinking of shortening a cricket pitch to curb Shoaib Akhtar and Brett Lee's pace.
Adrian, Australia

How can anyone say that 'big-servers' are dominating the game. The best players in tennis at present could not be called power servers. I refer to Lleyton Hewitt and Andre Agassi. When 'big bangers' start winning all the tournaments, then we can say they are dominating.
Mal Walker, Australia

I agree with Rob & Frank. This question has come up over a number of years. Why not reduce the number of serves to one? You could even have different competition levels where some (esp. for younger players) allow 2 serves. Please ask the commentators to discuss?
Colin Stephenson, UK

I'm never in favour of tinkering with the rules of a game, just because the way it is played and the tactics have evolved and developed over time. For a big server to be successful, he/she will need to have a wide range of skills. Serving is only one part of the game. It's no use being a big server, and get only 25% of your first serves in play. Pete Sampras won Wimbledon 7 times because he was a great player, not just because of the power of his service. I think we are in danger of being a bit 'Wimbledoncentric' here too.... service power is not as effective on other surfaces as it is on grass. Grass court tennis is a fascinating, important aspect of the game, but is nonetheless only one aspect. Perhaps we are in danger of forgetting that, sometimes!
Andrew, UK

Changing the size of the service box will effect both men's and ladies' matches, unless we have two sets of lines, like the tramlines for doubles. This would get rather messy and be confusing. Why not, instead, have the net a couple of inches higher for the men's game?

Dave Johnson, United Kingdom

Yes. The emphasis on power serves is de-emphasising the skill at ground strokes, passing shots and returns. With the advances in racquet technology, the game is completely different from the days when the court measurements were laid down. To return to that balance of service and rallies, the service box should* be made smaller, so that even big servers with modern racquets can rarely hit an ace. Maybe one or two aces per match would be more acceptable than one or two per game as we see at present.
David Shaw, UK

Secondly, how can people seriously suggest that a big serve is an unbalancing factor when Greg Rusedski has yet to win a Grand Slam, Ivanisevic has only won one, and yet Andre Agassi (who doesn't have a huge serve) is one of the few people ever to win all four major titles?

Finally, it sounds dangerously like political correctness. Tennis at the top level is for people with great skill and determination.

All players have differing physical and mental advantages and disadvantages, and to change the rules simply to penalise the taller players makes no sense.

By logical extension, each side of the court should be of a different size and the net should be set at differing levels depending on the height of the competitors.
John Kearney, UK

To make the game more interesting - reduce from two serves allowed to one. That'll cut down on aces, more rallies but overall shorter matches. I have though this for years.
Rob McLoughlin, UK

Server should only be allowed one service. You just need to look at the speed of the second service; with the worry of losing the point, more accuracy is required - hence more returns of the second service and more enjoyable for the audience. In what other racquet sport is the server allowed two attempts to produce a good serve - with the first one being a completely free?
Frank Shanley, UK