April 7, 2008--15, 30, 40, Deuce

I like tennis. It’s one of the very few sports, like baseball, where time is not the decisive factor. As Yogi said, “It ain't over ‘til it’s over.” Which means that you may be four runs behind, you’re batting in the bottom of the ninth inning, no one’s on base, there are two outs, and the count is against you—no balls and two strikes. You’re one strike away from losing. But until that last strike there is still hope. Not much. But it’s not over.

In tennis it’s pretty much the same thing. You lost the first set 6-1 and are down two breaks in the second. Your opponent is serving. If she holds her serve she will win the set and the match. The score in the potentially decisive game is 40-Love, which means she only has to score one more point to win. But, but there is no clock ticking away the time as in football or basketball; and thus there is still hope. Slim hope, but it isn’t over.

One of the appealing things about baseball and tennis is that they are metaphorically not at all like life. Life where the Big Existential Clock begins ticking the moment you are born.

So when the world is disintegrating around you, when your job is in jeopardy, when that chest pain reminds you of you know what, it’s good to be able to grab a cold beer, turn on the tube, zone out, and watch the Yankees or . . . Or tune in to ESPN and watch the Sony Ericcson tennis tournament that just concluded on Key Biscayne in Miami.

My guy, Rafael Nadal lost. But not because time ran out on him. He just played poorly and his Russian opponent, Nikolay Davydenko, was on his game. It wasn’t over for Rafa until it in fact was over. Not thankfully like life itself. (See NY Times article linked below.)

Tennis holds other fascinations. Among other things because it's difficult to fathom the scoring system and some of its nomenclature. Why are points in a service game not 1, 2, 3, 4 but rather 15, 30, 40, Game? What’s this Love business? And Deuce? What’s that about? And why when a player serves, places the ball in play, is it called Serving?

No one is really sure about any of this. Which is part of the fun. There is even no consensus about why tennis is called "tennis." It may be because there is evidence that the game originated in the Egyptian city of Tanis, or in Arabic Tinnis. I like that idea.

The scoring of a game may reflect some propitious medieval numerological system. Sixty was an special number back then when tennis may have had its origin. Kind of like the way 100 feels complete to us. So counting each of the four points required to win a service game as if each of them totaled 15, means that 15, 30, 45, 60 would make a version of sense to any one living during the Middle Ages. Or, less interesting, according to others, it may be that the 15, 30, 45, 60 sequence reflects the basic way in which we divide a clock face. Though I have no idea how that would work on a tennis court.

And neither explanation tells us why 40 came to replace 45 as the way the third point is tallied. Some tennis historians (and these do exist) speculate that it’s easier to say forty than forty-five. So much for the propitousness of ancient numerology. Or why, if you were tampering with the original system wouldn't you go all the way to something even easier to say--1, 2, 3, 4, as some have thus far unsuccessfully argued?

Since a version of tennis as we know it, or jeu de paumme, became popular in France more than 200 years ago, especially in the monasteries and the royal court, Deuce and perhaps Love are easier to explain. But this too is speculation.

When the score is tied at 40 All, it is called Deuce because two consecutive points must be scored by one of the players in order to win the game. And thus Deuce may be derived from à deux, two.

Love also may have come from the French. In this case from l’oeuf. L'oeuf mispronounced became "love," perhaps meaning zero in tennis because eggs are sort of round. But Love itself has not been free from controversy. When has it ever been? Back in 1907 a group of American tennis enthusiasts argued for it to be changed to Zero since to them Love as a sports term was insufficiently masculine. How sad. Isn’t it good that we’ve come a long way baby?

Then finally what about Service? This one is my favorite. French royals who became obsessed with tennis, or as it was called in French, the Game of the Palm since the ball was hit back and forth with one’s palm before the racquet was developed, thought that placing the ball in play was too menial for them. So they had their servants do it for them. Thus today’s Service.

Though what was so royal about running around wearing who-knows-what while getting all lathered up smacking the wooden ball back and forth with the palms of their delicate hands? I myself prefer a racket--which is how the English spell it.