Every Wednesday, this site publishes a post focused on the rules and regulations that govern how tennis is actually played. That emphasis is intentional. Most recreational tennis is self-officiated, and the gap between written rules and on-court behavior is where conflict most often arises. This post continues our systematic walk-through of “The Code,” returning to Principle 4 to examine its final sentence and the expectations it places on the returner during the serve warm-up.
Warm-up serves are taken before first serve of match. A player should take all warm-up serves before the first serve of a match. A player who returns serves should return them at a moderate pace in a manner that does not disrupt the server.
USTA Friend at Court 2025 , The Code, Principle 4 (Partial Excerpt)
The first two sentences of this principle, which we discussed last Wednesday, establish structure. Today, we are focusing on the third and final sentence that governs behavior within that principle. It does so in a way that is both intentionally flexible and, at times, problematically permissive.
At face value, the instruction appears straightforward. The returner should keep the ball in play and avoid interfering with the server’s preparation. Yet the key phrases, “moderate pace” and “does not disrupt the server,” rely entirely on subjective judgment. There is no requirement to return the ball directly to the server, no explicit prohibition on practicing the return, and no guidance on how disruption should be measured. The rule establishes a philosophical boundary, but it does not define it.
Earlier editions of the USTA’s Friend at Court were far more explicit about the spirit of this interaction. The 2021 version of The Code reads as follows:
Warm-up serves. Take all your warm-up serves before the first serve of the match. Courtesy dictates that you not practice your service return when your opponent practices his serve. If a player has completed his warm-up serves, he shall return warm-up serves directly to his opponent.
USTA Friend at Court 2001 , The Code, Principle 4 (Partial Excerpt)
That language leaves little room for interpretation. Courtesy is dictated. It clearly discourages practicing returns during the opponent’s serve warm-up. It also provides a concrete behavioral instruction by requiring the ball to be returned directly to the server once the returner’s own warm-up serves are complete. The objective is obvious. Maximize continuity, minimize disruption, and preserve the limited number of serves available during a finite warm-up period.
The modern version shifts that balance. By replacing explicit instructions with generalized standards, it effectively permits more aggressive warm-up returns so long as the server is not physically impeded. A return struck into the far corner may not violate the letter of the rule, even if it forces repeated ball retrieval and reduces the number of warm-up serves the server can complete. In environments where warm-ups are strictly enforced to the minimum time, that impact is not theoretical.
This change opens the door to gamesmanship, but more subtly, it also opens the door to misunderstanding. A returner who grew up under the newer wording may believe they are acting entirely within the rules, returning serves with intent but stopping short of overt disruption. An opponent with longer experience, shaped by earlier versions of The Code, may interpret that same behavior as discourteous or even hostile. In that moment, neither player is necessarily wrong. They are simply operating from different normative baselines.
This is one of those subtle fault lines that can produce real on-court tension. A veteran player may feel that the spirit of the warm-up has been violated, while a newer player may be genuinely surprised to learn that their conduct was perceived negatively at all. The rule has shifted, but expectations have not followed uniformly across the player population.
Seen through that lens, the evolution of this language matters less for what it permits than for what it no longer clearly prohibits. When explicit behavioral guidance is replaced with subjective standards, compliance and courtesy can diverge. What once was clearly out of bounds now lives in a gray area, and that gray area is where frustration tends to accumulate.
As with much of The Code, the issue is not about catching bad actors. It is about recognizing how subtle changes in wording can alter shared assumptions. Understanding that dynamic helps explain why experienced players sometimes react strongly to conduct that is, strictly speaking, allowed, and why newer players may feel unfairly judged for behavior they were never taught to avoid.
- Friend at Court: The Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations, USTA, 2025
- Friend at Court: The USTA Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations, USTA, 2001. (Hardcopy.)
For readers who may be new to the organized tennis landscape, the Friend at Court is the USTA’s compendium of all rules governing sanctioned play in the United States. It includes the ITF Rules of Tennis, USTA Regulations, and additional guidance specific to competition in this country. The Code is nested within the Friend at Court. That section outlines the “unwritten” traditions, expectations, and standards of conduct that guide player behavior. The Code is the ethical framework that shapes how recreational and competitive players conduct themselves every time they step onto the court.