# tennis scoring **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [July 13, 2000, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460 "2000-07-13T18:19:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Mark\_Squires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Mark\_Squires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mark_Squires)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2000, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/1 "2000-07-13T18:19:56Z")
Cecil says that tennis scoring was based on 60, and the divided by four, the points became 15, 30, rounded off to 40…game. I don’t quite get that explanation re: rounding off 45 to 40. It throws things out of whack. Further, the Lawn Tennis Assoc (Wimbledon) says: “based on the presence of a clock face at the end of the tennis court. A quarter move of the appropriate hand was made after each rest, with the score being called as 15, 30, or 45…” Apparently there is also this 45/40 problem here, but this seems to make more sense in terms of why the points are as they are. ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2000, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/2 "2000-07-13T19:05:01Z")
Click the kink to read Cecil’s column on [Weird Tennis Scoring](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_304a.html). ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2000, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/3 "2000-07-13T19:06:33Z")
Kink … link … whatever. ---
**Author:** ![Mark\_Squires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Mark\_Squires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mark_Squires)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2000, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/4 "2000-07-13T19:34:30Z")
Uncle…the column to which you are referring is the one to which I’m referring. It does not explain the discrepancies I mentioned, though. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2000, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/5 "2000-07-13T19:45:35Z")
Yes, Mark, he was providing the so that others could view the column as well. I’m not really sure that there is a discrepancy. While there being 60 minutes to an hour was convenient for scoring, it is still a fact that 60 (and its multiples) was a very popular number, numerologically speaking. So the question boils down to, was a base of 60 used for scoring because the clocks used it, or was it mere coincidence that clocks could be used to score tennis? I’d suggest that it’s irrelevant, honestly, unless we can come up with a historical record supporting either one. As for the 45-40 issue, I suspect that’s also lost to antiquity. My only guess would be that “forty” has one fewer syllable (two, along with “fifteen” and “thirty”), and might have simply originated from “forty-five” as a verbal shorthand. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2000, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/6 "2000-07-13T20:07:19Z")
BTW, welcome to the Straight Dope Message Board. You might find yourself at home–we have a few oenophiles floating around (myself included). 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Mark\_Squires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Mark\_Squires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mark_Squires)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2000, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/7 "2000-07-13T20:28:57Z")
Thank you for the warm welcome. Tennis is my \second\ hobby. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2000, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/8 "2000-07-13T20:53:52Z")
My apologies, Mark. I should have made my reasons for posting the link clear. Or maybe I should just leave the dirty work to the actual moderator of the this forum, the fine Arnold. I have no additional light to shed on the question or answer. Anyway, welcome to our little community. I have reciprocated by bookmarking your wine site and bulletin board. That’s a very nice piece of work you have there. ---
**Author:** ![ren](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ed655f/32.png) [@ren](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ren)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2000, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/9 "2000-07-13T23:03:55Z")
I used to play tennis competitively (I mean, you know, as part of a league and going to tournaments and all that. Not just that I like to win). A frequent rule when playing was that the score had to be announced by the server before serving. You always announced your points, then your opponents. Now, whenever we did this, it was very common to say “5” instead of “15”. Since 15 was the only score that ended in a 5 it was always clear what the score was if you said, say, “forty five”. It was never mistaken for meaning 40. (although, actually, if a 40 was involved, say the score was 40-30 or 30-40, it was most common to just say “ad in” or “ad out” or “set point” or whatever…) Anyone else had this experience? ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2000, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/10 "2000-07-13T23:17:48Z")
I’ve heard “five” used for fifteen, now that you mention it, but I’ve never used it myself, sticking to the slightly more cumbersone “Forty-fifteen” and such. ---
**Author:** ![Mark\_Squires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Mark\_Squires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mark_Squires)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2000, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/11 "2000-07-14T00:01:41Z")
The old timers always used to say 5 instead of 15 for the first point. This habit rubbed off on me from my coach. I never knew the origin. It would seem to cast some doubt on the clock or magical 60 theory though. ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2000, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/12 "2000-07-14T16:25:40Z")
Welcome to the SDMB, and thank you for posting your comment. Please include a link to Cecil’s column if it’s on the straight dope web site. To include a link, it can be as simple as including the web page location in your post (make sure there is a space **before** and **after** the text of the URL). Cecil’s column can be found on-line at the link provided by your friendly moderator UncleBeer. The column can also be found on page 304 of Cecil Adams’ book “[_The Straight Dope_](http://www.straightdope.com/otheroutlets/books.html)”. ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2000, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/13 "2000-07-14T17:27:55Z")
> [@](#): > > Mark Squires wrote: > The old timers always used to say 5 instead of 15 for the first point. This habit rubbed off on me from my coach. I never knew the origin. It would seem to cast some doubt on the clock or magical 60 theory though. Actually, I think it supports it. It demonstrates that verbal shorthand is a powerful etymological force. I’m surprised that some here have not heard “five” used to call out a score of 15 - I thought it was pretty much standard. I’ve never played tennis competitively, but when I play my buddies, the rule is for the server to call out the score before each point. Dropping off any extra syllables is natural in these circumstances. And this demonstrates how “45” could have become “40” at an earlier time. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2000, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/14 "2000-07-17T22:58:12Z")
Yep. People have done that sort of vocal abbreviation of numbers for hundreds of years. There’s an Italian term (in art-history?) I’m having trouble remembering, which seems literally wrong on its face, but is just a contraction of another number. Anyway, in tennis, it seems like the following is probably true (though I admit I’m making this up–extrapolating from what little I know, and ignoring possible rules changes–over 600 years–about which I don’t know): _Hundreds_ of years ago, in French, a game of tennis was scored to sixty. In order to win, you had to at least complete “_soixante_” (60) (and of course, lead by two points _as well_). “Soixante” was actually four points. The number 60 signifies a complete game–as it evokes the complete hour–better than the number four. It also echoes the _six_-game set. So the first three points of a game were called “_quinze_” (15), “_trente_” (30), & “_cinq et quarante_” (45). At some time (I don’t know when), any number higher than 45 came to be seen as unnecessary. Once a player reached sixty, one of three situations applied: the game was won, it was “deuce,” or it was “advantage.” So “sixty” was not kept as a term. Any number higher than sixty was extraneous–extra points were just there to get that two-point lead, and win the game. _Still_ hundreds of years ago, and probably in French, not English, “_cinq et quarante_” became just “_quarante_.” There was no possibility of confusion; there was no other “fourty” in the game. And so it went on that way, and was translated as such into English. By the middle of the Twentieth Century, English speakers were shortening “fifteen” to “five”–again, a shortening of the word. But I suppose that French speakers would find it absurd to say “_cinq_” (5) for “_quinze_” (15), as there’s no shortening of the word in speech, but rather a transpositon of two consonant sounds. ---
**Author:** ![JJ\_Richard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a587f6/32.png) [@JJ\_Richard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JJ_Richard)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2000, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/15 "2000-07-23T22:57:37Z")
Why don’t they just call 30-30 a deuce, since effectively that’s exactly what it is? If they did that, and just used “game point” (or double/triple game point depending on the situation) instead of 40, we could avoid the troublesome number altogether! 🙂 JJ Richard ---
**Author:** ![JJ\_Richard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a587f6/32.png) [@JJ\_Richard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JJ_Richard)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2000, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/16 "2000-07-23T23:18:53Z")
Oh, and one other thing since we’re talking about tennis scoring. Is there any other sport where someone can outscore his opponent and still lose? For instance, say you and I play one set. You win the set 6 games to 4. In the four sets that I won, I beat you with four Aces. That means that I scored 4 X 4 = 16 total volleys won. You scored zero. Now, in the 6 games that you beat me, I always had 30 when you won the game winning volley. That means that I scored two volleys in each of those 6 games, which gives me an additional 12 volleys for a set total of 16 + 12 = 28. You scored 4 points in each game you won, giving you a set total of 6 X 4 = 24 volleys. So, you win the set 6 to 4, but actually scored 4 less volleys than I did!! Say this happens three sets in a row…you win the match, having been outscored by 12 volleys!!! Perhaps we need to change the entire scoring system, and get rid of that nasty “40” in the process! JJ Richard ---
**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2000, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/17 "2000-07-23T23:41:10Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JJ Richard \* > Oh, and one other thing since we’re talking about tennis scoring. Is there any other sport where someone can outscore his opponent and still lose? It can probably happen anywhere they break the match up into a series of games. For example, a three game volleyball match could go like this: Game 1: Team A wins 15-13 Game 2: Team B wins 15-0 Game 3: Team A wins 15-13 Team B scores 41 points, team A 30 points. ---
**Author:** ![BobT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e8cbc/32.png) [@BobT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobT)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2000, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/18 "2000-07-24T01:43:07Z")
It didn’t take me long to find an example at Wimbledon where the winner won fewer points than the loser. In a third round match, Marc Rosset beat Tommy Haas in five sets, but had only 161 points to Haas’ 164. I imagine that in a not insignificant percentage of tennis matches that go the full distance that the winner scores fewer points. ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2000, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tennis-scoring/25460/19 "2000-07-24T03:26:57Z")
> [@](#): > > JJ Richard wrote: > Oh, and one other thing since we’re talking about tennis scoring. Is there any other sport where someone can outscore his opponent and still lose? To me, this is like saying that in football, you can make more yardage than your opponent and still lose. Of course you can, but it’s which yards you gain that count. In tennis, it’s which rallies (not volleys) you win that count.