Tennis Players' Grunts May Slow Opponents' Reactions
A recent study shows the negative impact that noise can have when one is attempting to predict where a tennis ball will land. Christie Nicholson reports
SUBSCRIBE TO 60-Second Mind
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
[audio clip] That’s Rafael Nadal, one of the loudest grunters in tennis But the real screamers are the women. [audio clip] Ah yes, Maria Sharapova, belting at 101 decibels, is the scream queen. Yet curiously, she doesn’t utter a peep during practice.
But does grunting distract an opponent? Ivan Lendl complained that Andre Agassi’s howls in the 1988 U.S. Open threw off his concentration and timing. And last year the International Tennis Federation began considering banning grunts. Well, maybe a study in the journal Public Library of Science ONE bolsters the case for a ban.
Thirty-three undergrads watched videos of a tennis player hitting a ball, sometimes with a grunt, sometimes in silence. The subjects had to predict, as fast as possible, the direction of the ball and where it would land, by hitting a keyboard key. And when they heard grunts, the subjects were slower and less accurate.
The researchers say that this is the first study on the impact of grunting in tennis. Now they’re examining how pro players deal with the negative effects of a loud player. But until the ITF rules, it’s up to the umpire to decide if a grunt goes too far.
—Christie Nicholson
[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]
Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism
Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.
When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.
Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber
