How do rules of paddle tennis differ?

Paddle tennis differs from lawn tennis in several fundamental ways that affect play style, accessibility, and cultural uptake. The governing rules highlight contrasts in court dimensions, equipment, allowed strokes, and common match formats. These differences shape how players train, how facilities are designed, and how communities adopt each sport.

Court and equipment
The official Rules of Tennis by the International Tennis Federation describe a full court notably longer and, in singles configuration, narrower than a padel court. The official padel rules from the International Padel Federation specify a closed court substantially smaller than a tennis court and surrounded by walls or glass that are integral to play. Padel rackets are solid and perforated, shorter and without strings, whereas tennis rackets use a strung face and a longer handle. Balls used in padel are similar to tennis balls but typically have lower internal pressure, which moderates bounce and keeps rallies tighter in the smaller playing area.

Serving and scoring
Scoring in padel follows the familiar tennis sequence of 15, 30, 40 and game, and many competitive formats mirror tennis scoring systems, as noted by the International Padel Federation and the International Tennis Federation. The serve mechanics differ: padel requires an underhand or low-trajectory serve after the ball bounces, while tennis allows overhand serving and a greater variety of spin and power. The presence of surrounding walls in padel permits plays that continue after the ball rebounds off the enclosure, fundamentally altering rally construction and shot selection compared with the open-court dynamic of tennis.

Gameplay, strategy, and social consequences
Because padel is predominantly played in doubles, teamwork, positioning near the net, and quick reflex exchanges dominate strategy. The enclosed court and lower-bounce ball favor volleying, angles, and use of the back wall to create unpredictable trajectories. Tennis rewards baseline endurance and serve-dominant point construction more often than padel, especially at higher levels where serves and groundstrokes can end points quickly. These rule-driven differences influence coaching methods, fitness priorities, and player development pathways.

Cultural and territorial nuances
Padel’s compact courts and emphasis on doubles have contributed to rapid adoption in urban and club environments where space is constrained. National padel federations and international bodies report significant growth in Southern Europe and Latin America, where the sport has become socially oriented and club-centric, often integrated into leisure and membership culture. Tennis has broader global infrastructure and long-established tournament systems governed by the International Tennis Federation, shaping professional opportunities and national investment patterns. Environmentally, padel’s smaller courts use less land per facility, making installation more feasible in dense urban settings but also creating higher surface-intensity per unit area.

Causes and long-term implications
The rule differences arise from historical evolution and intentional design: padel was codified for accessibility and social play, while tennis evolved around open-court athleticism and individual competition. Consequences include divergent player pools, different facility economics, and varied spectator experiences. As governing bodies continue to promote their sports, these rule distinctions will persistently shape how communities adopt racket sports and how athletes transition between disciplines.