you could tell he was very pissed, but i wouldn't say nuts.
dude, did u even listen to the commentary? johnny mac said hawkeye has a 90% accuracy rate, which means 10% of the calls can be wrong. today i really think fed was hooked on some of those calls.
and u think he's nuts? imagine yourself in a wimbledon final going for five straight and tell me u wouldnt get a littled pissed at moments like that. what a troll man.
what set did this happen?
i'm watching the start of the 4th set right now on DVR
Fed's eyes are messed up.. He dares challenge a system of precision and technologically advancement vesus his human eyes?
Funny comin consider your user name.I don't trust machines - eventually they will kill us all. Neither should Federer.
It just shows fed is a baby when all is not going his way.
dude, did u even listen to the commentary? johnny mac said hawkeye has a 90% accuracy rate, which means 10% of the calls can be wrong. today i really think fed was hooked on some of those calls.
they should make hawkeye an option or something before a match. like each player has to agree to use it or it wont be used that match. or something like that. cuz u know, the proponents r talking about "imagine getting a bad call match point down." with hawkeye, u supposed wouldnt get hooked by a call.
well it works both ways.
I don't trust machines - eventually they will kill us all. Neither should Federer.
Fed's eyes are messed up.. He dares challenge a system of precision and technologically advancement vesus his human eyes?
What did you think when fed yelled at hawkeye: "Was that in too you god damn idiot".. i dont remember the exact phase but I thought fed was going cuckoo.
Then suddenly nadal's knee goes bad and the rest is history.. what a lame day.
Exactly and if you look at many of those calls that Hawkeye was used in that match and through the rest of the tournament many of them were within 3mm of the ball being in or out. The OP needs to do his homework better before creating such a thread. Just like his Djokovic thread. :roll:
What did you think when fed yelled at hawkeye: "Was that in too you god damn idiot".. i dont remember the exact phase but I thought fed was going cuckoo.
Then suddenly nadal's knee goes bad and the rest is history.. what a lame day.
Not to go off the subject, but the Bryans had every right to yell at the umpire. He called a game and set against because he thought they touched the net, but it was the ball. They tried to challenge, but that's not up for challenge.Man, you are relentless. If he wins, he's a baby. If he loses, he's a poor sport. Did you see the Bryan Brother's match today? They called the umpire stupid and wrong on TV. Are you ripping them? Are they babies? I know you're upset that Nadal lost a good chance to win Wimbledon today, but YOU are the one that is being a baby when not all goes your way (AKA Nadal loses). Seriously, you've said this in 3 or 4 different threads today. Let it go.
Woah, someone went Greensalad on this thread.
He called a game and set against because he thought they touched the net, but it was the ball.
Not to go off the subject, but the Bryans had every right to yell at the umpire. He called a game and set against because he thought they touched the net, but it was the ball. They tried to challenge, but that's not up for challenge.
I can understand Roger's frustration with the machine, but every one of those balls were so close. I was looking at that thinking that it wasn't where the ball landed when I saw the live video.
I think we can all say they both played a really good match.
I thought it was funny.
Bottom line - Hawk-Eye was rigged in Nadal's favor today. It was clear for everyone to see. Even the slo-mo replays showed some of Rafa's shots to be clearly out but Hawk-Eye called them in.
They need to build in some margin of error into the Hawk-Eye's algorithm. I think the Hawk-Eye system should only confirm what the human eye can actually see. A ball that lands only 1% on the line CANNOT be seen by the human eye so therefore Hawk-Eye should adjust for that and also call those shots out. If 100 different linespeople call a shot that lands in the exact same spot out 100 times each, then the ball is out. If it cannot be detected by the human eye, then Hawk-Eye should be programmed not to be able to detect it either. I think in those cases where less than 5% of the ball lands on the outside edge of the line, Hawk-Eye is not CORRECTING the linesperson's call, it is CHANGING the linesperson's call. There's a big difference. It is NOT a wrong call if it cannot be seen by any human eye under any circumstances. This is supposed to be real tennis played by real human beings, NOT some computerized digital tennis video game.
Bottom line - Hawk-Eye was rigged in Nadal's favor today. It was clear for everyone to see. Even the slo-mo replays showed some of Rafa's shots to be clearly out but Hawk-Eye called them in.
They need to build in some margin of error into the Hawk-Eye's algorithm. I think the Hawk-Eye system should only confirm what the human eye can actually see. A ball that lands only 1% on the line CANNOT be seen by the human eye so therefore Hawk-Eye should adjust for that and also call those shots out. If 100 different linespeople call a shot that lands in the exact same spot out 100 times each, then the ball is out. If it cannot be detected by the human eye, then Hawk-Eye should be programmed not to be able to detect it either. I think in those cases where less than 5% of the ball lands on the outside edge of the line, Hawk-Eye is not CORRECTING the linesperson's call, it is CHANGING the linesperson's call. There's a big difference. It is NOT a wrong call if it cannot be seen by any human eye under any circumstances. This is supposed to be real tennis played by real human beings, NOT some computerized digital tennis video game.
It just shows fed is a baby when all is not going his way.
Fed's eyes are messed up.. He dares challenge a system of precision and technologically advancement vesus his human eyes?
hawkeye isnt always right. it's only right 90% of the time, which is pretty bad i think...
The point of Hawk-Eye should be to CORRECT obvious errors by the linespeople, NOT to CHANGE a lineperson's call which he saw correctly up to the limit what's possible for the human eye to see.what would the point be of having hawkeye then breakpoint?And some people are better than others at seeing whether the ball landed in or out, so how would the machine be set up exactly?
What does any of this have to do with a game called tennis?And automobile accident prevention systems should allow accidents to happen because that is what humans would have done. Air bags should not inflate because humans should be allowed to bump their head into the steering - after all, it is they who should be in control, not a computer. And no radar or GPS on fighter jets either - can't see the enemy with your bare eyes at night? - just say your prayers and prepare to be shot down.
No use of DNA in criminal cases either. I can't see the double strands of DNA - so a lab should not either. They should declare innocence or guilt just like they would have done if there was no DNA evidence.
It's very obvious to me that Hawk-Eye is much less than 100% accurate. They say the accuracy is within 3mm. Well, the way the system is currently set-up, with the ball just barely touching the outside edge of the line being called "IN", 3mm could mean the difference between winning Wimbledon or losing it.
Nadal also had issues with Hawk-eye when he lost to Youzhny at Dubai earlier this year.
LINK
I agree with he said. Put Hawk-eye to the test at Roland Garros where the marks are clear.
But, it is quite instructive to see that some people don't want to accept that Hawk-Eye can screw up, and the remarks of MasterTS and tlm smack of blind bias more than anything else.
The point of Hawk-Eye should be to CORRECT obvious errors by the linespeople, NOT to CHANGE a lineperson's call which he saw correctly up to the limit what's possible for the human eye to see.
They can easily re-program Hawk-Eye so that if less than 5% of the ball is on the outside edge of the line, that it would show the graphic of the ball as being out and also call the ball "OUT". The accuracy of Hawk-Eye should be limited only to what is physically possible for the human eye to see.
If you were calling your own lines, like 99.999% of all tennis matches around the world are, would you be able to call a ball that lands only 1% on the outside edge of the line "IN"? Also, how about all the matches that are played on the outside courts at tournaments which do not have Hawk-Eye? The same exact shots that were called "OUT" are now all of a sudden called "IN" just because you're playing on a different court? Is that fair to everyone in the draw?
Tennis is supposed to a real sport played by human beings with human eyes and not some computer video game. If it's not possible for the human eye to see it, then Hawk-Eye should not be allowed to change it.