Hawk-Eye Live needs to be on all courts for all WTA and ATP events going forward

srwaldr

New User
Hawk-Eye Live needs to be on all courts for all WTA and ATP events going forward.

Someone please provide the cons to hawk eye live. All I see are "pros" everywhere.

Faster and more accurate line calls.
No more "review time outs" because someone gets tired.
Cleaner court.
A step into the 21st century.

Maybe a con is the cost, what does it cost to put this on all courts, or at least the show courts of all masters and majors?

Discuss!
 

yokied

Professional
Kecmanovic Vs Davidovic Fokina at the Milan Challenger had one missed baseline call that was at least six inches out. The only noteworthy thing about it was that it was a blazing FH return from Fokina right at the feet of Kec - probably north of 160kph.

Kecmanovic insisted it be reviewed and the video showed it out, ump over-ruled it, WDFokina actually WTFed around for a bit before accepting it. Probably took at least 5 minutes out of the match.

I would say it needs more time in testing and more work needs to go into the backup processes so situations like that don't get so dramatic.
 

oldmanfan

Hall of Fame
Kecmanovic Vs Davidovic Fokina at the Milan Challenger had one missed baseline call that was at least six inches out. The only noteworthy thing about it was that it was a blazing FH return from Fokina right at the feet of Kec - probably north of 160kph.

Kecmanovic insisted it be reviewed and the video showed it out, ump over-ruled it, WDFokina actually WTFed around for a bit before accepting it. Probably took at least 5 minutes out of the match.

I would say it needs more time in testing and more work needs to go into the backup processes so situations like that don't get so dramatic.
Fair points.

I think the reason Hawkeye Live missed that call was bc it lost line of sight from Kec's feet and where the ball landed next to it. The video review is a good additional solution when needed, and it rarely is needed in the last 3 years iirc. The only real con I see from using Hawkeye Live is that it'll be less jobs for line umpires.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Kecmanovic Vs Davidovic Fokina at the Milan Challenger had one missed baseline call that was at least six inches out. The only noteworthy thing about it was that it was a blazing FH return from Fokina right at the feet of Kec - probably north of 160kph.

Kecmanovic insisted it be reviewed and the video showed it out, ump over-ruled it, WDFokina actually WTFed around for a bit before accepting it. Probably took at least 5 minutes out of the match.

I would say it needs more time in testing and more work needs to go into the backup processes so situations like that don't get so dramatic.
Yeah I saw that too.
The ball was clearly out and Hawkeye didn’t catch it.
it’s incredible it’s not accurate technology for this in 2019z
 

speedysteve

Legend
It's generally great.
Usually no messing.
They are using Next Gen as proving ground.. but for 3 tournaments over years!!

The line judge system is rubbish, interrupts the flow and ball calls often have an impact where they shouldn't.

The automated system makes the main tour look like amateur hour! Only it's year in year out, again again again..

Get on with it ATP / ITF!
 

shadow01

New User
There seemed to also be some confusion with hawk eye live in the recent demon/rude match in the next gen final. They had to replay the first point of the match.
 

chic

Rookie
Have there been any studies done on how (if at all) having fewer humans on the court effects viewership? A quick search didn't find any, and the umpire would still be there to add some personality (it's not like lines people get much camera time anyway).

I think people –when talking about having more technology– undervalue how much having a greater human element is part of our subconscious enjoyment. Not sure I'm right, but I'm curious if anyone has really tried to tease this out.
 
Yeah I saw that too.
The ball was clearly out and Hawkeye didn’t catch it.
it’s incredible it’s not accurate technology for this in 2019z
Just for this??
Roflmao we still don't have a pin-point accurate medicine for common cold in 2019.
Premature usage of any technology must be prevented.
Line Judges are faster than hawk-eye and accurate most of the time.
Let's use hawk eye on clay, the bubble of so called accurate technology will burst in a matter of 2-3 games only...
 
Have there been any studies done on how (if at all) having fewer humans on the court effects viewership? A quick search didn't find any, and the umpire would still be there to add some personality (it's not like lines people get much camera time anyway).

I think people –when talking about having more technology– undervalue how much having a greater human element is part of our subconscious enjoyment. Not sure I'm right, but I'm curious if anyone has really tried to tease this out.
You're right to a high extent.
Human element is needed.
I'd ask to these technology guys, why not make robots named Sampras, Agassi, Becker, Edberg, Federer, Nadal, Djokovic (inb4 someone says he is), Murray etc. And let them play tennis?? They'll produce even better quality matches than real human players...
Huh...:cautious::cautious:
 

chic

Rookie
wont thousands of line persons lose their jobs?
There's still umpires, most of the other positions are part time paid positions afaik. So not losing jobs so much as side hustles. And all that money is money that could potentially be paid out or reinvested to the top 250 potentially (not that I expect the atp to be reasonable like that).
 

Robert F

Semi-Pro
Is there any data comparing hawk-eye to line judges?

If line judges are significantly more accurate, that would mine only reason for keeping them.

People complain that Hawkeye has made mistakes, fine, but how much more than people? And is there any trend that would favor a certain type of player? Say hawkeye was good with balls travelling under 90mph. But couldn't read faster balls well--if it overestimated them as in it would favor servers.

But if it doesn't favor one situation over another, you could think of the court as a virtual court that the ball has to be in within the specs of hawkeye which are almost the lines on the court.

Heck, I wonder how consistent/accurate the dimensions of courts lines are from court to court. Are they more precise than the 3.6mm margion of error of Hawkeye? Most would agree if it was within a few millmeters, even a centimeter or 2, it is good enough--and since both players play on it--it could even out. Couldn't you say the same for Hawkeye?

A possible practical concern becomes cost, what is the cost per court to run Hawkeye full time vs. judges?
 

megamind

Hall of Fame
Not just hawkeye, we need to add technology to tennis nets, that automatically detects when they've been hit (e.g. calling a LET on serve). Was very disappointed to see a LET not called in the Fedr Thiem match

^ this would be much simpler and more accurate than even hawkeye
 

chic

Rookie
Not just hawkeye, we need to add technology to tennis nets, that automatically detects when they've been hit (e.g. calling a LET on serve). Was very disappointed to see a LET not called in the Fedr Thiem match

^ this would be much simpler and more accurate than even hawkeye
This definitely already exists at most if not all big atp events
 

blablavla

Professional
interesting, wonder why they dont have it at the WTF
are you sure they don't have it?

before this technology, there was a person, with the finger / hand on the net, to announce let.
nowadays, most if not all tournaments from 250 -> onwards have the tech in place.
 

Robert F

Semi-Pro
They have it. Sometimes it doesn't pick it up and if the umpire isn't certain he won't overrule it.

This would be one of the problems of perceived problems of fully automated line calling. If it is really close, there would be no challenge and you just have to accept the outcome.
 

speedysteve

Legend
Just for this??
Roflmao we still don't have a pin-point accurate medicine for common cold in 2019.
Premature usage of any technology must be prevented.
Line Judges are faster than hawk-eye and accurate most of the time.
Let's use hawk eye on clay, the bubble of so called accurate technology will burst in a matter of 2-3 games only...
They regularly show Hawkeye calls Vs line / umpire calls on clay court matches.
Just not officially used.
Many of the ex-pro commentators call for it to be used.
Umpire gets the wrong mark happens too. Remember Nadal Vs Goffin final - joke.

Tis the future.
 
They regularly show Hawkeye calls Vs line / umpire calls on clay court matches.
Just not officially used.
Many of the ex-pro commentators call for it to be used.
Umpire gets the wrong mark happens too. Remember Nadal Vs Goffin final - joke.

Tis the future.
Hawkeye will be exposed on clay, because players can actually "see" marks..
 

40L0VE

Rookie
Hawkeye will be exposed on clay, because players can actually "see" marks..
There's another system which I think originated from Germany. It actually sees the thermal footprint, mommentarily present, when the ball bounces off the court. This system would expose the inaccuracies of Hawk-Eye which is a computationally (software) computed impact point. Unless by chance the ball bounce happens exactly on a sampling frame the majority of balls are computed locations.

Fortunately for Hawk-Eye this thermal imaging system AIUI must be fixed overhead so is nonviable for outdoor events. Could be more expensive as well.
 

speedysteve

Legend
Time will fix everything

I'd compromise for now and say fine, keep clay as is for now, if you must.
But the tech will improve, costs will come down. It's coming.
The 3 years of Next Gen 3 use have proved it much fairer to both players and a faster more compelling watch, I think.
 
Top