Agreed--if you are a big hitter and fast server your game is more impacted than a pusher type. I also think that big hitters are more likely to be basket cases and more prone to bad calls impacting their psyche.
Will line calling technology ameliorate hooking in USTA matches?
- Thread starter Aurellian
- Start date
Agreed--if you are a big hitter and fast server your game is more impacted than a pusher type. I also think that big hitters are more likely to be basket cases and more prone to bad calls impacting their psyche.
Yeah I've never been a rager but have a history of basket-case-ism that I've only been getting past in the past 2-3 years.
But even a mentally solid big hitter it gets to you because you have to shore in your shots and serves which then pushes you into a less aggressive game.
I have a pretty strict 'if I'm not having fun no one gets to have fun' policy nowadays though.
Hook me like that the next game is all underhand serves and lobs (which I did in the aforementioned match, luckily my partner was down for my petty).
You’re not focusing on anything, you’re just victim blaming. It’s such a weird stance.
The loss of a point is the issue. You can’t just ignore that. Every stolen point requires two additional points to make up for it. That’s a significant penalty in tennis.
Last edited:
Yes, it makes you change your game and play down a level.
What? I quoted another poster unless you two are the same person.
My bad.
To be clear, personally I would have no problem using a line calling device brought by an opponent.
I was describing why you cannot mandate that if one person brings it, they have the right to use it without needing the opponent to agree.
For example one might argue:
If an opponent is intentionally hooking on line calls, I can call him out on it, or at least know that he is a scumbag.
If the machine is making calls unfavorable to me (perhaps opponent set it up such that the court is 'larger' on one side vs the other, and flips it around on change of ends), then this is much more insidious.
Your proposition is nuts: someone is going to program hawkyeye to cheat for them...and it's going to do it at the best time for the master cheater....really...are you serious?
Im pro machines being match allowed. But you're being disingenuous here.
All these systems are going to (probably) be calibrated to the lines of the court since most courts have some slants, imperfect net posts, thicker or thinner lines, etc.
If only one person knows how to calibrate the system and can figure out how to spoof it so the lines are slightly off then they can gain the same advantages as they would by hooking close shots (assuming they hit conservatively by default)
Your lucid argument has convinced me, looking forward to hearing about your undoubtedly similarly successful interaction with USTA.
How about learning some vodoo and casting a spell on your opponent to make any shots within four inches on the line go out! Back to reality, people do not want to cheat, people accept that there will be bad calls occasionally, what we seek to mitigate are the humans hooking each other by inadvertently giving themselves the benefit of the doubt in crucial moments.
Also if you were to "spoof the lines" by nefarious programming the handicap would be universally applied as players switch sides during a match!
How many people are that rotten and that technically capable?
Last edited:
Thanks, all you can use is logic. Some people don't have much of it, but I work with Engineers translating customer requirements to them so it's a skill that I have acquired. It's more about communicating the problem, identifying the solution, and not getting distracted by every little dependency unless its critical path.
I do agree that getting the USTA to buy in will be an important milestone!
If players self calibrate it could be trivial depending how they process works.
The likelihood they would is probably low but I'm sure it would happen if only one guy knows how it works.
The technical capability would/could be low for a calibration spoof – there's no programming involved.
How doable it is just depends on what the system will have the user verify at setup.
It would affect both sides or at least both players when they switch, yes. That can be true of normal hooking too which is why most people who hook a lot and intentionally hit with big margin
penpal
Semi-Pro
My interest in the line-calling machines doesn't really have much to do with cheating. Like many have stated, I agree that most players don't intentionally make bad line calls, and the bad calls that are inevitably made don't typically impact the outcome of a match.
Still, I think line-calling machines can fundamentally improve the sport if for no other reason than it removes the psychological fatigue that comes with being required to make line calls and allows for better concentration/focus on the actual playing of the ball and less hyper attention to where the ball hits the ground with respect to a line. If I'm playing every ball unless/until I hear an audible signal of some sort, that frees me up mentally to focus completely on my planned shot. No more thought processes like, "He's coming in, I should go shallow cross. It's going to drop close, might be going out. Keep feet moving just in case. That was close, I think it might have been a little wide. I should just play it, too close to say for sure. Shallow cross." - all thoughts passing through my head in about a second of actual time.
With a line-calling machine those thoughts are reduced to, "He's coming in, I should go shallow cross. Shallow cross."
Not to mention, no more worrying about how this player or that will react to your calls, and how much confrontation will be required as a result.
Still, I think line-calling machines can fundamentally improve the sport if for no other reason than it removes the psychological fatigue that comes with being required to make line calls and allows for better concentration/focus on the actual playing of the ball and less hyper attention to where the ball hits the ground with respect to a line. If I'm playing every ball unless/until I hear an audible signal of some sort, that frees me up mentally to focus completely on my planned shot. No more thought processes like, "He's coming in, I should go shallow cross. It's going to drop close, might be going out. Keep feet moving just in case. That was close, I think it might have been a little wide. I should just play it, too close to say for sure. Shallow cross." - all thoughts passing through my head in about a second of actual time.
With a line-calling machine those thoughts are reduced to, "He's coming in, I should go shallow cross. Shallow cross."
Not to mention, no more worrying about how this player or that will react to your calls, and how much confrontation will be required as a result.
I am sorry but your posts are bordering on the absurd. Drop it. I don't doubt that all matter of nefariousness is technically possible. Capability, intent, and resources...sure....but, again, 99% of people are not seeking to spoof a line call machine for a USTA match.
The value add is unbiased line calling that allows all players to play freerer.
Oh yeah absolutely I'm all for the legalization and usage of them.
But my concerns vs the USTAs are different lol.
I'll take steps to know how it works if for no other reason I'm in a sensing tangential industry and a nerd so the tech is cool. This also protects me from the n=small number of people who would bother cheating in this manner.
USTA on the other hand has to deal with what happens when some team tries to take advantage of the systems to try and make it to nationals. If privately owned units are the standard this gets thornier.
Ideally whomever makes whatever units become popular has some calibration routine that is intuitive, quick, and can be observed by the players during setup
Ok, we are aligned. I agree: need a mutually acceptable calibration protocol.
Curtennis
Hall of Fame
That’s me. Way too much. Ugh I need to get tough.
