Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 37 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Having watched many FO matches these past 2 weeks, there were quite a number of contradictions between what the chair umpires "confirmed" as being in/out versus the opposite call by the Hawkeye system. I'd also say most of the Tennis Ch/NBC announcers/former players were in favor of adopting Hawkeye. Several years back I recall there being some technical shortfalls/inaccuracies with using Hawkeye on clay, but I didn't hear that issue come up during this year's FO.
I believe it's now time for using Hawkeye officially at the 2021 FO; same as being done at the other majors with the players having the option to challenge a call and wait for Hawkeye's official confirmation. What say you?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,630 Posts
Not Hawk Eye. They should introduce Foxtenn Real Bounce because it's actually accurate on clay.
FoxTenn people have already hinted that it will happen: the French will adopt Foxtenn — possibly as early as next year, otherwise in 2022.

But nothing has been finalized yet (translation: they're negotiating money)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,542 Posts
There is a video on youtube called ---- Changing Lines on a Clay Tennis Court --- 53min
( a few people may want to fast forward)
The lines are 4 foot plastic sections with internal connectors and pounded into place with a hammer along a string guide line. You can see the sections move when they are pounded in place.
The construction of the lines is not super accurate, so there would be differences between a computer generated line and the real line. Apparently Foxtenn just uses cameras to call the lines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,489 Posts
Hawkeye costs approximately $60,000 US per court. If you're going to introduce it, you can't just put it on the three showpieces, so that's well over a million dollars to equip all the courts. If Foxtenn is as accurate (I've never seen it, so have no idea) but cheaper, then go for it. Whatever the choice, SOMETHING less subject to interpretation needs to be introduced.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,453 Posts
Hawkeye costs approximately $60,000 US per court. If you're going to introduce it, you can't just put it on the three showpieces, so that's well over a million dollars to equip all the courts. If Foxtenn is as accurate (I've never seen it, so have no idea) but cheaper, then go for it. Whatever the choice, SOMETHING less subject to interpretation needs to be introduced.
If the other slams can manage the cost then there's no reason RG shouldn't be able to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Since I started this thread, I should clarify that my interest is in using the best Hawkeye-ish technology at the next French Open. Thanks for all replies so far.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
Definitely! If I were a player, I'd refuse to play on clay because it's the most likely surface where umpiring/line judge mistakes could cause you to lose a match you would have won. Similarly, as we have seen over the last two weeks, there should never be a surface where line calls can be manipulated by players with poor sportsmanship. The Siegemunds and Kenins of this world should not be given the avenue to cheat (any more than they already would)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32,071 Posts
No. It's idiotic to use a machine to judge when the mark is right there. Okay umpires can occasionally mess up or not know, but such is life. They should find a way to review things like Siegemund's double bounce though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
483 Posts
Technology is going into dead-end. It was highjacked by hawkeye in the past and the optical devices killed research in other possibilities.
The cheaper and more effective way would be to develop shock-sensor technology to be placed underneath line areas. Would give submillimeter accuracy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
Technology is going into dead-end. It was highjacked by hawkeye in the past and the optical devices killed research in other possibilities.
The cheaper and more effective way would be to develop shock-sensor technology to be placed underneath line areas. Would give submillimeter accuracy.
Regardless of whether there are better options, the French currently refuse to use ANYTHING!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
I dont think this is necessary. Usually the umpire manages well to identify if the ball was in or out. I always enjoy when the umpire has to come down and check the mark, it's kinda old school. and on clay, this is still possible. Most of the times the players agree with the umpires decisions anyways or correct the calls themselves if the line judges were wrong. So I dont think hawkeye is clearly needed for the FO.
 
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
Top