Who else agrees that if Hawk Eye Live was used on Arthur Ashe stadium this year, Djokovic might have won the whole thing!!

I stand by the notion (especially after that US Open match with Serena) that even if the technology is inaccurate, human line calls are just far more inaccurate to leave millions of dollars on the line for.

Regardless of whether it is "right" or "wrong", it is still better than a human because it is consistent.

Having watched my first lot of tennis with automatic line calling at the Australian Open, I have to say that I found it a relief as the game flows so much better without the constant challenges and their delays.

removing the line judges would've helped Djoko out a tonne

"Watch as the worlds greatest tennis player winds up for a forehand" Shows Tomic lmaoo

A computer is more accurate than a human. Yes computers make mistakes and have errors. But I would take a computer calculating where a ball lands going 100+ mph over a human any day of the week.

I dont play tennis. I dont even think Ive held a racket. Yet I keep watching these videos, and learning a lot. UKposts is a weird place.

It’s not about fundamental accuracy in a vacuum, but about being better then a human. So long as a computer is even slightly better then a human it will be chosen. In addition people are far less likely to get angry at a computer for a seemingly bad call, rather then a human.

7:26 world Greatest tennis player got me lmao

As a baseball fan that somehow stumbled into tennis UKposts, we absolutely need something like this already. Umpires are absolute garbage. Great video

Some of those calls in the Williams/Capriati match were like what I see in my local doubles comp. Every ball that lands on the line gets called out. Lots of revenge calls in return!

Dude am binge watching your entire channel, this is next level stuff!

"the world's greatest tennis player" about Tomic - that sarcasm took me by surprise :D kudos to You CULT TENNIS

I feel that Hawk-Eye would work best in tandem with full replay review for visual confirmation - adding replay like in the ATP Cup this year would also help check double bounces, lets, etc. which Hawk-Eye can't do

Hawkeye was originally developed to determine LBW outs in cricket. The main function of the technology was to predict the ball's trajectory.

I think the problem with Hawk Eye being able to see that a ball was in when no human could have ever seen it like in the one example you showed is that actually changes what is considered in and out. Tennis players have always known these sorts of shots to be out and played accordingly. It’s almost as if the net was suddenly a centimeter higher.

Players cannot argue with a computer. However, I would like to see the lines themselves use some kind of touch sensitive sensor, linked to the ball coating.

Damn, this is some quality youtube content!!

a) More accurate than humans by far. b) Unbiased. c) Always at full concentration. d) Noone for players to get mad at. The $60k price tag is prohibitive to human beings, for decent tournaments, it's affordable.

Hawk-eye shows shots that are "in" that would be called "out" 99% of the time in a rec game.

I really love these documentary style videos, just binge watched them all. You deserve way more subscribers than you have.

Wow, your videos are VERY well made -- thoroughly researched, good pace, enjoyable editing, and all the right topics that satisfy a curious itch. Keep it up, buddy! Love your work! Cheers from Korea

Depending on the angle and velocity of the ball, as well as the rotation, some balls will slightly "skid" or "skim" along the ground at the moment of impact, rather than bouncing directly up or down. This is more pronounced on grass surfaces seen in your example at 7:25. This skidmark covers a larger area on the ground than the ball bouncing directly on its axis

Now we know why Serena had a short fuse at future US Opens lol

This is my new favorite channel! Great videos!

Hawk Eye is just great. Very accurate, fast to implement and fun. Great addition to tennis

Best up and coming tennis channel by a mile. Keep doing what you’re doing man!

Bro, you’re videos are really good, you speak well and you’re able to make it not boring, nice editing and nice “hosting”! Keep up man, loving ur channel

keep the videos coming!

In the early '80s, Vic Braden was using hi-speed video to check the accuracy of lines calls. I seem to remember that the consensus was that human lines persons were pretty inaccurate on close line calls.

Just found your channel and I love it! Really nicely made videos, enjoyed em a lot. Keep it up!

I'm so glad that the line calling technology is being widely adopted. I've always felt it was absurd to have all of those people staring down the lines when we know that that the human eye is incapable of judging the ball accurately at those speeds. Prior to this technology it would've made as much or more sense to simply have the chair umpire make the calls. Hopefully linespeople will soon be a thing of the past.

You deserve way more subscribers! Great Video!

4:48 cool animation. excellent channel you'll grow for sure. I dont even like tennis yet enjoy the content!

Your channel is very underrated. You should deserve more subs👍

Very informative. Keep it up! God bless!

i'm not a tennis fan at all, but man this is some high quality channel

Some history from cricket's side - Hawk Eye's first use in cricket back in 2001 was also for entertainment's sake. It wasn't until 2008 i.e. after tennis implementation that it was used to make official umpiring calls. Compared to tennis Hawk Eye calls in cricket have to be more predictive. The reason is because ball never reaches or touches the surface the wicket - the surface to which Hawkeye needs to predict the path to. You can see the example at 1:54 - red is the actual movement and blue is the Hawkeye prediction line to the three yellow lines (wicket). In cricket this is called LBW or Leg Before Cricket calls. Since its introduction it has as being quite controversial. Earlier Hawk Eye rules stated that if the distance between wickets and the ball impact was more than 2.5 meters Hawk eye cannot be used. This was very controversial because people couldn't understand why Hawk eye failed to predict distances above 2.5 meters. Aside from that Hawk Eye used to often misinterpret the path when a cricket ball was spinning. It has led to some hilariously wrong calls. You can find videos on YT about that. While the technology has gotten better with time it is still controversial for the "umpire's call" seen in 1:54. The reason is that in cricket Hawk Eye needs to make an actual prediction. So, if a ball partially touching the yellow lines or wickets there is no 100% certainity of that reallly happening . So, if there is some degree of uncertainity the decision is more aligned to the on-field (court) umpire's call than Hawk eye's call. Some say Hawk Eye's prediction has gotten better and it is 100% reliable but rules in cricket still don't allow that. That said, Hawk Eye had a huge impact in the way cricket is played. Cricketers used to often thrust out their legs to stop the ball from hitting the wickets. While LBW was a rule to stop people from doing that it was still a misused tactice. With Hawk Eye people need to be extra careful about using their legs and this has had a huge impact in the way cricket is played.

This is high quality stuff my man, you should have more subscribers

Your videos are amazing. Informative and funny, thank you friend! Great work

Hopefully computers can save a couple dozen line judges from being threatened with execution by Serena.

Man it was hard focusing on the video after seeing the Serena vs Capriati

Amazing production value and super informative. Love the sarcasm and certain "shade" throwing thrown in lol.

I am not a tennis fan but the quality of the video is keeping me interested. Great job!

What I think is interesting about the introduction of technology into referee calls of various kinds is that it will require getting specific with rules, finally. So many professional sports, with millions and millions of dollars at stake, have vague rules that are up to the subjective judgment of refs. That's the way it has had to be to cope with the limitations of humans, but no more. We can get be specific down to the millisecond over what counts as a traveling call, then let the computers and cameras call them. We can be specific down to the precise positions of hands and distance to the ball about what counts as pass interference, and let computers and cameras call it.

Even if it calls your ball out when it was in, it will also call it in when it was out so chances are throughout a player's career they will break even.

This video is so good honestly.

This man deserves WAY more subs.Great work bro

Worked along side Hawkeye many times. There is a LOT of work that goes into it and it's a huge team. Every single camera is configured and represented in a 3d simulation. Their smallest setup requires more people than our own crew. I highly respect their work and I understand technology can be flawed, but they are working hard to do deliver accuracy. I genuinely have nothing but respect for them and glad to work alongside them. Hoping they can bounce back after the lost of so many tournaments.

If only Chris Evert had this in 1988 during her Wimbledon semi-final with Navratilova!

Love the channel, keep it up

Your content and voice are like the Core-A Gaming of tennis. I don't even watch tennis, yet I subscribed to your channel, I don't play fighting games, but I subscribed to Core-A.

I never see UKposts videos on tennis other than highlights compilations of the same old points. This is a welcome change for all tennis fans and I hope you keep making awesome videos like this!

The reason why at 7:30 the ball looked as if it bounced out, is because it DID bounce while it was out. The ruling being the way it was, was based on it being a grass court. The ball grazed some white painted grass before it bounced(out of bounds). Based on that ruling, there can be slightly wider boundary margins on grass courts, especially with low-angled high-velocity shots, be it as few and far between as shots like that may happen.

same for VAR and goal line systems in football ;) people were opposed strongly but there is no turning back now :)

lovely channel! really fantastic videos

I did the math and on a 150mph serve Hawk eye’s camera take a picture of a frame every 8 inches the ball moves. Which is pretty large especially relative to the ball’s diameter. I think having the camera’ be better will dramatically reduce the likelihood of a wrong call

I like the system where the line judges male the calls, with Hawkeye being the challenge

I love how I’ve never played tennis in my life but still binge watch this channel

I’m reminded of the Agassi-McEnroe match in the Wimbledon semis in 1992, in which after the whistle for out-of-bounds kept going off at the wrong time on McEnroe’s serve, Agassi came up to the ref and said, “Turn it off. Just turn it off. This things been screwing up for the whole tournament.”

Wow I have never heard of that serena match they should literally get these line judges out of there

Hawk Eye operates with 10-12 "slow" cameras with 150 frames per second per camera (the video mentions 340 fps -perhaps Hawk Eye has improved). In contrast, Foxtenn ("Real Bounce" system) works with 40 high speed cameras with 2500 (!!) frames per second per camera (already used in quite many ATP tournaments). Hawk Eye interpolates/calculates/estimates the ball trajectory within the frames and shows a computer generated image on the basis of the calculations. Therefore it is sensitive to shocks like wind and trembles, etc. Its expected systematic error is 2,6 mm. Foxtenn shows the real video image of the ball's path and due to its extra fine time resolution, its systematic error is basically zero. Think for a moment to understand why the difference in resolution is so important: a ball flying at 126 km/h travels 35 cm in 0.01 second (!) or 23 cm between Hawk Eye frames. For 90 km/h it is 25 cm or 17 cm. So in the case of Hawk Eye, some wind gust after the last frame taken before landing can easily divert the ball with a few mm from the expected path.

Amazing video! Keep going!

Line call arguments are a fun aspect of the sport. Keep line judges and hawkeye. Together they make the sport more dramatic

Capriati in that 2004 match against Williams was incredibly dishonest; how can you not see those balls were in and steal your opponent's points. But the look on her face during the on-court interview when faced with questions about this was very telling. She knew Serena was being cheated, but was cool with it. I suppose that's how she'd have liked it for herself.

That's really interesting, to be honest I thought it would be more accurate. Before Hawkeye I used to think that one day the actual lines would be "smart" with the ability to sense contact with the ball/ players feet. Thanks for posting

very interesting! keep going!

I feel that when we get to the point where we start asking questions like "what actually counts as the ball touching the ground", we may as well just flip a coin. It's like trying to measure sprints to the millisecond, where it's just about how we define crossing the line.

When Hawkeye zooms in twice, u know it's a big one

this pandemic taught me one thing, to learn programming as soon as you can.

Great video. Love the Tomic jab.

When ever I’m watching a tennis match and there’s a challenge I always try to guess if the balls in or out and I’m right about 30 percent of the time lol 😅.

The truly weird part is incorporating the deformation of the ball into the call and ignoring that a spherical object can only make initial contact with the ground at a single point, meaning if only the deformation of the ball touches the line, the ball was in contact with the ground outside the line before that and the call should be Out.

Let's get you more subs. Awesome video! Thanks for the upload.

I genuinely don’t like and have never liked tennis or watching it but I still watch your videos and it baffles me

Great video and explanation. A minor grammatical suggestion. Your two text "it's" should read "its" without the "' ' ."

Wow, as a South African im shocked an American heard about cricket!

In cricket, even now in 2020 after 19 years of advancement, the use of Hawk Eye has limitations, and isn't as accurate due to the more inconsistent nature of a cricket pitch, the unique spin and swing nature of each ball as it is worn out through a match, and the effect of the seam of the ball in a bounce. If I recall, something like more than half the ball has to be impacting the stumps in a hawk eye replay for it to be considered confidently hitting. This is of course a bit different from tennis where the ball does eventually bounce after the estimation, whereas in cricket it remains an estimation and is used to predict the path of a ball if there had been no other action or impedance against it. Great vid! loved it.

It improves the game and speeds it up. When humans were put back on court for 2020 US Open, it was excruciating.

what about touch sensitive lines, I guess the challenge then would be to make the ball behave the same on the lines

As soon as the naked eye could see on TV the inaccuracies of the calls of the naked eye on court between Serena and Jennifer, it's a no brainer to get a system that would contest the call on court, which is the least accurate.

I've binged your videos, fell in love and now I have withdrawal symptoms because I'm not getting any new content. jk man, I know these take time, but they're awesome!

Hawk eye is a gift to all other sports from the great sport of Cricket.

First off, well produced video. Second: 8:43 is NOT a foot fault. Also, Serena might not have actually foot faulted. Too close to tell, but saying she would "get away" with it, is really snide of you.

The future for tennis is probably a combination of Hawkeye and the Foxtenn one you mentioned in the last minute. Foxtenn coupled with Hawkeye will give real data to improve Hawkeye's algorithm. On the other hand if players feel like Hawkeye f***ed up they can use the Foxtenn footage as a challenge.

Excellent presentation

Part of the reason that Hawkeye isn't used on Clay is that the spot of the ball is visible. You'll notice that the balls always produce a small amount of clay spray every time that they hit. Watch the close ups. That clay dust can mimic the ball with Hawkeye. The ball could be a fraction of an inch out but still register as in. If they can ever come up with Hawkeye that recognizes the ball and not the clay dust then they'll use it, but I just don't see that happening.. More importantly, and I've played on clay so have seen it. That's why they're not used on clay.

The issue with replacing line umpires at top tournaments is that you remove a lot of the incentive for people to get into umpiring in the first place. The unintended consequence of that might be a shortage of umpires at lower levels of tennis.

Hi there, just wondering what program is used to edit your videos? Thanks!

7:27.. Oh, the disrespect😂😂😂 Bernard Tomic😂 Love it

The issue with Hawkeye is: If it breaks during a match (which is certain to happen with thousands of matches each year), then how do any line calls get made? You would have to have some line judges on reserve in case that happens.

Yet another great video! I never thought about the technology behind Hawkeye but it really is more complicated and accurate than I thought. Future video topic suggestion: a break down of the rule that got Djokovic DQ'd at the US open and other times in tennis history it has happened/had exceptions 😀

Love these videos

I would prefer an actual camera system that shows where the ball actually hit.

LMAO ARIGHT 5:45

Damn, this video is good. The narration is on point too.

The key here is even if the computer is inaccurate, it is consistent. If its precision is high, that becomes the new standard and any pro athlete can and should adapt. One could argue that a line judge is less consistent due to inherent biases. Thus the precise, if not perfectly accurate, behavior of the computer system is superior to the imprecise (and still not perfectly accurate) human judge.

7:25 you just made yourselfe some enemies mate

HAWKEYE should be used on clay, just Google the amount of controversy from players that's disagree whether the ball clipped the line.