TLDR: multiple cameras do optical tracking on the ball for " millimeter precision ". The system is deployed because humans are fallible.
Transformed in the title is a real stretch.
Better title: ball tracking EyeHawk system replacing referees in tennis competitions.
Alternative title: “after 20 years Hawk eye is finally used at US open.”
I dunno. The match that prompted the change was pretty outrageous. Players shouldn't be competing against umpires as well as their opponent.
What match was it?
Exactly. The rule is "if the ball touches the line, it's out" (or is outside the line, whatever) why does it matter if a human judges it or a camera?
If it touches the line, it is in.
It matters because humans are fallible. Machines are much more reliable in situations where there is an unambiguous right answer. That match was awful to watch and it was made worse because the TV audience could see how badly the umpire was behaving.
I think my point came across wrong. I was angling for the "why shouldn't we use cameras since they're less fallible?", I don't understand when people say "we need human judges because that's more pure!" type responses.
Sony bought it from a UK developer called Paul Hawkins
You think he calls his house the "Hawk-Nest"?
i was wondering what Tony Hawk has to do with tennis. had to read the comments to figure it out.
So true. The game is completely unrecognisable now, basically a different sport. There was tennis before Hawk-Eye, and tennis after Hawk-Eye. Soon, the old tennis will be just a distant memory for those of us who were around when the switch happened, telling stories to our children, remembering the days before the Hawk-Eye system and chuckling to ourselves when they ask us what a line judge was. Tennis hasn't just been transformed, no, it has evolved, it's previous form no more recognisable or relevant to the current game than the first arthropods are to us.
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
