ATTN: Tennis nerds: If, as I understand it, the line calls are based on multiple cameras tracking the ball location, speed, angle, and spin in flight to calculate/predict whether it will land in or out (not by where the cameras show it landing). How would the replay simulation show anything but what was predicted by the computer? I assume replays/simulations are shown simply for "entertainment"? Has there ever been a hawkeye replay that showed anything other than the call that was made. It just seems weird that we still look at these like they are video replays. Thoughts? Comments?
A video of the actual ball or a computer generated image? They show the computer generated replays all the time and they (of course) always support the computer generated call. @@dextermorgan9460
multi io it’s still a big margin though Tennis can’t have much room for error, the smallest amount of a ball that is on the line could be the difference between the ball being called in or out
it is not "better", it is just newer and has some interesting features. XP is running more stable and is overall the much better choice of OS for any computer-based business.
another puff piece for RUclips. Doesn't the BALL change shape when it hits the ground. They show the full 'outer circle of the ball' in play back....wouldn't the area of the ball actually touching the surface be a circle LESS than the Diameter of the ball? From above the impact circle would be much less than the diameter? C'mon experts!
No, not at all. When the ball hits the ground with the forces involved in tennis, the ball will deform on impact and usually be at least equal to the static diameter. Often the ball will deform to actually leave a contact patch LARGER than its original diameter due to the impact force. This accounts for the short side in the replay being around equal to the balls initial diameter. (There are some good slow motion tennis ball videos on RUclips which show this clearly.) Also, you must be aware that the ball skids/spins off the surface, which is what creates the longer length in the Hawkeye replay.
The computer itself have no way to simulate a shot. it just records what is and has happend. unless you change the footage, or move the camera out of place, it can not be manipulated.
Einars Dubrovskis you can delete, corrupt, or replace the data, but it is simply a 3 dimensional recording of information. It cannot be manipulated, or at least meaningfully changed, the same way audio data cannot just be manipulated through code.
Einars Dubrovskis Voice changer is a software or hardware, not a hack through code. Let me ask you this, genius, how could a hacker possibly remotely connect to the Hawkeye, especially when it has no wireless connections? You can’t hack - real hacking, not this wonder do all you think of - requires some sort of direct connection. Hawkeye has no WiFi or Bluetooth. What magic connection could a hacker connect to?
Einars Dubrovskis WiFi is a process in which information is sent over a short distance through radio waves - they are very connected concepts because of this. Not all digital things give off radio waves - unless you believe your 5$ calculators has a connection to the internet somehow - a digital device needs a transmitter to send or receive information through radio waves of any kind. Even assuming a hacker could emulate a shot to the level of detail that the Hawkeye process, *they would have no way to implement that information to the Hawkeye system without a wired connection.* It’s very obvious you have no actual knowledge on how computers work, considering you believe everything digital connects somehow through radio waves. Stop calling me an idiot and pull up any piece of evidence that proves your claim or disproves mine.
Windows XP :D
LOVE the new full Hawkeye for 2022 :-)
Wasn't it called Cyclops?
ATTN: Tennis nerds: If, as I understand it, the line calls are based on multiple cameras tracking the ball location, speed, angle, and spin in flight to calculate/predict whether it will land in or out (not by where the cameras show it landing). How would the replay simulation show anything but what was predicted by the computer? I assume replays/simulations are shown simply for "entertainment"? Has there ever been a hawkeye replay that showed anything other than the call that was made. It just seems weird that we still look at these like they are video replays. Thoughts? Comments?
I saw a video of the ball bounce replay on japanese atp match. I forgot which one.
A video of the actual ball or a computer generated image? They show the computer generated replays all the time and they (of course) always support the computer generated call. @@dextermorgan9460
Anyone know what kind of cameras they use in this?
Which booth?
they should use heat sensors like they do in cricket
Exactly.
Have u checked their website?
Do they not update the system? Seems outdated
So good!
Wow is this really Stef? I'm a big fan
@joness1056 How is having a correct and fair game "ruining it"? That is literally the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
oh man 0:35...
If it was ball shaped and not Ellipse shape it would be in or out
this is not inside hawkeye, no real technical information is given.
half a centimeter margin of error? That's quite a liberal margin of error when we're talking about a tennis ball and a 2 inch line.
It's less than what the human eye can make out, so there...
multi io it’s still a big margin though
Tennis can’t have much room for error, the smallest amount of a ball that is on the line could be the difference between the ball being called in or out
2 mm
1:38 Gir's soooooo beautifull ... What's her name ?
motanelustelistu - Camilla Bowles
HE ; just a new way to help fix outcomes.
it is not "better", it is just newer and has some interesting features.
XP is running more stable and is overall the much better choice of OS for any computer-based business.
Poggers
@Stegma127 facepalm. :(
@Stegma127 no way, i like xp more, it is alot more stable
@Einars Dubrovskis this was gefore 9 years you fool.
Fucking good ones ;)
i do care
another puff piece for RUclips. Doesn't the BALL change shape when it hits the ground. They show the full 'outer circle of the ball' in play back....wouldn't the area of the ball actually touching the surface be a circle LESS than the Diameter of the ball? From above the impact circle would be much less than the diameter? C'mon experts!
No, not at all. When the ball hits the ground with the forces involved in tennis, the ball will deform on impact and usually be at least equal to the static diameter. Often the ball will deform to actually leave a contact patch LARGER than its original diameter due to the impact force. This accounts for the short side in the replay being around equal to the balls initial diameter.
(There are some good slow motion tennis ball videos on RUclips which show this clearly.)
Also, you must be aware that the ball skids/spins off the surface, which is what creates the longer length in the Hawkeye replay.
+Darryl Lanyon also consider that the ball is moving and may roll across the ground even for a split second before bouncing off
Look at the actual marks on a hard court, or better yet a clay court. The only way to get a circle is with a lob.
Can Hawkeye be manipulated?
The computer itself have no way to simulate a shot. it just records what is and has happend. unless you change the footage, or move the camera out of place, it can not be manipulated.
Einars Dubrovskis you can delete, corrupt, or replace the data, but it is simply a 3 dimensional recording of information. It cannot be manipulated, or at least meaningfully changed, the same way audio data cannot just be manipulated through code.
Einars Dubrovskis Voice changer is a software or hardware, not a hack through code. Let me ask you this, genius, how could a hacker possibly remotely connect to the Hawkeye, especially when it has no wireless connections? You can’t hack - real hacking, not this wonder do all you think of - requires some sort of direct connection. Hawkeye has no WiFi or Bluetooth. What magic connection could a hacker connect to?
Einars Dubrovskis believe it or not, just because it’s 2020 doesn’t mean every fucking digital thing is connected to the internet.
Einars Dubrovskis WiFi is a process in which information is sent over a short distance through radio waves - they are very connected concepts because of this. Not all digital things give off radio waves - unless you believe your 5$ calculators has a connection to the internet somehow - a digital device needs a transmitter to send or receive information through radio waves of any kind. Even assuming a hacker could emulate a shot to the level of detail that the Hawkeye process, *they would have no way to implement that information to the Hawkeye system without a wired connection.*
It’s very obvious you have no actual knowledge on how computers work, considering you believe everything digital connects somehow through radio waves. Stop calling me an idiot and pull up any piece of evidence that proves your claim or disproves mine.
@cssftw100 learn how to play tennis really well
@brendan215 im calling it gay cause ive used it and it is horrible, waist of my money. xp i more stable in every way
lolno. Go buy a Mac.
@faultyservice take all of the human out of the game and completely ruin it
eliminating faulty judgement and giving players less to worry about is a bad thing?