this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
59 points (92.8% liked)

Technology

59197 readers
3207 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

How Sony's Hawk-Eye electronic line-calling system transformed the U.S. Open::CNBC got a behind-the-scenes look at Sony's Hawk-Eye line-calling system to understand how the tech works in tennis and other major sports.

top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jet@hackertalks.com 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

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.

[–] coffeebiscuit@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Alternative title: “after 20 years Hawk eye is finally used at US open.”

[–] JoBo@feddit.uk 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I dunno. The match that prompted the change was pretty outrageous. Players shouldn't be competing against umpires as well as their opponent.

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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?

[–] JoBo@feddit.uk 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

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.

[–] bernieecclestoned@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sony bought it from a UK developer called Paul Hawkins

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawk-Eye

[–] Jessvj93@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

You think he calls his house the "Hawk-Nest"?

[–] vihil@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

i was wondering what Tony Hawk has to do with tennis. had to read the comments to figure it out.

[–] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 year ago

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.