craigandy
Regular Member
It doesn't though a guy does and just clicks the spot.
Re instant replay - It's not so much the human error part but the fact that why spend money on a system when you will inevitably have to show the crowd a shot that still everybody will not agree on because it is impossible to see what the right answer is(on the cusp). Leaving people as disappointed as they are with a human line judge. With the animation it maybe lying but it is clear in it's answer leaving everyone satisfied... well untill folk start putting screenshots up on forums.
craigandy
Regular Member
Could do it for lot cheaper if they were buying. 120fps cameras and a few cables go for a lot less than the price of an Iphone. Just found it funny because even an iphone has this, and it's just as a small feature besides all it's other main functions.
RedShuttle
Regular Member
Instead of posing a human judgement call as a fact with animation, it would be much more helpful to show the reason behind that judgement. This can be easily done with only rudimentary technology.
The key here is to find the gap between the line and the landing point. There are three possible outcomes:
1. Gap found. Highlight the gap and call an "out".
2. Intersection found, i.e. where the landing spot intersects with the line. Highlight the point of intersection and call an "in".
3. Too close to call. Highlight the suspect area and call a "no decision". In such case, the original call stands.
Scenario 3 should be quite rare. With the video review, the players are re-assured that the call was not made due to line judge's bias or incompetence. So that situation should be understandable to everyone.
In the other two situations, showing the real "smoking gun" is far more convincing than some animation that are only artificially connected to the reality.
The key here is to find the gap between the line and the landing point. There are three possible outcomes:
1. Gap found. Highlight the gap and call an "out".
2. Intersection found, i.e. where the landing spot intersects with the line. Highlight the point of intersection and call an "in".
3. Too close to call. Highlight the suspect area and call a "no decision". In such case, the original call stands.
Scenario 3 should be quite rare. With the video review, the players are re-assured that the call was not made due to line judge's bias or incompetence. So that situation should be understandable to everyone.
In the other two situations, showing the real "smoking gun" is far more convincing than some animation that are only artificially connected to the reality.
craigandy
Regular Member
For purists like you and me I am 100% with you on this idea but from what I gather the masses I fear are way more satisfied with just seeing an animation and a clear call. Would be good if they could just click the landing point on the animation more accurately and also drop the expense of using the hawkeye company.
visor
Regular Member
Just finished watching the cntv link, so there's no 3D tracking as in tennis? Only not at China Open or not ever?
I thought I remember reading in some BWF statement that Hawk-Eye had 3D tracking... maybe I was wrong and had assumed all along that Hawk-Eye did the same thing in badminton as in tennis.
If not, then why bother calling it Hawk-Eye technology (and paying for their trademark name) , because it's not! If it's not 3D tracking, then this is really just slow mo instant video replay, plain and simple. And if any of the commentators or BWF officials ever mention Hawk-Eye, they are flat out lying... knowingly or unknowingly.
I thought I remember reading in some BWF statement that Hawk-Eye had 3D tracking... maybe I was wrong and had assumed all along that Hawk-Eye did the same thing in badminton as in tennis.
If not, then why bother calling it Hawk-Eye technology (and paying for their trademark name) , because it's not! If it's not 3D tracking, then this is really just slow mo instant video replay, plain and simple. And if any of the commentators or BWF officials ever mention Hawk-Eye, they are flat out lying... knowingly or unknowingly.
Last edited:
CantSmashThis
Regular Member
From what I know, it's 9 high speed cameras that they slow it down to try to determine where it landed with two technicians and a referee in charge. I believe what is shown to viewers is more of a prediction of the slow-mo. (I was told how the whole system works but I forgot already 
)
)
craigandy
Regular Member
They said that is how they have been doing it so far in the video.
You weren't dreaming BWF did say they were using the hawkeye tracking system several times with statements like "The world-famous tracking system used in many sports to determine line calls has made its badminton debut in the MetLife BWF World Superseries"
From what I know, it's 9 high speed cameras that they slow it down to try to determine where it landed with two technicians and a referee in charge. I believe what is shown to viewers is more of a prediction of the slow-mo. (I was told how the whole system works but I forgot already
Well that certainly concurs with the cntv video explanation from the "hawk-eye" operator.
RedShuttle
Regular Member
If you read it carefully, BWF's statement may be misleading but arguably correct. The only thing that they explicitly promised was "Hawk-Eye’s popular graphics implementation". The next step from video review is to show the result graphically. Changing from video review to shuttle-tracking would be a quantum leap rather than a next step.
The other statements are correct but not necessarily relevant to the issue at hand. Such technique is no strange to discussion forums.
On one hand, I applaud BWF for the sensible decision of using video review which is quite sufficient; on the other hand, I shake my head for the disingenuous PR work by BWF.
The other statements are correct but not necessarily relevant to the issue at hand. Such technique is no strange to discussion forums.
On one hand, I applaud BWF for the sensible decision of using video review which is quite sufficient; on the other hand, I shake my head for the disingenuous PR work by BWF.
visor
Regular Member
Yes, although their statement is technically correct and and the method is more cost effective , but misleading nonetheless.
However, this so called "Hawk-Eye" (as we shall now call it from here on
) , has been doing fine in judging calls and replay animations so far this year... until this China Open with those few examples way off the mark. Perhaps miscallibration during setup?
Or perhaps inexperienced operators too, as I recall one instance of replay during the Ko/Shin vs Cai/LD match where it was labelled "in" when the animation showed clearly out, leading to confusion of the umpire and the KOR players who challenged the original line call.
However, this so called "Hawk-Eye" (as we shall now call it from here on
) , has been doing fine in judging calls and replay animations so far this year... until this China Open with those few examples way off the mark. Perhaps miscallibration during setup?Or perhaps inexperienced operators too, as I recall one instance of replay during the Ko/Shin vs Cai/LD match where it was labelled "in" when the animation showed clearly out, leading to confusion of the umpire and the KOR players who challenged the original line call.
Last edited:
Agree with everything being said here. Maybe BWF should consider changing the name of the "system" being used to EyeWash. 
On another more significant point: if there is no true tracking being implemented, then the decision is arrived at simply by examining the slowed-down playback from the high-speed cameras. The generation of the graphics is just floss, but this actually takes a finite amount of additional time, and sometimes this extra time is significantly longer than acceptable. It cannot be good for the players, who have to just stand around waiting...
On another more significant point: if there is no true tracking being implemented, then the decision is arrived at simply by examining the slowed-down playback from the high-speed cameras. The generation of the graphics is just floss, but this actually takes a finite amount of additional time, and sometimes this extra time is significantly longer than acceptable. It cannot be good for the players, who have to just stand around waiting...
craigandy
Regular Member
Nah I disagree I think wording is technically incorrect. The thing hawk-eye is famous for is the software that collates all the data and is able to make it's own call. So when they say "the world-famous tracking system used in many sports to determine line calls has made its badminton debut" That is just plain wrong.
What callibration do they need to be doing exactly given that it is not actually the hawkeye system being used?
What callibration do they need to be doing exactly given that it is not actually the hawkeye system being used?
Last edited:
RedShuttle
Regular Member
Understanding BWF's News Release. Annotation in (), Clarification in []
‘Hawk-Eye [Candy]’ to Determine ‘In or Out’
......
The world-famous tracking system used in many sports to determine line calls (totally correct so far) has made its badminton debut (that is, the graphical representation part of that world-famous tracking system) in the MetLife BWF World Superseries tournament in New Delhi and spectators in the stadium and watching at home will eventually be able to see instant reviews of challenges (Hint: Instant reviews, not real time tracking) which happen in matches on the TV court.
After testing various instant-review technologies in recent months, the Badminton World Federation has contracted Hawk-Eye Innovations to provide instant-review services (totally true, and again, no tracking mentioned) for the World Superseries as well as for BWF Major Events. This includes [only] Hawk-Eye’s popular graphics implementation (the truth!) which pinpoints the exact spot [that has been determined by the review official] on which a ball – or in badminton’s case, a shuttle – lands. These are often shown in sports venues worldwide and broadcast to fans elsewhere (you are correct, sir).
......
Hawk-Eye’s system will gradually be integrated with the in-venue video boards and live worldwide broadcast feed, allowing fans to see instant reviews [in multi-colored 3D animation] and decisions on challenges.
“Since we introduced instant reviews in last year’s World Superseries Finals, many people have been asking when we would take the next step – add the graphics (there you go!) which they are accustomed to seeing in tennis and other sports. Now, with Hawk-Eye on board, we are ready to progress to that stag (and, that promise has been delivered).
“The integration of these graphical elements (don't say that I didn't tell you) will be tested in India and ultimately we will get operations running smoothly. It’s another significant and innovative step for badminton in the sporting world,” added Lund.
......
‘Hawk-Eye [Candy]’ to Determine ‘In or Out’
......
The world-famous tracking system used in many sports to determine line calls (totally correct so far) has made its badminton debut (that is, the graphical representation part of that world-famous tracking system) in the MetLife BWF World Superseries tournament in New Delhi and spectators in the stadium and watching at home will eventually be able to see instant reviews of challenges (Hint: Instant reviews, not real time tracking) which happen in matches on the TV court.
After testing various instant-review technologies in recent months, the Badminton World Federation has contracted Hawk-Eye Innovations to provide instant-review services (totally true, and again, no tracking mentioned) for the World Superseries as well as for BWF Major Events. This includes [only] Hawk-Eye’s popular graphics implementation (the truth!) which pinpoints the exact spot [that has been determined by the review official] on which a ball – or in badminton’s case, a shuttle – lands. These are often shown in sports venues worldwide and broadcast to fans elsewhere (you are correct, sir).
......
Hawk-Eye’s system will gradually be integrated with the in-venue video boards and live worldwide broadcast feed, allowing fans to see instant reviews [in multi-colored 3D animation] and decisions on challenges.
“Since we introduced instant reviews in last year’s World Superseries Finals, many people have been asking when we would take the next step – add the graphics (there you go!) which they are accustomed to seeing in tennis and other sports. Now, with Hawk-Eye on board, we are ready to progress to that stag (and, that promise has been delivered).
“The integration of these graphical elements (don't say that I didn't tell you) will be tested in India and ultimately we will get operations running smoothly. It’s another significant and innovative step for badminton in the sporting world,” added Lund.
......
craigandy
Regular Member
You can say what you want but hawkeye is not famous for a made up(badly represented, forgiving where it makes contact) graphical animation, operator clicked. They said it was making it's debut clear as day paragraph 1. Neither is badminton using any sort of tracking system as mentioned.
Last edited:
craigandy
Regular Member
You're missing the point of Red's post...
No I got him taking apart BWF it was funny.
oops sorry been missing quoting what i am answering just been reading then commenting I understand why you said it now - #176 was supposed to quote #170
and 173 was supposed to quote #171
Last edited:
Hm. Guess I haven't been watching enough of the matches to see the bad calls that Hawk eye has been making. Maybe I just had incredible luck in the matches that I did watch have actually good calls in comparison to the instant replays. I really haven't seen one bad hawk eye call yet personally, but there's plenty more matches that happened in which I didn't watch.
Even if these do happen on say, a 5% error rate, I do agree the amount of error for the calls for the ones listed is quite a lot. Though it's not nearly as bad as when it first started (referencing the frequency of errors in the beginning).
Even if these do happen on say, a 5% error rate, I do agree the amount of error for the calls for the ones listed is quite a lot. Though it's not nearly as bad as when it first started (referencing the frequency of errors in the beginning).