Raducanu

Raducanu should take a lot of encouragement from that match and this tournament. She pushed the world number 1 out of her comfort zone for long periods despite going into the tournament not in the best of form. If she can stay fit, she will be back in the top 10 soon enough and challenging for majors again.
 
A little bit more courage of her convictions instead of tightening up when she got break(s) up on both seats and she’d have won. She gets into good positives and gives them straight back which o think is just relaxing and having self belief issue. All said and done she Played very well.

My only criticism would be that she didn’t move her opponent around enough when she had the chance (making angles making her opponent run side to side instead of playing middle-ish of the court - bit more self belief maybe to go wider towards the lines with her ground strokes).

A touch more self belief and hitting the lines at crucial moments and she’ll really go on from here.
 
SilentProf said:
Raducanu should take a lot of encouragement from that match and this tournament. She pushed the world number 1 out of her comfort zone for long periods despite going into the tournament not in the best of form. If she can stay fit, she will be back in the top 10 soon enough and challenging for majors again.
Click to expand...
I hope she does, but I don’t see her challenging for majors again. That title she won just looks like a one off, won against all the odds, but because it happened so early in her career people expect it to happen again.
 
Yeah, I wouldn't get my hopes up about her going on to win much in her career. Still kind of wild she's only won 1 title in her career and it was a Grand Slam. I don't necessarily believe in flukes, but she definitely benefitted from both a good draw, and the whole draw itself kind of collapsing with seeds going out. But between her general fitness and health, and I think she has an ongoing issue with her back as it is, and general lack of consistent form, I don't see her kicking on too much.
 
atypical_boro said:
I hope she does, but I don’t see her challenging for majors again. That title she won just looks like a one off, won against all the odds, but because it happened so early in her career people expect it to happen again.
Click to expand...
It was an unique set of circumstances that tornament win. Her opponent in the final Layla Fernandez hasn't hit the same heights again either.

Ive seen quite a few commentators suggest it was partly to do with the ball. They use (or used to) a different ball for the women in the US open which was lighter.

A lot of players complained about it and that it was harder to control. The theory is this helped the two younger (though obviously talented) girls as they had less pressure/nothing to lose and just came out swinging in their matches.

Not sure if they've changed it since mind.

I play club tennis to a decent level and I hate the US open ball. Particularly on, ironically, a hard court. It is a bit more wild than other balls.
 
See that she’s not happy with the automatic line calling. You could point and say it’s sour grapes butt there’s just been an incident in the Kartal match where it’s missed a call by a good foot so I’m not sure how you can have confidence in the marginal calls.
 
Norton_Nomad said:
See that she’s not happy with the automatic line calling. You could point and say it’s sour grapes butt there’s just been an incident in the Kartal match where it’s missed a call by a good foot so I’m not sure how you can have confidence in the marginal calls.
Click to expand...
She's not the only one.

Was watching the match yesterday (not going to attempt spelling her name, last years winner) and there was some pretty odd commentating from Martina N who was saying the players were still grumbling on the close calls, but it helps they now know they're now definitely accurate.

I was sat there thinking the players aren't thinking these are definitely correct calls at all.

I do wonder if they've rushed bringing it in a bit. I'm sure its more accurate overall, but does seem to be missing the odd one a line judge would've called correctly. Which is going to be quite annoying for the players.
 
It will no doubt improve consistently over time to the point of being virtually 100% but in the meantime you would expect someone to be watching and overruling obvious errors. I find it odd that they chose Wimbledon as the first big tournament to use it.
 
SilentProf said:
It will no doubt improve consistently over time to the point of being virtually 100% but in the meantime you would expect someone to be watching and overruling obvious errors. I find it odd that they chose Wimbledon as the first big tournament to use it.
Click to expand...
They used it in the French definitely.

Not sure if its been used in the others but think I read on the bbc it was one of the last to adopt it.
 
festa5 said:
They used it in the French definitely.

Not sure if its been used in the others but think I read on the bbc it was one of the last to adopt it.
Click to expand...
Ok my mistake. I thought I’d heard the commentators say it was the first time anywhere. Maybe it’s just the first time at Wimbledon. You would think they would have the issues ironed out before it was being used though.
 
They don't use it in the French Open yet cause it's clay so they just get down and look at the mark. They'll probably introduce it at some point, think they still have it set up to a basic level like the old hawkeye system for the purpose of TV confirmation but otherwise the umpire just checks the mark.

It's definitely used in the Australian and US Open though. Roland Garros is the only Slam still not using it cause there's less need to.
 
Jonathan said:
They don't use it in the French Open yet cause it's clay so they just get down and look at the mark. They'll probably introduce it at some point, think they still have it set up to a basic level like the old hawkeye system for the purpose of TV confirmation but otherwise the umpire just checks the mark.

It's definitely used in the Australian and US Open though. Roland Garros is the only Slam still not using it cause there's less need to.
Click to expand...

Well b***r me you're right.

Well I'm now pretty confused about a conversation I had with the brother of a lad I know who does umpiring/line judging who told me he was off to do the French Open but wouldn't be as a line judge because it was now automatic. Bloody teenagers!

Also confused because I remember Zverev kicking off about it and taking a photo of a mark, but can see now that was at Madrid.
 
festa5 said:
Well b***r me you're right.

Well I'm now pretty confused about a conversation I had with the brother of a lad I know who does umpiring/line judging who told me he was off to do the French Open but wouldn't be as a line judge because it was now automatic. Bloody teenagers!

Also confused because I remember Zverev kicking off about it and taking a photo of a mark, but can see now that was at Madrid.
Click to expand...
Think he's done that at the French Open in 2024 when he lost to Alcaraz in the final too. Zverev in general is terrible for arguing over marks in the clay, just highlights usually the wrong mark and walks off like it's already decided then argues when the umpire comes down to calls the right mark.
 
The problem is that they they use Hawkeye, which is a computerised system that works out, based on a number of different data points, where the ball is in relation to the lines. Then it generates an image, based on its algorithm.

It's not showing you where the ball actually landed, it's showing where it calculates that it landed.

There's another system they use in some lower level events (such as some WTA 250 events I've been to) called Real Bounce that uses 40 high-speed cameras. These actually generate a picture of the ball as it lands, and then that image is shown on a courtside screen, along with the call as to in or out.

Since you're seeing an image of the actual ball and the actual line, there's not really any doubt about it being right.

With Hawkeye there's a possibility of an error, if the algorithm calculates the ball's trajectory incorrectly.

Having seen it in action, I think RealBounce is a superior system.
 
Alan_Breck said:
Emma Radukanu played really well against Belarusian Sabalenka, and should be proud of her performance. Sabalenka knew she had been in a proper tennis match and won by the narrowest of margins.

#UTB
Click to expand...
Sabalenka won in straight sets, and made a lot of unforced errors. It was a good performance by Raducanu, and very encouraging after a few disappointing years, but she still lost in two sets and there's a chasm she still has to bridge.
 
Liamo said:
The problem is that they they use Hawkeye, which is a computerised system that works out, based on a number of different data points, where the ball is in relation to the lines. Then it generates an image, based on its algorithm.

It's not showing you where the ball actually landed, it's showing where it calculates that it landed.

There's another system they use in some lower level events (such as some WTA 250 events I've been to) called Real Bounce that uses 40 high-speed cameras. These actually generate a picture of the ball as it lands, and then that image is shown on a courtside screen, along with the call as to in or out.

Since you're seeing an image of the actual ball and the actual line, there's not really any doubt about it being right.

With Hawkeye there's a possibility of an error, if the algorithm calculates the ball's trajectory incorrectly.

Having seen it in action, I think RealBounce is a superior system.
Click to expand...
Does cricket still use Hawkeye?
Some of the projections of line and bounce in lbws are ridiculous
 
Chemicalworker said:
Does cricket still use Hawkeye?
Some of the projections of line and bounce in lbws are ridiculous
Click to expand...
It does and there is some discretion used. It’s only meant to correct obvious errors as there is an accepted margin of error so if the ball is judged to have clipped the stumps by a small margin, the umpire’s not out decision stands.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top