Tennis Players Hold Off Against Machine

Put it in the file of things you thought you would never see at the U.S. Open: Andy Roddick questioning the in call of his own serve.

In the men’s final against Roger Federer on Sunday, Roddick thought his serve was out and failed to move as Federer hit a winner into the open court. So, Roddick questioned the call.

Alas, seconds later, it was confirmed that the serve had been in, right on the line, and the point stayed with Federer.

A year ago, though, Roddick would have had no such recourse. The instant-replay system used at the U.S. Open this year allowed for such quirky developments at the just-completed Grand Slam event.

Hawk-Eye, as the system is called, made its main tour professional debut at the Miami event in March and was used at all the North American hard-court tournaments leading up to the U.S. Open. Scrutiny jumped several levels, though, when it came time for the U.S. Open because this was instant replay’s Grand Slam debut.

“The players get it,” said Arlen Kantarian, of the USTA, who pushed especially hard for instant replay. “The officials are more on the ball.”

The final numbers are in, and the review of the review system, which was used on the two main show courts at the Open, shows that the players won their line-call challenges 32% of the time. Men were correct 31% of the time, women 36%, and doubles challenges 29%.

In 88 matches, there were 2.44 challenges per match. Men challenged more often in singles, 3.54 times per match to 1.66 for the women.

Where instant replay was used, 10 cameras were positioned around the court to track the movement of the ball. The cost of the technology and video boards on the two main show courts was $300,000 to the U.S. Tennis Assn., according to a source.

Challenges at the Open were limited to two a set, and one more if the set reached a tiebreaker. A challenge that was not upheld resulted in the loss of a challenge.

“Going into it, there was a big debate for a while about whether it was going to be an unlimited or limited challenge system,” said Larry Scott, chief executive officer of the Sony Ericsson WTA Tour. “The decision was to start with limited challenges and see if there was a cry for unlimited and that hasn’t happened so far.

“There really hasn’t been a debate going on. If anything, there’s an interesting dynamic developing, where they’re not using it as much. They’re not using the full number of challenges. It seems that there’s something weighing on the players psychologically, especially in a big stadium. It’s self-regulating.”

The statistics also revealed that the two men who had been the most outspoken against the system, the champion Federer and Marat Safin, combined for 25 challenges.

Federer challenged 17 times, more than any of the other men. He was upheld seven times, for a success rate of 41%.

Safin challenged eight times and was upheld three times.

Jelena Jankovic challenged most among the women, six times. She was upheld three times.

Jankovic also was the most outspoken of the women about the system but focused on her frustration at the chair umpire not overruling line calls.

“Why do the players always have to challenge?” she asked.

“Sometimes we look stupid because we can’t see it that well, but we know the ball is close. And so you never kind of know how far outside, or maybe it’s touching little bit the line because those balls are so close. So it’s 50-50 chance. If we had 10 challenges, I would challenge all those calls. But I have only two, so what can I do?”

The symbolic mother of Hawk-Eye, Serena Williams, challenged only once, and the call was not overturned.

What had appeared to be an especially egregious overrule against Williams at the 2004 U.S. Open in the quarterfinals against Jennifer Capriati led to widespread calls for the use of instant replay.

Benjamin Becker, the qualifier from Germany who beat Andre Agassi in Agassi’s final match, was upheld on all three of his challenges.

Lindsay Davenport, runner-up Justine Henin-Hardenne and Amelie Mauresmo all challenged three times and were correct twice each.

As Scott pointed out, players seemed to back off on challenging for the sake of challenging, sometimes even despite the urging of fans. Then there was Federer.

“It’s there to be used,” he said. “Of course, I feel bad sometimes to use it on a ridiculous point but might as well, you know. You never know if the machine is wrong or something.”

Still, Federer and Safin appeared to be in the minority, as many players felt the system helped them get on with playing, not having to stew over perceived bad line calls for several games.

Though instant replay won’t be going away, and the men’s and women’s tours plan to increase its use, Federer questioned the investment.

“The money, we can use it for better causes than challenges,” he said “It’s only on the one or two biggest courts. It’s different for the other guys. They’re not used to playing with these things.

“For me, of course, it might be an advantage in the long run because I know how to handle those challenge calls, but I really don’t think it’s necessary. But look, if the fans and the tournaments like it, look, it’s not my problem.”

*

lisa.dillman@latimes.com

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

The recently completed U.S. Open was the first Grand Slam event to use the instant replay and player challenge system. The Hawk-Eye officiating system employs 10 cameras (plus one backup) the surround the court -- eight at a height of 28.5 feet and two 115 feet high -- to show whether the ball landed in play or outside the court.

(END TEXT OF INFOBOX)