Excerpt from Writing Seminar daily blog:

I usually don’t blog about the same subject two times in a row, but in this case I can’t help it: Federer lost. Unbelievable. Another five-set heartbreaker, this time to the up and coming Del Potro, whom Federer had actually beaten in five sets during this year’s French Open (karma?). I guess I’m most disappointed with this loss not because it puts an end to Federer’s streak at the U.S. Open, but because I felt that Federer didn’t play his best. In fact, he looked pretty lackluster the entire match, and his first serve percentage was under 50%–yikes. He also missed quite a lot of break points down the stretch, but Del Potro also deserves credit for playing a phenomenal match, especially that incredible forehand that Federer had no answer for. One thing I found interesting was the number of contentious calls during the match. Ever since the introduction of the “official review” (Hawk-Eye) system in tennis, where players can challenge a close call by the linesmen and the shot is reviewed using computers and image analysis, the game has not been quite the same. A lot of pros on tour complain about it, Federer being one of them. I felt that one of the turning points in the match was late in the second set, when DP hit a shot down the line that was initially called out. However, DP challenged the call, and the computers showed it barely, barely nicking the line. (Another question: how fine is too fine? Is it practical to review down to the ten-thousandth second during Phelp’s epic win over Cavic during the 2008 Olympics, or would it have sufficed to give both swimmers the gold? Remember, ties do happen in swimming, albeit rarely.) In this case. Federer couldn’t seem to get over the call, and consequently seemed distracted for the rest of the match, which he lost in a tiebreaker. While I welcome the use of technology in sports (more accurate timing in track, swimming, etc.), I also believe that it can sometimes hinder game play. This is especially true in tennis, where momentum can mean everything. The bottom line is that linesmen make mistakes all the time that aren’t noticed or challenged. Because players are only given a set number of challenges, players only invoke this right during the most critical moments in a match, oftentimes shifting the momentum of play entirely. While the official review system does ensure that the “right” decision is ultimately made, it seems to cause a lot of unnecessary animosity among both players and officials. Furthermore, players often abuse the system by purposely taking a long time to challenge the call in an effort to delay the match or disrupt their opponent’s momentum (of which Del Potro and Federer are guilty). In the end, we have to remember that officiating in sports is never perfect. Either review every contentious call or let the players play.