Can Tennis Players Challenge Electronic Line Calls? 2026 Hawk-Eye Rules Explained

A tennis player hits a powerful forehand toward the baseline. The ball lands extremely close to the line, and an electronic voice announces, “Out!”

The player stops, looks toward the chair umpire, and points at the mark.

A few years ago, fans might have expected the player to request a Hawk-Eye challenge. A replay would appear on the stadium screen, showing whether the ball touched the line.

But professional tennis has changed.

Under the 2026 ATP Tour rules, players generally cannot challenge individual line calls made by the Live Electronic Line Calling system. The technology already makes the official decision automatically.

Traditional electronic challenges still exist in competitions using a review-based system, including certain ATP Challenger Tour events.

The distinction is important because Hawk-Eye technology can operate in different ways.

This guide explains how electronic line calling works in 2026, whether players can challenge automated decisions, what happens when the system malfunctions, and how the rules differ between ATP events, Challenger tournaments, and Grand Slams.

Can Tennis Players Challenge Electronic Line Calls in 2026?

The answer depends on the electronic line-calling system used at the tournament.

At ATP Tour events using Live Electronic Line Calling, players do not receive the traditional challenge opportunities that were available when human line judges made the original calls.

The automated system determines whether the ball lands in or out.

Players cannot demand a conventional Hawk-Eye challenge simply because they disagree with the automated announcement.

However, some competitions still use Review Electronic Line Calling.

In those matches, players may challenge a line judge’s or chair umpire’s decision according to the applicable rules.

The official ATP 2026 Rulebook distinguishes between these two procedures.

Quick Comparison of Electronic Line-Calling Rules

Situation	Can a Player Challenge?
ATP Tour match using Live ELC	No traditional line-call challenge
ATP Challenger match using Review ELC	Yes, under the review protocol
Live ELC fails to announce a call	Chair umpire follows the failure procedure
Electronic system malfunctions	Officials apply contingency procedures
Tournament using human line judges and electronic review	Challenges may be permitted
Video review of certain judgment calls	Depends on competition rules

The key is identifying whether the technology makes the original decision or reviews a decision made by an official.

What Is Electronic Line Calling in Tennis?

Electronic Line Calling, commonly abbreviated ELC, is technology used to determine whether a tennis ball lands inside or outside the court boundaries.

The system tracks the ball’s movement and calculates its position when it contacts the playing surface.

Electronic line calling can assist human officials or replace traditional line judges.

There are two main approaches.

1. Live Electronic Line Calling

Live ELC makes line calls automatically during the match.

The system tracks the ball and produces an electronic announcement when a shot lands out or a serve is a fault.

Human line judges are not required to make those calls.

This is the system mandated across ATP Tour events.

2. Review Electronic Line Calling

Review ELC is different.

Human officials make the original line calls, and players can request an electronic review when they believe a decision is incorrect.

The system then evaluates the disputed ball impact.

This is the traditional challenge format familiar to many tennis fans.

The International Tennis Federation’s electronic line-calling classification recognizes the distinction between review-based and real-time systems.

What Is Hawk-Eye Live?

Hawk-Eye Live is an electronic line-calling system that uses tracking technology to determine whether a ball lands in or out.

Hawk-Eye is one of several technology providers approved for tennis officiating.

Its systems use cameras and software to track the ball and calculate its trajectory and landing position.

When operating in live mode, the technology provides decisions during play rather than waiting for a player to request a review.

For example, a serve lands just outside the service box.

The system detects the ball’s landing position and announces a fault.

The chair umpire does not need to wait for a line judge’s signal.

The system’s decision becomes part of the normal officiating process.

Is Hawk-Eye the Same as Electronic Line Calling?

Not exactly.

Hawk-Eye is a technology provider and system name.

Electronic Line Calling is the broader category of technology used to make or review line decisions.

Other approved systems include Foxtenn and Bolt6 Sentinel.

The ITF evaluates systems for accuracy, reliability, practicality, and suitability.

Therefore, not every electronic line-calling installation is necessarily Hawk-Eye.

Why Did the ATP Remove Traditional Line Judges?

The ATP announced in April 2023 that Live Electronic Line Calling would be adopted across the ATP Tour beginning in 2025.

The transition was intended to improve accuracy and consistency.

Previously, tournaments used different combinations of human line judges, electronic review systems, and automated calling.

That created variations in officiating procedures between events.

The ATP wanted a more standardized approach.

The change applies to main-draw and qualifying matches at ATP Tour tournaments.

Benefits of Automated Line Calling

One advantage is consistency.

The same technology can evaluate line decisions throughout a match without relying on different officials’ viewing angles.

Another benefit is speed.

Players no longer need to stop for conventional electronic challenges after disputed calls.

The technology can also provide visual information to spectators through stadium displays.

However, electronic systems still require careful installation, calibration, monitoring, and contingency procedures.

Automated officiating reduces certain human errors but does not make technology completely immune to problems.

How Many Hawk-Eye Challenges Do Players Get in 2026?

In a match using the traditional Review ELC system, players generally receive three unsuccessful challenges per set.

An additional unsuccessful challenge is available when a tiebreak is played.

Successful challenges do not reduce the player’s remaining unsuccessful-challenge allowance.

This system remains relevant to ATP Challenger Tour matches using Review ELC.

Example of the Three-Challenge Rule

Imagine a player beginning a set with three unsuccessful challenges available.

The player challenges a baseline call.

The review confirms that the original call was correct.

The player now has two unsuccessful challenges remaining.

Later, the player challenges another decision.

This time, the review overturns the original call.

Because the challenge was successful, the player’s allowance does not decrease.

The player still has two unsuccessful challenges remaining.

What Happens During a Tiebreak?

Under the traditional review protocol, players receive one additional unsuccessful challenge when a tiebreak is played.

The exact procedures depend on the competition and system being used.

Importantly, this allowance does not apply to ATP Tour matches using Live ELC, where conventional line-call challenges are unavailable.

When Can a Player Request an Electronic Review?

In a competition using Review ELC, a player cannot challenge any shot at any moment.

The ATP protocol generally permits requests involving a point-ending shot or a disputed shot during a rally when the player immediately stops playing.

A player must communicate the intention to challenge promptly.

The request can be made verbally or through an appropriate gesture.

The chair umpire confirms whether the request meets the applicable requirements.

Can a Player Continue the Rally and Challenge Later?

Generally, no.

A player cannot continue several shots and then challenge an earlier ball simply because the rally ended unfavorably.

The traditional challenge procedure requires immediate interest.

For example, a player believes an opponent’s forehand landed out.

The player returns the shot and immediately stops playing.

A review may be permitted if the procedure was followed correctly.

However, if the player continues the rally for several additional shots, the opportunity to challenge that earlier ball is generally lost.

This rule prevents players from using challenges as a backup option after seeing how a rally develops.

What Happens If Hawk-Eye Live Makes a Mistake?

Automated line calling is designed to provide reliable decisions, but the ATP has procedures for situations where the system does not function correctly.

A player cannot automatically overturn an electronic call simply by arguing that the technology was wrong.

However, officials can address failures or irregularities under the established protocol.

What If the System Does Not Make a Call?

If Live ELC fails to make a required call, the chair umpire is responsible for making the decision.

If the chair umpire cannot determine whether the ball was in or out, the point may be replayed.

The ATP protocol specifically addresses point-ending shots and situations where a player stops play because no call was made.

When appropriate, the chair umpire can request that the disputed shot be displayed on the stadium screen.

This is a system-failure procedure, not a normal player challenge.

What If the Entire System Stops Working?

If Live ELC malfunctions, play may be delayed while officials attempt to resolve the issue.

The 2026 ATP Rulebook establishes a 15-minute period for addressing the malfunction.

If the problem remains unresolved after that period, the ATP Tour Supervisor determines when and how the match will resume.

This provides a formal process for handling technical problems without allowing players to decide independently whether the technology should be used.

Can Players Ask to See a Hawk-Eye Replay?

A player may ask questions about an electronic decision, but that does not create an automatic right to challenge it.

At ATP Tour events using Live ELC, certain close calls can be displayed automatically on stadium screens.

The ATP protocol provides for automatic replay displays, when equipment is available, for point-ending out calls within 15 centimeters of a line.

Winning shots may also be displayed through the review official’s direction.

These visualizations help spectators understand close decisions.

However, displaying a replay is not the same as allowing a formal challenge.

The automated call remains the official decision unless an applicable failure or correction procedure is triggered.

Can Players Challenge Electronic Line Calls at Wimbledon?

Wimbledon introduced Live Electronic Line Calling across its match courts in 2025.

That eliminated the traditional line-judge challenge process for automated line decisions.

However, Wimbledon added another form of technology-assisted officiating in 2026.

The tournament introduced Video Review on six show courts.

This allows players to request reviews of certain judgment calls made by the chair umpire.

Examples include:

• Not-up decisions.
• Foul shots.
• Touch decisions.
• Certain hindrance incidents.

These reviews are different from challenges to automated in-or-out calls.

A player may be able to request a review of an eligible judgment decision without being allowed to challenge a normal Live ELC line call.

The ATP’s official report on Wimbledon’s 2026 video-review introduction explains the distinction.

What Is the Difference Between Video Review and Hawk-Eye?

Electronic line calling determines whether the ball lands inside or outside a boundary.

Video review addresses certain other officiating decisions.

For example, a chair umpire may need to determine whether a player touched the net or whether a ball bounced twice before being returned.

Those incidents involve different judgments from ordinary line calls.

Example: Electronic Line Calling

A player serves near the sideline.

The electronic system determines that the ball landed outside the service box.

The result is a fault.

Example: Video Review

A player stretches to reach a drop shot.

The chair umpire rules that the ball bounced twice before the player returned it.

If the tournament permits review of that judgment, the player may request video review.

The technology helps officials evaluate what happened.

The two systems can operate at the same tournament while serving different purposes.

Are Electronic Line-Calling Systems Always Accurate?

Electronic systems undergo testing and evaluation before receiving approval.

The ITF assesses accuracy, reliability, and practical performance.

However, no complex technology should be assumed to be completely immune to technical problems.

Camera positioning, calibration, environmental conditions, and system performance all matter.

That is why official protocols include procedures for missed calls and equipment failures.

ITF Gold, Silver, and Bronze Classifications

The ITF introduced a three-tier classification framework in 2025.

Gold systems are intended for elite international competitions.

Silver systems are aimed at second-tier international events.

Bronze systems are intended for national-level competitions.

Classification depends on meeting the relevant technical standards.

The ITF also evaluates systems for particular surfaces and operating modes.

A system approved for real-time line calling on hard courts is not automatically approved for every surface or setting.

This framework helps tournament organizers choose suitable technology.

Does Electronic Line Calling Work on Clay Courts?

Yes.

Electronic line-calling technology can be used on clay courts when the system has the necessary approval for that surface.

Clay presents different challenges because the ball can leave a visible mark.

Traditionally, officials have inspected ball marks to resolve disputed decisions.

Automated technology uses tracking systems instead.

The ITF classification framework includes systems approved for clay-court applications.

However, the procedures used at a particular event depend on its regulations and approved equipment.

Fans should not assume that a visible ball mark automatically overrides an electronic decision.

The governing competition rules determine the official procedure.

Why Do Some Tennis Players Disagree With Electronic Calls?

Tennis players often make decisions under intense pressure.

A ball traveling at high speed can land extremely close to a line.

From the player’s viewing angle, a shot may appear out even when the technology determines that it touched the line.

The opposite can also happen.

Television camera angles can make close calls difficult to judge.

A ball’s appearance on a broadcast image is not always enough to establish its exact contact position.

Players may also be frustrated when an important point is decided by a narrow margin.

Electronic line calling does not eliminate emotional reactions.

It changes the process used to resolve them.

Does a Ball Count as In If It Touches the Line?

Yes.

Under tennis rules, a ball that touches any part of the relevant boundary line is considered good.

The entire ball does not need to land inside the line.

Even a small amount of contact with the line is enough.

That is why electronic systems must evaluate extremely close impacts.

How Has Technology Changed Professional Tennis?

Electronic line calling is part of a broader transformation in tennis officiating.

Professional tournaments increasingly use technology to support consistency, efficiency, and transparency.

Players benefit from standardized procedures.

Officials can focus more attention on match management and judgment decisions.

Spectators receive additional visual information about close calls.

However, the transition also changes the relationship between players and officials.

Previously, a player could challenge a human line judge’s decision.

Now, at Live ELC events, the system makes the original line decision.

That means players have fewer opportunities to dispute routine in-or-out calls through the traditional challenge process.

For context on how technology and professional preparation have influenced modern tennis, read SportsVell’s feature on Roger Federer and Conor McGregor.

Federer’s career spanned much of the transition from traditional line judging to electronic review technology.

How Does Tennis Technology Compare With VAR in Soccer?

Tennis and soccer both use technology to support officiating, but their systems operate differently.

In soccer, Video Assistant Referee technology reviews certain match-changing decisions.

Those reviews can involve goals, penalties, red cards, and mistaken identity.

In tennis, Live ELC makes routine line decisions automatically.

It does not wait for an official to review every ball.

The distinction reflects the different structures of the sports.

Soccer involves continuous team movement across a large field.

Tennis involves repeated points in a precisely defined playing area.

SportsVell’s guide to how many players are on a soccer team provides additional context about soccer’s team structure.

The two sports demonstrate how technology can be adapted to different officiating requirements.

Will Tennis Ever Eliminate Human Umpires Completely?

Electronic line calling reduces the need for traditional line judges, but it does not eliminate the role of the chair umpire.

Chair umpires remain responsible for match management.

Their duties include announcing scores, applying the rules, supervising player conduct, and handling situations that electronic line calling cannot resolve independently.

Officials must also respond to equipment failures and unusual incidents.

Technology can make certain decisions more consistent, but professional tennis still requires human judgment and administration.

The likely direction is continued cooperation between automated systems and trained officials rather than a complete removal of human oversight.

Common Mistakes About Hawk-Eye and Tennis Challenges

Mistake 1: Every professional tennis player gets three challenges per set.

That applies to traditional Review ELC systems, not ATP Tour matches using Live ELC.

Mistake 2: Hawk-Eye and electronic line calling are exactly the same.

Hawk-Eye is one technology provider. Electronic line calling is the broader category.

Mistake 3: Players can challenge any shot after the rally ends.

Traditional challenges require specific timing and procedures.

Mistake 4: An electronic replay automatically means a player requested a challenge.

Live ELC tournaments may display replays without a formal player challenge.

Mistake 5: Video review and electronic line calling serve the same purpose.

Video review can address certain judgment calls, while electronic line calling determines ball placement.

Mistake 6: Electronic systems never malfunction.

Official regulations include contingency procedures for missed calls and technical failures.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can tennis players challenge Hawk-Eye Live in 2026?

Not through the traditional challenge system at ATP Tour events using Live ELC. Automated line calls are made directly by the system.

How many challenges do ATP players get?

At ATP Tour events using Live ELC, there is no traditional allowance of line-call challenges. In applicable Review ELC competitions, players generally receive three unsuccessful challenges per set and an additional one in a tiebreak.

Can a player challenge an electronic out call?

Not through a conventional challenge when Live ELC is making the official calls. Special procedures apply if the system fails to make a call or malfunctions.

What happens if Hawk-Eye stops working?

Officials follow the competition’s contingency protocol. Under ATP rules, play may be delayed while the problem is addressed, with the supervisor determining how play resumes if the issue persists.

Does Wimbledon use electronic line calling?

Yes. Wimbledon introduced Live ELC across its match courts in 2025.

Can Wimbledon players request video reviews?

Yes, for eligible judgment calls on designated show courts under the tournament’s 2026 Video Review procedures.

Does a tennis ball have to land completely inside the line?

No. A ball touching any part of the relevant line is considered in.

Is electronic line calling used on clay?

Yes, approved systems can operate on clay courts, subject to the relevant competition regulations and technical classifications.

Is Hawk-Eye 100% accurate?

Electronic line-calling systems are rigorously evaluated, but technology can experience technical problems. Official procedures exist for failures and missed calls.

Are human chair umpires still needed?

Yes. Chair umpires remain responsible for match management, scoring, conduct, and other decisions not handled entirely by automated line calling.

Final Thoughts

So, can tennis players challenge electronic line calls in 2026?

The answer depends on the system used.

At ATP Tour events using Live Electronic Line Calling, players generally cannot request traditional Hawk-Eye challenges because the technology already makes the official in-or-out decisions.

At competitions using Review ELC, players may still challenge eligible human line calls under the established rules.

The 2026 ATP regulations also provide procedures for system failures, missed calls, and electronic review.

Meanwhile, tournaments such as Wimbledon have introduced additional video-review technology for certain judgment decisions.

For players, understanding these differences helps avoid confusion during matches.

For fans, it explains why a player might challenge a call at one event but have no conventional challenge option at another.

Electronic line calling has changed tennis officiating significantly, but human officials remain essential for managing matches and handling situations beyond routine line decisions.

For more tennis rules, sports technology, and player stories, explore SportsVell.

You can also compare the structures of different sports through SportsVell’s guides to how many players are on a football team and how long a football game lasts.