The French Open has not adopted an electronic line-calling system, making it the only Grand Slam tournament without such technology [1].

This divergence from other majors creates a unique environment at Roland Garros. While the Australian Open, U.S. Open, and Wimbledon have integrated automated systems to ensure precision, the clay courts of Paris still rely on human officials to make critical calls.

The absence of electronic systems at the French Open persists despite the widespread adoption of the technology across the professional circuit [1]. In other Grand Slams, electronic line-calling has largely replaced the need for human line judges, reducing the frequency of contested calls and player disputes.

At Roland Garros, officials still use the traditional method of marking the clay to determine if a ball was in or out. This process involves the chair umpire descending from their tower to inspect the physical mark left by the ball on the surface [1].

Critics argue that the reliance on human judgment in a high-stakes environment is outdated. The discrepancy between the French Open and its peers has sparked an ongoing debate regarding whether the lack of technology harms the sport by allowing human error to influence match outcomes [1].

Organizers have maintained the current system, though the tournament remains an outlier in the modern era of tennis officiating [1]. The transition to electronic calling on clay is technically more challenging than on hard courts or grass, which may contribute to the delay in implementation.

The French Open is the only Grand Slam without electronic line-calling technology.

The French Open's adherence to human officiating highlights a tension between traditional sporting heritage and the drive for absolute technical accuracy. By remaining the sole holdout among the Grand Slams, Roland Garros preserves the unique visual of the umpire inspecting clay marks, but it also accepts a higher margin of human error compared to the digitized standards of the other three majors.