Golf on ESPN sucks

[Harry Longshanks]

I hate ESPN's coverage of the LPGA.

The announcers aren't bad. I've always been a fan of Judy Rankin, and the on-course ladies are usually good.

But what the @#$% is the point of broadcasting in HD and then blocking 25% of the screen?

ESPN forces black columns on the right and left-hand sides of the screen that say ESPN2HD so that only a 4:3 picture displays. That is, they broadcast a 16:9 signal, but block the actual program to 4:3. Why not show the full 16:9??? And because the signal is 16:9, I can't even use the format options on my TV to "stretch" or "crop".

But that's not the end of it. Oh no. At the bottom of the screen is the permanent ticker (it disappears for sommercials, of course). So, half the time, you get to see a putt disappear into a scrolling "Travis Henry has tested positive for marijuana again" instead of the cup, which is blocked by the same information you've already seen 37 times.

Then there is the top of the screen with the mostly-permanent leaderboard info. Oh, and let's throw an advertiser's logo up there too...

Here is a comparison between the Jamie Farr Classic (ESPN2) and the John Deere (Golf Channel):






And that doesn't even cover the lack of HD cameras being used on ESPN. A sports network not using HD cameras.

At least they don't have Chris Behrman on the mic today.

[iacas]

But what the @#$% is the point of broadcasting in HD and then blocking 25% of the screen?

It may be an HD channel, but it's an SD broadcast.

[mikelz]

Thanks for reminding me why I'm not getting an HDTV yet.
Everything looks fine on my 36" regular old TV.
Full 4:3 is better than partial anything.
Watching 4:3 on a 16:9 monitor is like going to the "Fun House" at the State Fair.

[joshtpa]

Until you have it, I wouldnt say that. When they put the bars up, it is the same as your set. 4:3. But not being able to watch golf in HD is crazy. It is the best thing to come to golf since metal woods.

But back on topic, I agree. Once we have watched in HD, going back to SD is just is not fun.

[AlCzervik]

you can still see gulbis' nice ass

[Harry Longshanks]

It may be an HD channel, but it's an SD broadcast.

It looked like a couple of the cameras were HD, but yes, most were SD. Of course, maybe I was just being optimistic and I was convincing myself some were HD.

But either way, its just stupid. First, it should be in HD. But even so, other networks broadcast SD in 16:9 (NBC, for example, when it covers golf, it mixes SD and HD - but all are 16:9). And even if it is a SD 4:3 broadcast, there is no excuse for all of the graphics all over the screen that don't go away. The friggin' State Farm logo?!?!? Are you kidding me? It's not like it's the Masters with limited commercial interruptions. There are already commercials every 5 shots. The screen looks like a NASCAR car.

[pjsnyc]

not to mention espn limits its hd broadcasts at 720p. even so - the image looks better on the hd channels even if the picture is only coming in at 4:3 with those vertical espn-hd thingys on the sides.

next time it happens, switch back and forth between the hd channel and the sd channel. i swear its not just in my head.

[CoolBreeze20]

ESPN "limits" its broadcasts to 720p because a progressive signal is better at showing fast motion things (like sports) than an interlaced signal is. The broadcast was in 4:3 cause it wasnt a "true" HD broadcast. I would rather see that, than a SD signal that is all stretched out to 16:9. CBS and other channels show 4:3 on their HD channels a lot too. Shows like 60 minutes and Dateline some to mind. They are just not filmed with HD cameras yet. Sucks.

[wichitapenguin]

Nothing like sports in HD.

Once you see it you will NEVER want to watch any sporting event in SD again.

[pjsnyc]

ESPN "limits" its broadcasts to 720p because a progressive signal is better at showing fast motion things (like sports) than an interlaced signal is. The broadcast was in 4:3 cause it wasnt a "true" HD broadcast. I would rather see that, than a SD signal that is all stretched out to 16:9. CBS and other channels show 4:3 on their HD channels a lot too. Shows like 60 minutes and Dateline some to mind. They are just not filmed with HD cameras yet. Sucks.

I'm with you on the rather seeing 4:3 than a stretched out picture.

But to clarify on the 720p vs. 1080i front - I prefer a higher resolution. CBS and Golf Channel, for example, broadcast in 1080i and it looks waaay better. Similarly for baseball - watching it on ESPN at 720p looks worse to me than 1080i on the YES network. I guess it all depends on the size of your screen and what resolutions it can support.

[Craig Mac]

Just be patient, it will all be HD before too long . I agree with the others that I would rather watch SD with sidebars than stretched out 4:3.

[hurley9192]

CBS sucks as well...4 minutes of golf, 2 min commercials, 4 min golf and repeat.

I loved Feherty's comment in Golf Mag this month..."if you watch golf on TV, you must think that the only viewers are guys in their late 50's who are erectionally challenged and want to play unlimited bad golf on 6000 yard courses..." That cracked me up.

[iacas]

ESPN "limits" its broadcasts to 720p because a progressive signal is better at showing fast motion things (like sports) than an interlaced signal is.

Word!

The broadcast was in 4:3 cause it wasnt a "true" HD broadcast. I would rather see that, than a SD signal that is all stretched out to 16:9. CBS and other channels show 4:3 on their HD channels a lot too. Shows like 60 minutes and Dateline some to mind. They are just not filmed with HD cameras yet. Sucks.

It was just an SD signal broadcast with wrappers on an HD channel. It was "up-rezzed" to match the 720p, but there were no actual resolution gains. It's like taking a digital image and making it three times as large. It's still the same darn image. You don't gain actual detail.

[TheGasman]

I must be the only one who gets excited when they up convert programming to 16x9 rather than 4:3. Ill watch the standard but it looks horrible on my TV. On a side note, Time Warner has been saying were going to get Golf, Food,CNBC, etc.. in HD for almost a year now with no result. What a joke.

[Harry Longshanks]

not to mention espn limits its hd broadcasts at 720p. even so - the image looks better on the hd channels even if the picture is only coming in at 4:3 with those vertical espn-hd thingys on the sides.

It's not just in your head.

ESPN "limits" its broadcasts to 720p because a progressive signal is better at showing fast motion things (like sports) than an interlaced signal is.

Yes, but golf is not a "fast motion" sport. Football, basketball, hockey - they need the progressive signal or they tend to pixelate. I've never had a 1080i signal pixelate while watching golf - or even baseball that I can remember. My TV is 1080p enabled, so I'm watching for them to start broadcasting in "true" HD.

Just be patient, it will all be HD before too long

I never adjust format if it distorts the picture, but I do use the SD-crop setting if an SD signal is being broadcast in letterbox. That way, the top/bottom and side bars are eliminated. For the LPGA broadcast, I was hoping to crop out the top and bottom graphics and the side bars - but the signal was being sent as 16:9, so I couldn't.

[Craig Mac]

I never adjust format if it distorts the picture, but I do use the SD-crop setting if an SD signal is being broadcast in letterbox. That way, the top/bottom and side bars are eliminated. For the LPGA broadcast, I was hoping to crop out the top and bottom graphics and the side bars - but the signal was being sent as 16:9, so I couldn't.

Not sure if it is the same for you but here(Cox Cable) Channel 12 is SD ESPN and 712 is HD ESPN. Then you could have just switched to the non-HD version of ESPN and made your adjustments that way, but this may not be the case in your area.

[pjsnyc]

...Yes, but golf is not a "fast motion" sport. Football, basketball, hockey - they need the progressive signal or they tend to pixelate. I've never had a 1080i signal pixelate while watching golf - or even baseball that I can remember. My TV is 1080p enabled, so I'm watching for them to start broadcasting in "true" HD...

Golf is a fast motion sport - clubhead speed and ball speed are both in excess of 100 mph. I'm not saying that I don't understand the difference between progressive scan vs. interlaced - I just think the picture looks much better at 1080i and that the slight pixelation that occurs when there's fast motion is negligible in my set...and yes - waiting for broadcasts in 1080p here as well.

[pjsnyc]

It's also possible that since 720p sets are more ubiquitous at this time (most 720p sets are capable of outputting 1080i signals anyway) ESPN is more than likely just saving on bandwidth costs since the avg consumer watching ESPN HD probably doesn't need the 1080 signal. Can anyone chime in as to whether or not this is the case?