4 ms·

How low is ultra-low-latency that it's relevant for sports? Does anyone really care if their broadcast is 30 seconds delayed from live? I subscribe to both For

How low is ultra-low-latency that it's relevant for sports? Does anyone really care if their broadcast is 30 seconds delayed from live? I subscribe to both Formula 1 and MotoGP online streaming services and couldn't care less if the broadcasts were even multiple minutes delayed. They may very well be already and I wouldn't know. As far as I can tell they both just use standard CDNs delivering DASH or similar (basically just short video files played in sequence). That seems more than enough for sports. Multiple minutes may result in getting real time information from elsewhere (e.g., Twitter, local radio) but anywhere from 10 to 30 seconds seems fine.

toast0 8y ago
If your friends are watching the same events in other places; you basically need your video to be less delayed than your friends' viewing plus the latency of them texting you (friend observes something, types something, sends, then whatever network and push delay on the way to you). If you're not watching with someone else, it doesn't make that much difference; but 30 seconds is plenty for someone to cheer for a goal and the notification to distract you from seeing it.
- pedrocr 8y ago
  That's already an issue with radio vs TV which is where I'm getting the ~10 to 30 second value. Normal cable TV already has a bunch of delay and someone listening on the radio is often 15+ seconds ahead of you. This can be disruptive. If that person is at a bar or other gathering they will disrupt the viewing because they will cheer (or not cheer) well ahead of the event so the suspense is gone. I've seen this happen. So given that what you are competing against (cable TV) already has a significant delay I doubt a normal web stream can't reach the same or better latency with just standard HTTP download of video files.
daniel-cussen 8y ago
Yes. 30 seconds is too much. In Santiago, during national soccer matches everyone would watch, goals would reach us through the sound of neighbors rejoicing sooner than they would from actual television coverage because the satellite dish had a latency of say 3 seconds over cable.
- pedrocr 8y ago
  You're giving an example that validates my point. Existing technologies already have widely variable delays (radio vs broadcast TV vs cable TV vs sattelite TV) and yet they're all in wide use. And you can't compare directly the 30s I suggested (end-to-end latency) with the 3 seconds of latency differential between technologies. It's probably less than that but it's possible your neighbors are in a 30s delay and you are in a 33s delay. And if the problem was actually that serious it would be easier to fix it by just adding additional delay to the faster technologies instead of having to reduce latency in internet streaming at huge cost.
  - asutekku 8y ago
    Then you would have the people at stadium tweeting about the results and ruining the experience for the rest. We can and we should strive to get the best possible result if it is feasible.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
brightball 8y ago
Yes, absolutely. Huge deal for live sports. It’s the entire reason that I won’t cut the cord.
- pedrocr 8y ago
  The chord you're not cutting already has a large delay from live. If you're in the US even larger because besides the delay from the technology there's also intentional broadcast delay for censorship reasons.
oaththrowaway 8y ago
I work for a video streaming company (primarily sports). There is a huge problem with latency in sports. We call it the "Twitter effect". Essentially people either see things on social media or app notifications before it happens. Kinda ruins it for some people. We are working on sub-30 second latency in 4K w/ server side ad insertion, but it's hard work. Especially with encoding with DRM baked in.
- pedrocr 8y ago
  Thanks! Do you know what the equivalent latency number is for cable TV? The Twitter effect only applies for the difference between the two numbers.
  - oaththrowaway 8y ago
    I'm actually not sure. I'm sure it's different for every station and mode of delivery. Our latency is measured directly from the broadcaster signal.
  - cstejerean 8y ago
    Broadcast TV latency is usually in the 4-10 second range, with typical latency being around 6s. Not sure how it breaks down between cable vs satellite vs over-the-air.
- TickleSteve 8y ago
  Surely, in that case what would be important is relative-latency, not absolute. If you delay all your friends by 30s +-2s then that would probably be fine... That changes the problem somewhat.
  - isostatic 8y ago
    good luck having a conversation with them with that type of latency
- pjc50 8y ago
  At the top of this thread I was wondering "how many miliseconds is low latency", I hadn't realised it was usually worse than 30 seconds!
ajflores1604 8y ago
Just experienced this delay being an issue for the 3rd period of this vegas-san jose playoff game. When goals pop off as fast as they do and it completely changes the game, that delay matters. Especially when my friends are either at a bar or streaming the game, it's hard to communicate and share the moment without spoiling. I basically have to keep a mental tab on who's stream is delayed and when I can get excited with who.
netwanderer3 8y ago
Ultra-low-latency is absolutely vital in sports betting industry where the odds are constantly changing based on what actions are taking place in real time. Results in sports can switch from one side to the other end within split second, so whoever has the lowest latency will gain massive advantages. It's very similar to stock trading.

toast0 8y ago

If your friends are watching the same events in other places; you basically need your video to be less delayed than your friends' viewing plus the latency of them texting you (friend observes something, types something, sends, then whatever network and push delay on the way to you). If you're not watching with someone else, it doesn't make that much difference; but 30 seconds is plenty for someone to cheer for a goal and the notification to distract you from seeing it.

pedrocr 8y ago
That's already an issue with radio vs TV which is where I'm getting the ~10 to 30 second value. Normal cable TV already has a bunch of delay and someone listening on the radio is often 15+ seconds ahead of you. This can be disruptive. If that person is at a bar or other gathering they will disrupt the viewing because they will cheer (or not cheer) well ahead of the event so the suspense is gone. I've seen this happen. So given that what you are competing against (cable TV) already has a significant delay I doubt a normal web stream can't reach the same or better latency with just standard HTTP download of video files.

daniel-cussen 8y ago

Yes. 30 seconds is too much. In Santiago, during national soccer matches everyone would watch, goals would reach us through the sound of neighbors rejoicing sooner than they would from actual television coverage because the satellite dish had a latency of say 3 seconds over cable.

pedrocr 8y ago
You're giving an example that validates my point. Existing technologies already have widely variable delays (radio vs broadcast TV vs cable TV vs sattelite TV) and yet they're all in wide use. And you can't compare directly the 30s I suggested (end-to-end latency) with the 3 seconds of latency differential between technologies. It's probably less than that but it's possible your neighbors are in a 30s delay and you are in a 33s delay. And if the problem was actually that serious it would be easier to fix it by just adding additional delay to the faster technologies instead of having to reduce latency in internet streaming at huge cost.
- asutekku 8y ago
  Then you would have the people at stadium tweeting about the results and ruining the experience for the rest. We can and we should strive to get the best possible result if it is feasible.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

brightball 8y ago

Yes, absolutely. Huge deal for live sports. It’s the entire reason that I won’t cut the cord.

pedrocr 8y ago
The chord you're not cutting already has a large delay from live. If you're in the US even larger because besides the delay from the technology there's also intentional broadcast delay for censorship reasons.

oaththrowaway 8y ago

I work for a video streaming company (primarily sports). There is a huge problem with latency in sports. We call it the "Twitter effect". Essentially people either see things on social media or app notifications before it happens. Kinda ruins it for some people. We are working on sub-30 second latency in 4K w/ server side ad insertion, but it's hard work. Especially with encoding with DRM baked in.

pedrocr 8y ago
Thanks! Do you know what the equivalent latency number is for cable TV? The Twitter effect only applies for the difference between the two numbers.
- oaththrowaway 8y ago
  I'm actually not sure. I'm sure it's different for every station and mode of delivery. Our latency is measured directly from the broadcaster signal.
- cstejerean 8y ago
  Broadcast TV latency is usually in the 4-10 second range, with typical latency being around 6s. Not sure how it breaks down between cable vs satellite vs over-the-air.
TickleSteve 8y ago
Surely, in that case what would be important is relative-latency, not absolute. If you delay all your friends by 30s +-2s then that would probably be fine... That changes the problem somewhat.
- isostatic 8y ago
  good luck having a conversation with them with that type of latency
pjc50 8y ago
At the top of this thread I was wondering "how many miliseconds is low latency", I hadn't realised it was usually worse than 30 seconds!

ajflores1604 8y ago

Just experienced this delay being an issue for the 3rd period of this vegas-san jose playoff game. When goals pop off as fast as they do and it completely changes the game, that delay matters. Especially when my friends are either at a bar or streaming the game, it's hard to communicate and share the moment without spoiling. I basically have to keep a mental tab on who's stream is delayed and when I can get excited with who.

netwanderer3 8y ago

Ultra-low-latency is absolutely vital in sports betting industry where the odds are constantly changing based on what actions are taking place in real time. Results in sports can switch from one side to the other end within split second, so whoever has the lowest latency will gain massive advantages. It's very similar to stock trading.