Horse Racing Video Streaming

[JimG]

What affects the quality of horse racing video streaming from sites like youbet, twinspires, etc.? What is the optimal setup for quality streaming at full screen or are the sites themselves limited for that?

I get better quality on some sites than others, but none I am completely satisfied with. I have an older xp machine with 2 mb ram and my current download speeds are 10mb down and 5 mb upload. Should I be looking for a doscis 3.0 modem? Would that help? Thanks for all replies.

Jim

[HUSKER55]

I will also be interested in the response to this. I have been told that the problem lies in your softwares ability to interpret the signal.

So I bought a tv simulcast card reader and still the same problem. I get great video until the race starts and then it go bonkers.

I called tech support and they claim it has everything to do with who is dispensing the signal.

I called time warner and they say they only send what they receive.

If you know enough to outsmart customer service you don't need em because all they do is pass the buck, so save your time.

If anyone here knows the answer I am all ears.



thanks for your assistance

:)

[GameTheory]

Even at their max quality it isn't all that fantastic. I'd like to say eventually they'll be outputting an HD (or even SD) quality stream, especially since it is getting easier to actually send these signals to your TV, but this is racing so what is inevitable progress in every other industry may just not ever happen.

[Bobby Seller]

my wagering computer is primarily setup for streaming video, which is to say internet and a wiide screen are the highlights. It doesn't require a whole lot of computer power.

Your settings are good to stream the video.
If there is a "lag", you should also test your "Ping". sounds like you know your download/up speeds, you may also check: http://www.speedtest.net/

Video quality is determined by the adw/provider. They keep it cheap and low quality because that way everyone can view without lag.

However, the common internet standard has INCREASED in the past several years, and dial-up is rare among ADW players.
an option of highER quality would be much appreciated.

[DJofSD]

A worthwhile and achievable goal would be IPTV . (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPTV)

And lest your eyes glaze over by all of the techno-jargon, IPTV is what AT&T uses for their U-verse product which can be delivered over your existing POTS two wire/twisted wire pair. When I subscribed, you had the ability to stream 1 HD and 3 SD channels at the same time.

[Dave Schwartz]

Primary considerations are:

1. Internet connection speed
2. Processor speed.
3. available RAM
4. CPU time available (i.e. what % of the CPU is being used by other programs?)
5. Fast Video card with lots of RAM.

Note that #4 can be helped by dual and multi processors.


I have a full T1. There was a time when this was the biggest pipe you could find. (Now it is just the most expensive. <G> Alas, I need it.) Cable is typically 4-5 times faster than what I have for about 15% of the price.

That being said, I have a semi-dedicated machine for running all of my bandwidth-intensive apps during the playing day. That includes At The Races and YouBet video (which is a backup for my RTN system).

[skate]

Ditto on Dave


I had problems years back. What i found was that the Verizon optics, that went directly to you house, made my reception 100%.

I thought that Comcast Cable was the same , but the cable(line) they used was able to be overburden at Times. Between 5 and 7 PM, i'd be cut off, which is likely the time most people were trying to jump on line.

Verizon Optic went directly to my house. Not available in all locations, but worth looking into.

[Dave Schwartz]

Optics? Are you kidding? I'd kill for an optic connection.

I have a friend who pays $70 per month for 72mb down and about 10mb up!

I pay $350 for my T1 which is 1.5 both ways.

[chickenhead]

just curious, but why do you stick with the nailed up T1 Dave?

[CBedo]

Optics? Are you kidding? I'd kill for an optic connection.

I have a friend who pays $70 per month for 72mb down and about 10mb up!

I pay $350 for my T1 which is 1.5 both ways.That would be stellar. Still not available where I am. I pay about 45 a month to get 16 down and .700 up with a plain old dsl line.

[Dave Schwartz]

I need static IPs.

Cable company wants almost $600 for what I have now.

[wilderness]

I need static IPs.

Cable company wants almost $600 for what I have now.

Why not just use paid hosting? It would be much cheaper than requiring static IP's for a home based server?