Mich St / WIS

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by letemplay

Most new scoreboards are operated via wireless signal, although some do have a hard wire either for backup or because the particular arena has experienced interferences on their wireless. I'm going to offer that in this case the clock on top of basket is receiving a wireless signal, while the main arena scoreboard is connected via hard cable like a standard co-ax or cat-5. If this were the case it can actually take longer for the signal to reach that distance, which MAY explain the very momentary delay of .02

Wireless is almost always slower than wired unless the wire is ridiculously long.....as in going a few miles out of the way. Wireless has more steps of encoding/decoding to go through that wired doesn't and must undergo much more complicated error detection and correction....all adding to delays beyond what wired solutions encounter. In humanly observable terms, however, they're usually close enough....but wireless is rarely faster.

The difference is more likely in the processing module that converts the control signals into the signals to turn on/off the relevant lighting elements on the board and the time it takes for the board/display to switch them on/off....known as lag time....the time from when the input signal arrives at the display to when the display reflects the input. And this is not the same as response time.

Typical lag times for LCD monitors, for example, range from something like 20ms (0.02 sec) up to around 200ms (0.2 sec) and LCD monitors are compact, high volume products where the cost of developing a fast system is amortized across the millions of units.

I would not be surprised if the large, fancy arena monitors had lag times greater than that of LCD monitors. The 0.2 sec lag difference as shown in the above snapshot would not be unreasonable.