Racing in HD

Simon

Simon

At the Start
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
1,314
Channel 4 manage to show racing in HD (Channel 140) and as far as I know, they use ATR and RUK's cameras, so the capability is obviously there. Why don't RUK and ATR use it then?]

I just watched the Leopardstown Chase on ATR and flicked back to Channel 4 and it's so much better.
 
Last edited:
But I don't see why it would cost any more as the technology's obviously already there to be used if Channel 4 are doing HD through ATR and RUK's cameras.
 
I will ask SIS for you, Simon, who supply the filmage for ATR and RUK (and all the betting shops, as well as home tv). A good question to raise with them next week.
 
granger said:
Does Channel 4 have a specific HD channel?
Click to expand...
Yeah, channel 140 on Sky, instead of 104 for standard definition.

For some reason, when Sky brought in the capability to put HD on 104 for HD subscribers, while still keeping SD as 104 for SD customers they refused, as did BBC and ITV. I don't understand why. Sky Sports 1 HD being 401 is far better than it being 408 like it used to.
 
Ruk and C4 use different cameras. They aren't showing the same pictures; at least they weren't today.
 
Last edited:
ATR is not owned by Sky alone, it is 50/50 with Arena Leisure (in terms of the holding of ordinary shares) less a tiny holding by Ascot Racecourse.

Astra charge a lot more for the use of an HD transponder on the satellite than they do for an SD transponder.
 
So now the Reuben Brothers own most of the UK's courses plus half of a TV station?
 
Racetech were providing pictures at Cheltenham racecourse today in HD and I believe HD for RUK is on its way at some stage, they are in the process of moving to dedictated HD studios I understand.

Have to completely disagree with anyone who suggests RUK is overpriced. I think it's a fantastic channel, and wouldn't give a second thought to paying £50 a month for it.
 
I'm sure we're all very happy for you thinking nothing of shelling out £600 a year for a bit of racing, DJ, but even £20 pcm can be a bit steep for those on limited incomes. But, if you don't mind paying nearly three times the amount you currently pay, perhaps you'd like to sponsor this enjoyment for a couple of us rather more impoverished members? Me first - and thank you!
 
Krizon

I can sympathise that some can't justify an extra expense of £20 per month for something as trivial as televised racing in these tough economic times, but that is a different debate altogether as to whether the programming on the channel currently offers value for money.

If most people look at the amount of money they turn over in a month through betting on racing, 67p per day for the usefulness of such a resource really doesn't strike me as being anything other than good value.
 
Some of us, though, don't watch racing for betting. We watch it because we simply like it. If you're betting properly, I'm sure you're bringing in way more than enough to pay for RUK. But for those of us who can't really be called punters, and are on reduced or limited incomes, it's quite a luxury. Personally, I was perfectly happy when it was one free-to-air channel, prior to the two-way split, and I'm quite content to put up with it being commercial if it means free.
 
I suppose the news that various racecourses are leaving ATR for RUK isn't welcome news then, Kri. Can someone remind me which courses are making the switch?
 
I was positive I read on here about Punchestown or Leopardstown or one of them thinking ofswitching, but I can't find it.
 
Back
Top