by Todd Raubenolt

Created on: April 13, 2009

There is little doubt that both Golf and Baseball coverage as compared to other televised sporting events move at a snails pace. Actually, even compared to CSPAN coverage these sports can seem to drag on. I happen to be a fan of both, so I have some interest in watching but I can commiserate with those who do not enjoy either and are forced to sit through a baseball game or day of golf coverage. If I had to pick which one was the slowest to watch, I would have to point the finger at baseball these days.

If asked the same question 10 years ago, there is little doubt I would have picked golf hands down. In fact, I think it would be very difficult to argue to the contrary. Times have changed in both sports, and based upon play per minute coverage (very scientifically calculated by me as you will see) and variety of activity I have to say that baseball now the slower telecast. I think this switch is due to technology changes in the coverage of golf, and trends in the game of baseball.

Let's start with baseball. In years past while not speedy, a baseball game used to proceed at a fairly predictable clip. You could count on a game lasting from 2-2 1/2 hours. If you watched on television that was always a fairly reasonable time commitment. In the last several years this pace has slowed. It is not uncommon now for games to stretch well past 3 hours - no rain delays here, just slow play. There are multiple reasons for this, but I am going to point the finger at Mathmatics, specifically statistics. The game today is so driven by matchups and stats that managers, hitters and pitchers are constantly adjusting: Managers bring in pitchers to face specific batters, pitchers overthink pitch selections delaying delivery, hitters adjust their gloves, cups, grip and anythinge else they can touch between each pitch. The result of this is we have a lot of coverage time devoted to non-game action like pitching warmup, 75 throws to first, 15 practice swings along with batting glove adjustments between each pitch.

This leads to my very scientific measurement on "slowness". If I can read more than a paragraph of a newspaper story between game action, the game is slow. These days I can almost read an entire page sometimes between pitches of a baseball game when a pitching change is underway or a runner is on first - mind numbing!

Golf coverage used to be the same. You had 2 or 3 camera crews out there scrambling around trying to get on course coverage with a couple of stationary cameras in place on key holes. This often led to minutes of coverage of some guy trying to figure out which way the wind was blowing or if he should use an 8 or 9 iron. Better coverage has all but eliminated this until the later phases of each day when there are fewer players on the course. Now, the second it appears one of these guys is unsure of what to play or when to hit, coverage switches to another player at ball address. No doubt golf coverage can last much longer than baseball, but when I apply the "newspaper test", I am seldom able to get through a couple of sentences before another player strikes or putts the ball.

There is no doubt that baseball and golf take the crown for slowest of all the televised sporting events (poker might be right up there too), but it is my belief that golf has given up the proverbial throne to baseball as slowest in recent years. Technology and matchups have turned the tide in my opinion. But look on the bright side, pick either one and you are ensured of losing 2-5 productive hours of your life, and isn't that what watching T.V. is all about?

Learn more about this author, Todd Raubenolt.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.