The motion is not delivered in 60 different frames progressively with 1080i, no matter how 1080p weaves together the two fields of 540i, it is still configuring, weaving together a non progressive signal. The motion can not compare to 60 progressive frames from it's conception, especially live sports.
The two interlaced 540 fields are mended together, but does not equal a real 60 frame signal because the odd & even fields were split from the same frame of a 30 frame signal, but 720p 60 is 60 frames each being unique of itself.
To compare 2 broken up pasted fields of an interlaced signal to 60 progressive from it's conceptions is ludicrous.
1080i is 2 fields of the same frame where as real 720/60 is 60 frames of 60 frames
That is not one frame being shown after the other like 720p/60 because both fields of 1080i are weave together to be displayed on the screen at the same time.
FROM THE ARTICLE PROVIDED..
"If nothing in the image is moving, the processor combines the two fields directly. With this method, still images can have the complete 1080 lines of vertical resolution, but as soon as there is any motion, half of the data is discarded and the resolution drops to 540 lines. So, while static test patterns look sharp, video does not."
"While it is mathematically impossible to avoid discarding pixels in motion during de-interlacing, HQV processing is careful to discard only the pixels that would cause combing artifacts"
(This can not compare to a true 720/60 progressive frame signal...)
"Second Stage Diagonal Interpolation:
To recover some of the detail lost in the areas in motion, HQV processing implements a multi-direction diagonal filter that reconstructs some of the lost data at the edges of moving objects, filtering out any jaggies. This operation is called second-stage diagonal interpolation because it's performed after the deinterlacing, which is the first stage of processing. Since diagonal interpolation is independent of the de-interlacing process, competitors have used similar algorithms with their frame-based de-interlacing approaches"
"Silicon Optix is not the only company to implement pixel-based motion-adaptive de-interlacing, and it is important to recognize that all such de-interlacing is not identical. In order to implement a true per-pixel motion-adaptive deinterlacer, the video processor must perform a four-field analysis."
(This can not compare to a true 720/60 non Interpolation progressive frame signal...)
Never mind 2nd stage Interpolation....http://www.hqv.com/technology/index...FTOKEN=54917728
Keep in mind even this that helps the 1080i signal ...is not on every 1080p set
"However, this is still rare in high-definition video processors due to the computational complexity of even frame-level high-definition motion detection."
So that says it all... so it can not compare to the true progressive 720p/60 signal for sports etc... on a 720p set
720p is better on 720, 1080p proponents once again ignore the fact that 360 vertical and and 640 horizontal dilute the 720p signal on 1080p sets which is why once again, 1080p sets see a better 1080i signal than a 720 signal & the reports and tests are in of there being no difference with the 1080i signals on 1080p set next to the 768 one at a normal distance.
The tests and fact speak for themselves and 1080p advocates will ignore the fact the 720p signal is weak on the 1080p set.
Once again the resolution of the eye comes into play.
Go talk to Sony tech's.