Some Stream Commentators Irk Me

[HawaiianEye]

I watch lots of free streams and it irks me when the commentators don't have a clue what they are talking about and don't see shots that are "obvious" to me.

I can't count how many times I sit here and hear both guys call the wrong shot or say "there is no possible way out of here for him", when the shot the guy actually shoots is the shot I saw as soon as he came to the table. He may have actually intended to get the cue ball where it was because it was the only spot he could get to the next ball.

And don't they watch the same view on their monitors as we do? I can't count the number of times they say he is hooked or blocked, when I'm sitting here and can see they can hit the ball.

IMHO, if you don't know what you are talking about in the booth, talk less. If you can't shoot, don't try to predict what they guy who can shoot is doing.

Rant over.

 

[couldnthinkof01]

Dont you wish they would bring back that guy from inside pool?

Every time I watch a stream I always wish for more LIIIVVVEE!

 

[billiardthought]

I watch lots of free streams

Not a bad price for mediocre quality

 

[HawaiianEye]

Not a bad price for mediocre quality

The Price Is Right is a TV show and the guy knows what he is talking about.

 

[billiardthought]

The Price Is Right is a TV show and the guy knows what he is talking about.

I think the guy with the microphone that you're mentioning gets paid to be up there

 

[spartan]

I watch lots of free streams and it irks me when the commentators don't have a clue what they are talking about and don't see shots that are "obvious" to me.

I can't count how many times I sit here and hear both guys call the wrong shot or say "there is no possible way out of here for him", when the shot the guy actually shoots is the shot I saw as soon as he came to the table. He may have actually intended to get the cue ball where it was because it was the only spot he could get to the next ball.

And don't they watch the same view on their monitors as we do? I can't count the number of times they say he is hooked or blocked, when I'm sitting here and can see they can hit the ball.

IMHO, if you don't know what you are talking about in the booth, talk less. If you can't shoot, don't try to predict what they guy who can shoot is doing.

Rant over.

It's free so I guess we cannot complain
While we are on it , those calling bad shots are fine since at least they talk about the match
The worse are those who go on and on about irrelevant non-match related stuff like food, gossip, have personal chats with each other over stream etc.

 

[MuchoBurrito]

I gotta say that even though Cotton plays pretty good from the both on the bar tables, he does bug me a little bit at times... He's always got a story to stop all stories, etc.

 

[dawgcpa]

Commentators

Turn down the volume.....

 

[HawaiianEye]

I gotta say that even though Cotton plays pretty good from the both on the bar tables, he does bug me a little bit at times... He's always got a story to stop all stories, etc.

Cotton is actually one that I like more than a lot of others. He tells a lot of stories, but when he talks about what is happening at the table, he knows what is going on and predicts most of the shots well.

 

[MuchoBurrito]

Cotton is actually one that I like more than a lot of others. He tells a lot of stories, but when he talks about what is happening at the table, he knows what is going on and predicts most of the shots well.

Yeah he does, he calls them better than most. Cotton and Ken are probably my favourite combo.

But he sure does think he's some cool dude...

 

[jeffj2h]

Commentators would really benefit from bringing a sheet of paper into the booth with them. For each game write down simple stuff like whether it was a B&R, or a player made an error, or scratch on break. And the score.

Commentators have a lot on their minds and easily get distracted just by the need to fill air time talking. So they very often forget the score, or over estimate how many B&R's a player is on (they say "he's on a 4 pack" when he actually pushed out twice). If more than 2 commentators are in the booth, these mental errors go up 10x.

 

[Jimbojim]

That's the biggest reason why I like vintages matches. Billy Incardona, Buddy Hall, Nick Varner, Jim Rempe, etc were great commentators.

 

[pt109]

Commentators would really benefit from bringing a sheet of paper into the booth with them. For each game write down simple stuff like whether it was a B&R, or a player made an error, or scratch on break. And the score.

Commentators have a lot on their minds and easily get distracted just by the need to fill air time talking. So they very often forget the score, or over estimate how many B&R's a player is on (they say "he's on a 4 pack" when he actually pushed out twice). If more than 2 commentators are in the booth, these mental errors go up 10x.

I agree about a sheet of paper.....actually two sheets.

One sheet with ongoing match info...

Another sheet with both player's bios....each player should be quizzed by the commentators
....I have watched matches where they weren't even sure about a player's name.

...and a commentator should have a fair knowledge of the history of the game.
...that's including former winners of tha tournament being played...who made the table..
...type of cloth...etc

 

[Wheels33]

Not a bad price for mediocre quality

Their sponsors wouldn't agree if increasing the quality brought in more viewers.


Also, sometimes that mediocre quality is there on a pay per view, and you don't know it until the tournament has started. A reason why I won't be a repeat customer on a lot of pay per views.

 

[HawaiianEye]

The stories and "filler" don't bother me as much as the lack of knowledge of the game.

I realize that not everybody in the booth is going to be as good as the guy playing at the table, but the commentators shouldn't sound like APA-3s trying to predict the patterns and strategies of guys like Oscar Dominguez and better.

The player will have a "routine" layout and some of them will explain how "difficult" it is going to be to get out and how they should probably play a safety.

 

[Cornerman]

The stories and "filler" don't bother me as much as the lack of knowledge of the game.

I realize that not everybody in the booth is going to be as good as the guy playing at the table, but the commentators shouldn't sound like APA-3s trying to predict the patterns and strategies of guys like Oscar Dominguez and better.

The player will have a "routine" layout and some of them will explain how "difficult" it is going to be to get out and how they should probably play a safety.

I assume this was all free stream and not PPV?

Not that you're really looking for an answer but,

For sure, what we see as commentators is often different than what the viewer sees. We have a monitor, but often we are looking at the table from our weird angle. And we can look back and forth from the table to the monitor, and they look different due to parallax and lighting.

Additionally, there's a matter of the intended audience. Personally, I think commentators should be directing their efforts to middle of the road players and beginners. Advanced players don't need the commentary, so commentary is often background noise for them. I believe this is true for every sport out there. Those of us who know baseball, golf or tennis don't need the commentary, and don't need to know how easy or difficult a shot is

For example, overhand smashes and swinging volleys are absolutely routine for advanced players, so why does the commentator always make it sound like it's so difficult? Because they're speaking to the average player who might not find that particular shot so easy.

Why does the commentator tell me that it's a a 2-2 count and that the catcher is setting up inside, and the pitch was a cut fastball. As someone who knows baseball pretty well, I knew all of that in my sleep. But, the commentary isn't for me; it's for someone who might not understand it.

Why does the commentator tell us that due to his fade and distance, he aims over here with a X-iron. Surely every golfer who's ever duffed it into the trees knows that he's going to use the distance-appropriate club, and go with his natural fade (or draw). The commentary isn't for advanced players. It's commentating sake.

Like it or not, that's what other sports already do. We have a choice in our industry. Personally, I'd like to mimic sports that work. That means color commentary for commentating sake, not for instructional and certainly not for the advanced players who already know what's going on.

Freddie <~~~ my $.02

 

[Jimbojim]

I assume this was all free stream and not PPV?

Not that you're really looking for an answer but,

For sure, what we see as commentators is often different than what the viewer sees. We have a monitor, but often we are looking at the table from our weird angle. And we can look back and forth from the table to the monitor, and they look different due to parallax and lighting.

Additionally, there's a matter of the intended audience. Personally, I think commentators should be directing their efforts to middle of the road players and beginners. Advanced players don't need the commentary, so commentary is often background noise for them. I believe this is true for every sport out there. Those of us who know baseball, golf or tennis don't need the commentary, and don't need to know how easy or difficult a shot is

For example, overhand smashes and swinging volleys are absolutely routine for advanced players, so why does the commentator always make it sound like it's so difficult? Because they're speaking to the average player who might not find that particular shot so easy.

Why does the commentator tell me that it's a a 2-2 count and that the catcher is setting up inside, and the pitch was a cut fastball. As someone who knows baseball pretty well, I knew all of that in my sleep. But, the commentary isn't for me; it's for someone who might not understand it.

Why does the commentator tell us that due to his fade and distance, he aims over here with a X-iron. Surely every golfer who's ever duffed it into the trees knows that he's going to use the distance-appropriate club, and go with his natural fade (or draw). The commentary isn't for advanced players. It's commentating sake.

Like it or not, that's what other sports already do. We have a choice in our industry. Personally, I'd like to mimic sports that work. That means color commentary for commentating sake, not for instructional and certainly not for the advanced players who already know what's going on.

Freddie <~~~ my $.02

Can't agree more with you there. Mike Sigel was good at making it a great experience for new players. You could really tell when he was commentating that he was speaking to the inexperienced watching.

But I do agree with the OP that commentators should focus on the match at hand and maybe a short pool story but nothing else.

 

[Cornerman]

Can't agree more with you there. Mike Sigel was good at making it a great experience for new players. You could really tell when he was commentating that he was speaking to the inexperienced watching.

But I do agree with the OP that commentators should focus on the match at hand and maybe a short pool story but nothing else.

Agreed on this. I don't mind an anecdote here and there, but anything longer than two or three sentences starts to lose the moment. You'll notice the "meanwhile, back at the table" phrase often heard.

Freddie

 

[billiardthought]

I do wonder how our current commentators are getting compensated? Some streams are free, some are free with ads, some are paid. How much money trickles to the people behind the mic? Scott Rabon is a great commentator and I hope Bigtruck compensated him well for his work in the past few one pocket events they have done.

If Joe Blow is getting a free cheeseburger for sitting down behind the mic, I don't care if he talks about his dying dog because I'm not paying for it...

 

[Z-Nole]

I watch lots of free streams and it irks me when the commentators don't have a clue what they are talking about and don't see shots that are "obvious" to me.

I can't count how many times I sit here and hear both guys call the wrong shot or say "there is no possible way out of here for him", when the shot the guy actually shoots is the shot I saw as soon as he came to the table. He may have actually intended to get the cue ball where it was because it was the only spot he could get to the next ball.

And don't they watch the same view on their monitors as we do? I can't count the number of times they say he is hooked or blocked, when I'm sitting here and can see they can hit the ball.

IMHO, if you don't know what you are talking about in the booth, talk less. If you can't shoot, don't try to predict what they guy who can shoot is doing.

Rant over.

Brent Musburger has made a career out of being a mindless idiot.