Live Stream- NO commentary or COMMENTARY?

[Tommy-D]

I've only watched a few matches my whole life that didn't have commentary.

It's not as bad to ME as watching a good match where the commentary is done in a foreign language I can't understand.

Sigel's first 150-out against Rempe from '89 has no commentary. So does the semi and finals from '88 Tara Open with Efren and Earl.

For matches like those,I just put some music on.

Joey's commentary is GOOD. For me,Alvin is hit or miss,mostly depending on who's with him.

One guy I feel should do more commentary is John Schmidt. Bobby Hunter too. I also like the Cotton/Jeremy combo.

Jim Wych is tolerable. Mitch Lawrence is almost unbearable. Listening to Shannon Daulton and Rodney Morris after a few beers each is pretty funny. Tommy D.

 

[Needing weight]

Commentary is a must.

Even if its bad commentating its still better than no commentating

I enjoy most of the regular commentators
Ray Hansen
Billy Incardona
Danny DiLiberto
Larry Schwartz
Jay helfert
Alvin & JR
Joey A
Upstate Al

I like it when there are Pro's in the booth

Three best commentators are
1 Scott frost
2 juice
3 mikey frost

All three of them are very funny

*Oh yeah and Gabe Owen, I heard him commentate an old(2006ish) Efren match, it was freaking hilarious. Gabe was doing funny Efren voices, I was dying laughing!! I will never forget that! I wish I could find this and watch it again…

 

[pt109]

I gotta have a commentator.
I also like reading the chats.....often hilarious.:rotflmao1:

Also, commentators, like pool players, can have a bad day....
....give them a break.

And commentators, like pool players, can improve.
The more they get to work, the better they get.

 

[Duane Tuula]

As a small/medium tournament organizer I feel the stream is enough by itself. It's way too much work for us at The Carom Room to provide commentary on top of a free stream. We let you watch & provide scoring most of the time.

Watch it & enjoy it. We provide a super view of a featured table.

If you like commentary I hope you expect to pay. Anybody who streams who provides decent & relevant commentary needs to be paid. I watched Bigtruck sit for hours & hours answering questions & providing commentary & anyone who offers that service needs to be compensated.

 

[BobTfromIL]

I definately prefer commentary, but it should be focused on the match. I really think
paying too much attention to the chat detracts from the match and really serves no purpose other than to stroke someones ego.

 

[StraightPoolIU]

I would like to make an addendum to my earlier post. I can't do foreign language commentary. I've tried. There are matches I really want to watch, but when it's the middle eastern dudes talking 1000 mph while never taking a breath I reach for the mute button and prefer silence.

P.S. Seriously how do those dudes talk that much about 1 pool match?

 

[DeHouser]

I generally mute the commentary on pool matches (the exception being the Mosconi Cup). I don't watch many streams or matches, as I prefer to see 14.1 runs on YT or some such.

Overall, I tend to like snooker commentary better, as there is less of a tendency to 'fill the space' with words. I like to hear the sounds of the game: balls contacting, rails being smacked, cue tips striking, etc.

Knowledgeable (and restrained) commentary is great, though. I just don't hear it often.

 

[watchez]

The problem with the commentary is that many people that think they are good are simply bad. No one has the guts to tell them.

 

[CreeDo]

I got to do commentary the past few APT events in our region...
they're the tour that has Mike Davis, Brandon Shuff, etc.

It's not hard, but it's a little harder than it looks. It's SO easy (for me) to get sidetracked and babble
on things besides the match in front of me (what did someone call it, rainman mode?).
It's also very easy to get a little TOO in-depth on the match and call every obvious shot.
And of course I worry I'll make some scrubby B-player prediction.

One thing that I wanna point out (which I hope will encourage the knockers
to go a little easier on the guys in the booth):

The actual commentary setup has a big effect on the quality of it.

Many bad calls can happen when the commentator doesn't have a good viewing angle.
If they are a distance from the table they assume balls don't pass that do, or a shot is easier
than it looks from the shooter's POV.

If they're forced to watch the same stream you are on a nearby laptop, it may be even worse.
They can't hear player's comments to one another. In the MD 14.1 event they were in a room facing
a wall and couldn't see it if e.g. a waitress with a hot turkey dinner strolled in front of someone's shot.

Then there's the chat... it's great if that's available as it's a source of fresh info and interaction,
and the booth guys can be alerted to problems they weren't aware of (wrong score, muted mic)
and also answer questions and make observations based on people's comments.
Sometimes though the chat is not available (the laptop is used for something else or just too far away).

Anyway, Joey, I'll say that to me, matches without commentary are much less interesting,
like something's missing. I get people's point about how you'd never hear an NFL or NBA game
with some of the amateur-hour stuff we've seen on pool streams. But I sure couldn't imagine
watching those games in silence either.

 

[ceebee]

try turning the sound off anything on TV & see how much you enjoy it.

I'd like to see roving MICs in the audience & each opponents corner... might be fun.

 

[Tramp Steamer]

Thirty some years ago NBC, as an experiment, televised an NFL game between the Jets and the Dolphins, without commentators. It went over like a turd in a punch bowl.
Of the few One Pocket streams I've watched, the best have been those with two people calling the match. One giving the blow by blow, as it were, and the other providing color commentary. Joey, and Grady, did some good ones, if memory serves. :smile:

 

[ceebee]

Why, exactly, does it seem to be necessary in pool commentary for a commentator to predict how the player who actually qualified to compete is going to play his next shot? Or better yet, two commentators predicting how the next shot will be played and arguing over who guessed correctly. I've never noticed this in golf commentary and I haven't noticed it in the limited amount of snooker I have watched.

And, in general, why is it that the commentator(s), because they see a mike in front of them, feel that means it's necessary for them to keep talking no matter what- stupid, irrelevant, uninteresting, stories about my mother-in-law, where I went to high school, etc., comments?

There's more. I turn off the sound at least 50% of the time which ruins watching the game.

Actually I don't like commentators that do that. Are they trying to impress the audience with their knowledge? Do they feel a need to upstage the players? I'd rather they offered up a good guess, after the fact, of what was done to do what.

 

[JoeyA]

I say, every railbird in the joint should have a microphone and layback the best of it to the video for later viewing on YouTube!

I doubt that you will ever see that. :smile:

I like commentary along with the streams, but only when the commentators have a clue about the game in progress and about the game of pool "in general".

I hate when the commentators just sit there and babble like "Rain Man". They don't have to do "play by play" on each and every shot, but when they make a comment they should know what the hell they are talking about.

I've seen SO MANY shots or safeties that were miscalled that it gets me wondering if many of the viewers are actually more knowledgeable about the game than the people commentating.

One of the streams I enjoyed most was a recent one (can't remember the event) where Bobby Cotton was on the microphone. That was the BEST that I've heard from anyone. He knew what he was talking about, he didn't just sit there and babble, and he filled the void times with pool "history" and stories from his pool playing days.

"Play by play" commentary is important to particular target audiences, imo.

I want commentary; won't watch it if it doesn't have one.

Yes, it appears that the consensus of opinion is that a live stream without commentary is NOT the way to go.

I like commentary. I agree that the commentary from Bobby Cotton was the best. I believe that was the week of the world 14.1 and the ginky memorial. Upstate Al was commentating some that week also. And then there's Alvin. Somebody refered to him as a dj style commentator. I could do without that.

Everyone has their favorite commentators and each has their own style and all of them should be respected.

I echo alot of the statements already. Its hard enough for me to watch pool for long spurts but without commentary I will not tune in at all.

Things I like:
a. Some talk about the game going on and the players at the table. Doesnt have to be shot for shot but should reflect whats going on to include the stage of the match/tourney or pressure involved.
b. If its a tourney, I like to hear updates from other matches even if limited.
c. I like random players from the tourney that pop in that note how their event went.
d. I like stories that players or commentators randomly might tell.

Nice suggestions.

I'm very much in favor of commentary. Dead silence is brutal. I like to have a little flavor. Talk about what's going on on the table, make a few prognostications, talk about the tournament, tell a few stories that fit in, build a narrative, talk about hot topics in the pool world. All of that adds to my interest. The only type of commentary I don't like is when guys are talking to the ustream chat without repeating the questions that they were asked. It's like hearing one side of a phone conversation that doesn't make sense. Still I prefer something over nothing.

Your complaint about answering questions from the chat without stating the question is valid and duly noted.

I don't mind either way.

If there is no commentary i tend to concentrate more on the play and think about how i would play the shots and then see how the pros do it, instead of listening to how the commentators think he'll play. I think i learn more without the commentary, even though it might not be as interesting.

If you don't like commentary, and listen without it, it is possible if you pay close attention, you may learn some things that you might have missed with a chatty commentator doing their job.

This won't be a popular opinion, but it's my opinion. This post is not directed at anyone in particular, just a general thought on the art of commentary in itself. Again my opinions here, and I'm a nobody so there shouldn't be any hurt feelings.

My answer is, it just depends. It depends on who is doing the commentary, their knowledge of the game, knowledge of the players, the players individual styles of play and the commentators personality. It also depends on the amount of commentary taking place. It's ok to have some dead air and just let the game "play out" on the screen. Not every shot has to be discussed in a multitude of scenarios unless it's a particular strategic situation the competitor is currently facing.
Some people don't mind the "dead air". Not sure if the majority of the viewing audience prefers detailed shot by shot explanation or only an explanation where the commentator thinks it is needed. The problem with that is that no one knows the level of understanding had by the viewer.


The commentary should not trump the action at or around the table. After all, we're here to watch the streaming pool first and foremost. The commentary is just an informational relay for the viewer To inform the viewer of events taking place out of the frame, or out of the reach of the microphones. To inform the viewers of where the match is at in regards to who has what score, and how many games are left until a victor is determined. The commentator should also be informing the viewers of future matches to take place on the stream and also recap some of the previous matches that a new viewer just tuning in may have missed.

Somewhat off topic here, and I've stated something similar in a previous thread:

On the topic of audio. Why is it none (that I have viewed) of the pool streams have a microphone located above or as close as possible to the table? As a viewer, first and foremost I'm interested to hear a multitude of things that are happening at the source. Some of those things I wish to hear are, 1) The sound of cue impact, I can tell if the hit was pure or not and would like to be able to hear it. 2) The communications that are happening at the table by the players. Both the players barking at each other or berating themselves for a failed attempt, or discussing fouls or potential game/rules situations. Some foul language is to be expected in my opinion, it's not like we're streaming porn, violence or illicit drug use live.

Back on topic:

There are several of the popular commentators/streamers that I have no problems with hearing on stream, and they are very professional and make it enjoyable to listen to. On the flip side though, during a match when there are several people on the mic who are clearly unfit for the task, and usually so inebriated they can't form a complete sentence. The worst is when these people are having their own little party on the microphones and paying the match zero attention. At that point I usually go for the mute button, but I still watch the action on the screen and I'm still very appreciative of them providing the video streaming service. I don't "Expect" professionalism, it's juts a nice added bonus to a freely available production.

Hats off to anyone who can commentate well with clarity, I don't think I could do it very well and appreciate the amount of mental attention and dedication it takes. So there you have it, you asked and I gave my opinions on commentary. I'm probably opening the door for an onslaught of bad comments towards me for stating how I feel about the subject. I'm a big boy and can handle it.

Feedback on my thoughts are always welcomed.

Dopc.

A lot of great thinking in your post.
If people want professional commentary and I think the majority of viewers do, the question that begs to be answered is, are they willing to pay for it? There are a lot of expenses involved in providing the live stream with commentary. I don't know of any live streamers that are making a very nice living out of providing live streams and commentary.

Even for a short event, to bring in a single, professional commentator can cost well over a thousand dollars. It is difficult for Live Stream Promoters to pay for professional commentary.

I strongly prefer commentary. I often watch matches after the fact on youtube, as I'm drifting off to sleep. Believe it or not, I can enjoy just the commentary without the video if it is focused on the match.

Here is what I like:
1) get your microphone levels right. I don't want to hear distortion or someone yelling at me
2) get your microphone levels right. see above
3) No need to yell. Talk to the viewers as if we are both sitting a few rows back in the stands. *Quiet* talk about the match.
4) Focus on the match. This is not your opportunity to go on and on about whatever tour, product, or whatever you might be involved in. I mean sure mention it here and there, no big deal. Just don't make it a show about you or your wares.
5) Call it like you see it. If someone makes a horrible shot, don't say it was a pretty good attempt.
6) Stories about pool and pool players are cool. Just don't talk over the action too much. Tell those stories when the players are on break, or racking or something.
7) The main enjoyment for most players watching is "what is he going to do here". So make that the primary focus of conversation. That is why Billy is the best...he never lets a tangent go too far, and always steers back to the match.
8) make an effort to stay updated on other scores.
9) scan the chat a little. Maybe there is a good question or issue.
10) Keep everyone updated and informed about what is coming up next
11) I shouldn't have to wonder what the score is ever. No reason any professional streaming outfit can't have an overlay with the players names, the race, game, and score.


However, to answer the OP...even if every one of my "Likes" are ignored, I can always turn the sound off. So no commentary is almost always a bad option for me.

Hope it helps,

KMRUNOUT

Some excellent suggestions for all commentators to consider.

 

[JoeyA]

I do like when the commentators discuss patterns and shot selection and cue ball position. Sometimes when this might be obvious it's less important. Also, I think it's every bit as important to hear the why and how a shot is performed than just what the shot is. Why did he go 2 rails instead of 1? Why did he use reverse? What english will he use? Was that the right choice? etc. Also, I wanted to add that I always enjoy your commentary Joey because you seem to do a really good job of getting the information out of your analyst partners like a true play by play man. Those guys have so much pool knowledge in their noodles, but sometimes it takes someone to tease it out of them and have them explain it in a way that makes sense.

You have discovered my "secret". :wink:

I like the suggestion for the questions you posed.

50% of the time, I have to mute the commentary. Why can't it be better than the air-heads in the chat room that ramble on about nothing, all the while insulting world class players?
There are some commentators that do a superb job, while others are so bad I mute them the very first rack and watch the match in silence. I know because of who they are, the exact dialog that will follow. I'd rather hear fingernails on a chalkboard. They speak as if every viewer just started watching pool last week.

Your last sentence is somewhat of a paradox. Some commentators are well respected for providing detail on practically every shot. Again, I guess it depends upon your target audience. It is impossible for the commentators to know the level of experience that the listeners possess.

I won't watch pool unless there is commentary. On the other hand if the commentary is horrible, I'll just shut off the match entirely. Some of my biggest pet peeves are lip smacking, drink slurping and coughing. Instead of naming names who I don't like, I'll name my favorites. Billy I., Grady, John Schmidt, Scott Frost, Steve Booth, Upstate Al, Jerry Forsyth, Buddy Hall, one pocket rich(from LA), Jay Helfert and Joey Augizin. I really enjoy the matches with you and Jay in the booth together. My favorite YouTube match that I've watched more than any other is the finals of the 2011 us open one pocket. I've watched that video and drifted off to sleep at night more times than I even care to think about. I could listen to Scott Frost and Corey rib each other and analyze one pocket every night of the week. Great thread Joey!

Nice pet peeves. I try very hard never to do any of those things. They are all cardinal sins. :smile:

Commentary is a must.

Even if its bad commentating its still better than no commentating

I enjoy most of the regular commentators
Ray Hansen
Billy Incardona
Danny DiLiberto
Larry Schwartz
Jay helfert
Alvin & JR
Joey A
Upstate Al

I like it when there are Pro's in the booth

Three best commentators are
1 Scott frost
2 juice
3 mikey frost

All three of them are very funny

*Oh yeah and Gabe Owen, I heard him commentate an old(2006ish) Efren match, it was freaking hilarious. Gabe was doing funny Efren voices, I was dying laughing!! I will never forget that! I wish I could find this and watch it again…

The problem with the commentary is that many people that think they are good are simply bad. No one has the guts to tell them.

Are you saying that some commentators don't know that they themselves, are "simply bad"? Or that many people (listeners) think that the commentators are good, but that the commentators are "simply bad" in your opinion?

I got to do commentary the past few APT events in our region...
they're the tour that has Mike Davis, Brandon Shuff, etc.

It's not hard, but it's a little harder than it looks. It's SO easy (for me) to get sidetracked and babble
on things besides the match in front of me (what did someone call it, rainman mode?).
It's also very easy to get a little TOO in-depth on the match and call every obvious shot.
And of course I worry I'll make some scrubby B-player prediction.

One thing that I wanna point out (which I hope will encourage the knockers
to go a little easier on the guys in the booth):

The actual commentary setup has a big effect on the quality of it.

Many bad calls can happen when the commentator doesn't have a good viewing angle.
If they are a distance from the table they assume balls don't pass that do, or a shot is easier
than it looks from the shooter's POV.

If they're forced to watch the same stream you are on a nearby laptop, it may be even worse.
They can't hear player's comments to one another. In the MD 14.1 event they were in a room facing
a wall and couldn't see it if e.g. a waitress with a hot turkey dinner strolled in front of someone's shot.

Then there's the chat... it's great if that's available as it's a source of fresh info and interaction,
and the booth guys can be alerted to problems they weren't aware of (wrong score, muted mic)
and also answer questions and make observations based on people's comments.
Sometimes though the chat is not available (the laptop is used for something else or just too far away).

Anyway, Joey, I'll say that to me, matches without commentary are much less interesting,
like something's missing. I get people's point about how you'd never hear an NFL or NBA game
with some of the amateur-hour stuff we've seen on pool streams. But I sure couldn't imagine
watching those games in silence either.

I think you share the opinion of most listeners/viewers in that commentary is a major plus and needed item for pocket billiard live streaming.

try turning the sound off anything on TV & see how much you enjoy it.

I'd like to see roving MICs in the audience & each opponents corner... might be fun.

Again, this takes additional people and people cost money, especially people that you can rely on to do a good job.

Why, exactly, does it seem to be necessary in pool commentary for a commentator to predict how the player who actually qualified to compete is going to play his next shot? Or better yet, two commentators predicting how the next shot will be played and arguing over who guessed correctly. I've never noticed this in golf commentary and I haven't noticed it in the limited amount of snooker I have watched.

And, in general, why is it that the commentator(s), because they see a mike in front of them, feel that means it's necessary for them to keep talking no matter what- stupid, irrelevant, uninteresting, stories about my mother-in-law, where I went to high school, etc., comments?

There's more. I turn off the sound at least 50% of the time which ruins watching the game.

So instead of the commentators guessing what might be done or what should be done, or filling in dead air with stories, they should be doing what? In your opinion, what exactly should the commentators be talking about?

Thanks to everyone who participated in this thread.

JoeyA

 

[NYC cue dude]

With commentary

I prefer with commentary. But, there is a surprising amount of bad commentary out there too. I won't name names, but recently, during the World 14.1 there was one who got under my skin. And many other seemed to like him. But he really had no clue, but sure thought he did. A fresh new voice at that event was Ralph Eckert. I've known Ralph for a few years and he is not only articulate, but very knowledgeable.

There are so many knowledgable folks out there, there is never an excuse for poor commentary. I can listen to about anything, too. I've watched Asian streams and even the Qatar stream wasn't too bad. Dead silence is the worst. At the very least I want to hear the chatter of the room and the click of the balls.

 

[jay helfert]

This is something I like about Joey. He takes his job seriously and is constantly trying to find ways to do it better. Joey has probably risen faster as a commentator than anyone else in the last few years. It's always a pleasure for me to work with him. He's generous to his co-coms and knows when to chime in and when to hold up. There is an art to doing good commentary and just like playing pool I know when I'm on and when I'm just a little out of stroke. :wink:

 

[tommyceilings]

I enjoy commentary.

I do not enjoy your commentary

Little to no doubt that everyone thinks Billy is the best, and I agree.
Danny D, second

The reason I ask is I was wondering what makes you watch pool matches on live stream, the actual play only or the actual play plus the pool commentary.

I find myself unable to watch a match without commentary. I even prefer poor commentary to no commentary. Maybe I am a little different than some of the viewers/listeners because I provide pool commentary from time to time but I try to look at this as just a person who enjoys pool.

I prefer to hear a commentator getting the wrong call than having no commentary.

Even if a commentator says or does things that get under my skin, I prefer commentary. I don't think I have ever turned the volume off while watching a match even in another language. I guess I am just a commentary junkie. I have found myself listening to the other commentators in an entirely different language of which I don't know a single word and wondering if I can guess what they are saying as the match goes along. Now, I am probably wrong 99% of the time since I don't know the language but it is fun to hear the commentator's rhythm and excitement or lack of excitement as it relates to the match.

If a live stream has a web cam just sitting there streaming and nothing is happening, even though I know there is going to be a big match some time soon, I will turn off the computer and go find something else to do. I find it irritating watching a live stream and not knowing what is to come and what is going on. So in summary, I guess I like the idea of commentary keeping me informed about what has gone on, what is going on and what will be going on.

There it is. Sometimes I just have to type to get the thoughts straightened out. I depend upon the commentators to tell me:
1. What has gone on before.
2. What is going on now.
3. What will be going on in the future.

That's about it for me.

What about you?

JoeyA

 

[dr9ball]

The reason I ask is I was wondering what makes you watch pool matches on live stream, the actual play only or the actual play plus the pool commentary.

What about you?

JoeyA

JoeyA,

I prefer knowledgeable commentators. I do not like people who are more interested in telling jokes and hamming it up with their friends in the booth. It in my opinion shouldn't be a frat party it should be professional. Quality commentators are rare just like highly skilled people in any discipline. I've always enjoyed Grady and Billy as well as yourself. Some of my least favorite commentators sound like they should be pro wrestlers full of ego and as my dad would say full of piss and vinegar and a little green.

 

[Neil]

This won't be a popular opinion, but it's my opinion. This post is not directed at anyone in particular, just a general thought on the art of commentary in itself. Again my opinions here, and I'm a nobody so there shouldn't be any hurt feelings.

My answer is, it just depends. It depends on who is doing the commentary, their knowledge of the game, knowledge of the players, the players individual styles of play and the commentators personality. It also depends on the amount of commentary taking place. It's ok to have some dead air and just let the game "play out" on the screen. Not every shot has to be discussed in a multitude of scenarios unless it's a particular strategic situation the competitor is currently facing.

The commentary should not trump the action at or around the table. After all, we're here to watch the streaming pool first and foremost. The commentary is just an informational relay for the viewer To inform the viewer of events taking place out of the frame, or out of the reach of the microphones. To inform the viewers of where the match is at in regards to who has what score, and how many games are left until a victor is determined. The commentator should also be informing the viewers of future matches to take place on the stream and also recap some of the previous matches that a new viewer just tuning in may have missed.

Somewhat off topic here, and I've stated something similar in a previous thread:

On the topic of audio. Why is it none (that I have viewed) of the pool streams have a microphone located above or as close as possible to the table? As a viewer, first and foremost I'm interested to hear a multitude of things that are happening at the source. Some of those things I wish to hear are, 1) The sound of cue impact, I can tell if the hit was pure or not and would like to be able to hear it. 2) The communications that are happening at the table by the players. Both the players barking at each other or berating themselves for a failed attempt, or discussing fouls or potential game/rules situations. Some foul language is to be expected in my opinion, it's not like we're streaming porn, violence or illicit drug use live.

Back on topic:

There are several of the popular commentators/streamers that I have no problems with hearing on stream, and they are very professional and make it enjoyable to listen to. On the flip side though, during a match when there are several people on the mic who are clearly unfit for the task, and usually so inebriated they can't form a complete sentence. The worst is when these people are having their own little party on the microphones and paying the match zero attention. At that point I usually go for the mute button, but I still watch the action on the screen and I'm still very appreciative of them providing the video streaming service. I don't "Expect" professionalism, it's juts a nice added bonus to a freely available production.

Hats off to anyone who can commentate well with clarity, I don't think I could do it very well and appreciate the amount of mental attention and dedication it takes. So there you have it, you asked and I gave my opinions on commentary. I'm probably opening the door for an onslaught of bad comments towards me for stating how I feel about the subject. I'm a big boy and can handle it.

Feedback on my thoughts are always welcomed.

Dopc.

Won't get any flack from me. I totally agree with you. And, because I do, I find myself turning off the sound most of the time. Something else I will add... the commentators should always be making sure of the score, and let the viewers know what it is if it isn't on the screen. They should also give some sort of "history" of the player. Who he is, is he a newbie on the scene, or a veteran with many wins? Something about the players so one can form a side to root for. Commentators also need to periodically say who they are. Often there are people commentating and few know who they are.

Again, the real reason I'm even watching is to see the match. Not listen to someone just making noise. Commentating is a job, others need to take it seriously like you do Joey.

 

[Luxury]

I vehemently agree with the original post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free