Pool Announcers; What do you want?

There IS a lack of professionalism among commentators of pool. As others have mentioned, they rarely do their homework regarding past encounters of the contestants, their records etc...This can be tolerated when it's a one person operation, but we should probably expect better from the pros. Probably the people running mom-and-pop streaming channels do not have time for anything apart from the technical stuff, which is understandable. You won't believe how many problems can occur with high res streams, especially with multiple cameras etc. Usually the bandwith at the pool hall or venue is not adequate, which causes endless problems with choppiness, picture/audio drop outs and out and out crashes. I'm ok with computers but I'm not an expert at streaming and network operations. I doubt much can be done about these problems by a small operation, live and under the gun.

What is more difficult to swallow is talking about what they ate, private conversations with their friends and the stream chat. This is the point in which I mute the audio. I also can get tired of people being repeatedly wrong about EVERYTHING. We all get stuff wrong, but when it's your job to commentate, some competence is expected. Commentating is hard. I can't speak English rapidly without stumbling over words and am way to excitable to be any good as a commentator myself, so I do have respect for the underappreciated art of talking clearly, without repeating yourself and making Ummm sounds after every sentence.

I am rarely angry with professional commentary in Eurosport, Matchroom or Accu-stats productions. Some times I mute them if the cater to much to people who do not know the game, if they are wrong all the time etc.., but in general i appreciate commentary when an effort has clearly been made.
 
DieselPete said:
I'm watching Table Two of the Matchroom World Pool Championships, streaming on YouTube, and generally enjoying it. I appreciate that they stream some content for free and the quality of play is obviously amazing. But I find that I do miss having announcers.

At the same time, I often find that I don't love what I get from pool announcers, that there is too much time spent predicting every single shot and then telling us what the player should have done, what the announcer would have done, why another route was better, and then the occasional comment about how great a shot actually was. (I can't stand being told that "the folks at home don't know how hard that was" when most of us know EXACTLY how hard something was).

Announcers often seem torn between teaching the game, like the viewers are beginners (Gasp! "He has to go THREE rails for position; here, here, and here, to get on this ball, here...") and over using the telestrator to show us every route, or assuming that the viewers know all of this and using technical terms that beginners wouldn't get ("He just has to stun this ball and he'll fall onto the carom for his next shot.").

So, the question: What is it that you want from your pool announcers? How is the job done properly in your opinions?

Should they speak to the veteran players or should they teach the game to the newbies, like instructional videos?
Click to expand...
When the money arrives for the game, to create lives for the players/sport, then and only then will we have Professional announcers like the Camel Pro Tour Tommy and some of the earlier Wide World of Sports Productions. Top Professional/educated commentators/went to school, even from that pool of talent very few ever become successful on camera.
When the $$$$$$ arrive, we'll begin to PAY/ the commentators who had schooling, matters will improve.
 
I want Vin Scully on commentary. Knows when to STFU. Knows when to point out something noteworthy. Doesn't point out the obvious. Doesn't create fake drama ("He's blocked! Oh, wait, not he's not.") Has interesting anecdotes but doesn't let them take priority over the action in front of them. knows when to insert them.

I was watching a match recently (don't ask me which match, which series; I don't remember) and the commentators, at least two, maybe three on the mic, started telling stories about when they were in this tournament, or that gamboling match, or that grudge match, etc., and got SO far into their own stories, that they neglected to acknowledge some really, really superb three-rail-then-carom pocketing, followed by a truly remarkable perfect speed control positioning of the CB, followed by a perfectly-executed out. I think it was at the hands of SVB, but was there any comment by the "commentators" about what had just occurred? No, there was ego-stroking amongst themselves about what they had seen or done at a tournament decades ago.

I am sorry I didn't note who the f* it was commentating, but they were egomaniacs, first pointing out (mostly incorrectly) what the player was doing, then when something truly noteworthy happened on the table, were too busy stroking their own egos reminiscing.

Yes, I may suck at pool, but as a consumer of pool coverage, I have a voice. (It's the wine talking. My good self-governors have been disabled.)

Doug
 
Last edited:
sjm said:
Let me open by saying that I'm talking about commentators, not guests such as active pros who sit in for a match. I'm talking about those who are commentating, not participating, in an event. For me, I'm looking for five things more than anything else: 1) impartiality, 2) selectivity, 3) meaningful analysis, 4) avoidance of cliches, platitudes and patent falsehoods., and 5) supplementary information about the players.

As this thread has been started during the World Championship, I will focus on the commentators of the current event.

Impartiality
The first thing I want in a commentator is impartiality. When a commentator openly roots for one of the players, it devalues the commentary. Such announcers also tend to be apologists for the errors of their favored players and are excessively critical of their opponents. They are more laudatory of their preferred players in pre-match comments, too. The lack of impartiality has been a big problem at the current World Championship.

Selectivity
The next thing I want is selectivity in commentary. Most shots require few, if any words. Great shots deserve praise and poor shots deserve to be pointed out, too. Difficult decisions should be analyzed before the shot. After the fact assessments of a player's intent is, more often than not, like cheating on a test.

Meaningful Analysis
The next thing I want is meaningful analysis of the play, which you get from less than 5% of the commentators. The best, by a mile, at the World Championships has been Alex Lely, and Team Europe is in very good hands at the Mosconi with such a knowledgeable player and game analyst who also shows superior communication skills. He's the only commentator I never mute of the Matchroom group, Karl Boyes isn't bad either, but he's way below Lely in his analysis of the play.

Avoidance of Cliches, Platitudes, and Patent Falsehoods
Commentators who feast on cliches and platitudes, and offer uninformed statements about the participants are hard to listen to and such comments add almost no value at all. The worst of these is Phil Yates, but most of the commentators fall into this trap, offering heaping helpings of the obvious far too often.

Supplementary Information About the Players
Have the contestants met in other tournaments? Who has had the edge? Have they ever met in a very big spot? Are they rivals? When did they last draw each other in a tournament and who prevailed? When did each contestant win their last title? Which of them is having a good year in tournament play? Questions like these are rarely, if ever, answered. Commentators rarely furnish the kind of supplementary information that is standard in other sports, and I attribute most of it to poor preparation by such commentators.

In my case, I use the mute button on many matches. Pool commentators as a group are terrible, but there are a few good ones worth a listen. Decide which ones you enjoy.
Click to expand...
Really excellent post here! So much so I am quoting the whole thing in case anyone missed it earlier in the thread. :)
 
Doug pretty much the norm for decades. It's often a friend of a friend, or someone who knows the room owner, or the TD or usually the production crew. Or someone that wants to talk, yet gets paid zero.

''I think it was at the hands of SVB, but was there any comment by the "commentators" about what had just occurred? No, there was ego-stroking amongst themselves about what they had seen or done at a tournament decades ago.''
 
If a match is 2 hours I want them to shut up for 3 hours. If they should speak, stop using their little clichés
and pool terms only they know or want to invent. Most viewers are players and understand what's going on.
Please Shut up
For beginners, new players, and non players, explain in simple terms the little nuances of the game, keep peoples interest, keep it simple.
Stop talking like you are the one playing because many times you are wrong and then cover it up with Ok, he went that way, I can't see that from here, but I would have done this and that. Please shut up.
Please shut up or get out of the booth and on the table.
Back to our regularly scheduled program.
 
Last edited:
Very tired of over analyzing game play such as JJ. Liking almost everyone else chatting except JJ who ONLY predicts CB & OB paths…

Generally liking every Brit, especially KB & JS…
 
RefrainReyes said:
Very tired of over analyzing game play such as JJ. Liking almost everyone else chatting except JJ who ONLY predicts CB & OB paths…

Generally liking every Brit, especially KB & JS…
Click to expand...

first time i listened to JJ commentating i thought he was just monotone and boring. then i started paying attention to what the man was saying and now i think he's by far the smartest and most knowledgeable commentator out there. i would advice every aspiring pool player to watch matches that he's commentating and take heed of what he's saying.

boyes is ok.
 
Johnny archer was good commentator as was nick varner. The early mosconi cups you would often hear Kim davenport he was good too.

I like to watch the old BPT matches with Tom Kelly, Mizerak Jim rempe, varner.and buddy Hall. What more could you want. That Tom, always felt like he was in the middle, of which ever two guys were talking!!!
 
skogstokig said:
first time i listened to JJ commentating i thought he was just monotone and boring. then i started paying attention to what the man was saying and now i think he's by far the smartest and most knowledgeable commentator out there. i would advice every aspiring pool player to watch matches that he's commentating and take heed of what he's saying.

boyes is ok.
Click to expand...
This is exactly how I feel about Blomdahl doing commentary on 3C matches.
 
DieselPete said:
I'm watching Table Two of the Matchroom World Pool Championships, streaming on YouTube, and generally enjoying it. I appreciate that they stream some content for free and the quality of play is obviously amazing. But I find that I do miss having announcers.

At the same time, I often find that I don't love what I get from pool announcers, that there is too much time spent predicting every single shot and then telling us what the player should have done, what the announcer would have done, why another route was better, and then the occasional comment about how great a shot actually was. (I can't stand being told that "the folks at home don't know how hard that was" when most of us know EXACTLY how hard something was).

Announcers often seem torn between teaching the game, like the viewers are beginners (Gasp! "He has to go THREE rails for position; here, here, and here, to get on this ball, here...") and over using the telestrator to show us every route, or assuming that the viewers know all of this and using technical terms that beginners wouldn't get ("He just has to stun this ball and he'll fall onto the carom for his next shot.").

So, the question: What is it that you want from your pool announcers? How is the job done properly in your opinions?

Should they speak to the veteran players or should they teach the game to the newbies, like instructional videos?
Click to expand...

The worst is when the commentators have dueling opinions and then won't shut up for the shots.

That is when you turn them off. I would rather have one commentator vs. dueling commentators.
 
About 50% too much commentary. It's fucking 9-ball your next shot isn't a personal selection like it is in other games it's predetermined. Also, these are world class players and when they get 3 inches of of line they make it seem like the end of the world. Filler's going to make the damn ball anyway so just shut up.
 
I think the commentary could be greatly enriched by more creativity of the camera person. How would you like to watch golf if the camera went directly to the club and the ball when the golfer was starting his swing? That is how it happens in pool.

It would be nice to see a full view of the pool player stroking and following thru the shot. A commentator could describe what is happening on specific shots such as the break, draw, masse, etc. He could also describe follow thru, elbow drop, wrist action, jumping up, etc. A frontal view to watch the players eye pattern, straightness of stroke, etc. The list is endless.

As an example, compare the break style of Shane vs Earl.
 
sjm said:
Let me open by saying that I'm talking about commentators, not guests such as active pros who sit in for a match. I'm talking about those who are commentating, not participating, in an event. For me, I'm looking for five things more than anything else: 1) impartiality, 2) selectivity, 3) meaningful analysis, 4) avoidance of cliches, platitudes and patent falsehoods., and 5) supplementary information about the players.

As this thread has been started during the World Championship, I will focus on the commentators of the current event.

Impartiality
The first thing I want in a commentator is impartiality. When a commentator openly roots for one of the players, it devalues the commentary. Such announcers also tend to be apologists for the errors of their favored players and are excessively critical of their opponents. They are more laudatory of their preferred players in pre-match comments, too. The lack of impartiality has been a big problem at the current World Championship.

Selectivity
The next thing I want is selectivity in commentary. Most shots require few, if any words. Great shots deserve praise and poor shots deserve to be pointed out, too. Difficult decisions should be analyzed before the shot. After the fact assessments of a player's intent is, more often than not, like cheating on a test.

Meaningful Analysis
The next thing I want is meaningful analysis of the play, which you get from less than 5% of the commentators. The best, by a mile, at the World Championships has been Alex Lely, and Team Europe is in very good hands at the Mosconi with such a knowledgeable player and game analyst who also shows superior communication skills. He's the only commentator I never mute of the Matchroom group, Karl Boyes isn't bad either, but he's way below Lely in his analysis of the play.

Avoidance of Cliches, Platitudes, and Patent Falsehoods
Commentators who feast on cliches and platitudes, and offer uninformed statements about the participants are hard to listen to and such comments add almost no value at all. The worst of these is Phil Yates, but most of the commentators fall into this trap, offering heaping helpings of the obvious far too often.

Supplementary Information About the Players
Have the contestants met in other tournaments? Who has had the edge? Have they ever met in a very big spot? Are they rivals? When did they last draw each other in a tournament and who prevailed? When did each contestant win their last title? Which of them is having a good year in tournament play? Questions like these are rarely, if ever, answered. Commentators rarely furnish the kind of supplementary information that is standard in other sports, and I attribute most of it to poor preparation by such commentators.

In my case, I use the mute button on many matches. Pool commentators as a group are terrible, but there are a few good ones worth a listen. Decide which ones you enjoy.
Click to expand...
When I was giving my play by play today, I tried very hard to be impartial in my commentary. I think it's kind of a necessity for proper commentary.

Jaden
 
  • Like
Reactions: sjm
chefjeff said:
THE ANNOUNCER NEEDS TO TELL STORIES ABOUT THE PLAYERS so the viewers have something to hang their hats on.

It's about the story, not so much this game or this match. It's the story that viewers like and can get into. Once there, the game suddenly becomes meaningful.


Jeff Livingston
Click to expand...
You've got to be kidding. If I ever hear another Cornbread Red story out of Danny D. I'm going to lose my mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top