Mark Wilson or Allen Hopkins?

H

hardydson

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Was wondering who you like better doing the color for the espn's coverage...myself i think they both do a very good job...i think Alan's more entertaining...but Mark....has alot of teaching knowledge that come's across really well...just wondering what others think

Hardy
 
Allen Hopkins has been at this for years (at least since the early 80's), and certainly sounds comfortable doing it. His grammar and pronunciation just drive me crazy though. He is a great player, but a below average communicator.

I like Mark Wilson's commentary a lot. He is relatively new to commentating, and is working hard on improving (very noticeably). He is definitely trying to bring some of the finer points of pool to the audience's attention.

Overall, I give a huge advantage to Mark over Allen.
 
I watched two matches last night with Mark commentating and was very impressed with his insights. It wasn't the usual stuff. If he can inject a little more variation and inflection in his delivery (i.e. less monotone), I think he will be up there with the best of them.

On the downside, Mark's knowledge and expertise makes Mitch's inane blathering even more annoying. To me. Sorry Eva. :)
 
ScottR said:
I watched two matches last night with Mark commentating and was very impressed with his insights. It wasn't the usual stuff. If he can inject a little more variation and inflection in his delivery (i.e. less monotone), I think he will be up there with the best of them.

On the downside, Mark's knowledge and expertise makes Mitch's inane blathering even more annoying. To me. Sorry Eva. :)
Click to expand...
They should turn Mitch's mike off as soon as they break the ball for each game and turn it back on when the 9 goes in. Allen and Mark are both great players with great knowledge of the game, but neither are great at commentating, imo. For the record, I'd rather watch Mark play and Allen commentate than watch Allen play and listen to Mark. Allen's poke-stroke is hard to watch, even if effective.

They need better work in the booth. They have had many great matches on the WPBA lately and they need to get the excitement and tension into your living room. Eva and the other women do a good job. I'll volunteer to take over Mitch's place with Eva, lol, for the good of the sport!

unknownpro
 
give me hoppy.
maybe it's because i've grown up with him,it might be a comfort thing.

mark seems to be our dennis miller.
 
Both are very dry in their commentary.
Someone who can come across with a little more enthusiasm in addition to some pool knowledge.
I LOVE the accu-stats tapes where Incardona and Di Liberto do the commentary.
 
I think Mark does an excellent job. He has great knowledge of all aspects of pool & it shows in his commentary. Also, you should know that I have asked Mark and he has nothing but respect for Mitch Lawrence. He says Mitch is a great professional & is always 'ready to go'.

Maybe pool needs a third man in the booth. Poker has done well on TV because of the slight comedy of Norman Chad. ESPN, you listening? If so, give me a call.
 
Neither, give me silence. Sometimes I would much rather no commentary and just listen to the sounds of the balls clicking and going into pockets.
 
believe i would prefer Allen Hopkins here.
Mark doesnt seem to be too polished yet behind the mic, but i am sure given time he would certainly grow into it. i think Mark wants to talk more about the mechanics/stroke of the game, whereas Allen prefers to keep his commentary simple. plus i think Allen is more enthusiastic with his announcing also.

i'd definitely give the edge to Mr. Hopkins at this point in time.

DCP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top