You can't blame the DVD/TAR for how the players played on that particular night, which is kinda how you come across >_<
I mean, I can sorta see it... "they really got my hopes up from their hype and yet the play was subpar"... but it's like a movie with an all-star cast. You want to see their performance and find out the ending and if it turns out not to be Citizen Kane... well, they still have to pay for those A-list actors, producers, etc. It wasn't "Beverly Hills Chihuahua" at least. And you want them to have money just to encourage them to keep doing what they're doing. Think of the DVD as a free gift for your $25 dollar donation towards their continued efforts
- I do agree video quality was subpar and took a little away from it. It was like a hi-res stream more than a DVD. And the camera was a bit crooked, though it sounds whiny to complain about it.
- Chesscat nailed it about the commentary. TAR has that kinda underground up-to-the-minute feel and I think a different style of commentary is called for. When top players who are also watching the match just drop in and talk about it informally, it gives you that cool feeling like you're right there sweating the match with the other railbirds. I don't want it to sound like commentary, not in the ESPN or accustats sense of the word.
Billy's commentary used to be more shot-oriented and play-by-play.. he freewheels a little more now. I liked hearing him on accustats and I enjoy his posts here too. But maybe it's possible to get "Billy burnout". Having already heard his opinions on efren, shane, and pool in general, you will not get any surprises in his commentary here. And in some ways that kind of takes some freshness out of it. I'd almost rather hear a totally unprofessional, off the wall newbie commentator who brings new stories, sayings, and opinions. Maybe someone who even says something controversial. Hell, let him cuss and say something a bit dirty now and then. I wanna feel like I'm at the pool hall
- It seems a little unfair that you can talk about how efren is playing below his usual speed, but billy can't say the same (with an explanation). It's not a knock on a player to say they're past their prime, though the wrong guy can get his feathers ruffled by the implication. But Effie's not that guy. He's clearly said he felt he played his best when he was in his 20's. Billy's offering an explanation as to why you're seeing this subpar performance. I think that's part of his job.
You don't want some dry, sugarcoated explanation or no explanation at all, right? It'd be awkward if he ignored the elephant in the room and the watcher is left wondering 'isn't someone gonna say something about this? This is unheard of.' (or a less educated watcher might say 'this is that efren guy I keep hearing about? He's not as good as people made him out to be').
