[rogerclee]

What is the criterion for being a Vugraph commentator?

I only ask because I feel like the general skill level of commentators has been dropping, especially for some of the less important events. Without naming names, it's very clear that at least two or three of the regular commentators are poor players.

A reasonable solution, I think, is to have some sort of feedback for Vugraph commentary, where both positive and negative comments can be left.

[Rossoneri]

Refer to the vugraph issues forum. I believe I have brought up this issue there before...

Link to thread

[paulg]

There is already a reasonable solution, just let Roland (walddk) know your views.

Paul

[fred]

Keep in mind that being a great player is not a necessary condition for being an effective vugraph commentator.

Most of the members of the audience are not even close to being experts and many of them appreciate learning about what an expert might call "the basics". You certainly do not have to be a great player in order to explain concepts like "RKCB" and "crossruff" in a concise and lucid manner.

Of course it is the case that great players are capable of explaining such concepts as well, but the fact of the matter is that most strong bridge players (including me) do not naturally think about "the basics" when they are commentators. Many find it difficult or impossible to "lower their thinking" to the level of the average member of the audience.

Besides that, there is value in having commentators who are familiar with things like the players themselves, the systems they play, the history of the tournament, and general happenings in the world of bridge. There is also value in commentators who are generally amusing. Again you do not have to be a super-expert to be able to contribute in these areas.

Now I am not suggesting that the non-super-expert commentators you refer to necessarily restrict their comments to teaching at a relatively low level and/or the type of info mentioned in the previous paragraph. Those who do get involved in analysis beyond their abilities (or at least beyond their ability to do accurately in real time) tend to get corrected pretty quickly.

If you think there are some particular commentators who we would be better off without, please let Roland know. Roland is sometimes constrained by lack of volunteers or through his (admirable) sense of loyalty to those who volunteer for "minor tournaments". But he certainly cares deeply about what members of the audience think. Sending him feedback is the best thing you can do if you want to help make BBO vugraph better.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[DJNeill]

Hi all,
I think that the commentating that basically shows how close to GIB they can be is not helpful. If they can try to imagine themselves as commentating a Premier League match on TV, that would get them close to what I think the vast majority of viewers are looking for. It is a creative opportunity, to me at least.

On the policy side, the mute capability already provided by Fred-Uday is a fantastic client-side solution to the problem of undesired commentary.

Thanks,
Dan

[Walddk]

fred, on Dec 16 2007, 05:08 PM, said:

Roland is sometimes constrained by lack of volunteers or through his (admirable) sense of loyalty to those who volunteer for "minor tournaments". But he certainly cares deeply about what members of the audience think. Sending him feedback is the best thing you can do if you want to help make BBO vugraph better.

Quite right. Constructive criticism is always welcome. Just drop me a line at

roland_wald at hotmail.com

Everyone will get a reply and an explanation. The only thing I require is that the criticism is constructive. Rudeness is not appreciated, but no matter what you must trust me to keep your name out of it while I investigate if that is your wish.

Vugraph commentary on BBO is far from perfect, but generally speaking I think it's pretty good. I can't always make the best sign up for certain events, but believe me when I say that I try hard. Around 225 potential commentators receive between 80 and 120 e-mails a year!

Fred can confirm because he gets a copy every time.

Roland

[whereagles]

I would like to help, but I can't seem to have any free time in my hands

[helene_t]

I have noticed a general lack of familiarity with Capp, Flannery and Gerber. Other than that I have no issues with the commentators.

[Walddk]

helene_t, on Dec 16 2007, 11:01 PM, said:

I have noticed a general lack of familiarity with Capp, Flannery and Gerber. Other than that I have no issues with the commentators.

Being familiar with those conventions is irrelevant since they are not worth explaining. Commentators who don't know them have an edge and spectators would be better off if no one tells them that they exist.

I think I know what you are referring to, so let me make it clear by saying that while it's true that F&G are tied 1st, Capp is further down on my list of "Top 10 Useless Conventions."

Roland

[whereagles]

helene_t, on Dec 16 2007, 09:01 PM, said:

I have noticed a general lack of familiarity with Capp, Flannery and Gerber. Other than that I have no issues with the commentators.

ahhhh.. the terrible three.. add ghestem to the pot and you'll understand why commentators flee from those like DA PLAGUE!

[vdoubleu]

As a Vu-Graph Commentator, I might repeat what some of the previous posters have already stated as well as adding a few.

We are appealing to an audience of disparate abilities.

Often, I will make a comment that needs clarification: i.e. "Declarer will eventually strip hand, and 'end' East" ....or "This is clearly a case of the STA (Striped-tailed ape) striking again"

I, personally, try to take the time to expatiate on the themes, time permitting.

Also, most VG Commentators that I know personally try to respond to as many questions & comments from the specs as is possible.

Also, it is often difficult to get a full grasp on all the varied systems the players are using spur-of-the-moment.

Rest assured, every Commentator is trying his or her best & am sure, at least speaking for myself, wld welcome all comments, even criticisms:-)

VDOUBLEU

[Rossoneri]

Well, I would say most commentators are good. It's just the few that spoil the name sometimes.