[aguahombre]

JoAnneM, on Aug 1 2009, 05:34 PM, said:

One of the commentators mentioned made extremely arrogant and distainful comments when an "unknown" team made it far up the ladder.  I think this was just sour grapes.  I have noticed other "condescending" comments from this person other people seem to like.  I just move to the other room, thinking it must be me.

Certainly an important element in deciding for yourself, who is/are your favorite commentator(s). Clever comments about silly actions on a particular board are part of the show. But elitism and open distain should not be.

Similarly, someone cleverly pointing out the lunacy of one of my posts is enjoyable to me. Personal attacks are not.

[Fluffy]

I agee with peachy, there might be a great comentators for expert's who are completelly useless from the beginner's point of view.

I became comentator a week ago since nobody was scheduled, I tried to make an effort explaining "basic" things such as competitive doubles, but I am sure this could be improved. I was comentating on Dad and Lantaron and I was completelly biased, nothing that I could help on it.

Remember that the majority of vugraph watchers are far from experts. They need basic explanations.

[TimG]

Fluffy, on Aug 2 2009, 06:28 AM, said:

They need basic explanations.

I think commentators should be giving the spectators what they want rather than what it is determined that they need.

[aguahombre]

TimG, on Aug 2 2009, 09:39 AM, said:

Fluffy, on Aug 2 2009, 06:28 AM, said:

They need basic explanations.

I think commentators should be giving the spectators what they want rather than what it is determined that they need.

I am not a very good searcher. Has there been a thread about what spectators want? Tim is right, but how do they do that? Emulating those commentators who "win the poll" is one way, I guess.

[Fluffy]

what I mean is: beginners don't like something like...


2NT is the jacoby convention.


they want something like:

2NT is the jacoby convention showing game forcing values with support for spades.

[onoway]

I think it extremely unhelpful to have a popularity contest for the commentators. I choose to watch some vugraph rooms because of who is doing the commentary, much as I will follow some players to kib tables. Others undoubtedly choose to follow different people.. I won't specify who my favorites are as it strikes me as being highly ungrateful to speak in such terms in the FORUMS about people who are VOLUNTEERING a good deal of their time, energy and expertise.

Each has his or her style, and sometimes it is a special treat when a group of them work particularly happilly together and support each other. The other day one room had a very slow series of hands, which had to be a severe trial to the commentators, and they did an amazing job of keeping interest up.

I really wish people could just be appreciative sometimes, instead of having to evaluate and critique all the time.

[aguahombre]

onoway, on Aug 5 2009, 11:54 PM, said:

I think it extremely unhelpful to have a popularity contest for the commentators.  I choose to watch some vugraph rooms because of who is doing the commentary, much as I will follow some players to kib tables. Others undoubtedly choose to follow different people.. I won't specify who my favorites are as it strikes me as being  highly ungrateful to speak in such terms in the FORUMS  about people who are VOLUNTEERING a good deal of their time, energy and expertise.

Each has his or her style, and sometimes it is a special treat when a group of them work particularly happilly together and support each other. The other day one room had a very slow series of hands, which had to be a severe trial to the commentators, and they did an amazing job of keeping interest up.

I really wish people could just be appreciative sometimes, instead of having to evaluate and critique all the time.

I agree that we could be more appreciative of those who do the commentator job, but these forums (fori?) provide feedback to those people, as well. If they use that feedback, and the result is even more enjoyment of the vugraphs, this cannot be a bad thing

[onoway]

I think if you are PAYING people then you have the right to discuss with them, in private, the job they are doing. Would you appreciate the job you are being PAID to do becoming the subject of an public discussion, and being told through a public popularity contest, being voted on by people who have never done your job, that you don't make the cut? Would you be gratefully receptive or would you be more likely to feel like telling them all to "Go to hell, then!"?

There is even less justification to do this to people who are good enough to VOLUNTEER their efforts. What possible positive outcome can there be? One or two may have a happy little smile, and the vast majority will feel hurt and unhappy. If you want to have a discussion as to how the vugraph could be better suited to your taste, then do so by all means. Discuss the job, not the individual. The use of names and how "popular" each individual might be should not enter into it. This is just wrong.

[rbn]

Ok I hear you. Vuegraph Commentator of the Year seems to be a bad idea, but still, if BBO could host the election and only reveal the top-three (or whatever), then #4-200 would be considered #4.

And I certainly don't want to depreciate the hard work made by all the volunteers. Without them, BBO Vuegraph wouldn't exist!

Some of you made a list of the skills required by a good Viewgraph Commentator. This (probably) means that you actually have a favorite commentator. Why not let her/him know that he's good?

I mean, in many companies, you compete with your peers to be the best, so that you'll get recognized by the higher-level management. Everyone gains by this internal competition - not only the company; the company encourages people to get better - making the company more successful; the peers to the winner will learn from the winner and thereby get better.

I will not reveal my favorite, 'cause that wouldn't add to the discussion.

My 10 cents.
/René