Tight schedule

[Walddk]

You all know how tight our vugraph schedule is, but the coming weekend beats it all. New Zealand, Poland, Japan and Denmark simultaneously more or less. Due to the time differences we are having broadcasts virtually around the clock.

 

Around the world with BBO. Sleep? Well, why would it be any different for you than it is for me? ;)

 

http://online.bridgebase.com/vugraph/schedule.php for full schedule.

 

Roland

[shoeless]

Roland, you might listen to yourself and consider the future. I think it is realistic that the BBO vugraph will continue to grow in numbers of events broadcast, number of viewers, etc. In large measure the reasons for success of this thing might be attributed to two things: the great BBO facility for hosting these broadcasts and not the least, your co-ordination of the broadcast schedule and the commentators, nurturing the operators, getting broadcasts started, etc - not to mention your time spent commentating. You have been your own worst enemy in the sleep department, to good effect of course for us vugraph junkies. Because the future of BBO broadcasts appears to be more of the jam-packed schedules you have facing you this weekend - perhaps it's time to put on your strategic management hat and start considering some division of labor. You are a workhorse my man - but as organizations change, evolve and grow - the increased load usually requires more on the team to pull the load - it becomes a matter of quality or the risk of losing it. An example, Pacific-asia and Asia are waking up to BBO and with the time zone issues you face, perhaps you could add an assistant co-ordinator for that area of the world. Anyway regardless of what you do - bless you for doing this - I have enjoyed incredible bridge in the last year and am thankful for your part in making that available.

[Walddk]

.... and even tighter after we added the French Team Trials from Paris. 47½ hours of live vugraph broadcast over the weekend starting Thursday at 13.00 Paris, 12 noon London, 7 am New York, 9 pm Sydney. Have fun and remember to get a few hours of sleep in between! :)

 

http://online.bridgebase.com/vugraph/schedule.php

 

Roland

[shoeless]

I have long been convinced that when I notice a commentator go silent for several boards, its because they are catching 40 winks. Richie uses the walk the dog line - sure - his dog's name is zzzzzzzzzzz

[Clinch]

An incredibly diverse schedule, and just tremendous to watch.

 

As the diversity increases, though, hopefully the commentators will give due attention to the fact that not every player on display is likely to carry off the Bermuda Bowl. The first session of the Japanese event yesterday was marred (in my opinion) by some hypercritical remarks about the quality of play - one pair, in particular, was singled out.

 

It's true that some plays were not of the highest standard. Having said that, as we all know, we can all see all four hands, we are under no pressure, we have Deep Finesse to ensure that our counterplays are not themselves flawed.

 

On a positive note, I found that shoeless was excellent in not engaging in this kind of banter, and gave us some good insights into some of the less familiar names at the table. Steve Robinson was also steadfast in focussing on the positive.

 

Thanks,

 

Peter.

New York, NY.

[shoeless]

Peter, your post raises some issues that I have long reflected on about the BBO vugraph broadcasts. I have no answers, just questions:

 

1. What do vugraph spectators want from commentators?

2. Should there be a formal BBO feedback channel that allows spectators to commend excellence in commentary and make comments on what they deem to be the reverse? Remembering of course that commentators volunteer their time - just as players are essentially volunteers to the broadcast as well.

3. Should there be a code of conduct for commentators?

4. In many sports broadcasts there are expert commentators and color commentators - would this be appropriate for BBO?

5. Is there a difference between critical review and criticism?

Etc, etc, etc

 

Cheers

[Clinch]

FWIW, Here are my thoughts on each question:

 

1. What do vugraph spectators want from commentators?

 

I appreciate:

 

- insights into bidding systems or history of the players

- strong explanations of plausible technical actions or treatments (rather than "I think it may be makeable", following a rather obvious glance at DF)

- genuine wit that in some tangential way relates to what is happening in the play

- cross-reference to useful sites giving tournament standings, bidding systems, player profiles

 

I do not particularly appreciate:

 

- banal chitchat between commentators, including tedious running jokes, or descriptions of how they have just awoken, what the weather is like where they are, what a lot of spectators there are, or some domestic detail about what is going on in their home

- commentators who *always* get things right, and who then explain how they would have done so at the table

- phrases which demean the play such as "s/he is doing his/her best to give the contract" - players in some events did not volunteer to be on display, and to have their actions decomposed by a panel of experts.

 

2. Should there be a formal BBO feedback channel that allows spectators to commend excellence in commentary and make comments on what they deem to be the reverse? Remembering of course that commentators volunteer their time - just as players are essentially volunteers to the broadcast as well.

 

I expect such feedback channels do exist, but I don't see a need to institutionalise them. Without being too cynical, I would guess that many commentators enjoy their voluntary job, though I am sure some of the less glamorous events still probably require some prodding to get a full complement. I also suspect some tables in events are more popular with commentators than others - this is just a guess .

 

Do players really volunteer to be broadcast? Do they have a right of refusal?

 

3. Should there be a code of conduct for commentators?

 

Despite all my preferences above, I don't support a rigid code, and I don't know of any commentators who have been grossly offensive. All I hope is that commentators remember there is an audience, and that players are doing their best.

 

4. In many sports broadcasts there are expert commentators and color commentators - would this be appropriate for BBO?

 

I don't know how easy it is to implement, or how well commentators would take to such a stratification. It does seem as though some fit naturally into the role of host, but I am sure many want their say - even some of the vugraph operators like to chip in with some analysis every now and then. There does sometimes seem to be a race to say the obvious, with three or four saying simultaneously "5 IMPS to X", but that's probably tough to avoid.

 

5. Is there a difference between critical review and criticism?

 

Yes. Here is a critical review.."In that position, my partnerships would normally jump in hearts here to show ....." Here is criticism : "1 heart? What kind of a bid is that?" The first invites debate, the second invites derision.

 

Peter.

New York, NY.

[shoeless]

Well when all is said and done - BBO vugraph is a heck of a show. To steal a slogan from the PGA website - "These guys are good!" (reference to commentators here)

 

I have wish. I would love to see a BBO documentary of a week in the life of Roland Wald that was filmed during a week like he just had. To rephrase a stolen slogan: "This guy is good!" Roland did a very small thing on a broadcast last night that simply resonated with quality. Roland and I are cats of a very different stripe, but he has my unconditional respect.

[Guest Jlall]

I do not particularly appreciate:

 

- banal chitchat between commentators, including tedious running jokes, or descriptions of how they have just awoken, what the weather is like where they are, what a lot of spectators there are, or some domestic detail about what is going on in their home

Want to echo this. The commentators do a great job and aren't paid, but if someone could tell them that these type of things are annoying to A LOT of people (especially how many cokes one will receive) I think it would be quite constructive. But again, they do a great job and aren't perfect. This is meant as constructive criticism.

[shoeless]

I think sometimes a culture is unwittingly created and people try and fit into that culture. Interestingly enough I believe each and every broadcast quickly develops it's own culture for the duration of the broadcast - it evolves from the particular chemistry and leadership in the commentating group. The resulting broadcast ranges from homey to hilarious to magnetic to inane to awesome to average to ..... What is happening at the table can play a big factor in what happens in the commentary. Watch sometime and correlate the two. After 12 commentating sessions over 3 days some commentators just run out of gas. On the whole I would rate the broadcasts very high in terms of quality. Clinch has offered a couple of things that I too think would be nice to have.

 

I do have a suggestion for event organizers. Feed the commentating team with notes on event background and player information - give them something to work from in that area - they dont really have the time to dig it up on their own, as much as they might like to.

 

It is impossible to please all spectators - our needs are different and our reasons for watching are different. I think the best a commentator can do is be themselves, but at the same time they remain conscious that they have a diverse audience. If there is one candle that I would recommend that each of them carry - it is the candle of respect for others.

[Chamaco]

I do not particularly appreciate:

 

- banal chitchat between commentators, including tedious running jokes, or descriptions of how they have just awoken, what the weather is like where they are, what a lot of spectators there are, or some domestic detail about what is going on in their home

Want to echo this. The commentators do a great job and aren't paid, but if someone could tell them that these type of things are annoying to A LOT of people (especially how many cokes one will receive) I think it would be quite constructive. But again, they do a great job and aren't perfect. This is meant as constructive criticism.

I'd like to strongly agree with the view expressed by Peter and Justin.

 

Over 1 year ago I posted something along the same lines, of course from the perspective of a much weaker player, like myself:

 

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...3490&hl=vugraph

 

See also this thread:

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...6310&hl=vugraph

[Walddk]

We had 78 (!) commentators in action for 48 (!) hours over the weekend during our broadcasts from Poland, New Zealand, France, Japan and Denmark. Needless to say it's impossible to get the very best at all times, and we very much appreciate that so many offer their time to do a job they get absolutely nothing for!

 

Perfection is an illusion, close to perfection is too. I am pretty pleased with what we have achieved so far. Vugraph is here to stay, and still more organisers realise how great this is for promoting bridge in their countries.

 

No matter what we do, we won't be able to satisfy all spectators. If we make the vast majority happy (and in my humble opinion I think we do), we have every reason to be content.

 

There is obviously room for improvement, and rest assured: we are doing all we can to make our vugraph presentations even better than they are now.

 

Roland

[Walddk]

I have wish. I would love to see a BBO documentary of a week in the life of Roland Wald that was filmed during a week like he just had. To rephrase a stolen slogan: "This guy is good!" Roland did a very small thing on a broadcast last night that simply resonated with quality. Roland and I are cats of a very different stripe, but he has my unconditional respect.

I spent 44 of the 48 hours commentating (10 of those on my birthday yesterday), but that is nothing compared to the amount of time I spend behind the scene to get all of this organised. I don't want admiration, just some respect for a damn hard work.

 

Constructive criticism is welcomed, and I am obviously prepared to look at all the suggestions Chamaco and others make. Fred and I are in touch on a regular basis, and we are only interested in one thing: making vugraph as interesting as possible.

 

Things will change little by little. Time is all we need. Sighhh.

 

Roland

[pclayton]

Great job as always Roland. VG's will continue to get better and better.

 

I'll echo the comments about the occasionally banal dialogue. It adds nothing to the presentation. When I commentate, I try not to engage in it as though I was watching it.

 

I will occasionally be harsh on a bid or a play. This isn't being derisive, its being objective.

 

And when the correct line or correct defense isn't clear, I will often say something like "hard to say whats right here" if only to avoid the 'dead air' that occurs as the other commentators are trying to figure out the hand as well (or in Richie's case, as they are walking the dog :angry: ).

 

Oh, and I never use DF when I commentate. I'll sometimes use it after a hand, but relying on it as you analyze a hand is akin to shutting off your brain.

[inquiry]

I kibitz a lot of vugraphs in real time, and more virtually from the vugraph storage site. The commentors range from outstanding to horrid. To view them virtually (after the fact, check out... webpage with recent vugraphs ). The vast majority of the commentors do an excellent job (earning at least what they are paid). And Roland does a good job of weeding out the horrid ones.

 

However, maybe we can ask the commentators to go back and review their preformance by going to the link above, and read/see their comments after the event. I think some would find their own comments fall in the banal space mentioned above. They can see what appears to work, and where description of walking their dog, going to fix dinner, the weather, etc is not working. I think some might be surprised at how little bridge they discussed.

 

Ben

[Walddk]

I won't deny that you see too much chitchat, sometimes more than enough, but I can only control what I type. I have no intention of imposing censorship upon my co-commentators. They are all adults and should know what they are doing.

 

What I do object to, however, is when they are unneccesarily rude to a player. I have told those people several times in the past, and I will do it if it happens again. I have even banned a few from making comments. This is easily done: I simply don't invite them any more.

 

Everyone deserves fair commentary. One may not agree with what a certain player does in a given situation, but there are more than one way of expressing one's view in a civilised manner.

 

Weather, dog, dinner, etc. You are right, it has nothing to do with bridge, but occasionally you have significant pauses where you feel like doing something to fill the gap. The issues are not always bridge related, I agree, but I don't think it's the end of the world for specs if someone states that it's sunny in Tel Aviv and bucketing down in Delaware.

 

Roland

[Chamaco]

Hi Roland !

 

Of course I think your task (coordinating so many people) is indeed a big burden, and the fact that we are indeed privileged of the possibility of realtime enjoying such beautiful matches speaks by itself: we should be thankful of this opportunity provided by volunteers :-)

 

On my behalf, I can only identify areas where I *wish* there were improvements.

I do not expect or require anything, as I said, I know the task is hard.

And I know that there are plenty of people who will have ideas/wishes different from mine :-)

 

Still, as always, improvements are always possible.

 

Keep up the good job and thank you :)

[card_judge]

I kib lots of vugraphs, whether during the week or weekends, and learn a great deal from them. From the opinions expressed by the commentators I cannot count the number of times I have responded to a commentator's remark and we in turn speak to the positives or negatives on line of play or bidding. This in and of itself is worth the idle banter between commentators.

 

The idle chit chat during long interludes may have little if anything to do with bridge but I assume it is to keep the spectators attention. IMHO the commentators are doing the spectators a service just like any other sports commentator for any other broadcast sport. How many times did/do we, in the USA, have to endure Terry Bradshaw talk just to hear himself?

 

Well done commentators and give them all a 30% raise !!

[shoeless]

Ah Ben such wisdom - self-evaluation in all things is the most effective, often the most critical and clearly the least destructive form of evaluation. Nice suggestion.

 

I believe this thread started with someone making a comment about hypercritical commentary. Good commentary by it's nature must include in some measure a critical analysis of bidding and play. A guideline that might be helpful is to be critical of an action not critical of the person who took the action. Separating the action from the person often is a simple as chosing appropriate language - as suggested by other contributors in this thread. There are many commentators who have this one down pat, unfortunately there a few who don't. But all in all I have no difficulty in saying that I believe BBO vugraph is fast becoming a superb bridge institution.