Why not Televise the Cavendish?

[jtfanclub]

For a long time, I've thought what American bridge needed was a televised tournament. One based in Vegas (where they have the room and equipment to handle it), a large money prize, a short run (5 days max) and the best teams involved. And then I read about the Cavendish, which seems almost perfect. The only way it could be better, in my mind, is if the open tourney's top four got an automatic Invitation to next year's Cavendish, which for all I know may be in the works.

 

It's hard to believe that they haven't already thought of this. I'm wondering if the holdup is...

 

-Money: the Cavendish wants more than the TV networks are interested in paying.

-The Principals aren't interested.

-The players don't want it.

-The networks don't want it (I was thinking the Travel Network, for example).

-Technical issues with the cameras, etc.

-It's already in the works, these things just take time.

 

I was wondering if anybody here knew any of the Principals, or would know the logic behind not televising this.

 

Thanks,

 

Matthew

[mike777]

My guess is they think almost no one will watch for any extended period of time.

Heck if you can get what 50,000 watching cheese age but less watching bridge you got problems.

[nickf]

Bridge on TV? I don't think so.

 

as near as I can tell TV networks are not really in the business of broadcasting television shows. They are in the business of making money.

 

And they make money by selling advertising spots to companies who think either their core market may be watching a particular program or that so many people will watch the program that they'll hit enough potential consumers by virtue of firing enough shots.

 

Bridge is far too complicated to appeal to the mass market and the core market is way too small.

 

As a comparison, Poker on TV works because a lot of people have learnt the basics of poker some time in their life, it's fundamentally a very easy game to play (albeit very hard and rare to be a consistent long term winner). Have you ever seen those idiot celebrity poker tv shows where the host explains Movie Star has an ACE and a KING - "they're good cards, because they are HIGHER than Sport Star's SEVEN and TWO".

 

There's also the element of risk associated with losing or winning chips, which are tangible.

 

Try explaining an endplay, a finesse, etc etc etc to a bunch of couch potatoes.

 

nickf

sydney

[Aberlour10]

I think every internet vug broadcast would still work better, but I like an idea to watch one day a coverage about "Cavendish People", there are enough charismatic persons around the bridge pro-scene, it would be interesting to hear their statements about "mechanisms" im world class bridge, about human aspects of the game, about winning, losing, about the passion. Just something in the style of the canadian tv coverage we watched a few weeks ago.

 

Robert

[cherdano]

I know from a reliable source that CNN offered a seven-digit number for exclusive rights to the live coverage of the Cavendish with Kokish as commentator, but the organizers didn't want to give up on Kokish as their on-site vuegraph commentator.

[pbleighton]

I know from a reliable source that CNN offered a seven-digit number for exclusive rights to the live coverage of the Cavendish with Kokish as commentator, but the organizers didn't want to give up on Kokish as their on-site vuegraph commentator.

 

I've known this for some time, that Fred is the most powerful man in bridge. He's pulling ALL of the strings.

 

Peter

[jtfanclub]

Well, I can't see ABC doing it, but for something like the Travel Channel, where 100,000 would be a darned good audience, it should be very doable. As far as selling advertising, think of the average wealth of a bridge player...cruises, luxury cars, condos...I'm betting we can get advertisers. You need a channel with an older audience, but it should definitely be doable.

 

I'm also not worried about betting chips. Most sports with money outcomes don't put money on each action. For example, lots of people watch tennis, or pool. As long as you can point out how this team beat that team, and can have a running score...which is how Teams tend to work.

 

Try explaining an endplay, a finesse, etc etc etc to a bunch of couch potatoes.

 

Piece of cake. I think you vastly underestimate the viewing audience there. Endplays, Finesses, Crossruffs, and Squeezes aren't bridge-only tools, after all. Even in as simple a game as Euchre you can use all four. Nothing like doing a strip sqeeze & endplay in Hearts. Even if they didn't know what it was called, 99% of the population has played a card game where they had to choose to play for the drop or the finesse.

 

Bidding and scoring is tougher- you'd have to concentrate on card play. But I can see people listening to things like squeezes and then trying them out the next time they play Spades. :-)

[cherdano]

Try explaining an endplay, a finesse, etc etc etc to a bunch of couch potatoes.

 

Piece of cake. I think you vastly underestimate the viewing audience there. Endplays, Finesses, Crossruffs, and Squeezes aren't bridge-only tools, after all. Even in as simple a game as Euchre you can use all four. Nothing like doing a strip sqeeze & endplay in Hearts. Even if they didn't know what it was called, 99% of the population has played a card game where they had to choose to play for the drop or the finesse.

I am curious. Where is the universe you are living in? Sounds like a nice place...

[nickf]

I know from a reliable source that CNN offered a seven-digit number for exclusive rights to the live coverage of the Cavendish with Kokish as commentator, but the organizers didn't want to give up on Kokish as their on-site vuegraph commentator.

I'm going to go out on a limb here, but no-one, but no-one knocks back a million bucks just to keep a commentator and analyst on staff.

 

Tell me more about your source. Do they work for CNN? Or maybe their brother does? Or maybe their brother heard it from their dentist whose drycleaner was talking to a taxi driver who *swears* they overheard it from a passenger. Unless that passenger was talking about poker. "I dunno, I was focussing on the bum who just cut me off..."

 

Maybe I'm just a cynic.

 

Knocking back a million bucks from CNN? That's rich, it really is.

 

nickf

sydney

[bid_em_up]

Personally, I forsee a future where BBO has streaming video or webcam broadcast for each seat on vugraph. :P

[cherdano]

Ok, if even an Australian doesn't get this was a joke, :) then no joke will ever be understood without adding one of those dreaded smileys :P

 

I was joking because I thought it was obvious that it is the TV networks who aren't interested in broadcasting the Cavendish.

[pclayton]

I know from a reliable source that CNN offered a seven-digit number for exclusive rights to the live coverage of the Cavendish with Kokish as commentator, but the organizers didn't want to give up on Kokish as their on-site vuegraph commentator.

Lets get this rumor started, but it can't be a news channel. We'll say the Travel Channel made the offer, but the Cavendish didn't accept because of personalities or scheduling, or whatever.

 

Then Bravo gets a 'one-time' opportunity to do it for say $200,000.

[hrothgar]

Personally, I forsee a future where BBO has streaming video or webcam broadcast for each seat on vugraph. :)

I've never understood why people have any desire for a real time video feed from a table. Is it really that exciting to watch Paul Soloway (or whomever) staring at a little piece of paste board?

 

At best, I consider video feeds an irrelevant waste of bandwidth. More often than not, they'd be a distraction from the "real" issues like the best line of play or some comment about the bidding.

[uday]

The ACBL seems to have moved away from the old fashioned vugraph shows at NABCs (the kind where you'd have a hand on screen, 2 video feeds, Edgar Kaplan supplying commentary) but there was something quite fun about those shows.

 

The feed gives you something to look at while the players tank, better status (if players are away), and occasionally some entertaining hand-waving.

[pclayton]

Personally, I forsee a future where BBO has streaming video or webcam broadcast for each seat on vugraph.  :)

I've never understood why people have any desire for a real time video feed from a table. Is it really that exciting to watch Paul Soloway (or whomever) staring at a little piece of paste board?

 

At best, I consider video feeds an irrelevant waste of bandwidth. More often than not, they'd be a distraction from the "real" issues like the best line of play or some comment about the bidding.

This cant be any less boring than watching an 8 color screen and a diagram of the cards in play. Video would add in another dimension to the show.

 

Not ready for prime time? I think a lot of people would intuitively get the card play aspect, even if they didnt understand the bidding, but thats what commentators are for.

 

When the WSOP main event started a few years ago, each telecast started with a 60 second explanation of hold em. Even if the telecast is 'dumbed down' a little, much like they did on the Wolpert / Demuy show, it would still be entertaining to a bridge player and watchable for a casual or a non-bridge player.

 

I think a lot of us are pretty cynical about the prospects of mass marketing the game, but I think the public is smarter than what many give them credit for, and a project like televising the Cavendish might have traction.

[nickf]

Ok, if even an Australian doesn't get this was a joke, :lol: then no joke will ever be understood without adding one of those dreaded smileys :)

 

I was joking because I thought it was obvious that it is the TV networks who aren't interested in broadcasting the Cavendish.

*blush*

 

not only am I a cynic, I am also extremely naive.

 

nickf

sydney

[JanM]

Personally, I forsee a future where BBO has streaming video or webcam broadcast for each seat on vugraph.  :)

I've never understood why people have any desire for a real time video feed from a table. Is it really that exciting to watch Paul Soloway (or whomever) staring at a little piece of paste board?

At the World Championships in Geneva in 1990, they had television camera people doing the video, instead of fixed cameras. It was amazing! Sometimes they'd focus in on a player's foot swinging up and down as the player was thinking, or on a hand writing a note or a face or I've forgotten what else. I do remember that it added a great dimension to the Vugraph. But I think it was very expensive and I've never seen anything like it since.

[Free]

Personally, I forsee a future where BBO has streaming video or webcam broadcast for each seat on vugraph.  :lol:

I've never understood why people have any desire for a real time video feed from a table. Is it really that exciting to watch Paul Soloway (or whomever) staring at a little piece of paste board?

 

At best, I consider video feeds an irrelevant waste of bandwidth. More often than not, they'd be a distraction from the "real" issues like the best line of play or some comment about the bidding.

If you want camera's to record every move players make, to have better proof of cheating, then you might as well share the images with people who don't care about bandwidth and want to feel the atmosphere :)

[bid_em_up]

Personally, I forsee a future where BBO has streaming video or webcam broadcast for each seat on vugraph.  :P

I've never understood why people have any desire for a real time video feed from a table. Is it really that exciting to watch Paul Soloway (or whomever) staring at a little piece of paste board?

 

At best, I consider video feeds an irrelevant waste of bandwidth. More often than not, they'd be a distraction from the "real" issues like the best line of play or some comment about the bidding.

I'm not real sure what your issue is. A live broadcast would be no more boring than current vugraphs already are. And could well be more entertaining. The same commentary currently being done would be done by voice instead, so I am not sure what your objection is there.

 

Is it that exciting to watch Soloway stare at a piece of pasteboard? No. But then again, it isn't exactly exciting to stare at a computer monitor for commentary, either. And either certainly beats watching things like golf, bowling, pool, painting, or any of the other endless boring shows currently on TV.

 

Eventually, the day will come (imo, it is almost here anyway) where bandwidth is meaningless. TV shows will be broadcast live via the internet (you can already get some reruns), and just released movies will be available (this can already be done in some cases). I don't think an additional broadcast to an audience of 10,000 people is going to break the internet. :D

 

If you were going to have a television broadcast, you may as well consider broadcasting your own show. You might even get sponsor(s) to help cover costs (or actually make it into a money making broadcast). It wouldn't surprise me if Bill Gates or Warren Buffet were willing to have one of their companies sponsor such an event as a means of promoting bridge. You might even charge a small fee (either annually or per event) for the privilige to watch these vugraphs, thereby turning the broadcast into a money making venture. Then again, you might not if the corporate sponsorships were sufficient.

 

Just some thoughts...

[mike777]

With unlimited broadband and a few more years ..2015? I expect a Hologram Soloway and Hamman in my family room playing bridge against those darn Italians. :P

 

Lets dream big folks.

[hrothgar]

I'm not real sure what your issue is. A live broadcast would be no more boring than current vugraphs already are. And could well be more entertaining. The same commentary currently being done would be done by voice instead, so I am not sure what your objection is there.

Comment 1: I think that text is much better than voice in conveying complex information. I find it much easier to absorb the data. There's also much better options to scroll back and review hand diagrams and the like. I suspect that this is (largely) a function of the fact that most of my experience discussing bridge hands has been based off visual cues. For example, when we review hands over beers, we always carry around pieces of paper to sketch out hand diagrams. Sure, its possible to say "AK 5th, Jack 4th ,KQ tight , Ax", but it just doesn't work as well

 

Comment 2: Most good user interfaces are "stream lined" and simple. You don't add a talking paper clip without a damn good reason. In a similar vein, I don't you bother adding a live video feed unless you need to.

 

I recommend that people go back and look at a lot of the debates that took place when BBO first added ads into the client. I recall a lot of people complaining that the ads were distracting and prevented them from being able to focus on the hands. People were especially vocal about dynamic ads that moved or twinkled or whatever. I view a video feed in much the same way.

 

I don't think that it ads to the user experience

I think that its would be a major distraction

I'd prefer not to see development efforts wasted on it