Printable View
Opinion or fact?Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
My OPINION is he does what is expected. Nothing more, nothing less. When 2% of the population of the U.S. is racing fans and only 20% of those are Open Wheel fans, the 815,000 that viewed that race is 652,000 of RUBES and TUNER INs. The rest are real racing fans. So who is Scott trying to educate? 163,000 expert racing fans or the clueless 652,000?
Kind of like the teacher in the front of the room, he plays to those that do not know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by !!WALDO!!
Wow!!
This has absolutely NOTHING to do with Champcar!!
This has Everything to do with who would be a great man for the job!!
Seat time doesn't always give you the ability to deliver technical information in a most colorful way.
Jon Beekhuis is the man for the job!!
We get our depth news from writing and immediate on-the-scene news from radio and TV. It's been that way for decades. TV and radio TRY to give more depth with anthology shows but they can only go far with live broadcasts of sporting events. Again, WALDO's point is those of us on the forums might already know some of the technical stuff because our interest is much more intense.
But the guy who's watching a basketball game doesn't need to know how many seams there are on the ball....he needs to know that it's Kobe Bryant shooting the thing to satisfy him. And that's how WALDO's 600,000-plus figure enjoy a race.
Here, here. It is exhausting, isn't it? Waldo should understand that he doesn't have to have a response for everything. He's asking for a link about an emotional response to a broadcaster. The entire notion of the link is based on opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Exactly. And that doesn't require race wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Well, through the various responses, that Uncle Waldo is at it again. Once more he knows everything and the rest of us know nothing. I am not sure why you folks are wasting your time on this guy.
Asking for "facts" when someone suggests that Jon would be a better fit than Scott. The whole notion of "facts" in such a discussion is just ridiculous at face value. I and others have pointed out how Jon can do some of the "color commentary" of explaining some of the technical aspects of the race in a way that both engages and educates the uninitiated and at the same time doesn't talk down to the small percentage who already understand the topic. That is a rare trait.
But what really got me was in the reply to Starter, where he made the comment about the teacher playing to those who don't know. Ahhh, we have finally found a topic where Uncle Waldo does NOT know where of he speaks. He could not be more wrong a GOOD teacher engages both those who don't know and those who do and expands the horizons for both. I have been a teacher and a trainer and if I ever lowered my standards such that I only bothered to reach out to those who didn't know and didn't draw in the folks in the room who did, I would be doing both groups a grave disservice.
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by TU Homer
Yeah, well good luck on the first part of that. He is the self annointed expert on everything. Just ask him.
What was more funny was he was asking for FACTS about an emotional response to a broadcaster.
Gary
The basketball game and most other sporting events aren't really a good comparison. How many of them have the equivalent downtime provided by the full course yellows? It only makes sense to use that time to do some of the more in depth explanation of some of the terms and situations that come up during the broadcast. The casual tuner is bound to hear about the car being loose or tight or the terms oversteer or understeer. Do you honestly think they don't want to know what that means? Do you think that they want to just hear those terms flash by and be done with it? Sorry, I don't buy that at all. In fact I think that in all likelihood that a real opportunity exists to turn those "casual tuner" into something more if given a chance to be educated while being entertained. I am not suggesting it needs to be hoop explaining the second sector split time differences in a car set up with increased camber and lowered ride height, but some enumeration is useful. And Jon, has a skill found in very few broadcasters to do that sort of thing very well. There is a guy on some of the Nascar broadcasts who I have seen with similar skills. He has a cutaway car at his disposal and during yellows gives some background on some aspect that has just occurred in the the race. I do not think for one second that he is targeting ONLY that low percentage of gearheads in the viewing audience. He is going for a much large segment of the 600,000.Quote:
Originally Posted by indycool
I think you and Uncle Waldo are selling those 600,000 just a bit short.
Gary
Gary, I agree that Beekhuis is a fine broadcaster for the reasons that you mentioned. I also agree that personal preferences cannot be argued as FACTS. And I understand loose and tight and "stepped out" more than oversteer and understeer because I get those mixed up and hafta think about 'em.
If it's, as you put it with NASCAR's cutaway, germane to the situation on the track, I think that is very useful to the viewer and NASCAR's broadcasters pioneered that. But if it's why the red widget goes into the blue dingushole for better aerodymanic efficiency on the right front, uh uh.
I have a problem with this notion of the "casual tuner-in's." Racing isn't that hard to understand and NASCAR broadcast have gone a long way to educating (bludgeoned) on how it all works. IMO, most people that sit down to watch a race, know what racing is all about and can easily disseminate the subtle differences between series. I will also go so far as to say that most people that tuned in to watch the Indy Car opener has already watched a half dozen NASCAR races and 2 F1 races, this season, and if they know the rules there, then they surely can figure Indy Car out.
If at some point in your life you wanted to be a race fan, you had the "want to" or passion to learn enough about the races to figure it out. Watching racing is not brain surgery and unless you are a total moron you can figure it out in one oval race and one road race. So how many of that 800,000 and change really tuned in to watch the race? ... If they have watched more then 2 races in their lives they already have a real good grasp on what racing is about. If they specifically tuned in to watch an Indy Car race, I gotta believe they know their racing.
If there are any "casual fans" watching, they are setting on the couch next to their boyfriend, husband or brother who's already a hardcore fan explaining it to them.
People here, that continue to have to explain to us about the "casual race fan" underestimate the intelligence of the Indy Car viewer. IMO, they underestimate all race viewers and race attendees.
If I hear the phrase "casual race fan" again, I'm gonna throw up. I purpose there is know such animal.
Note: The above comments are not made to insult any of the regular posters I highly respect and any questions ask are strictly rhetorical.