TheStroBro wrote:
Now that both races are over. Looking at this from a broadcast product perspective, I know some things, but not everything as I work in a ball sport.
Commentators will always either turn people on or turn people off. The thing with commentary is you need to be able to present a cohesive dialogue to the novice who just discovers through flipping on the Peacock app, keep them engaged, but then also not dumb it down so much for the hard core. Early on the Professional Broadcasters kept it dumbed down and same with the Color/Expert commentators. It was kind of annoying. For the three pros, this was probably the first triathlon race they've ever covered. The main guy who does NASCAR. For me I didn't think the "Experts" knew enough about the field to provide adequate color commentary, especially for the women's race. The Professional Play by Play guys actually did a lot of research as they were able to tell stories but that's not where they fit in the broadcast, that was for the Color/Athlete commentators to do.
I will say, the women's race really didn't lend to the pros being able to present their best, but the cool thing for them is they had a second race almost immediately. They showed their stuff after being waterboarded with a morning triathlon session. I thought the commentary for the men's race was really really good. I think what helped the professional sports broadcasters was that there was actually a RACE going on. Man that was really exciting.
From a camera perspective, I don't think much extra was brought to the table here. So I only remember one cut to the onboard camera and that was 30 seconds from Rachel McBride, was that the only bike wired up in the women's race? Distinctly don't remember any cuts during the men's race, that needed to be employed a lot more.
The best thing about this race was the graphical presentation, it reminded me of watching a NASCAR race. The live splits really changed how the product feels. And I know graphics are expensive, but relying on the NASCAR team to produce this turned out a visual experience that was pretty excellent overall. In the end for a director, there isn't much difference between a stock car race around an oval vs a triathlon around an oval. The graphical presentation for me is the standard bearer, this is what needs to happen going forward whomever the event promoter is.
The difference for the next race is you don't get such an experienced production team on an open course 70.3 or 140.6 distance.
I'm really happy for Paula Findlay, great to see her healthy and put it all together. The Men's race was just an amazing show, and I honestly think it's extremely important for this race to have been won by a young guy, then add all of the other young guns that showed out. Halvard is probably pleased, and to the vegan who told Gustav's last ride didn't look like a taper on Strava? Time to eat some crow!
Also, only one ITU guy beat Lionel. And that run by Matt Hanson to take second!
good stuff.and much more productive stuff than silly negative one liner.
i agree the worst decision was to have a pool swimmer in the commentating team. belinda was good .
i thought the filming and commentating from the motorbike was good and could be even better if the commentators are guided a bit better in terms of camera work. when they had the athlete in the middle of the frame it was good. i guess that was definitely something new cameraman and commentator in one.
sine they had a load of nascar camera people involved i guess they will make a good improvement the next time as they will have a better idea about tri the next time.
i have to say for the male run the camera work was really good they moved well between leader and other important groups that was fab.
bit of a pitty the stream blacke out just after luis crossed the line but otherwise transmition was really good .