Hey, I just wanted to give my 2 cents about the ama commentary during races. It got to a point where I just listen to music and mute it completely. Why do they talk literaly non stop? Why do they always have the need to fill gaps where nothing happens? Why cant they just observe for a minute? Why do they always trying to figure out what the riders think at the exact moment, mind reading and create storys out of anything. Its not a "chess game", its not a "selection of musicial chairs" (oh what a stupid comparison that is), its not nearly as complex as theyre trying to make it. The riders just go as fast as possible AND THATS IT. I love RC, Weege, js and all of them dont get me wrong, maybe theyre forced to make it that way idk. But with the addition of James it got even worse, there is so much non sense talk its ridiculous. Shouldnt a commentator be there to call the race as it happens? (-> like Malin?) Is there always the need to talk? If not much is happening, well then dont talk?
I know this is an ongoing discussion for years, but its most of the time directed to one specific person. It doesnt matter who is sitting in the booth. Has been the same with emig, GL or anyone really...
And I know I will receive a lot of hate and its ok, doesnt change the fact that its 90% nonsense talk.
“Shouldnt a commentator be there to call the race as it happens?” - that right there.
No side stories, prerecorded interviews and pre-prepared storylines.
I’m not usually up for the constant commentary bashing, but it’s not good.
Couldn’t believe my ears on the weekend when Stew said Sexton was faster than Jett and RC said Jett should let Chase by. Like really? Two of the best racers ever and that’s your take?
Couldn’t work out if I was missing something, or watching a different race.
What gets me is, them trying to make it seem like it's anything but Jett just sitting up there, managing the race.
Week after week.
And yes, the endless backstories during the race are insufferable.
I think a lot of it has to do with the network and production people in the US. They’re the ones calling the shots and they’ve been bad for years. In all other mainstream sports it’s assumed the audience knows how the game is played or they’ll figure it out as they go along. For some some reason moto coverage likes to try and dumb it down and treat its audience like they’re all from outer space and have never seen a dirt bike before. That coupled with people that have no experience behind a screen or mic that know when to talk and when to not just produces bad coverage. It won’t change.
It’s dumbed down for fuckwits on this forum
The Shop
Free shipping: VITALMX
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
Something else that kills me is they literally only show the top guys. How often do you see the names from 6-10 flipping on the leader board but they’ll just keep the camera on Deegan or Hunter for multiple laps because “he might catch him soon”? It’s like guys like Hawkins, Noren, Swoll, Schwartz, Mumford, etc. don’t exist. Then you watch MXGP and Paul Malin literally knows what hospital the guy in 12th was born in, and they’ll show him battle for 11th.
It often feels like RC and James are overly concerned about sticking to the script, versus creating a natural “flow”. Compare the announcing to their podcasts and interviews and the listener hears a distinct difference in tone and pace.
David Bailey set the standard for color commentary. No canned responses or questionable observations; just a straight-up expert opinion. Several guest commentators (notably RJ and Broc) have demonstrated similar talents, which is refreshing, but maybe not what the production team has in mind.
It’s almost like the producer doesn’t want/take feedback…nah never mind DC and Weege say the broadcast can’t be improved, give Bondo an extra large Xmas bonus this year!
I dont think the commentary is that bad, I mean thats what commentary is. Talking about the race and when there isn't a good battle going on they have to talk about something. Two full hours of racing there is going to be some downtime in the excitement.
I will say id like if theyd show more battles further in the pack but also if the camera is off the top 3 and something exciting happens everyone will be pissed they didnt show that so its sort of a catch 22 since they cant predict the future.
They simply make shit up. Or it's pre-produced mid race sponsor shit.
NBC paid 5 people to comment on the race this weekend.
The industry/business side of professional moto is a big circle jerk.
And they know they can sell it to an audience who grew up jerking off to these dudes' signatures on their $30 MotoTee.
We all love the riding part so much that we have a hard time seeing what's under the hood.
Don't even get me started on the "I will not give the brand free attention" Battle Box.
It’s sooo dumbed down its insane. Not only that they don’t talk about what’s actually happening live! They will just ramble about non sense while some exciting is happening on track. I shouldn’t scream at my TV saying deegan went down a whole minute before weege figures it out.
You people will never be happy
A huge crash in the first turn of 450 Moto 1 that collected most of the frontrunners and commentators never list off the names of the guys who crashed. You had to watch the leaderboard to get an idea of what happened. Zero coverage as these guys made their way towards the front either.
In 450 Moto 2, they put the race on as "background" and aired some pre-recorded segment with the Lawrence Brothers.
This shit doesn't generally happen in other forms of motorsport, especially not ones with 60 total minutes of racing (per class).
RC/Stew comment relentlessly about how there's no action when Jett has a huge lead, yet the cameras and commentary stays focused upon him. Any battles farther back are completely overlooked.
At least with SX, the track is condensed to the point where you can see action that is not being mentioned. With MX, you're entirely at the mercy of Bondo.
I have been saying this for yrs. Stop following a rider for too long . Keep switching thru the field. Unless the top 2 are within 2.5 seconds or closer. Then you stay on them. This weekend was terrible. Bondo loves to show the same guy for 10 minutes. Zzzz 😴 he is terrible.
Says the guy on this forum
During the broadcast this weekend, it seemed they took more of a NASCAR style approach passing from one guy to the next as the race moved around the track. I hadn't really noticed that before and it may have simply been because they had several commentators for the event.
Also, as much as I like Ricky, how many times was he going to tell us the ruts were a problem because you can't move lines once in them?
I like commentary that tackles the psychological aspect personally. You really get that a lot with the David and Art in the older races - I saw one a while back where David (in reference to Windham trying to hold back Carmichael) said "This is what Kevin really needs as a rider Art. He needs to win battles like this, tough battles, and let these guys know that they can't just roll through" etc (or words to that effect). Commentary like that creates or highlights drama around the human experience. If the riders were just automatons listed from 1 - 40th they'd be nothing to invest in outside of bike manufacturer.
The death killer for all commentary is over simplicity, and then drawing it out...
If you can't fill the air for something fairly meaningful that drives the narrative forward, then don't fill it (agreeing with the OP here). 'Brevity is the soul of wit'. James is good, as is Jason. In fact I think Jason is often under appreciated - he does an amazing job. Ricky... can be good but often takes an age to get to the point he's trying to make, and then proceeds to make it over and over. For example his point about appreciating "the different riding styles on the track between the riders" - I believe he made that one no less than 3 times. Too much.
Rc...." I'm surprised he didn't put em in the cheap seats...Wil?...wil...'i just talked to the team manager and the team manager said that the team and the manager that I talked to said they need more air in his tire.. blah.blah.blah..."
I've just started muting it. It's actually embarrassing to listen to it. That said, if you mute it, it still beats waiting to see the Carlsbad GP once a year on ABC Wide World of Sports!
Pit Row
The casual viewer doesn't subscribe to Peacock to watch motorcycle racing, How many happen to stumble onto and watch a race on broadcast TV ? Not many I bet.
So pleae stop dumbing it down for the nearly non existent casual viewer and cater to your subscriotion payibng base.
Call the race and if the race for the lead is not exciting find some riders dicing someplace on the track and follow that or a top guy that's coming throughn the pack.
My 2 cents.
I would bet less than not many. I have to search motocross for it to come up, it never is up on my "home" screen when I log into Peacock on race day. If you have to search for it I doubt anyone is stumbling upon it....maybe that is Peacock's way of negotiating the next contract, no one is watching so we don't have to pay you much.
Not to mention the guy who is 2nd in points visibly dropping from 3rd to outside the top 10 on the leaderboard but it takes multiple minutes for it to even be mentioned.
Half the problem is the fact you have so many people, and they all have to contribute, but the flip side of that is you have people on the ground finding out what is going on... 2 in the booth is enough, but unless you are hooked up to someone down on the track, actually watching, you only know what you see on screen.
Playing out prerecorded BS in the middle of a race is criminal IMO , i would have loved it if Jett's bike had corked it while they were playing that .
Its not easy, but you dont have to make it harder than it is.
I agree cwell11. The obsession with 'storylines' and 'backstories' and 'talking with so and so earlier today' has got noticeably worse when you compare them to races from 10 or more years ago.
You'd have to assume that the producers have data from audience focus groups that shows people want this shite? Otherwise, why do it? Alternatively, maybe it's just their preference?
During the race, there should be a play-by-play person and colour commentator and that's it. Trackside commentary should be saved for before and after the races. Will Christian should return to wakeboarding and get the f**k out of motocross/supercross.
Once that has happened the race commentators will have some space to work on their own craft. As the OP pointed out this means not speaking the whole time. If you listen to Paul Malin - the absolute man in this game - he often doesn't speak, he lets the race speak for itself. When he does speak he practices the art of brevity. His commentary is crisp, sharp, informed and to the point.
Last point - why the F do the producers dumb down the whole broadcast for the 'new' fan? You don't need to tell this mythical 'new fan' a whole bunch of moronic shite in an effort to help them understand the sport. Anything someone wants to know can be found in a quick Google search. For example: Which motocross bike is blue? What is supercross? FFS!
Got to agree with alot of what's been said in here. The production could do with alot of improvement? Race/battle coverage, commentary quality, style and what they actually talk about is questionable for sure.
They're trying to do/be too much. With the limited budget they've got you'd think they would simplify and concentrate on the basics? Do a few things really good rather than many things very average?
Post a reply to: The Commentary Approach in general