The trouble with T&F TV coverage

[Walt Murphy]

WM wrote

Oh, really? EVERY race call in Boston (except for the H.S. Miles) was live. As for the 5k, I produced a sheet that showed "Tiru"'s pace from last year, so it was easy to compare her splits throughout the race. And please point out a race where you thought someone other than the athlete(s) we highlighted had a chance to win. Criticize mistakes if you will(personally, I thought we spent too much setup time on some races), but give us some credit for having some idea of what's going on out there.

I believe that is called live-to-tape and eliminates editing costs.Live race calls are better even if they do contain a gaffe or two. They really sound better.
Why did the producers change from the normal live race call for the HS miles?
Good show all in all.........Nice to have Larry back in the booth.
[email protected] will let you comment on the meet and I assume will stay up for the entire series. I'm not sure who will read the incoming mail but
if we show support for TV Track meets in general we may get enhanced versions in the future.
One thing I'd like so see is full in depth ,including attempts in field events and winners splits, results up on the screen for a sec so nutcases like me can go back-freeze frame-the total event picture.The top three result posting is enough for the casual fan but some info is missed,ie long jumper "Y" runs 400 finishes 4th, local guy gets in to fill out field and runs 7th in 2 mile.[/quote]

Tom,
Yes, it is called live-to-tape and it has as much to do with time as it does with cost. The high school races were done after-the-fact because it wasn't certain how much time we would have for them. It all depended on how the women's 3000 and 5000 turned out.

We do try to mention significant finishers out of the top three, especially if we mentioned them before the race. We don't always succeed, but the attempt is being made.

I'll see what we can do about the field event series

[fieldguy]

re: a much earlier post on this topic about lebron james snuff-and-stuff play on sunday. the best headline i saw for the play was "0 to 94 in 6 seconds.'' calling it 100 feet is overstating the length of the court by .06 percent. i suppose he might have covered that much between skidding to a halt and turning around to go the other way, though. not to be picky about it or anything.

[dj]

re: a much earlier post on this topic about lebron james snuff-and-stuff play on sunday. the best headline i saw for the play was "0 to 94 in 6 seconds.'' calling it 100 feet is overstating the length of the court by .06 percent. i suppose he might have covered that much between skidding to a halt and turning around to go the other way, though. not to be picky about it or anything.

Backboard to backboard is only 86 feet. Let's keep picking away and see if we can analyze this down to 2-foot layup!

[fieldguy]

i merely pointed out that long-time favorite nba play, one whose popularity has been re-established by kobe bryant -- 94 solo.

[kuha]

While looking up (YES, I ADMIT IT!) the info on the 1971 Dream Mile, I came across this story. As Yogi would say, "IT'S DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN."
From T&FN, II July 1971, page 29.

"CBS-TV Track Series Ratings Drop Drastically

The first seven track meets telecast in the CBS-TV series have shown a significant drop from the first two years in the Nielson Ratings of the Share (of potential viewers). [A list of ratings, etc. follows. The 1969 series of 7 meets had a 21% share and 5.4 rating; the 1970 series of 7 meets had 20% and 5.1; the 1971 series of 7 had 17% and 4.2]

...If the downward trend continues, the future of the program could be in serious jeopardy. It's anyone's guess what may be responsible for the waning interest in the program. Format may well be a major key. And therein lies an area where you, the viewer, may be of some assistance--by offering your constructive criticism for improvement of presentation..."

Gee, do you think that "downward trend" continued...?

[bad hammy]

Gee, do you think that "downward trend" continued...?

I do not have a valid hypothesis to explain this, but I notice that the decline in T&F popularity also roughly corresponds to its increasing professionalism. Anyone have a guess as to why there is this apparent correlation? Maybe once folks get to watching pro sports, they want to see big money involved, and T&F’s relatively paltry salaries works to its detriment in the public eye?? Don’t know if there is anything to this.