Support Chess.com TV

I think a great draw to chess.com would be highlights of the post-match press conference- if this is very expensive too then how is Susan Polgar able to show it on her blog as well as live coverage?

I also agree that the video stream looks like a waste of bandwidth.

I would encourage anyone to get a membership. I'm new on here and I'm having a fun time and my chess is improving. I have to say that if I were a company and paid $250/hour then I would want a better quality of broadcast than it has been. I have enjoyed the broadcasts but they fall below acceptable professional standards.

I agree with you rubygabbi that the streaming chat is so distracting and much of what is said is completely useless. I'd like to see it done away with. I also think that the picture quality is poor and the layout needs to be clearer.

I think that with a more professional appearance it would encourage investment.

should try and fund raise and still make it diamond and prem only! im just being selfish of course, as the spammy people make it less fun for me :)

Nor is it a secret that 85% of statistics are made up on the spot in an attempt to give additional credibility to something that's probably no more than a hunch or perhaps an educated guess.

90% of golf putts left short don't go in

.. agreed .. can't get the current game positions ( rather confusing,act) so I only watched for a short while.

As a thought, at the moment in chesstv, we can't tell who is spamming because there is nothing identifying the premium members from basic members. So its unfair to lay blame for spamming.

an idea is to make chess.tv only available to premium members.

I will say try to strike a longer deal with your streaming video providers. Since with longer deal, there long term risk will reduce and then i am sure they will give much better deal. 

one more source of income could be increasing cost of premium account in range of 1$-3$, in return you guys need to provide broadcast of all live chess tournaments. This way members will get a good return of there money and you will get finance. 

of course that's true. 2 out of every 3 people know that.

but in all seriousness, the chat is annoying but i can deal with it. i kind of stopped watching mostly due to the commentators.

the reason i'm watching is because i'm interested in the game being played. obviously the game with commentary is better, but it really depends on what type of commentary. going off on 10+ move variations for extended periods of time even when the next move in the game has already been played does not tickle my fancy. i know variations will be considered, but a limit on these would be beneficial imho.

furthermore, analysis of the actual position or move that was just made would be fantastic, or even an analysis on the specific opening for example. if i could get an explanation of why this GM made this move it would be great, and not just "well he moves here, then he moves here, then he moves here...no that doesn't work...so he moves here instead". it is my assumption that most of the people watching are not of a high rating (like myself) and would therefore love to hear a more basic analysis than a 10 move variation from move 13 - i learn nothing from that except that i have no idea what they are droning on about and i don't even know what the actual position in the game is. even if they could mix it up a bit - sometimes go on some crazy lengthy variation, and the next time simply explain why the bishop retreated to this square and why the knight was positioned here earlier because he/she was anticipating this move, etc. etc.

okay, sorry about the rant. just my two cents. overall, i am greatly pleased that you are showing these games live and in actuality any chess.com tv is better than none at all. keep up the good work.

Chess is not a simple game. And often times, those 10 move variations ARE why the bishop is retreating, or why the knight was positioned there. Grandmasters can see a lot of moves in their head really really fast. Additionally, they have seen a LOT of positions, and have a lot of patterns in their head, so this allows them to further analyze a position even though they may not be actively calculating that part of it. For the commentators to fully explain WHY this or that move was made, often requires all the back and forth, and all the deep lines that they cover.

For whatever reason, I have a hard time just "not looking" at it. Inevitably something over there will grab my attention, and Ill get caught up. I have the same problem in Live Chess, but there I can just take it off the screen. 

trigs, i appreciate the feedback. maybe we can try to mix it up a bit.

but let me make something really clear. we don't understand the game. we don't know the reasons they play their moves. they are SO MUCH better than us, and they are entirely focused. we are trying to explain concepts, we are checking chat, we are entering moves on the computer, etc.

to give any kind of account of "who's winning" or "why did he do that" it is necessary for us to look at a bunch of variations. we could do that silently in our heads without moving pieces while you all wait 20 minutes... but i'm not sure anyone would find that to be an improvement.

but what you made me think, trigs, is that we could perhaps try less hard to answer those difficult questions, and instead explain some of the simpler features of the position more often; then at other times try to answer those questions, and kind of switch up the pacing for the vastly different levels watching. of course that also means that at all times there will be someone yelling at us; either " i don't get it " or " oh wow, masters aren't any good, why are you talking about such dumb stuff."

as for the chat, we can turn it off. completely. should we try that with one broadcast and see what kind of response we get?

Well, I don't that you'll get a very good response to that at all. What I'd like personally is a way to just hide it from my view. Though, as I said, I wasn't sure that was implementable.

Oh man.  My Premium isn't renewed yet so I will miss IM Daniel Rensch on May 1st.
He is so funny and has a cool voice.

oh furtive, i just had an idea! drag your browser window to the right side of your screen and then.... push the chat off the edge! then laugh at it as it falls into the abyss. solutions. :-)

i'm pretty sure that since this chat room is outsourced we don't have that kind of control, but i'll inquire if there are any such options.

This may get some upset with me, but:  

too bad there isn't a filter to limit chat to premium members only.   or have same name used as login name for chess.com.

also, while it is nice to see the GMs, IMs, FMs, NMs who are commentating, to have a face to associate with the name,  I don't find their facial expressions add much to the commentary.    in fact, I try to ignore the talking head on the left as it distracts from the board.       if cutting out their faces would reduce the bandwidth - maybe show them for two minutes at start of each half hour....

the streaming chatter doesn't lend much value to the analysis, and often (I suspect) is a distraction to those trying to commentate on ideas.   While having the ability to post a question to the analysis team is nice, the 'chat' window seems to be getting overwhelmed with the many who seem to think this is "all about them" and flood or spam or just try to make annoying comments to get attention.

   I suspect that the analysis team could do a more thorough job if not distracted by and trying to accomodate all the "nuisance" questions.    granted, many are valid questions but when they flood in a stream, causing the chat to keep flowing, they become 'nuisance' value to the discussion team.

It would be nice to have a board showing the game position, and the moves showing, to reach the position in the analysis as they develop ideas/concepts/lines for us - - - - from the game position.    That way, a visual reference would be available to see the "starting point" of an analytical line.   (Not sure how readily that can be accomodated, but it is an idea that may interest many - particularly us lower-rated / lower-skilled who cannot carry the 'starting points' in our heads while looking into complex analysis.)

It is unfortunate that upon login, the user's IP can't be billed $1.00 per broadcast.   That would make it 'pay per view' for non-premium members and generate a revenue stream from all those who want to watch.   (maybe even premium members...)