hi
Moderators
Sort:
You should post a couple of links as examples.
It's a matter of taste. I couldn't endure a soccer match in the Colombian TV for example.
uscftigerprowl wrote:
"Every single person that Agon has chosen for commentary rather condemns chess to the intellectual rather than emotional."
Top players like Judith, and the fact she has done stuff beyond just playing, will not resonate with an audience of onlookers. They are not trying to entertain viewers. They are trying to market an "intellectual" product to high end consumers, not chess.com members who are too cheap to fly and see it in person like an opera.
If that's who the target audience is, then isn't an appeal to emotion EVEN MORE important? After all, people who don't know much about chess will be more attracted to the drama of sport than they will be to dry, technical ramblings.
Luckily we have been spared Judith the last couple of days but in my humble opinion,
in any endeavor (I am a musician), there is the intellectual and the emotional.
When I watch all the dialogues on You Tube (I am not so good on the internet so perhaps relying on YouTube is naive) the thing that I miss is the passion, the emotion for the game.
This is what I like about Maurice Ashley, his emotional reaction to moves.
Every single person that Agon has chosen for commentary rather condemns chess to the intellectual rather than emotional. For me this is unfortunate because for me chess is entirely emotional so I relate much more strongly to someone who sees it this way and is able to express it in such a way. Therefore I have been rather disappointed with the chess world broadcasts and
am sorry they could not see things frankly in a bit more American way (emotional). My two cents.