Looks like the easiest way to be popular with letsrun is dis flotrack. Grow up letsrun, just cause you got beef with them doesn't mean they're a bad website. They've done a lot for the sport.
Looks like the easiest way to be popular with letsrun is dis flotrack. Grow up letsrun, just cause you got beef with them doesn't mean they're a bad website. They've done a lot for the sport.
Can you please link your claim to my argument. Logical debate may be difficult for you, but that doesn't mean that you don't have to try at it.
I'll break it down for you:
My claim: flotrack is bad for the sport
My reasoning: they have the rights to many events and races and provide supremely subpar, unprofessional, and uninformative coverage of these events.
Your claim: flotrack has done a lot for the sport.
Your reasoning: "grow up", "you are kissing brojos butts", and " just because you don't like them doesn't mean they're bad"
You make no sense at all. I claimed that they are not only a bad website, but also bad for the sport. Then I gave my reasons. Try to catch up before contributing.
Officially (adverb, noun)
A word used by basement-dwelling internet cry-babies to make their poorly constructed arguments seem more plausible
I think there are two issues -
1) that they have locked up webcast rights
2) whether or not they are any good at webcasting/announcing
for 1)...would anyone else be webcasting these events if flotrack didn't? If yes, then why wasn't it happening before? why is it bad for the sport to have a subscription based viewing platform? presumably you thinjk someone would be doing it for free. Do you really think it would done for free with any quality at all? Any examples?
for 2) more a matter of opinion. You either dig the youthful enthusiasm or you want to listen to a bunch professional broadcasters. I like that they get excited and a little wild - but I can see why others may not.
bearbro wrote:
Can you please link your claim to my argument. Logical debate may be difficult for you, but that doesn't mean that you don't have to try at it.
I'll break it down for you:
My claim: flotrack is bad for the sport
My reasoning: they have the rights to many events and races and provide supremely subpar, unprofessional, and uninformative coverage of these events.
Your claim: flotrack has done a lot for the sport.
Your reasoning: "grow up", "you are kissing brojos butts", and " just because you don't like them doesn't mean they're bad"
You make no sense at all. I claimed that they are not only a bad website, but also bad for the sport. Then I gave my reasons. Try to catch up before contributing.
First off, try to improve your reading comprehension. While you correctly identified your claim and your reasoning, however poor, to "back up" said claim, you failed to do the same with mine.
My claim: bearbro kisses brojos butt.
Evidence to support said claim: You are incredibly immature in you reasoning of this topic; you need to grow up. You are really just looking to be popular with letsrun, as evidenced by your choice of topic. The website flotrack has provided significant coverage of a little known sport, publicity which is good for it.
Now linking your claim to my argument was pretty difficult when all I had to go by was your first post. In it's essence, your first post was one long rant on flotrack's coverage of a particular race, so I in turn just stated the facts of your post. But now I'll try to better give an argument for my opinion.
Flotrack has given this sport a lot. They provide a way to watch various races, coverage which no one else will provide. The do interviews with athletes and coaches, cover races in an unprecedented fashion, and in general have made running a better known,better understood and more cared for sport.
That help?
It is TERRIBLE to watch Gordon in those videos. Seriously. He is really awkward, pale, and baby faced. Do not try anymore staches.
Considering how hard it is to find any races, I do not mind Flotrack. Yes, their live commentating needs to be more polished and professional, but I appreciate the effort they put into their workout showcases.
Really, the only complaints I have against Flotrack is their exorbitant premium fees and lack of professionalism on live feeds.
Don't really care to get into your guys' d!ck measuring contest, but it is possible to have the opinion that the Flotrack guys are bad at commentating, even start a thread on it, without the motive being Letsrun popularity.
Carry on.
The good news is Flotrack does not broadcast major events so I don't watch Flotrack but a couple times a year.
I've seen minor league baseball broadcasting and it sucks. What do you expect?
you don't get it
we aren't talking about some no-name high school race.
it is the bigger events to which exclusivity should be eliminated.
the technology is getting better and better for individuals to webcast.
in the future, there can be software guided agglomeration sites where folks can upload their pictures and video feeds and the agglomeration site will assemble user selectable multi-cammera angle feeds. this will be especially nice for road races, like marathons, but will be great for track races as well.
there is no place for exclusivity. flotrack can just go away.
you don't get it wrote:
you don't get it
we aren't talking about some no-name high school race.
it is the bigger events to which exclusivity should be eliminated.
the technology is getting better and better for individuals to webcast.
in the future, there can be software guided agglomeration sites where folks can upload their pictures and video feeds and the agglomeration site will assemble user selectable multi-cammera angle feeds. this will be especially nice for road races, like marathons, but will be great for track races as well.
there is no place for exclusivity. flotrack can just go away.
and you get it?
tell me - who in the world is going to do webcasts for free, with announcing and interviews and adequate bandwith? You really think this will happen?
I think you WISH it would happen and would be really happy if it did, but really..it ain't going to happen.
The single biggest problem with Flotrack is message board posts saying "they need to go back to the old Flotrack" or "they need to be more like Fenton."
Here's a short history of Flotrack:
1. Fenton is entire website. People fcking love him.
2. Alex Lohr hired. He's very similar to Fenton. People like him.
3. Gordon & co. hired. All very dissimilar to Fenton. Rather than permitting them to grow into themselves, FT brass recognizes that exactly one thing has worked for their on-camera talent in the history of the website: acting like Fenton.
So, Gordon, James, Lincoln, Meg, and Taylor all try to ape this caffeinated intensity that worked really, really well for Ryan + Alex but simply isn't them. It comes across really poorly.
They are good people. They work harder than anyone, and they know track as well as anyone. But that doesn't really come across on camera. If they stop trying to be (or are permitted to stop trying to be) Ryan Fenton, and just act like themselves (which is all those first two guys ever did), they'll come across much better on camera. That's it.
devo wrote:
The single biggest problem with Flotrack is message board posts saying "they need to go back to the old Flotrack" or "they need to be more like Fenton."
Here's a short history of Flotrack:
1. Fenton is entire website. People fcking love him.
2. Alex Lohr hired. He's very similar to Fenton. People like him.
3. Gordon & co. hired. All very dissimilar to Fenton. Rather than permitting them to grow into themselves, FT brass recognizes that exactly one thing has worked for their on-camera talent in the history of the website: acting like Fenton.
So, Gordon, James, Lincoln, Meg, and Taylor all try to ape this caffeinated intensity that worked really, really well for Ryan + Alex but simply isn't them. It comes across really poorly.
They are good people. They work harder than anyone, and they know track as well as anyone. But that doesn't really come across on camera. If they stop trying to be (or are permitted to stop trying to be) Ryan Fenton, and just act like themselves (which is all those first two guys ever did), they'll come across much better on camera. That's it.
this is fair
so what is fenton doing? why isn't he on camera anymore?
Just watched some flopro videos...
that's what is good about flotrack. Sure their videos are stupid, but they are great distributors of urnning content. I encourage you to try to do better if you think you can. I'd bet your announcing would be dry and boring by comparison.
swerve wrote:
Agreed. Flotrack's new employees are just so annoying and childish. I hate Run Junkies and watching meets now because of them. The website is good, but they need to change their style back to the old Flotrack.
+1
Has anyone noticed they have started to leave spelling corrections and passive-aggressive replies to critical comments on their Facebook?
The problem is that I'm not claiming that I am an expert announcer. Just watch one of the Major Marathons broadcast in europe. When the camera is covering the lead pack you are getting the bios of every runner still in the mix. When a runner falls off you will hear that he said his training has been tough due to family issues in the pre-race interviews, or something along those lines.
^^^so this happened
Kevin Selby is taking over as the GM of Flotrack after the new year.
From everything I've seen in the past, the guy knows what he's doing. Perhaps he'll be able to turn the ship around.