New Graphic on NBC Telecasts

[albatross]

The one where it tells me what shot the guy is on.  So completely annoying.  If you tell me he's putting for birdie on a par 4, you don't need to also show me an additional graphic that indicates that it's his 3rd shot.  Showing me it's his first shot when he's standing on the tee is ridiculous overkill.  I know it's a small thing, but it's really irritating.

[Golfingdad]

I disagree. I think it's great. When the player is not on the green they never say "for birdie" or "for par," etc, they just say "fourth shot," so it's nice to know what it means. If they're playing courses I'm really familiar with, and I'm watching exclusively, then yeah, it's not going to add anything. But when I'm only half paying attention, and flipping back and forth to basketball, it's quite helpful.

[Hammer 4]

It's o.k...what I wish they would do is put up a graphic on the yardage left, and what club they are using. I know that the club They use doesn't relate to which club most of us would use, still would like them to show it.

[albatross]

I disagree. I think it's great. When the player is not on the green they never say "for birdie" or "for par," etc, they just say "fourth shot," so it's nice to know what it means. If they're playing courses I'm really familiar with, and I'm watching exclusively, then yeah, it's not going to add anything.

But when I'm only half paying attention, and flipping back and forth to basketball, it's quite helpful.

It's fine if you think it's great, but your explanation is incorrect.  I watched all day today and every time the graphics come up it says, for example:

8th Hole

Par 4

For Birdie

1 2 3 4

And if they are hitting from the fairway, it already says Par 4, second shot, so why do I need an additional graphic with the number 2 highlighted?  Knowing Par and that it's their second shot, tells you everything you need to know.  What does the new graphic tell you that isn't already on the screen?

So it's definitely redundant.  And on the tee?  I realize that they could be re-teeing and hitting 3, but in those cases they always put 3rd shot on the screen.  Was talking to some golf buddies about it, and it annoys them too.  You're certainly entitled to love it though. I was just pointing out that it's certainly redundant.

A picture of the graphic and some funny comments about it's stupidity on this site:

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2014/3/22/new-golf-graphicwhat-do-you-think.html

[clutchshot]

I don't mind it, there are times when I don't know what shot they are on in relation to par (not very often) and it helps. Def no harm having more information up...

[jamo]

It's fine if you think it's great, but your explanation is incorrect.  I watched all day today and every time the graphics come up it says, for example: 8th Hole Par 4 For Birdie 1 2 3 4 So it's definitely redundant.  And on the tee?  I realize that they could be re-teeing and hitting 3, but in those cases they always put 3rd shot on the screen.  Was talking to some golf buddies about it, and it annoys them too.  You're certainly entitled to love it though. I was just pointing out that it's certainly redundant.   A picture of the graphic and some funny comments about it's stupidity on this site: [URL=http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2014/3/22/new-golf-graphicwhat-do-you-think.html]http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2014/3/22/new-golf-graphicwhat-do-you-think.html[/URL]

I think they made it redundant like that so that you don't have to use the new numbers. I didn't love the new graphic, but it didn't bother me.

[Golfingdad]

It's fine if you think it's great, but your explanation is incorrect.  I watched all day today and every time the graphics come up it says, for example:

8th Hole

Par 4

For Birdie

1 2 3 4

And if they are hitting from the fairway, it already says Par 4, second shot, so why do I need an additional graphic with the number 2 highlighted?  Knowing Par and that it's their second shot, tells you everything you need to know.  What does the new graphic tell you that isn't already on the screen?

So it's definitely redundant.  And on the tee?  I realize that they could be re-teeing and hitting 3, but in those cases they always put 3rd shot on the screen.  Was talking to some golf buddies about it, and it annoys them too.  You're certainly entitled to love it though. I was just pointing out that it's certainly redundant.

A picture of the graphic and some funny comments about it's stupidity on this site:

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2014/3/22/new-golf-graphicwhat-do-you-think.html

I'm not going to swear to it (because I wasn't paying super close attention, nor is it on right now) but I'm pretty sure I'm right.  When they are on the green, you are absolutely right - it'll show that it's the third shot AND say "for birdie," so, yes, in those cases it is absolutely redundant.

But I've watched a lot of golf over the years, and been frustrated multiple times before (albeit for only a minute or two) because if the guy is chipping from off the green the graphic doesn't say "for birdie," it says "3rd shot."  Without the "1 2 3 4" I don't really know what they're shooting for.  Yes, I acknowledge that it could still be redundant because the announcer may say "for birdie" but I'm not always listening to the tournament with volume, or even when I am, it's hectic around here and I'm not always hearing them.

It's not taking the place of anything else, so its not hurting anything, and there are certainly occasions where it's helpful.  That's how I see it.

And even if it were reduntant 100% of the time, I'd argue it's still helpful for those of us who aren't quite as focused.  For example, knowing that their short birdie putt is on a par 5  versus a par 3 makes it slightly less meaningful.

More information, to me, is usually a good thing.

[iacas]

I think they could have used that space for something useful instead of something redundant.

More information is not always better. It slows down recognition of the information that is there.

[Golfingdad]

I think they could have used that space for something useful instead of something redundant.

More information is not always better. It slows down recognition of the information that is there.

Agree to disagree ... I like it.

Another example:  LPGA has a drivable par 4 right now (#16).  Girl makes the green and the graphic says "for eagle," but ends up in greenside bunker and it just says "2nd shot."  Without the numbers, I'd look up and likely think that girl in bunker missed the green on a par 3.  With numbers, there is no doubt.  So it appears as though its redundant info, but it's really not.

[iacas]

Agree to disagree ... I like it.

Cop-out. I raise the point that more information is not always better, and you cop out with the equivalent of plugging your ears and humming. It's redundant information 90% of the time. Any time the par of the hole is listed, it's redundant when they say "2nd shot" or "for eagle."

You can keep liking it, but if you're just gonna ignore valid points, why post? You like it and you've made up your mind.

[Golfingdad]

Cop-out. I raise the point that more information is not always better, and you cop out with the equivalent of plugging your ears and humming. It's redundant information 90% of the time. Any time the par of the hole is listed, it's redundant when they say "2nd shot" or "for eagle."

You can keep liking it, but if you're just gonna ignore valid points, why post? You like it and you've made up your mind.

I'm not plugging my ears and humming ... I'm explaining why I think it's a good thing.

[iacas]

I'm not plugging my ears and humming ... I'm explaining why I think it's a good thing.

More information is not always a good thing, particularly when it's almost always redundant. They have a word for that: clutter. :)

[Golfingdad]

More information is not always a good thing, particularly when it's almost always redundant. They have a word for that: clutter. :)

Yes, I respect your opinion on that and I agree that many people will see that its redundant and not like it.  I'm simply not one of those people. So far, it doesn't bother me, and I see some situations where it provides me info I didn't have in the past.

[iacas]

Yes, I respect your opinion on that and I agree that many people will see that its redundant and not like it.  I'm simply not one of those people.    So far, it doesn't bother me, and I see some situations where it provides me info I didn't have in the past.

That's fine.

I think it's stupid. :) I'd rather they use that space for something else, like GIR rank for the player for the year, odds of holing the putt, etc.

[albatross]

Yes, I respect your opinion on that and I agree that many people will see that its redundant and not like it.  I'm simply not one of those people.    So far, it doesn't bother me, and I see some situations where it provides me info I didn't have in the past.

No one can argue with you about whether or not you like it. If you like it, that's fine.  However, you're wrong when you keep saying that it's information you didn't have in the past.  NBC and CBS coverage always show, as part of the pre-shot graphic, the par for the hole and the shot the player is currently hitting, so you aren't getting any new information.

If you flip to the golf randomly in the past, you quickly know that it's a Par 4 and the old graphic has always said 2nd shot.  The new graphic we've been discussing gives you absolutely ZERO new information.  That's the problem a lot of people have with it. You can like it all you want, but it's just a repeat of what's already been part of the pre-shot graphic.

[Golfingdad]

That's fine. I think it's stupid. :) I'd rather they use that space for something else, like GIR rank for the player for the year, odds of holing the putt, etc.

I'd be cool with that ... Although it takes up a small amount of space so I imagine they could do both. :)

[dhanson]

it's repetitive. i agree with the above - more useful statistics should be integrated into broadcasts. the golf channel/nbc used to use aimpoint putting lines on greens. it'd be neat if they'd show that along with hole out percentages from the person putting vs the field. it seems like they've stopped using the aimpoint line altogether, which is unfortunate - it's difficult to get a good idea of the slope of a green on tv, and i thought it always added great perspective. same with the protracer.

[tmac20]

I don't like it. They should use that space to show what position the player is in and how many strokes back from the leader. For example: "T5. 5 strokes back."