[BigMovies]

Exactly breeze, exactly. I'm a BC homer because I enjoy his delivery and obvious love for the history of the game. Well that and the fact he's not afraid to go against tiger in one breath and then praise him in the next.

--
Tapatalk2

[VottCetaVeivE]

Commentators, I want someone who can add more than "and there's the putt...tap in left for par, over to 17". Do they need to have played pro golf...maybe not, but they need to know the game and to me that means high level amateur at worst. They certainly should have a flair for commentary and the ability to parse a complete sentence. Favorite? Peter Alliss. Will call it like he sees it and doesn't pile on when it's gone bad for someone.

Instructors...really, how many instructors are lousy? They don't need to be pro material, but despite all the unsolicited advice available on the course, I can't imagine a ton of 15 caps take up instruction professionally. Also, ability to play the game doesn't always imply an understanding of the swing, there's some great feel players out there who couldn't help anyone learn. People skills help, I've met a few pro / instructors who have tons of ability and the people skills of a rabid badger. There's a world of difference between "This is what we need to work on to progress" and "lose the bent arm or we're both wasting time here".

[Abarricoss]

As far as an instructor is concerned I think they need their own ideas and a method to convey those ideas. Whether it be through demonstration or spoken word. A good instructor should be able to communicate with everyone and on many levels.
They do not have had to play as most didn't or couldn't. I feel they should stay away from cookie cutter ideas that are taught at various schools. They should be individuals.

Commentators should be knowledgeable with being in your face. They should share their opinion with out being intrusive. I think they should have been involved in what ever sport they are commentating on at the highest level.

[Argurnenoni]

People bash Miller and BC all the time but I find them interesting to listen to. I don't always agree with them but that doesn't bother me at all. You can tell they're analyzing what they're watching and not just on auto-pilot like some others.

[hexniks]

My favorite on course guy is Gary McCord. I'll take him over Faherty any day.

[hapasaparaz]

My personal favorite commentator is Peter Aliss.

As for qualifications, I think you just solely need to be able to SOUND like you know what you're talking about. I for one don't think the majority of the commentators really know what they're analyzing and thus are giving out a lot of bad information to the audience.

[Opening-auto]

My personal favorite commentator is Peter Aliss.

As for qualifications, I think you just solely need to be able to SOUND like you know what you're talking about. I for one don't think the majority of the commentators really know what they're analyzing and thus are giving out a lot of bad information to the audience.

I like Aliss a lot too, he's always got just the right thing to say and he's also funny in a Brit sort of way..

[DioraMoostebeers]

It's just funny that Tiger fans want to bash BC b/c he never won a Major or whatever. The dude played on Tour. I wonder if these same people didn't like listening to Harry Caray?

Hey Hey Hey... don't be bringing no Harry into this conversation!

[hapasaparaz]

I like when they're honest about shots. I can't tell you how many times I've seen them say, "oh anything within 10ft would be great from this lie" and then the player hits it to a foot. Either that player has hit an out of this world shot or they embellished the difficulty just a little bit. I'd rather them be honest and say no, this player should be able to hit this within 5 feet because while the lie sucks, they've got a ton of green to work with and nothing but the lie is going to dictate what shot they decide to play. That way, if they hit a good shot it's because they were expected to. If they don't, then you know the player hit a bad shot.

[BopeDolaNeone]

I just prefer the commentator to appear to have knowledge of the game. I think that some commentators get carried away talking about the players, whether they are talking about Phil, Tiger, Sergio, Rory, etc. I just think that sometimes commentators go off on a tangent about these players which I feel takes away from what they are doing. I mean how many times do we need to hear the same things they talked about all week leading up to said tournament?

Chamblee seems to be the guy that everybody talks the most about with regards to golf commentating. I think he can be a great commentator and gives great insight, but I think he can also fall into the category of going off on tangents that aren't really relevant or important. But when he's not going off on irrelevant tangents, I really like to listen to what he has to say.

Oh, I also like announcers that can describe why shots are going to behave a certain way, Faldo does a great job of this.