Subtitles for TV fencing

[Genjuro]

Hej, New thread:

Just an thought: wouldn't be an idea to have a kind of 'subtitles' for foil/sabre bout's which are broadcasted on TV? Just to show who has right of way, things like that, so that with help from the commentor, the average watcher (non-fencer) can get an idea what's happening.

Now fencing (on TV) is like tennis without lines or a net on the playing field. It's very hard to follow to a non-expert and you don't always know why a player is letting a ball go or not.
It should be possible , usually it's not live, so you can add some special effects (via a computer).

Please comment!

Thanks.

[JackSparrow]

In a perfect world that would be just lovely. The main difference between tennis and fencing is the vast sums of money and huge audiences that we can only dream of. Computer wizardry costs money, which I think would probably be better spent sorting out those doggy biased refs (China in the MF team for example). To be honest, I'm in heaven when they bother to put fencing on television at all.

I think I'll be happy so long as we get slow motion replays and a fairly decent commentator but I can't fault you for aiming high.

[edew]

The question is just who will be determining who has right of way at any one time during the bout. At certain moments, no one might have RoW, then it might change back and forth due to beats, counter-beats, feints, false actions, flinches, missed actions, and so forth. If there's a RoW pointer, it'll bounce back and forth so fast that it'll make the viewing audience dizzy. And I don't think the viewer would get any better information.

It'll be reading the stock ticker going at 8x the current speed.

[Rolls]

Originally Posted by edew

The question is just who will be determining who has right of way at any one time during the bout. At certain moments, no one might have RoW, then it might change back and forth due to beats, counter-beats, feints, false actions, flinches, missed actions, and so forth. If there's a RoW pointer, it'll bounce back and forth so fast that it'll make the viewing audience dizzy. And I don't think the viewer would get any better information.

It'll be reading the stock ticker going at 8x the current speed.

Unless you just showed the last actions of an exchange much the way the ref does. Basically, the ref calls it, then they show the slow mo w/ RoW symbols. they could just be icons of the hand signals the ref gives.

You know something like right attack parry riposte. point left.

Rolls.

[zark00]

Actually, it wouldn't be all that expensive or difficult to come up with a system similar to the new down lines in Football, the puck tracker in hockey, etc.

In hockey for example, during the game the puck's electronics sends back it's position every few seconds to twelve computers housed in a forty-foot semi. They process all the data then draw the puck on the TV screen.

I would imagine there would be a semi-simple way to track both blades. The puck glows blue on screen, and changes to red when it goes over 100mph. Blades go pretty fast too, maybe way faster at the tip. But they could change the color of the blade for RoW or maybe just light the guys with RoW?? The Hockey thing works in real-time, or near real-time, with a 7 second delay maybe they could work it so the last few actions showed the RoW or something?

I don't know, all I know is it improved Hockey viewership and the guys who did it for hockey would be up for giving fencing a shot too - here's a quote:

"This new glowing puck upset hard core hockey fans, who claimed they could already follow it. But since it helped attract new viewers, I have bad news for devoted sports fans. The team that brought us the glowing hockey puck is adapting their technology to other sports. They want, for example, NASCAR coverage to feature cars that glow. "

[kalivor]

Originally Posted by zark00

Actually, it wouldn't be all that expensive or difficult to come up with a system similar to the new down lines in Football, the puck tracker in hockey, etc.

In hockey for example, during the game the puck's electronics sends back it's position every few seconds to twelve computers housed in a forty-foot semi. They process all the data then draw the puck on the TV screen.

I would imagine there would be a semi-simple way to track both blades. The puck glows blue on screen, and changes to red when it goes over 100mph. Blades go pretty fast too, maybe way faster at the tip. But they could change the color of the blade for RoW or maybe just light the guys with RoW?? The Hockey thing works in real-time, or near real-time, with a 7 second delay maybe they could work it so the last few actions showed the RoW or something?

I don't know, all I know is it improved Hockey viewership and the guys who did it for hockey would be up for giving fencing a shot too - here's a quote:

"This new glowing puck upset hard core hockey fans, who claimed they could already follow it. But since it helped attract new viewers, I have bad news for devoted sports fans. The team that brought us the glowing hockey puck is adapting their technology to other sports. They want, for example, NASCAR coverage to feature cars that glow. "

A couple of problems:

1. It didn't improve hockey viewership. It increased Fox's hockey ratings for a couple of weeks, while everyone tuned in to see what the glowing puck was all about. The increased numbers didn't last long, and neither did the glowing puck.

Part of the problem, of course, is that the glowing puck was hard to take your eyes off of -- and the sport is in what the athlete does, not what their equipment is doing. (Imagine a slam dunk in basketball -- are you paying attention to the ball, or the player?) The puck is boring, the players are exciting. Similarly, the blades are boring, the fencers are exciting. That's my opinion at least ... maybe some people here would prefer to watch some blades waving around without fencers rather than actual fencing ...

2. It measures speed. How fast a blade is moving doesn't tell the story of RoW -- the blade can also speed up because of a beat, parry or counter-attack. On the other hand, a marching attack might not get the "sped up" colour change, despite it being an attack.

3. Putting a chip/transmitter thingy into a puck -- no problem. A puck is relatively large and heavy. Putting it into a foil tip? How are you going to manage that? How does it keep from getting damaged?

I think that putting a light show over/under the fencers during the action is absurd -- people would watch the lights, not the fencing. The 1st down line in football is unobtrusive -- a moving light show will attract attention, particularly if it's the "key" to understanding what's going on.

However, after each point, a very short slow-mo (or even just semi-slow-mo) replay with graphics overtop could make it clear. The attack starts on the right (red dot, line comes out towards the left), it gets parried (red line is blocked) and the riposte is made (green dot, line comes out towards the right, then the green light comes on the box in the background/the mask/wherever else it might belong).

Coupled with decent commentary, and maybe a pause and circle drawn around a bent arm when there's an attack in preparation, and the points could be understood by the average viewer in only slightly more time than it takes for the fencers to return to the en garde line.

This way, viewers could start to follow the action themselves, and get upset at referees when a close call is made against their favourite fencer ...

[zark00]

Yeah I agree there's no direct application of hte glow puck technology.

You are right, it wasn't nearly as successful as that article made it sound. Apparently the down line in football was very successful but that glowy puck was not.

I really mostly meant it's not that expensive or prohibitive technologically to do 'something' to make fencing more approachable on tv. I fence and I can hardly tell what's happening. They're too fast, and *hopefully* just getting faster.

I don't think you could use the speed of the blade to determine RoW in any way - just meant it would track that fast if indeed there was someway to automagically connect the movement of the blade to the RoW. The automation is the key. It would simply be too cumbersome to have someone manually put graphics over a replay of every point. Unless it was done post production.

As far as putting an RF or IR transmitter on the end of a blade - no problem - head of a pin if you need them and they don't cost a lot of money - even that small.

You're right, it probably wouldn't work. But neither will keeping fencing as an unaproachable sport when televised - if you're shooting for ratings that is.

[Rolls]

Originally Posted by kalivor

A couple of problems:

2. It measures speed. How fast a blade is moving doesn't tell the story of RoW -- the blade can also speed up because of a beat, parry or counter-attack. On the other hand, a marching attack might not get the "sped up" colour change, despite it being an attack.

But the information conveyed is whatever you want it to be. So, you COULD have it change color with RoW or simply glow with RoW. It glow or color doesn't have to measure speed.

Originally Posted by kalivor

3. Putting a chip/transmitter thingy into a puck -- no problem. A puck is relatively large and heavy. Putting it into a foil tip? How are you going to manage that? How does it keep from getting damaged?

That's not how the technology works at all. They just run the video though a computer filter and it highlights the puck based on an algorthm. It would be the same thing with the blade.

Originally Posted by kalivor

I think that putting a light show over/under the fencers during the action is absurd -- people would watch the lights, not the fencing. The 1st down line in football is unobtrusive -- a moving light show will attract attention, particularly if it's the "key" to understanding what's going on.

No, it's not. Let's face it, it's hard to see the blade on video. It's damn near impossible to see parries sometimes. So, highlighting the blades could help. Especially if they had a little spark or flash when there's blade contact (think about how video games do this). It COULD be obtrusive, but it doesn't necessarily have to be.

Rolls.

[Artisan]

It seems like folks are so intent on DOING something to fencing to make it telegenic. But thats not the problem. People aren't interested in watching because they can't see it or don't get it. They don't watch because they don't care - it could be the best eyecandy on TV, - but if the audience has no interest beyond the few that respond just because of the eye candy factor - it won't see air time.

For example, I will sometimes watch Bull Riding as I'm clicking around - because of the spectacle and the good odds of seeing someone get mashed.

Suddenly there's a bunch of interest on broadcasting Poker games on TV. Why? Because there's a hook: its interesting to watch when its "celebrities" playing the game. We feel like we know them, and they try their best to be witty and engaging. Plus wee see all the cards, so it gives us the Gods-eye view of the game and their strategies.

Before fencing can capitalize on a gimmick of camera play or special coverage or other hook during a broadcast to make it more engrossing, it has to first be interesting enough to get an audience in the first place. The primary ways for any sport to get eyeballs on TV is:
- High risk: real threat of injury. Boxing, Racing, etc...
- High stakes: a whole lot of money for the winners - so people can think: Gee - maybe I could succeed at that. People sit to watch idiots eat maggots and pig balls for $50k
- High Profile: Celebrities, All Stars, Characters with Charisma. Fencers are mute and hidden behind masks - and no the little windows don't help much.

Unfortunately fencing lacks all three in addition to the conventional stigma of being elitist, aristocratic and alien to the American psyche.

[Genjuro]

Now there's a pessimistic view of our sport. ..

Anyway, I can give a number of sports which are without the
three points you mentioned and are still popular (and fun to watch)

All I'm thinking of is a way to make fencing more comprehensible for the
average viewer. If you know what the fencers are doing, then it becomes quite exciting to watch)
And I'm not talking about turning the blade into a lightsabre, just some very simple grafics will do fine.
I don't think that welding masks and gaget technology (you all know what I mean) is the anwser to make fencing more attractive, but making it understandable to the viewers is.

[Artisan]

Perhaps you missed my point, so overwhelmed as you were with my "pessimism" I see my self as being realistic BTW.

There is no "Average viewer" for fencing yet, so making the broadcast of it more comprehensable is a step ahead of the solution to the problem: getting people interested enough to want to watch in the first place.