Over the course of the last couple of seasons it has been particularly noticeable during that during the BBC tournaments, commentators such as Willie Thorne, Dennis Taylor and John Virgo have focused increasingly on the use of statistics, but is this really a good thing?
Given how much reliance has been placed on statistics this year during the BBC coverage I am interested as to whether you as the viewers feel that this is a positive step, or whether as I sometimes do, you think that perhaps they go just a little too far with it.
Just to make clear, I do not mind the occasional use of statistics when relevant, perhaps to show that one player is really struggling in the safety department, or that another (as was the case with Shaun Murphy last week), is enjoying a lot of success with the rest.
But whether it was pot success, safety success, long pot success, rest success or something else, during many matches last week it felt like they were constantly showing some stat or another and at times, placing too much emphasis on them. For example in one match I remember a difference in their pot success rates of 2-3% and the commentators suggesting that this was the key reason for the scoreline in the match. In another they were showing the long pot success rate in just the second frame and drawing conclusions at a stage which surely is too early in matches of such a long duration.
While I understand and appreciate that for example it can show that one player is potting better than another, it is not an entirely accurate barometer as it does not take into account that players may miss pots playing exhibition shots long after the frame is won, or kicks that can mean that players can miss shots through no fault of their own. Sometimes I just can’t help but think that too much weight is given to the various statistics available to those up in the commentary box.
What do you think?