Gary Anderson vs Martin Brundle
#1
Posted 31 July 2012 - 16:48
That said, Gary Anderson is super knowledgable and very intuitive. The guy is very valuable and gets my vote.
What do others think?
#3
Posted 31 July 2012 - 16:51
Surely it should be Kravtiz and Anderson? That said, Anderson any day of the week. In my humble opinion, Kravitz is a 'wannabe' technical reporter, whilst Anderson has had the experience (being a TD at Jordan) and can pick up on a lot more things that Kravitz can't .
#4
Posted 31 July 2012 - 16:55
#5
Posted 31 July 2012 - 16:57
Y NO INCLUDEZ ME IN UR POLLZ?
#6
Posted 31 July 2012 - 16:58
#7
Posted 31 July 2012 - 17:11
Like others have said the comparison's should betwen Anderson vs Kravitz and then Coulthard vs Brundle.
Anderson everytime.
Coulthard everytime.
#8
Posted 31 July 2012 - 17:14
Anderson everytime.
Coulthard everytime.
Absolutely .
#9
Posted 31 July 2012 - 17:22
#10
Posted 31 July 2012 - 17:31
Very impressed with his commentary he did for STAR Sports last year. His commentary was millions better than some of technical articles he has written for autosport magazine. I'll pick him over current **** bags currently doing commentary for STAR Sports.
#11
Posted 31 July 2012 - 17:33
#12
Posted 31 July 2012 - 17:35
#13
Posted 31 July 2012 - 17:47
#14
Posted 31 July 2012 - 17:48
Kravitz is far better at getting in race "scoops" (perhaps better contacts with people in the teams...?) whereas Anderson tends to just give his view from a technical stand point (which is, more often than not, accurate).
Both are equally as valuable to their respective employers.
#15
Posted 31 July 2012 - 17:48
I don't have Sky so can't say what Brundle is like on there but I remember his informative contributions on both ITV & BBC - top notch!
That said, Gary Anderson is super knowledgable and very intuitive. The guy is very valuable and gets my vote.
What do others think?
I can't understand a word he says...
#16
Posted 31 July 2012 - 19:00
#17
Posted 31 July 2012 - 19:07
#18
Posted 31 July 2012 - 19:19
However, Anderson >>> Kravitz every time. Nothing against Ted, but gary is excellent every time he starts on the technical details, I really enjoy his pieces and analysis.
Best thing about the BBC
#19
Posted 31 July 2012 - 19:42
although that said, a 'Brundle' & 'Anderson' line up would be the 2nd best EVER!
(Best being Murray and James of course)
Advertisement
#20
Posted 31 July 2012 - 19:50
Anderson everytime.
Coulthard everytime.
Having watched Sky for the last 2 races, I have to agree with you there.
#21
Posted 31 July 2012 - 19:53
Why are you comparing Brundle to Anderson?
Surely it should be Kravtiz and Anderson? That said, Anderson any day of the week. In my humble opinion, Kravitz is a 'wannabe' technical reporter, whilst Anderson has had the experience (being a TD at Jordan) and can pick up on a lot more things that Kravitz can't .
Indeed. Anderson should be compared with Kravtiz. And Kravtiz wins by miles simply because he has better voice. Anderson's voice is so annoyingly quiet and non understandable that I perffer to watch races on some crappy stream from Sky rather than from higher quality BBC.
#22
Posted 31 July 2012 - 20:08
Ted is a presenter, his background is in media. Gary is an engineer. That's all you need to know when deciding on something like this.
#23
Posted 31 July 2012 - 20:20
Y NO INCLUDEZ ME IN UR POLLZ?
He's busy at the Olympics - actually heard him earlier today commentating on women's (non-beach) volleyball.
#24
Posted 31 July 2012 - 20:58
#25
Posted 31 July 2012 - 21:07
Gary Anderson: smartass. He's very suitable for articles but presenting it in normal language is not quite his piece of cake.
Ted Kravitz is a very good presenter like Brundle but he has not the complete knowledge of Anderson.
Put them together and you have gold.
PS: I voted for Brundle to mess with you. Oops, I accidentally your poll
Edited by Jejking, 31 July 2012 - 21:08.
#26
Posted 31 July 2012 - 21:43
Both Brundle and Kravtiz have been doing their presenting jobs for 15 years now so as you'd expect they are far better at presenting information than Gary Anderson is.
But Gary Anderson is obviously more knowledgeable.
And he designed this so he wins by default.
#27
Posted 31 July 2012 - 21:44
Gary would be no good as a commentator and Martin would be no good as a Technical Analyst.
Edit: The 21 of you who voted for Martin, I think you need to learn what a "technical expert" is.
Edited by R420, 31 July 2012 - 21:46.
#28
Posted 31 July 2012 - 21:46
#29
Posted 31 July 2012 - 22:01
How can you compare Gary and Martin, they both do entirely different jobs.
Gary would be no good as a commentator and Martin would be no good as a Technical Analyst.
Edit: The 21 of you who voted for Martin, I think you need to learn what a "technical expert" is.
I guess I still view Brundle as the technical expert from way back when. I used to value his technical input more than his commentating abilities.
Martin, for me, was very good at interpretating data and reading the race, strategy and technical stuff.
You could say Ted does all that stuff, but I still see Ted as the Junior next to the likes of Allen & Louise Goodman. He is very good, but I'd rather have Brundle over him.
Martin & Gary are on a level. With Gary I don't miss Martin.
#30
Posted 31 July 2012 - 22:09
When? He's only ever been the colour commentator or main commentator as far as I am aware. James Allen was in the pit lane before he moved indoors to sit alongside Martin and made way for Ted.I guess I still view Brundle as the technical expert from way back when.
This whole comparison makes no sense to me at all because even if he did do some tech reporting from the pits, it was so long ago nobody is going to be able to remember in order to vote.
#31
Posted 31 July 2012 - 22:50
Anderson everytime.
Coulthard everytime.
#32
Posted 01 August 2012 - 00:32
#33
Posted 01 August 2012 - 01:18
#34
Posted 01 August 2012 - 08:51
+1Its a bit silly comparing a man who designed F1 cars and has a wealth of technical knowledge to an ex driver like Brundle and who hasn't driven an F1 car competitively for over 15 years.
Like others have said the comparison's should betwen Anderson vs Kravitz and then Coulthard vs Brundle.
Anderson everytime.
Coulthard everytime.
Was/am a big fan of Brundle but last year when paired with DC highlighted his short comings imo, DC is just more current and has a better understanding of modern F1
Again was big fan of Kravitz, who was massively under used on the beeb, but Anderson has been a revelation this year. When asked technical questions during GPs anderson comes out with opinions and theories which are insightfull and 99% of the time correct. While Ted says he will have to ask the teams, slopes off, and comes back with some vague non-explanation from said team. Andersons drop zone qually time predictions are spot on too, i just dont understand the "he doesnt look good on tv" stuff, what do people want? him to turn up in a mini skirt and a blonde wig or something?