- This topic has 40 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
I accept the point about the Irish coverage, it is the only chance to see coverage of that racing, but that coverage is so awful.
It’s curate’s egg stuff rather than irretrievably awful in my opinion, Colin. Its strengths and weaknesses break down as;
– perfectly acceptable (and in some cases quite a bit better than acceptable) presenting and analysis from Gary O’Brien and David Duggan,
– some terminally bored commentary from Des Scahill,
– some rather more animated and enthusiastic commentary from Jerry Hannon,
– absolutely sod-awful fixed-rostrum camera work.I make that a scoring draw between good and bad. Any advances on that?
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
I think O’Brien is the only saving grace.
The actual view you get of the racing is unbelievably bad.
Colin
ATR for me every time. They do have some good class races has as been stated, but I enjoy watching the lesser lights triumph at the smaller meetings. Let’s face it there are a lot more of them than Grade 1 animals.
The bookmaking aspect doesn’t bother me one bit, I bet when I choose to.
The red button is great & some of the in depth interviews ATR get are really good.
I also find some RUK presenters come across as ever so slightly superior, but worse than that imo staid.
It’s all down to personal preference, but if I can see a 50/1 shot come in in a selling hurdle & the owners look as if they’ve won the town hall clock, that’s great by me.
My favourite presenter form RUK/ATR, no contest, the effervescent Matt Chapman!Agree with GC about Dessie sounding fed up with his racecalls.
He did say in an interview that he is still going on until his little uns have gone through college.
The camera work did improve but Punchestown and Galway do improve with the RTE cameras aswell.
RUK do have slightly better class racing but ATR is good for the small meetings which have potential stars of the future.
In reality both channels should merge and have one showing top class British racing and the other showing Irish and French racing with the occasional Point to Point.
i’m confused – are all ATR watchers supposed to be losing gamblers on the all weather whereas RUK watchers aren’t ?
Also, we’ll all have our preferred or disliked (to watch and listen to) presenters but we surely all want to watch all the racing ?
that’s what the mute button is for, far as i am concerned
cutting nose off to spite face ?
I don’t have RUK but I’ve seen it plenty of times when it’s free to view. It’s OK but I have to agree that the presenters sometimes seem rather superior, and I love the homeliness and slight amateurishness (if that’s a word!) of ATR. It’s friendly, it’s cosy, that’s what I like, and I couldn’t agree more with QC about the 50-1 shot! That’s what racing is about, the fun and excitement whatever the race, and the betting means sod all to me. The presenters are easy on the ear with the whopping exception of Mr. Chapman, and I just find it a happy place to be of an afternoon!
- Total Posts 17716
I don’t have RUK but I’ve seen it plenty of times when it’s free to view. It’s OK but I have to agree that the presenters sometimes seem rather superior, and I love the homeliness and slight amateurishness (if that’s a word!) of ATR. It’s friendly, it’s cosy …. [i:247uevdz][snip][/i:247uevdz]
… it’s the reason many of us thank heavens for RUK.
I exempt the magnificent Robert Cooper, peerless for dry wit and hangdog visage. I only wish RUK would offer him a contract.
Matt Chapman’s brand of “effervescence” is about as reviving as a glass of flat asti. He has obviously modelled his patter on “Big Fella” Derek Thompson, to appalling effect. I only wish somebody would provide him with a muzzle every time he introduces the excellent, long-suffering Gary O’Brien.
Of course, in the opinion of many benighted, sheepish souls anybody with a degree of expertise, professionalism, clear diction and the ability to string two words together in sequence without a laddish catch-phrase or matey nickname is going to branded as “superior” (and quite possibly “elitist”).
Well I personally would like ATR presenters such as Matt Chapman to stop being so studiously and affectedly inferior. He has the talent, he has the passion, he has the journalistic instinct. What he lacks is the intergrity to be himself, rather than a demagogic, tabloid foghorn. Lord spare us!
I do find RUK a much more pleasurable watching experience and really enjoy their re-runs of the days racing, as I am unable to watch much live due to work.
The presenters appear much more racing orientated and I do feel that they give me, as a novice racing enthusiast (I have been following racing for less than 5 years) some additional insight into the racing (along with the knowledge I pick up from reading this forum).I never feel like I get that from ATR, although I don’t feel brainwashed to bet unnecessarily.
That said however for the small amount it costs, ATR is a useful channel to be able to watch the racing that is not covered elsewhere, although the constant adverts are really annoying.
I do think there is a place for both formats and RUK could learn a bit from ATR with the racing news and chat type programs in the morning before racing
the magnificent Robert Cooper, peerless for dry wit and hangdog visage.
That’d be my take on him also – my favourite person of any role on ATR.
Of course, in the opinion of many benighted, sheepish souls anybody with a degree of expertise, professionalism, clear diction and the ability to string two words together in sequence without a laddish catch-phrase or matey nickname is going to branded as “superior” (and quite possibly “elitist”).
Aye. I’d have the RUK team down as articulate, considered, measured and in the case of some individuals frequently very funny indeed. But smug and superior? Never.
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
ATR = Tabloid. Sensationalist. Small minded amusement. Titilation. Appealing to the ‘masses’ for the cheapest possible option based on the lowest common denominator
RUK = Quality. Worthwhile analysis. Interesting. For enthusiasts. An actual dedicated channel worthy of funds, although I agree the level of "ads" is taking the mick rather.
But, it isn’t a case of one or t’other as they show different racing. I know which I prefer (MUCH MUCH prefer) but I have to watch the other to see everything I want.
I exempt the magnificent Robert Cooper, peerless for dry wit and hangdog visage. I only wish RUK would offer him a contract.
Matt Chapman’s brand of “effervescence” is about as reviving as a glass of flat asti. He has obviously modelled his patter on “Big Fella” Derek Thompson, to appalling effect. I only wish somebody would provide him with a muzzle every time he introduces the excellent, long-suffering Gary O’Brien.
Of course, in the opinion of many benighted, sheepish souls anybody with a degree of expertise, professionalism, clear diction and the ability to string two words together in sequence without a laddish catch-phrase or matey nickname is going to branded as “superior” (and quite possibly “elitist”).
Well I personally would like ATR presenters such as Matt Chapman to stop being so studiously and affectedly inferior. He has the talent, he has the passion, he has the journalistic instinct. What he lacks is the intergrity to be himself, rather than a demagogic, tabloid foghorn. Lord spare us!
Good post, agree wholeheartedly
If attempting to inject a little understated thoughtful intellect into a racing programme makes some folk feel uncomfortable, then that is their failing not RUK’s.
Perhaps their presenters and pundits come across as ‘superior’ because for the most part they are, which is something of a backhanded compliment given yer average punter, admittedly.
ATR and RUK sum up the tabloid-broadsheet dichotomy in a nutshell
I think RUK is an excellent service
A very minor quibble is that they dont detail the trainers details during the replayed cards or results. As im too lazy to look sometimes…this gets on my nerves
The ads dont bother me at all
Hey folks , thanks for some great posts, I seem to have stirred up a hornets nest , I dont know why ATR its so touchy a subject , but good luck to all who enjoy it
For me its a decision based upon my results , its that simple , plus I wanted to highlight the bookies bias that grows ever stronger
anyway thanks for a damn good debate I enjoyed it very much
cheers
Ricky
I’m on Virgin Media. Can’t get Sky because of the position of my house relative to the satellite. ATR is free, RUK is £15 per month. Don’t see how anyone can complain about a FREE service.
All this moaning about our racing channels, so lets see what we get
We have two TV channels dedicated solely to horse racing so what do we get for our money, (or in the right circumstances no money or at least no extra money.)
We get to watch every race run in the UK plus every race run in Ireland. We can also watch a healthy chunk of all things American and if you suffer from sleep problems Australian racing too. We can also watch a large percentage of decent French meetings and any meetings/races of note from all around the world and all live.
What more do you want?
Most of these complaints are unjustified and are just nit picking or down to personal preference.
Some of you sound like a delegation form the anti racing/gambling brigade looking for any excuse to get the channels banned.
aji if you are on Virgin Media and paying £15.00 for RUK I think you should review your package. If you have the XL TV pack then you don’t pay any extra for RUK
) is of secondary importance.- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.