Game logs and shot data for old games

Moderators: penbeast0, trex_8063, PaulieWal, Doctor MJ, Clyde Frazier

trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#41 » by trex_8063 » Tue Aug 4, 2020 7:17 pm

70sFan wrote:.


Do you happen to know exactly what years they utilized the "3 to make 2" rule? Also, within this era (60s, early 70s), do you happen to know when teams enter the "penalty"? Is it after 5 team fouls in a period? 6?

While logging G7 of the '70 Finals it just occurred to me, noting how in those videos of yours I've logged [where FT's are mostly not shown] there are always points unaccounted for---pts usually coming by way of FT's I couldn't account for......maybe I CAN account for some: in instances where it was a "3-to-make-2" situation, or because what I thought would be a non-shooting or 1-shot foul was actually 2 attempts [due to being in the penalty].
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
Owly
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,307
And1: 2,998
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#42 » by Owly » Tue Aug 4, 2020 7:41 pm

trex_8063 wrote:
70sFan wrote:.


Do you happen to know exactly what years they utilized the "3 to make 2" rule? Also, within this era (60s, early 70s), do you happen to know when teams enter the "penalty"? Is it after 5 team fouls in a period? 6?

While logging G7 of the '70 Finals it just occurred to me, noting how in those videos of yours I've logged [where FT's are mostly not shown] there are always points unaccounted for---pts usually coming by way of FT's I couldn't account for......maybe I CAN account for some: in instances where it was a "3-to-make-2" situation, or because what I thought would be a non-shooting or 1-shot foul was actually 2 attempts [due to being in the penalty].

via a realgm gb thread from wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_throw wrote:Prior to the 1954–55 season, the NBA established the rule that a backcourt foul would result in a "three to make two" situation (up to three attempts to make two free throws) if the violating team was over the team foul limit.[6] By 1979, the rule had been extended to the penalty situation for flagrant fouls, fouls made in the act of shooting (resulting in a miss), and fouls due to the swinging of the elbows.[7] Prior to the 1981–82 season, this rule and the related "two to make one" rule were abolished.[6]

citing
https://web.archive.org/web/20110303213838/http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_history.html
which includes
1954-55
• The penalty for a backcourt foul became two shots – three to make two if you are over the limit.

1981-82
• Three free throws to make two; two to make one eliminated.


Or see https://www.deseret.com/2019/2/21/20666425/nba-rules-have-adapted-over-the-years-to-make-the-game-more-fun-for-players-fans

The Robert Bradley compendium or the NBA Encyclopedias (or the Total Basketball encyclopedia) might be more comprehensive, if there's not enough detail above.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 28,499
And1: 23,471
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#43 » by 70sFan » Tue Aug 4, 2020 7:54 pm

trex_8063 wrote:
70sFan wrote:.


Do you happen to know exactly what years they utilized the "3 to make 2" rule? Also, within this era (60s, early 70s), do you happen to know when teams enter the "penalty"? Is it after 5 team fouls in a period? 6?

While logging G7 of the '70 Finals it just occurred to me, noting how in those videos of yours I've logged [where FT's are mostly not shown] there are always points unaccounted for---pts usually coming by way of FT's I couldn't account for......maybe I CAN account for some: in instances where it was a "3-to-make-2" situation, or because what I thought would be a non-shooting or 1-shot foul was actually 2 attempts [due to being in the penalty].

As far as I know, 3 to make 2 rule existed for whole 1960s and 1970s. Penalty was entered after 6th shot, just like today.

Someone could correct me if I'm wrong though.
colts18
Head Coach
Posts: 7,428
And1: 3,237
Joined: Jun 29, 2009

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#44 » by colts18 » Tue Aug 4, 2020 9:57 pm

How did they handle FT%. Did they count the miss as a miss? 3 for 2 makes Wilt Chamberlain significantly more valuable.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#45 » by trex_8063 » Tue Aug 4, 2020 10:47 pm

colts18 wrote:How did they handle FT%. Did they count the miss as a miss? 3 for 2 makes Wilt Chamberlain significantly more valuable.


Additional misses obtained if taking 3 attempts went into the total just like normal.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
colts18
Head Coach
Posts: 7,428
And1: 3,237
Joined: Jun 29, 2009

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#46 » by colts18 » Wed Aug 5, 2020 1:09 am

trex_8063 wrote:
colts18 wrote:How did they handle FT%. Did they count the miss as a miss? 3 for 2 makes Wilt Chamberlain significantly more valuable.


Additional misses obtained if taking 3 attempts went into the total just like normal.

Thats a massive advantage for Wilt compared to Shaq. Wilt was a 50% FT shooter just like Shaq. Shaq averaged 1.0 points per Free Throw trip. Wilt with a 3 for 2 averages 1.45 Points per trip. If you assume they have 5 free throw trips (10 Free Throws) per game thats an extra 2.3 Points per game that Wilt gained over Shaq.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#47 » by trex_8063 » Wed Aug 5, 2020 4:33 pm

70sFan wrote:.


Some general comments on G7 of the 1970 NBA Finals......

This was an ugly game. I'd seen it before, but I guess I forgot just how ugly it is. The final score isn't overly close [14 pt victory for NY], but that doesn't at all express what this game was actually like: LA trailed by >20 pts for ~65% of the game (by as much as 29 pts). This game was more or less over by halftime. Not to take anything away from the Knicks (who played fantastic), but the Lakers just looked like s*** in the first half. Really sloppy with the ball, and seemingly helpless against that Knick backcourt pressure.


As per usual, there are a few very minor discrepancies between the "official" boxscore and what actually occurred, and then one MASSIVE error: Walt Frazier is credited with an enormous 19 assists.......I credit him for 9 (+2 secondary or "hockey" assists).

And I've loosened up perhaps marginally, and feel I'm reasonably generous. For example, look at the play starting at 26:20 in the video, where Bill Bradley hits one from the top of the key......I didn't initially, but to get at least a pinch more in-line with the official box, I went back and credited Frazier with an assist for that one.
To Frazier's credit he is trying to push in transition when he passes it ahead to Bradley; and there is nothing between Bradley and the point of his score [he pretty much just had to trot up to his spot], so from that stand-point the pass did "lead to" the score. But Bradley catches the pass just barely across the half-court line toward the left side-line.....he then takes THREE dribbles before pulling up at the top of the key (at a spot that is >20' from where he caught the pass). So I feel I'm being more than generous to call that an assist for Frazier, but I did.

Additionally, I note that the box only credits Bradley with 5 assists (I counted 6 for him), and only 2 assists for Barnett (I tallied 5 for him).
What I'm guessing happened is Frazier was mis-credited with some of their assists (stat-keeper perhaps asking the guy next to him if there was an assist, and maybe being told "Frazier" [or perhaps just assuming it]); suspect the stat-keeper may have simply added on 1 or 2 here and there at the end of quarters (just for the hell of it, maybe to fill up the box more), too.

I even went back and looked at several made FG's by NY where I had NOT already credited Frazier with an assist, and I'm not seeing them.

It's possible I may have been stingy and NOT credited an assist in one or two spots where the stat-keeper did.......but no more than one or two. I challenge anyone to find TEN additional assists; I challenge anyone to find even HALF that number which could credibly be called assists. You won't find them; I doubt you even find 2 others, actually.

So......it's disappointing to see such a huge error that is part of the "official" record, but that one is just flat wrong.
Such an unnecessary inflation, too. Frazier had an amazing game even with ten fewer assists: game-high 36 pts on >80% TS, 6 reb, 9 ast [+2 "hockey" assists], 5 stl, 1 blk, and only 2 tov. I mean he just dominated this game regardless.

Dave DeBusschere had a fantastic game too: 18 pts (~57% TS), 14 reb, 2 ast, 5 stl, 0 tov. And if counting every time he drew a loose-ball foul while boxing out on the defensive glass, he drew THREE offensive/loose-ball fouls.
The official box credits his with 17 rebounds, but that again appears to be in error. I suspect in a couple of those instances where he drew a loose-ball foul, the stat-keeper probably credited him with obtaining the defensive rebound (because he basically did have a handle on it for at least one that I remember). BUT, it was distinctly called a loose-ball foul (and no FT's awarded). If he'd secured possession (i.e. got the rebound), then by definition it is no longer a loose-ball foul; it is now a backcourt personal foul (and he'd get FT's [which he didn't]).


Wilt had a decent game except for the fact that he went 1/11 from the FT line.

Other than Frazier's remarkable game, and the "I think I see Reed coming out of the tunnel!" narrative, the real story of this game was the backcourt pressure by Frazier and Barnett (and Riordan when in), and the help/post-sniping by DeBusschere and Bradley.......they just broke the Laker offense apart: 26 turnovers by the Lakers [vs just 11 by the Knicks, fwiw].
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#48 » by trex_8063 » Thu Aug 6, 2020 1:11 am

70sFan wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
70sFan wrote:.


Do you happen to know exactly what years they utilized the "3 to make 2" rule? Also, within this era (60s, early 70s), do you happen to know when teams enter the "penalty"? Is it after 5 team fouls in a period? 6?

While logging G7 of the '70 Finals it just occurred to me, noting how in those videos of yours I've logged [where FT's are mostly not shown] there are always points unaccounted for---pts usually coming by way of FT's I couldn't account for......maybe I CAN account for some: in instances where it was a "3-to-make-2" situation, or because what I thought would be a non-shooting or 1-shot foul was actually 2 attempts [due to being in the penalty].

As far as I know, 3 to make 2 rule existed for whole 1960s and 1970s. Penalty was entered after 6th shot, just like today.

Someone could correct me if I'm wrong though.


I'm currently logging the Royals/Warriors game from '70; in the 1st Q the Warriors seem to get the penalty shot after just the 5th team foul by Cincy. EDIT: Confirmed. You can see on the scoreboard for just a split second before they blank it out to start the 2nd Q, they were listing 5 team fouls for Cincy, but Dave Gambee for SF had received 2 FTA's (1 shot "plus the penalty") for a non-shooting foul in one of the last possessions of the quarter.

EDIT #2: I noted later in the game after a quarter where one team had WAY more than five team fouls that the scoreboard still only showed 5 for that team........which although the full/total foul count for that team was not accurate, it does nonetheless indicate that 5 is the penalty number (because they stopped counting at that point).
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#49 » by trex_8063 » Sat Aug 8, 2020 4:54 pm

70sFan wrote:).




So I've finished logging (game log and shot data) the Royals/Warriors game from '70 (though I still need to tally up the boxscore). The video is about 75% complete (there are a few breaks where the next clip is picking the game up at a later point; probably 11-12 minutes missing in total).

Some general impressions.......

With the exception of Norm Van Lier (who gets himself fouled out), both teams seemed fairly poor defensively in this game.

Robertson is actually pretty quiet thru most of this game, and it's interesting that it's Van Lier and King who did most of the ball-handling. Connie Dierking has a star-like game, despite how unimpressive he generally looks; he plays all 48 minutes, as apparently they didn't really have a back-up C at this point.

One kinda wants to draw conclusions from one game, but obviously there can be a lot of noise with just a 1-game sample. But it sure seems like Fred Foster and Tom Van Arsdale shoot a lot (and not terribly well in this game).
Looking at the stats for the '70 Royals, it indeed seems TVA, Foster, and Dierking ALL take more shots per 36 minutes than Oscar Robertson does......which hardly seems right. I'd have liked to see Oscar be a bit more aggressive in this one.

He destroys all of them in efficiency [not just in this game, but generally speaking on the whole season], and is rarely assisted; he seems able to get those shots when he wants.
For shot location data on Oscar, I now have this game (which again is about 75% complete), and the 2nd half of G4 of the '71 Finals. In this 1.25-game sample, Oscar is absolutely KILLING the mid-range; accuracy is obscene on this very limited sample. Would like to see him do it a bit more for this team.

Foster in particular kept firing away from the outside to dreadful accuracy (though he did very well around the rim, and seems decent working the baseline or on back-cuts......wish he'd stick to that more).


For the Warriors, I was expecting to see more outside shooting by Jerry Lucas. Maybe this game was an anomaly, but only 1 shot out of 10 was NOT at the rim for him.
Joe Ellis (who if I'd heard of him previously, it was in passing and I'd mostly forgotten him) was ON FIRE in this game.

I think Ellis is perhaps a decent talking point in response to posters who verbally defecate on this era, and perhaps make statements to the effect of "ANY decent athlete from today's era would dominate then".
Ellis was a true 6'6", though lanky of build (175 lbs listed on bbref, noting this in an era prior to the encouragement for, or facilitating of, weight training), seems a fair/decent leaper, and has a certain fluid grace to his movements and body control; seems like potentially good open-court speed, too, though we rarely get to see him open up his stride and really run in this game.
So he's a pretty decent athlete (would be a fair athlete even in today's league). And he's not totally unskilled. No real handles or playmaking ability that I can see, but he's got a fairly nice looking form/stroke on his shot. His accuracy in this game is somewhat anomalous [looking at his season/career %'s], but perhaps not dreadful given he looks like he's almost exclusively an outside shooter (the vast majority of his shots coming in the 18-22 ft range).
So here we have a decent athlete who has some shooting skill, and he's still not dominating this era......he was in fact barely a fair role player in that era.

There's another good talking point for this topic in Johnny Green. Johnny Green was a legit GOOD athlete for any era of the NBA. A true 6'5", solid but slightly lanky build (200 lbs), could jump (quick jumper, in particular), really quick first step, really fast......at one point when he really sprints in the open-court and the commentator says "Green's 36 years old, but he still runs like a colt!". It's sort of impressive watching him in this game, realizing he's 36 years old at this point, because he still looks like a terrific pure athlete.
Green is sort of like Kobe Bryant minus the spectacular mid-air body control. He's got all the other features of Bryant's athleticism: almost exact same height and build, I definitely think he could match young Kobe in open-court speed, similar [close anyway] quickness, excellent leaper [close at least], similarly durability.....
But he didn't "dominate" this era. He was a good player, but not great (never received any MVP votes, for example, nor ever made an All-NBA Team).


There are other examples we can bring up, but I'm drifting enough off-topic, I suppose I'll just stop here.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 28,499
And1: 23,471
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#50 » by 70sFan » Sat Aug 8, 2020 5:44 pm

About Oscar's lack of agression - it's probably due to the Cousy becoming a coach of Royals. Supposedly, Cousy tried to change Oscar into more of an off-ball player. This failed miserably, as it was the only Royals season with Robertson when they were bad offensively.

If you want to geta bigger sample of size of Oscar's shots, you can include second half of 1966 ECF game 4. There are also some Bucks games from later seasons, although not a lot of them.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 28,499
And1: 23,471
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#51 » by 70sFan » Sun Aug 9, 2020 5:53 pm

I see that you started tracking 1967 ECF game, so I wonder - if you track only halves as well, will you also include game 4 of 1964 finals as well as 1966 ECF game 4?
slimreaper2021
Sophomore
Posts: 129
And1: 7
Joined: Jul 02, 2020

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#52 » by slimreaper2021 » Sun Aug 9, 2020 7:16 pm

When’s the Wilt footage coming?
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#53 » by trex_8063 » Mon Aug 10, 2020 4:44 pm

70sFan wrote:I see that you started tracking 1967 ECF game, so I wonder - if you track only halves as well, will you also include game 4 of 1964 finals as well as 1966 ECF game 4?


Absolutely. There's ~25% of G7 of the '62 Finals on YouTube (the [sarcastic] "Nice shot, Frank!" game), which I intend to log. There's the 4th-quarter only of [I think] G7 of the '69 Finals I intend to log as well. Anything I can get to increase the sample size for the data I'm collecting.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 28,499
And1: 23,471
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#54 » by 70sFan » Mon Aug 10, 2020 6:21 pm

trex_8063 wrote:
70sFan wrote:I see that you started tracking 1967 ECF game, so I wonder - if you track only halves as well, will you also include game 4 of 1964 finals as well as 1966 ECF game 4?


Absolutely. There's ~25% of G7 of the '62 Finals on YouTube (the [sarcastic] "Nice shot, Frank!" game), which I intend to log. There's the 4th-quarter only of [I think] G7 of the '69 Finals I intend to log as well. Anything I can get to increase the sample size for the data I'm collecting.

If that's the case, I will make a list of all games that I have at least a small sample. Are you only interested in broadcast games, or would you like to see archival footage as well?
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#55 » by trex_8063 » Mon Aug 10, 2020 9:24 pm

70sFan wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
70sFan wrote:I see that you started tracking 1967 ECF game, so I wonder - if you track only halves as well, will you also include game 4 of 1964 finals as well as 1966 ECF game 4?


Absolutely. There's ~25% of G7 of the '62 Finals on YouTube (the [sarcastic] "Nice shot, Frank!" game), which I intend to log. There's the 4th-quarter only of [I think] G7 of the '69 Finals I intend to log as well. Anything I can get to increase the sample size for the data I'm collecting.

If that's the case, I will make a list of all games that I have at least a small sample. Are you only interested in broadcast games, or would you like to see archival footage as well?


Archival is fine too; broadcast stuff is easier in many ways (commentary helps follow the action, especially knowing what has occurred in the dead-ball stoppages), but I'll take either.

Have started logging the limited footage of G7 '62 Finals.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#56 » by trex_8063 » Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:59 am

70sFan wrote:?


Not sure if anyone other than you is paying attention, so just thought I'd let you know I've altered the spreadsheets. Just felt the ONE spreadsheet (with multiple tabs) was getting too cluttered, so I've now spread things out among THREE [so far] spreadsheets, broken up by half-decades. The links are below (also changed OP).

Finished logging the 2nd half of G4 '64 Finals, btw. I'll try to write some general impressions from that (as well as G7 of the '62 finals that I recently logged) soon.

Play-by-play logs - early 60's
Play-by-Play logs - late 60's
Play-by-play logs - early 70's
Shot location data
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 28,499
And1: 23,471
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#57 » by 70sFan » Fri Aug 14, 2020 5:45 am

trex_8063 wrote:
70sFan wrote:?


Not sure if anyone other than you is paying attention, so just thought I'd let you know I've altered the spreadsheets. Just felt the ONE spreadsheet (with multiple tabs) was getting too cluttered, so I've now spread things out among THREE [so far] spreadsheets, broken up by half-decades. The links are below (also changed OP).

Finished logging the 2nd half of G4 '64 Finals, btw. I'll try to write some general impressions from that (as well as G7 of the '62 finals that I recently logged) soon.

Play-by-play logs - early 60's
Play-by-Play logs - late 60's
Play-by-play logs - early 70's
Shot location data

I agree - it was getting a bit too large at this point I like the change. Can't wait to see your thoughts as well.

What game will you do next?
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#58 » by trex_8063 » Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:20 pm

70sFan wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
70sFan wrote:?


Not sure if anyone other than you is paying attention, so just thought I'd let you know I've altered the spreadsheets. Just felt the ONE spreadsheet (with multiple tabs) was getting too cluttered, so I've now spread things out among THREE [so far] spreadsheets, broken up by half-decades. The links are below (also changed OP).

Finished logging the 2nd half of G4 '64 Finals, btw. I'll try to write some general impressions from that (as well as G7 of the '62 finals that I recently logged) soon.

Play-by-play logs - early 60's
Play-by-Play logs - late 60's
Play-by-play logs - early 70's
Shot location data

I agree - it was getting a bit too large at this point I like the change. Can't wait to see your thoughts as well.

What game will you do next?


Celtics @ Royals G4 from ‘66
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 28,499
And1: 23,471
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#59 » by 70sFan » Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:28 pm

trex_8063 wrote:
70sFan wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:
Not sure if anyone other than you is paying attention, so just thought I'd let you know I've altered the spreadsheets. Just felt the ONE spreadsheet (with multiple tabs) was getting too cluttered, so I've now spread things out among THREE [so far] spreadsheets, broken up by half-decades. The links are below (also changed OP).

Finished logging the 2nd half of G4 '64 Finals, btw. I'll try to write some general impressions from that (as well as G7 of the '62 finals that I recently logged) soon.

Play-by-play logs - early 60's
Play-by-Play logs - late 60's
Play-by-play logs - early 70's
Shot location data

I agree - it was getting a bit too large at this point I like the change. Can't wait to see your thoughts as well.

What game will you do next?


Celtics @ Royals G4 from ‘66

It's up to you, but personally I prefer this version:

trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: Game logs and shot data for old games 

Post#60 » by trex_8063 » Fri Aug 14, 2020 3:30 pm

70sFan wrote:It's up to you, but personally I prefer this version:



Thanks! It looks like the same exact video broadcast, but the picture quality is much better.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd

Return to Player Comparisons