Worst. Reporting. Ever.

[ziggy_m]

Jesus Fergusuon!

How many times must we suffer through multiple sevens of diamonds in the same hand, chopping a pot with king high versus three aces, and a Q8 being called the nuts on a board containing K88*?

All the sites are doing it, too.

Proofread people!

Proofread.



* yeah the wang coming over the top of butt with his nuts is funny, but still.

[Howard Treesong]

It really is hard to believe. The following made me laugh out loud:

Steve Dannenmann doubles up through Rod Pardey, Jr.
Pardey bet 100k on a flop of [A 9 5] and Dannenmann reraised all in for 400k more. Pardey called and showed [A 9] for top pair. Dannenmann showed [5 5] for a set. The turn and river came [6][5], giving Dannenman a boat. Dannenmann now has over one million in chips.

[touchfaith]

Worst. Seventh. Post. Ever.

[LargeCents]

[ QUOTE ]
It really is hard to believe. The following made me laugh out loud:

Steve Dannenmann doubles up through Rod Pardey, Jr.
Pardey bet 100k on a flop of [A 9 5] and Dannenmann reraised all in for 400k more. Pardey called and showed [A 9] for top pair. Dannenmann showed [5 5] for a set. The turn and river came [6][5], giving Dannenman a boat. Dannenmann now has over one million in chips.

[/ QUOTE ]



Here's cardplayer.com's version:
[ QUOTE ]
Date / Time: 2005-07-12 23:49:00
Title: Steve Dannenmann Doubles Through Rod Pardey
Log: After a flop of A-9-5, Rod Pardy and Steve Dannenmann are both all in. Pardy shows A-9 (two pair), but Dannenmann has pocket fives for a set. Dannenmann needs to catch a nine or an ace to eliminate Dannenman. The turn card is the 6, and the river card is -- a 5. Dannenmann makes four of a kind to cripple Pardy down to about $245,000. Dannenmann increases his chip stack to roughly $1,250,000.


[/ QUOTE ]

Good thing Dannemann didn't catch that nine or ace that he "needed", he'd have ended up eliminating himself.




Good grief. I just went over to pokerwire.com, and they have some very confusing news about this particular hand:
[ QUOTE ]


Dannenman doubles through Pardey Jr. again
With a board showing [A][9][5], Pardey Jr. [A][9] went up against] Dannenman's [5][5]. Dannenman's lead increased when the board filled with [6][5] and Pardey Jr.'s chip stack plummeted to 245k while Dannenman's stack increased to 1,250,000.




2005 WSOP
[Event 42] $10,000
No Limit
Hold'em
Main Event
Jul 13, 2005
02:52:02 EDT Steve Dannenmann doubles up through Rod Pardey, Jr.
Pardey bet 100k on a flop of [A][9][5] and Dannenmann reraised all in for 400k more. Pardey called and showed [A][9] for top pair. Dannenmann showed [5][5] for a set. The turn and river came [6][5], giving Dannenman a boat. Dannenmann now has over $1million in chips.


[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently this same hand happened twice, within a short period of time. What are the odds?! /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[ziggy_m]

[ QUOTE ]
Worst. Seventh. Post. Ever.

[/ QUOTE ]

But quite a beautiful, masterfully crafted 579th, huh?

[ziggy_m]

[ QUOTE ]
It really is hard to believe. The following made me laugh out loud:

Steve Dannenmann doubles up through Rod Pardey, Jr.
Pardey bet 100k on a flop of [A 9 5] and Dannenmann reraised all in for 400k more. Pardey called and showed [A 9] for top pair. Dannenmann showed [5 5] for a set. The turn and river came [6][5], giving Dannenman a boat. Dannenmann now has over one million in chips.

[/ QUOTE ]
My point exactly.

There has to be at least fifty more from cardplayer, pokerwire, and gutshot over the last three days....

[jdock99]

I was actually at the Rio for some of the earlier events and considering the surroundings I would actually assume there would be errors in the reporting. First of all, the tournaments are going on in a humongous convention hall filled with people playing tournaments and live games. The room is set up sounds reverberate very loudly through the whole room. Between all the talking and chip rifling it is an extremely distracting environment to begin with.

You add in the fact that there are many people crowding around the tournament tables rubbernecking making it extremely hard to see anything very well. This is especially true when a big hand comes up as everyone will rush over to that table in a mad dash effectively blocking the view for all but the quickest/tallest/pushiest of observers. Also, when looking at the chip stacks for the no-limit events it is virtually impossible to know how many chips a person has as everyone has monstrous stacks of multi-colored chips in various pyramid shapes. (I really had no idea how many chips the respective persons had because I never bothered to find out what the denominations were for the various colors, but even assuming one did know this information it would be very difficult from a far vantage point to accurately assess chip stacks. On a side note, most of the peoples stacks reminded me of giant bumblebees as there seemed to be a lot of yellow and black chips, but that is neither here nor there.)

Finally, one has to put in perspective how the sites are getting this up to the date information and posting it so fast. What it basically amounts to is various twenty somethings wandering through the tables among the massive crowds trying to observe all the action, then when something happens these people jot notes down on pads of paper and run to an empty table where another twently something has a laptop connected to the internet set up where he is given the notes and forced to decipher and type in the information as soon as possible amid all the chaos that is surrounding him/her.

Given these circumstances, I do NOT find it hard to believe there is going to be errors in the reporting. Trust me, I saw these "reporters" working and it does not look like an easy or particularly fun job (I think I will stick to poker, thank you). Finally, I was a week ago during the 'relatively' small $5000 events with smaller crowds. As bad a zoo as it seemed when I was there, I do not even want to begin to imagine the mess it must be during a 5000+ person tournament with the throngs of crowds that I am sure are present.

[kslghost]

As the previous poster said, it's a difficult job to run around accurately taking down while watching from a very crowded and uncomfortable position. If you're going to complain about live and free information, you ought to just go over there and watch it if it's that damn important to you to have every detail correct.

[ziggy_m]

Good points, all.

But my beef is with all the hands that have multiple of the same card, (it wasn't just the two 7d in the pot with Lederer), and the ones that just make no sense whatsoever.

Mixing up names is one thing, though still pretty shoddy IMHO. A hand replay that leaves you saying, "WTF" is quite another.

A simple proofread by any amateur would uncover them before unleashing them on the masses.

[MagicMan08]

Thats exactly it, besides being there myself, I will take what I can get. I can just about imagine how stressful that job really is. I mean cardplayer.com got a new server or upgraded just to deal with the traffic of people checking up on the me progress.

[Josh W]

[ QUOTE ]


There has to be at least fifty more from cardplayer, pokerwire, and gutshot over the last three days....

[/ QUOTE ]

So, are you saying that the 3 leading WSOP reporting sites all made similar errors (maybe not all on the same hand) many times?

Geez, can you believe it...Shaq, Duncan, Nash AND RAY ALLEN all missed freethrows in the playoffs too.

Nobody's perfect. If it was one site that was making blunders, you'd have a legit complaint. Since they all are, maybe it's tricky to have 100% accurate reporting on 100% of the vital hands 100% of the time.

Take a deep breath. Again.

Josh

[benneh]

this has been happening the entire series. seems logical that the errors would escalate in a a higher tension setting.

calm down. as long as you guys understand who wins the pots and what the chip counts are, who cares?

the only thing i can understand you guys whinning about was the huge messup on cardplayer for the chip counts, but i was out so i dont even know how severe that was...

[ziggy_m]

Josh, they aren't just "errors".

They are typos and such that hit the wire with nary a proofread.

I hate repeating myself, but "Any amateur could immediately recognize and catch these poker oxymorons before they ever hit the wire, with one simple proof."

[Josh W]

typos aren't 'errors'????

there is a need for speed. whichever site has the fastest updates will get the most hits, period.

if you want more accurate reporting, just wait for ESPN's broadcast or for a cardplayer magazine in September.

if you want faster reporting, with a possible accuracy glitch, go to the websites. you really have a simple decision.

and it isn't that simple of proofreading. in the case of two 7 of diamonds, a proofreader could see "yep, that must be wrong", but they'd have NO IDEA of what the actual card is. and, to go back and find out may very well be impossible. sure, they could just substitute an inconsequential card.

or you can, when you read it.

Hey, look, Manny Ramirez struck out. Worst. Batter. Ever.



Josh

[ziggy_m]

Of course, it comes down to speed vs accuracy.

Which do you really want?


I'd prefer they at least proofread once.

If it doesn't make any f'ing sense at all, THEN they could say, "We realize that this doesn't make any sense at all, but we reported it ANYWAY to be the FIRST with CRAP NEWS".



Or perhaps they could wait twenty minutes and not lose credibility with CRAP NEWS.

[Josh W]

again, if they proofread, see two 7 of diamonds, then what do you want them to do?

do you want them to do something that your brain can't automatically do on its own (substitue an inconsequential card?)

Do you want them to:

1.) Substitute an inconsequential card.
2.) Report it as was written down by the tableside reporter, with an obvious error.
3.) Not report the hand at all.
4.) Report the hand with a "?" for a card instead of a repeat card.
5.) Disrupt the tournament floor, players, flow of the game to say "ahem, excuse me, but that hand 5 minutes ago when you had AA vs KK, was the turn the 7c or the 8c?"

I truly am curious if you have a method to propose that is better than their current method.

Josh

[ziggy_m]

[ QUOTE ]
3.) Not report the hand at all.

[/ QUOTE ]
Get it right or don't report it at all.

Like it or not, it's supposed to be "news".

[Nathan183]

[ QUOTE ]
Get it right or don't report it at all.

Like it or not, it's supposed to be "news".

[/ QUOTE ]

This is moronic. This isn't CNN or the Wall Street Journal. These are live updates in a very hectic environment. Would you honestly rather not find out what happened that be forced to suffer through reading the same insignificant card twice?

[augie00]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Get it right or don't report it at all.

Like it or not, it's supposed to be "news".

[/ QUOTE ]

This is moronic. This isn't CNN or the Wall Street Journal. These are live updates in a very hectic environment. Would you honestly rather not find out what happened that be forced to suffer through reading the same insignificant card twice?

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course not, but there is a difference between "Gavin Griffin doubles up to 320k" and "Gavin Griffin is crippled to 50k"

[daveymck]

Gutshots setup is on one of their videos, basically there is one guy on a laptop with an earpiece and the on the floor reporters shout back stuff via walkie talkie to him, I think they have 4 people floorwalking so the guy on the laptop might have 4 people screaming stuff in his ear at a time so I am sure there is a load of chances for mistakes.

The way things seem at the rio I am surprised the updates have been as good as it sounds like madness, its not like covering a sporting event where you can sit in the press box and keep score.