ESPN commentary hits a new low

[TimTimSalabim]

On tonight's show, after Scotty Nguyen took down a huge pot when he hit his 5 outer on the river, the alleged expert commentator said "Scotty is a good player, but he also runs lucky".

I take back every bad thing I ever said about Vince Van Patton.

[cferejohn]

I have just given up on the ESPN broadcasts, they are just unwatchable (I only saw the first 2). They don't give any information on bet/stack/blind/pot sizes. The only kind of neat thing is the running tally on which hand is how much of a favorite, but it doesn't make up for the fact that the show is *clearly* run by people who know nothing about poker, and don't have a clue as to what information viewers would want.

I thought the 2002 WSOP commentary was decent, if not horribly exciting, and I was hoping for a production similar to that.

If Poker does take off on TV, and it seems that that's where this is headed, I think that the WPT is going to be the big game in town in a few short years unless the WSOP gets much much better broadcasting. Similar to how the NIT was once the big college basketball tournament but was supplanted by the NCAA and now is the 'also ran'.

Of course, as long as the WSOP is a big $10,000 event, its going to draw people, but it would not surprise me to see it co-opted into the WPT sometime in the next 3-5 years.

[TimTimSalabim]

I just try to ignore the commentary, because the poker is interesting when you can tell what's going on. I can't believe Moneymaker called an all-in holding 88 on a K9x flop. Then he gets lucky when an 8 hits the turn. But then, I guess it does take some luck to win the big one.

[BillE]

did i hear them make a comment about no woman ever making it to the final table (or maybe that annie duke's 2000 wsop was the closest a woman ever placed).. forgetting barbara enwright?

[Roy Munson]

Watching Humberto's reaction to that 2 outer clubbing him over the head was a funny contrast to his incessant singing during his win at the Jack Binion World Poker Open.

[pokerlover]

I was watching the re-broadcast of the previous week at 8pm and it bothered me again when Jonny Chan moved all in on Howard Lederer when Howard held 8-8 and Chan held As-3s on a flop of 7-7-3 and they kept making it sound like Chan had the best of it. Did anyone else become annoyed when they heard this?

[Wake up CALL]

"forgetting barbara enwright? "

She never made the final table of the $10K event. Did she? If so what year was that?

[pudley4]

5th place, 1995

[Rushmore]

...AND she got taken out by an absurd beat.

[Lee Jones]

Yeah - it's been however many years, and I still remember it, though somewhat vaguely. Brent Carter busted her with 6-something (4?) offsuit - he called all his (or her) chips with it and flopped two pair IIRC.

Of course, this is the final table of a NLHE tournament, so there may be many complicating factors that none of us are aware of (or have forgotten).

Regards, Lee

[Nottom]

I really wasn't paying much attention to the commentary since I was just so interested in seeing what Chan had in this hand after reading Howard's WSOP Diary. He certainly misread Chan on this hand.

[ACBob]

Lee,

I recall Barbara had pocket 8s and loved it when Brent turned over 6-4, and yes he flops two pair.

Bob Lewis

[Mash]

Why did they repeat the same episode on consecutive Tuesday's??

[TimTimSalabim]

They decided to monkey with the scheduling at the last minute. They showed a repeat at 5(Pacific time), then a new one at 6.

[Easy E]

There's a thread building on RGP about the production company or ESPN having fake hands/data and mixed up timelines.

[hutz]

I haven't read that thread, but I was commenting to a friend the other day that the timing of the hands on day 4's telecast didn't seem to mesh. Howard's stack looked like it had been built up and torn down more times than Michael Jackson's face! I think he appeared at more than one table during the show, too, although I couldn't swear to that. Overall, it simply had a disjointed feel to it, as if they had cut-and-pasted random hands together without following a smooth timeline.

[Wake up CALL]

They chose to follow a "story line" rather than a "time line". In my opinion it is much more interesting when done in this manner.

[tpir90036]

it would seem that pros mix up their play enough that when they try to read one another it is just a bunch of mumbo-jumbo. any pros out there care to shed some light on this?

[TimTimSalabim]

I don't mind that philosophy, but to tell a story well, you need to include important details (bet size, chip counts, etc.). Ironically, the show that is not on a sports channel (Travel Channel's WPT) is the one that seems to understand the importance of constantly updating the "score" of the game.

[Wake up CALL]

Tim I agree with what you are saying. The problem arises when telling the story using clips from more than one day the stack sizes, player placement at tables, blind/bet sizes no longer correspond like they would if you were using a "timeline" format.

I would prefer all the nitty gritty details too but perhaps the general public enjoys the current format. After all the 7 episode series concept is in it's infancy. Give them some time to come around and take a few more chances, in future years, which may please the hardcore poker players as well as the recreational fans.

[youtalkfunny]

I quit watching ESPN's 2003 WSOP very early on, when one of the announcers called KQ "one of the VERY BEST hands in no-limit hold'em."

BTW, Enright was terribly short-stacked, and was raising almost every hand, desperately trying to stay ahead of the blinds that were trying to eat her up. It cost Carter almost nothing to call her all-in raise, and he can't be faulted for not respecting the raise.