Howard Lederer\'s commentary: overrated.
 

I might be missing something, but I'm watching this Monte Carlo Millions Invitational, with Lederer on the mic, and I don't understand why his ability as a play-by-play announcer is so widely praised.

His observations are plain, he seems to contradict himself fairly often in an effort to cover all bases and I haven't heard anything too spectacular in the way of "inisght." His speaking voice is dry and borderline-monotonous.

On an aside, am I the only one who thinks the Full Tilt/FSN alliance presents some conflict-of-interest issues, especially when the announcer has a vested interest in the show's sponsor?

Re: Howard Lederer\'s commentary: overrated.
 

Meant to post this in WPT forum. Feel free to move it, lloyd.

Re: Howard Lederer\'s commentary: overrated.
 

negreanu's commentary during the live webcast of the WSOP was the best poker commentary ive heard.

Re: Howard Lederer\'s commentary: overrated.
 

[ QUOTE ]
negreanu's commentary during the live webcast of the WSOP was the best poker commentary ive heard.

[/ QUOTE ]that was a great webcast. negreneau was very good but i actually enjoyed hellmuth the most even though i dont like him.

but lederer is above the average anouncer but nothing special. but maybe he is holding back some of his knowledge?

Re: Howard Lederer\'s commentary: overrated.
 

i disagree i think he has been very good particularly in his analysis of the players involved

Re: Howard Lederer\'s commentary: overrated.
 

Howard Lederer > Norm, Lan, Vince, Mike

Is he perfect? No, of cource not. But he is one of the best out there.

Re: Howard Lederer\'s commentary: overrated.
 

I like Howards analysis.

Tex

Re: Howard Lederer\'s commentary: overrated.
 

[ QUOTE ]
i disagree i think he has been very good particularly in his analysis of the players involved

[/ QUOTE ]

Care to elaborate or point to some of his comments which you thought were juicy? On the broadcast that just aired, I gleaned next to nothing in the way of "insight."

He said a few different times "so and so is the ONLY player who would make THAT call" but never really gave consistent or in-depth reasoning for that; his analysis was full of equivocation.

I'll take two goofballs like norm and chad cracking jokes for an hour over this pseudo-professorial drone.

For the record, I did like Lederer's bit on the "Full Tilt: Play poker like the pros" thing, and I believe he possesses plenty of insight into poker. I just think his commentating skills have been overrated.

*someone move this thread!*

Re: Howard Lederer\'s commentary: overrated.
 

off the top of my head:

juanda using the equity he banked by playing tight early on, and how with the huge blinds he is probably the favorite because he is a great preflop player

ivey perhaps being out of his element in a preflop contest as his strength is deep-stacked situations being a cash game player

ferguson being the most likely to make marginal and mathematically sound calls, and having the best technical understanding of the game

hellmuth having a tendency to call raises and limp in wanting to take flops while many players would be more likely to reraise before the flop.

hansen being the most active player and his general style of opening the most pots. also i thought it was funny when he said after gus called with the Q8 "okay i'm not even going to try to guess what gus hansen is going to do anymore"

devilfish being perhaps the best player in the field with a big chiplead. also anticipating his chips evaporating if he didn't slow down opening so many pots.


i think you are just clouded by the fact that you expect him to be good because he is a top pro. to even put him in the same breath as the ESPN commentators is just ridiculous. the commentary is just in a completely different league.