Poker Superstars Invitational II 03/27

[Hold'me]

Is anybody else watching this? David Sklansky has caught pocket aces four times so far! Rofl. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[bocablkr]

I saw it again last night and he got pocket aces at least 5 times including two hands in a row - what are the odds of that? They got busted twice.

[wray]

I can't believe I can't think of the females name right now but she got them twice as well.

[Iron Tigran]

Cyndi Violette

[wray]

[ QUOTE ]
Cyndi Violette

[/ QUOTE ]


gratzi

[Easy E]

That has to be the most disjointed poker telecast I've ever seen! David nails his second Aces, we come back from break and he's down a bunch of chips. Later he's near the top in stack size or second, we come back again... and he has less than 200K.

What a mess! David got a lot of big hands, but we have NO idea how well or badly he might have been playing.

What an irritating show to watch- no wonder everyone's calling it an all-in fest! That's 85% of the hands that they used, but we have no idea why they were being so aggressive with certain hands (other than the starting blinds of 50:1, we don't know if there was a blind escalation that forced the play or if the players were reacting to one another).

Was it just me, or did the telecast make Mike Sexton look like the tightest player on the planet? Yet they showed the stat where he was betting at the most pots.

That was a badly edited show, from a poker analysis perspective.

I don't expect David to chime in with much analysis, since I think these tournaments are still going on. No point in giving away pointers to his future opponents.

[jojobinks]

easy pretty well nailed the problems with the show. i really want to like it; it's got good players (not as strong as it should be, but pretty good), and a cool structure.

but the editing is pure garbage. who's running things over there? oh yeah, and in the first episode, when they had 2 hours, they spent the whole time on liebert complaining about her penalty!

another wasted opportunity for quality poker on tv.

:sigh:

[Easy E]

This should be a decent show to watch. I can understand why they showed all of the big hands- it was a very unusual set of circumstances and made for a nice theme for the audience- but without two hours to fill out some of the other hands and see the REAL play, the show becomes a bad low-limit online game.

jojo, what players are you looking for, other than the "striking" ones from last year?

[jojobinks]

[ QUOTE ]
jojo, what players are you looking for, other than the "striking" ones from last year?

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, that's about right. i think superstars is a good idea. it get's rid of the random amateurs from wpt, and introduces pros that i've not seen play before. but it's not really superstar action when the superstars are sitting it out. you know?

[wray]

I agree with you all pretty much....But a year ago there were many people saying all these tourneys were all-in fest. They said they wanted to see blind steal hands. Any time you see "experts" talk about the game they say it's nothing like on TV. They say people aren't going all-in with 9-4 all the time.

So I think the real answer is trying to get more TV time.