4 replies to this topic

[CodyHartman]

Talk about some bad commentary, for the worst I have ever seen, on the WPO (Jack Binion/Tunica) from 2001 (Juanda won it). This broadcast that had the guy from the show "Coach." I think it was Jerry van Dyke (or Dick, don't remeber). This guy talked over the top of all the play, he would not shut up, and this guy knew NOTHING about poker. In fact Hellmuth was trying to do comentary on the hands, and you couldn't hear him speak.He would say dumb A$$ $hit like, "He's gotta have a big hand doesn't he? "Oh I think (whatever player' name) is going to win the hand." Oh I 'd be dead right here, I mean I would of gone all in already." Where did they find this guy, poor Jim Alrecht is trying to talk poker with a brick wall next to him. Poor Phil could not get a word of commentary in edgewise.I hate that broadcast all because of him, and Juanda played some great poker that day too. :roll:

[KDawgCometh]

agree and agree. Jerry Van Dyke was awful on that broadcast. The poker was great though

[mark33f]

There really isnt anything to say when you dont know the cards they have??? Besides he raises...he calls...he is all in

[CodyHartman]

mark33f said:

There really isnt anything to say when you dont know the cards they have??? Besides he raises...he calls...he is all in

Nah BS to that, just b/c you can't see the cards doesn't mean that $hitty commentary should be accepted. By your logic then all commentary prior to the WPT was crappy, I don't buy that.Van Dyke just couldn't shut up. Jim Albrecht couldn't do much except listen to his crap and try not to say, "Dude STFU (shut the fu_k up)."Go back to older broadcasts w/ Kaplan that guy could do some commentary explaining theory and talking about psychology. Seeing the cards defeinatley can make the commentary better but by all means isn't the only why to make commentary worth listening to.

[mark33f]

yeah i am not saying it should be accepted or making an excuse for him