Is anyone else suprised DN likes poker superstars? I think it is hand downs the worst poker show on T.V. The format is horrendous and you literally see nothing but allins. There is zero post flop play. I will watch anything poker related (even multiple times), but Poker Superstars is so bad I rarely turn it on.

Michael Konik, "Well all right Chris, we have a great group tonight. Doye Brunson, Johnny Chan, Daniel Negreanu, Phil Ivey, Chris Ferguson all at the same table."

Chris Rose, "You're right Michael, we're sure to see some great action. Each player starts out with 500k in chips, blinds start out at 250,000-500,000." .....

^
HAAHHAHAHA.... so true

Any tourney where Kathy Leibert does well is suspicious. Whenever she is on I can't watch. She is the most irritating person on the planet. I played in a tourney with her once at the Hustler in LA and she was scary. I think she had to spend 3 hours in hair and makeup before they let her on TV....it did'nt help.

totally agree about poker superstars ... nothing but all-in poker ... and what makes it so funny is those two corny-ass hosts, saying, "OH WOW CHRIS, LOOK HOW CONCERNED SCOTTY IS." ... like they give a crap about those games ... king-four? OK ... is it suited? ... SWEET! ... that's poker superstars ... f that noise ...

I think the main reason pros play in that game and on that show is exposure. They more the people "know" you, and see you on TV the more you're "worth" for endorsements. And since PS isn't a major tourney. They're guarenteed a spot on the show.

So my guess is, the pros that are on, aren't on for the poker, but rather for the exposure. Is that a good or a bad thing? I don't know. But that's just my thoughts.

And on a side note, it's poker superstars 2 that sucks. PS 1 was really fun to watch. They same eight guys playing a freeze out best of 11(?) straight games. It was just fun.

I agree that one was alot better.

I like the show, because I don't look at it as a poker show really. It's a rally neat game show with a cool format IMO. I love tournaments, stats, and all that kind of stuff. The unique situations that arise in the heats make it un for me.

For example, when Todd Brunson finished 4th in his first heat in the sweet 16, he needed to not only win the next one, but also have Carlos finish exactly second, Dewey Tomko 3rd, and David Grey 4th.

He made it happen and I thought that was pretty awesome.


If you are watching the show for it's poker content you are watching the wrong show. The WPT offers the best "poker" show. The PS is just a fun format.

Daniel, if ESPN ran one table for two hours instead of one hour, do you think that the World Series of Poker coverage would be the best poker show, or would they need better hosts?

Also, do the people at EPSN screw up with the blind structure and how fast the blinds go up like the WPT?

Here is my take on:

WPT: Without the shadow of a doubt, the best source for studying poker and your opponents. They focus on the poker rather than the characters. It's very easy to follow the action and it's very clean.

ESPN: The exact opposite. A terrible source for studying opponents as the poker doesn't flow at all. They rip a 9 hour final table down to an hour so that you don't get an accurate picture of what really happened.

They don't show all of the discards which is valuable information when sizing up opponents. It's hard to figure out the bet sizes as well.

What ESPN does better than anyone else, is promote the colorful characters in the game and makes stars out of the players. Their target audience is fans that aren't too familiar with poker.

Daniel,

do you think this ESPN format is driven by players who dont want to give out too much free information? I know Paul Phillips (who appeared) in one of Fox's "live" poker events said he thoughts players played differently (especially Ivey heads up) because they didnt want their tendancies shown for the world.

btw, I think Fox's coverage of the plaza tourney was the best poker event ever.

Per ESPN, I think the problem is that there is no real insight provided by the broadcasters. I don't understand why they don't bring a guest commentors (player who didnt make the final table) to actual put some poker in the show.

Come on now, "Celebrity Poker Showdown" is by far the worst poker show on the air.

i like the pokerstars format. like DN said it makes for interesting situations that dont come up in other poker.
however, the tv show itself is without a doubt the most frustrating and irritating poker/gaming broadcast ive ever seen. heres the show

scotty nguyen raises, chau folds. lets check the chip standings. kathy L pushes allin, every1 folds. lets see the chip counts. lets see the chip counts.
----commercial break---- lets check the chip standings. .. cards are dealt. lets see the chip counts.......... ****ing horrendous.

Before I knew what it was, I got a season pass to Poker Superstars, just because it was a Poker show. But the lack of crowd, horrible announcers, and idiotic card-camera got that shit deleted after one episode.

I absolutely hate Celebrity Poker Showdown, but I would probably watch it before PS just to make fun of it.

I haven't had a chance to see Poker Royale on GSN, but I imagine that is pretty horrible as well.

If you watch Celebrity Poker Showdown to see good Poker you should get a clue.

or a baseball bat to the back of the head

though Paul might've been concious of it, I don't think that Phil was. Phil said somewhere that he thought that it was just being taped for sometime down the road, or else he would've stuck around for a few seconds after it ended when he had to go to the bathroom, as that has turned into a funny joke.

I think that if a player is too worried about a live event, then they are gonna be at a disadvantage because they won't be concentrating hard enough to do what they normally do

Celebrity poker is about as fun to watch as a trainwreck. So bad, but you can't take your eyes off of it.

Tom.

The actual poker on Celebrity Poker showdown may not be very good, but it has the best commentator of any of them hands down. I've learned a lot from Phil Gordon watching Celebrity Poker. All I've learned from the WPT is that many hands have names, and all I've learned from Norman Chad is that he's been married and divorced several times, which is not the least bit surprising with how annoying he is.

I'm surprised he's been married several times. I don't really see how he could have so many ex-wives, however, without several marriages. Who ARE these sad, sad women?