Jessie May, I have a comment for you.

SkittlePoker

STOP FRIGGING SHOUTING !!!!

I was able to catch a few of the British poker shows over the past couple of days (sounds silly when they say "pass" tee hee) and good gravy do you need to shout? Ya, we can see he needs a King or Queen or spade, just say it, don't SHOUT it.

Vince Van Patten > Jessie May

Nuff said.

Unknown

I was pretty excited when I first heard that Jessie May was doing some announcing work for poker broadcasts. His book, 'Shut Up and Deal', is great. It's subtle, intelligent, cohesive and thoughtful. Basically all of the things he's actually not, if his announcing is any indication.

I suspect that a producer 'coached' him. The producer probably didn't realize that--at least to poker players--the action of the game is plenty exciting, and doesn't need to be all hyped up. Jessie May is the most embarrassing television personality I have ever seen, and I used to work on Open Mike with Mike Bullard, so that's saying something.

Regards,
all_aces

ice

all_aces wrote:

Jessie May is the most embarrassing television personality I have ever seen, and I used to work on Open Mike with Mike Bullard, so that's saying something.

Regards,
all_aces

ROTFLMAO... I thought I was the only one who thought so lowly of Bullard.

Monteroy

I tried watching that show and couldn't get through it. Watching announcers on speed commentating on a game being played by monotone players who overdosed on downers in a silent room with no audience was a bit painful.

The WPT show did their homework when it comes to production values. Flashy stage, live audience, good quick segments on players and aspects of poker which is what most people watching enjoy.

Also, as silly as it sounds, the WPT way of showing hands (ie: just on the TV next to the name) is a lot smoother then this other show where you have to watch the players place the cards on a glass. I think most people just want to know the cards, we don't need to peek at them.

This other shows use of a heartbeat tracker is clever I admit.

Unknown

Agreed, the heart monitor is a nice touch, and the placement of the cards over the glass would be a pain in the ass for the players. Another thing that would be a pain in the ass for the players is the way it's shot. IIRC (and I may be thinking of another poker show) they shoot this at a half-moon shaped table, like they use for blackjack. The dealer sits on one side, and faces all six players, who would have a hard time facing each other.

Obviously, this design makes it easier to shoot. At a 'regular' table, you have to shoot 360-degrees if you want to get good shots of faces as opposed to profiles or backs of heads. 360 presents a lot of problems, particularly for lighting. Also, you have to build a set or stands or something for background that takes up the entire room. Finally, you will have other cameras in your shots. WPT does a great job addressing all of these challenges, as does the WSOP. Their take on seeing cameras is 'so what? It's not as if people don't know they're there!', and I'm a big fan of that attitude when it comes to 'non-dramatic' television.

Also as you mentioned, not having an audience is a mistake. Again, this makes it much easier, production-wise. All of these comments add up to the fact that the WPT and the WSOP simply spend more money, because they have the ratings to attract lucrative advertisers. Apparently they spend more money on their announcers, too.

Although the jury's till out on VVP...

Regards,
all_aces

ScottyZ

At first, I didn't much care for the "goofy sidekick" poker commentators (Jesse, VVP, Chad, etc), but I've gotten to like them more and more as time has gone on. I think it's all about taking them the right way.

I can see why they can be irritating to "serious" poker players. They sometimes get their poker content a little off. (JTs is a monster hand in a NLHE tournament? Yeah, okay Vince.)

As long as you've got someone who knows what they're talking about (e.g. Lederer) along for the ride, you're still going to get a solid analysis of the play.

I think what it really boils down to is that the goofy sidekick often just seems to be trying too hard. If you find this annoying, then that's that. It personally gives me a good laugh now and then.

Finally, I think the goofy sidekick is a *great* thing for the newbie poker players in the audience. You can't have the top three poker players in the world (although having one would be awesome) churning out hand after hand of solid analysis in pokerspeak. You've got to get something either fun or to make fun of (or both) in there for the casual players.

Maybe I'm still a newbie at heart. :cool:

ScottyZ

Unknown

Newbie.