I used to watch a fair bit, but lately I've waned off mainly because it shows SNG's with terrible players and highly accelerated blind schedules (which I'm guessing has to do with the show length). I mean when it gets to 2 or 3 players and there's like 5 BB between them there's not much to watch really... you might as well just say "Ugh, ya we're pretty much at a crapshoot now, someone will win" (actually I think I've heard that said). Similarly there's zero point to even having a commentator to describe the "play" of 74o pushing and getting called by Q2o and having the 74 get lucky by spiking a 4 only to have the Q2 catch a Q on the river.
The NL cash games I find to be more interesting (in general), but as a limit junkie, I'd be interested in seeing limit cash games (low or high stakes, full ring or shorthanded). Although, in general, I'd guess limit poker doesn't make for great TV because it's lacking the 2 most important words of TV poker - "All in". Maybe if you get a table where 3 donks buyin for the min and rebuy 6 times it'd be more entertaining.
Maybe I'm the only one though that would actually get a kick out of watching a limit cash game... (I think if maybe they'd keep some sort of tally of who was up/down and how much, it might be marginally more watchable)
So Devo, I assume there's little interest in anything but NL games?
Actually in hindsight, probably the last thing I need is people watching Devo critique people's limit game, it's far better promoting the NL craziness which inspires so many B&M limit wannabees that think it's like "TV poker".
I was thinking the same thing as I think it would be interesting to watch an Omaha or Stud 7 game.
Actually, I was just referring to NL vs FL Holdem, but ya, I think a PL Omaha or Omaha H/L game would be pretty interesting as well. Although commentating that live I imagine would be a real challenge (to say the least) in just keeping track of which draws which guys were on, let alone how many outs each player had, what kind of odds they were getting etc.
They don't have a chance to go to the studio and edit some of the commentary out or change it, for them to keep the show flowing at a good pace has to take a lot of work so we can all forgive the unusual comment every now and again.
Thanks... yeah, no editing, which means no selection of INTERESTING hands. The tough part, for me, is talking about anything beyond the surface level of "the big blind gets a walk" or "someone had good cards and raised and nobody else had good cards so they folded". When in doubt, I just talk about myself. Fascinating subject for one and all...Â
All the hosts do a great job, just remember the "LIVE" part of PNL.
Very difficult to think on your feet with millions watching....
Hobbes
Thanks Hobbes. Yes it is difficult to think on my feet for two hours with thousands... err... millions watching, but it gets easier as I get more and more shows under my belt. (BTW I have absolutely no idea what our ratings are like. I will say that we get many more emails/night than many major network shows I've shot, but PNL appeals to sort of a niche audience that is very computer literate.)
Last night on PNL there was a guy named Wifesab1tch. Tina almost said it once. I was laughing my head off.
HoofHearted, BallNutz, etc etc. I'm just glad none of the $50/$100 Party players are there. I play against CaptainRimjob and EyeLuv2TittyFk among others.
I used to watch a fair bit, but lately I've waned off mainly because it shows SNG's with terrible players and highly accelerated blind schedules (which I'm guessing has to do with the show length). I mean when it gets to 2 or 3 players and there's like 5 BB between them there's not much to watch really... you might as well just say "Ugh, ya we're pretty much at a crapshoot now, someone will win" (actually I think I've heard that said).
That was probably me. I get fed up of the crazy blinds as well, but I also think that some of the early play--terrible or otherwise--can be instructive.
Similarly there's zero point to even having a commentator to describe the "play" of 74o pushing and getting called by Q2o and having the 74 get lucky by spiking a 4 only to have the Q2 catch a Q on the river.
That's usually when I decide to berate the player who called with Q2o. Or, I talk about myself.
The NL cash games I find to be more interesting (in general), but as a limit junkie, I'd be interested in seeing limit cash games (low or high stakes, full ring or shorthanded). Although, in general, I'd guess limit poker doesn't make for great TV because it's lacking the 2 most important words of TV poker - "All in".
The game of choice is NLHE right now. Never has that been more evident to me than when I was at Turning Stone. Table after table of $100 max. NLHE, filled with screaming 18 to 20 year old guys, and the casino loving every minute of it. LHE is being moved to the back of the bus, like it or not.
Actually in hindsight, probably the last thing I need is people watching Devo critique people's limit game, it's far better promoting the NL craziness which inspires so many B&M limit wannabees that think it's like "TV poker".
Well... I actually try to discourage people from playing like some of the donks on the show... that's kind of the point of PNL. However, who knows if anyone listens or learns... maybe by showing some brutal plays we are somehow creating brutal players, but I doubt it. Although I did hear that someone was in a bar recently and they had PNL on with the sound turned down, so you never know!
GTA, I have to say, you did say that Johnny T was not a winning player, even if you meant that being a poker TV host doesn't make him a winning player. That is libel, since it could effect his career on the show.
I like the show, like Devo and Johnny T and find Tina to be an exceptionally intelligent 'pretty face', which is a nice change from other (not specifically thinking poker) shows where the host knows nothing about the subject and is just there because they look good.
Gail seems to be new and learning. The biggest problem she has is she confuses cash games and sit&go's, and she likes to stare into the camera when the show goes to commercials. Other then that, despite what I just said, a host who asks very basic questions is useful because there's usually some viewer who's just started watching the show and new to poker (like I was)
Aubrey seems like a knowledgable player who needs to adjust to a format where she doesn't have a whole lot of time to make points before 2-3 hands have passed and we forget what she was talking about. Also, her accent doesn't come across well because PNL has terrible sound. Not just the hosts, but the theme music is very, very quiet, which means it's not clear because I have it cranked, then the commercials blow my eardrums out.
I'm pretty sure she's Canadian, although her accent isn't strong enough for me to place.
I would be happy to see low-limit games, even though they're useless for me right now (I've been playing poker for 2 weeks, so have been playing with fake money. I can imagine that you cannot protect a hand with low-limit, as people will just call all the way through)
I'd also love to see better players, perhaps an invitation tournament. Still, lots of mistakes are good. You can get very good at something by just eliminating all major mistakes.
Keep up the good work, all the cast. If I ever move to real money I'm sure it'll be due to the urge to play on PNL and hear my play discussed. If that ever happens, it's just Coyote. BD stands for Barking Dog, another name for the Coyote I named myself after, so you can just leave it out when you say: "And it looks like Coyotebd just took the sit&go with spectacular play"
GTA, I have to say, you did say that Johnny T was not a winning player, even if you meant that being a poker TV host doesn't make him a winning player. That is libel, since it could effect his career on the show.
lol, you think a posting on an online forum is goint to affect his career? How tenuous a career would he have to have for that to be true?
the fact that some of the posts under my name are from a often times drunken friend at should work in my favour, but i'll have my lawyer handy in case
PNL has terrible sound. Not just the hosts, but the theme music is very, very quiet, which means it's not clear because I have it cranked, then the commercials blow my eardrums out.
I watched a few minutes the other night and I noticed that as well. I will mention something about this to the technical team when I go in tonight. I might be doing my first show with Gail... I forget if it's tonight or tomorrow night. Should be fun! I have no idea what to expect.
Still, lots of mistakes are good. You can get very good at something by just eliminating all major mistakes.
While I agree that a lot of mistakes give me a lot to talk about, if the play is REALLY brutal it almost borders on making a mockery of the game of poker. When that happens, I usually tend to talk a lot less, until the game becomes something that resembles poker again.
In general, I like that we show SNG's ranging from $2.50 to $50 buy-in's, but it would be interesting for me to comment on games at the level that I typically play, as well.
Keep up the good work, all the cast. If I ever move to real money I'm sure it'll be due to the urge to play on PNL and hear my play discussed. If that ever happens, it's just Coyote. BD stands for Barking Dog, another name for the Coyote I named myself after, so you can just leave it out when you say: "And it looks like Coyotebd just took the sit&go with spectacular play"
Ahh, one can dream.
Coyotebd
I'll keep an eye out for your username, and I will try to take it easy on you.  Well, I'll be brutally honest, but in the nicest possible way. Thanks very much for your support of PNL.
That game is full of zen proverbs and wacky simplifications. For example:
There is death in the hane.
six die but eight live
make a fist before striking
And my favorite Go theory:
Loose your desire to win, seek only to play the best possible game.
I like it because it works. I think it works for poker. Folding pocket twos in early position on a very loose board is a good play, whether or not you flop 4 of a kind (which I've done, folding 8s, then flopping 8, 8, something and having two people call all-in during the rest of the hand chasing flush draws)
I'm enjoying the show but am finding it fairly predictable. I really don't care if the game is live and have no interest in the players. What I would really enjoy is seeing the hosts play in a game beforehand and then replay it during the show with the hole cards and comments. It gives more of a rooting interest.
I'm enjoying the show but am finding it fairly predictable. I really don't care if the game is live and have no interest in the players. What I would really enjoy is seeing the hosts play in a game beforehand and then replay it during the show with the hole cards and comments. It gives more of a rooting interest.
Could you please get the technical team to also post the Buy-In for the SNGs. Sometimes it seems like the players are playing like garbage, i.e 5.50$ buy in. Or other time they're playing pretty solid poker i.e 50$. I'd like to be sure though.
The third french announcer hasn't gotten into the groove yet.
Last comment, i find it hillarious the different styles of play between Devo and Johnny. I love the different comments you both make of the exact same situations.
Could you please get the technical team to also post the Buy-In for the SNGs. Sometimes it seems like the players are playing like garbage, i.e 5.50$ buy in. Or other time they're playing pretty solid poker i.e 50$. I'd like to be sure though.
It's not that easy. I believe that the feed we get is the feed we get, and we're probably (I'm guessing here...) not allowed to tamper with it, ie: add information to the screen.
I'll tell you what I'll do though... from now on I will always say what the buy-in is for any of the sit and go's I'm talking about. You'd be surprised... the solid play isn't always at the higher levels. Quite the opposite sometimes. And really, NONE of the SNG's are at anywhere even approaching big buy-in's. $2.50 to $50 is still in the same ballpark IMO.
The third french announcer hasn't gotten into the groove yet.
I admit that I blinked a couple of times when I was watching the show for a few moments and heard her say: "The least prepared you are the better."Â I am sure though that like any of us, she has her fans and her naysayers.
Last comment, i find it hillarious the different styles of play between Devo and Johnny. I love the different comments you both make of the exact same situations.
While I would love to get a couple of examples of this, it doesn't entirely surprise me. I love John's advice... he tends to steer players towards a somewhat tighter game, which is a good thing, because many of the people who watch the show are fairly new to poker. I tend to lean more towards the risk-taking side of things. Hopefully what we are achieving is a nice balance, as opposed to completely mixed messages.
We've been getting a lot of emails about who is on and when. Here are the next couple of weeks if you are interested:
It is repetitive, the show lives or dies on the hosts/experts making things interesting.
Right now, my only feedback is to increase the buy-ins over time, or get an invitational sit&go with some of the better players.
Although I think player quality will improve on its own as the fan-base spreads.
Other than that, Gail seems to be getting better, as is Audrey (although not as much, Gail is getting more practice and has less work to do)
Just saw a Devon episode, first one i've seen in a while. Man, I really think you are leagues ahead of the other 2 hosts, especially the new host. I think your main strength lies in your interaction with the co-hosts, they seem more comfortable with you, definitely in Gail's case, she did a good job today with you. I think she's got a little crush on ya. She did say she'll tell you how aggressive she is "later"
Anyway, just a quick note to say your doing a good job, keep it up.
Just saw a Devon episode, first one i've seen in a while. Man, I really think you are leagues ahead of the other 2 hosts, especially the new host. I think your main strength lies in your interaction with the co-hosts, they seem more comfortable with you, definitely in Gail's case, she did a good job today with you.
Thanks... that was my first show in a week. My last one was with Gail too... I feel like I haven't seen Tina in forever. The two of us are doing one tonight though, so that should be fun. Old school!!!
I think she's got a little crush on ya. She did say she'll tell you how aggressive she is "later"
I think the show would be better if you only looked at 1/3 of the hands or certain hands instead of trying to comment on every hand. There's just too much information
I tend to just talk about other stuff if I see that there isn't much happening in a hand. Either the hand before it, or about some weird poker experience I've had... whatever comes to mind. It's a tricky little dance we do... deciding on the fly what merits discussion and what doesn't.
I tend to just talk about other stuff if I see that there isn't much happening in a hand. Either the hand before it, or about some weird poker experience I've had... whatever comes to mind. It's a tricky little dance we do... deciding on the fly what merits discussion and what doesn't.
like checking to see if poker chips float? i laughed my ass off for a good 30-40 seconds when you did that one.
I have a question about the show's futur. I was just wondering where is this going really? Will PNL always be a show for noobies to learn how to play better by watching bad to mediocre poker on T.V and having experts tell them what's right or wrong? Or will the show sort of grow up with the audience and steer towards more advanced poker in the futur, i.e 50$+ buy ins... cause as much as like poker watching PNL is getting to be quite boring... I don't fancy myself an expert by any means, and i don't have a large bankroll ( got school and bars to take care of ). But ya... it's just seems to be the same stuff happening over and over. Bad players making bad mistakes and getting lucky... or not.
So can i hope for some larger SNG's any time in the near futur, or mabye some 5-10$ LHE cash games?
I think having different themes would be good. One night emphasize pot odds, another slowplaying, headsup, etc. And focus on less hands! The show seems to have potential but noone really wants to watch other people's SnGs every night. I suppose the main idea was to co-brand with the poker site...
just a viewer's humble opinion
Hey Clown man, I haven't played with you either but I hear you're a big fish. The rumors must be true. Why do people love to talk about my play so much? There must be a reason why I am so hated? Hmmm...could it be that I've left a bitter taste in someones mouth? I should eat more pinapple, they say that takes away the bitterness.
Omega
Hey Clown man, I haven't played with you either but I hear you're a big fish. The rumors must be true. Why do people love to talk about my play so much? There must be a reason why I am so hated? Hmmm...could it be that I've left a bitter taste in someones mouth? I should eat more pinapple, they say that takes away the bitterness.
Omega
I heard the same from my sister's hairdresser's cousin...Clown is the donk of donks, no doubt
Hey Clown man, I haven't played with you either but I hear you're a big fish. The rumors must be true. Why do people love to talk about my play so much? There must be a reason why I am so hated? Hmmm...could it be that I've left a bitter taste in someones mouth? I should eat more pinapple, they say that takes away the bitterness.
Omega
Well i am a clown, but I'm not on TV pretending not to be one.
I always forget is it 82 or 83? That's the hand you are infamous for at the Office.
Comments
The NL cash games I find to be more interesting (in general), but as a limit junkie, I'd be interested in seeing limit cash games (low or high stakes, full ring or shorthanded). Although, in general, I'd guess limit poker doesn't make for great TV because it's lacking the 2 most important words of TV poker - "All in". Maybe if you get a table where 3 donks buyin for the min and rebuy 6 times it'd be more entertaining.
Maybe I'm the only one though that would actually get a kick out of watching a limit cash game... (I think if maybe they'd keep some sort of tally of who was up/down and how much, it might be marginally more watchable)
So Devo, I assume there's little interest in anything but NL games?
Actually in hindsight, probably the last thing I need is people watching Devo critique people's limit game, it's far better promoting the NL craziness which inspires so many B&M limit wannabees that think it's like "TV poker".
I was thinking the same thing as I think it would be interesting to watch an Omaha or Stud 7 game.
Actually, I was just referring to NL vs FL Holdem, but ya, I think a PL Omaha or Omaha H/L game would be pretty interesting as well. Although commentating that live I imagine would be a real challenge (to say the least) in just keeping track of which draws which guys were on, let alone how many outs each player had, what kind of odds they were getting etc.
Thanks... yeah, no editing, which means no selection of INTERESTING hands. The tough part, for me, is talking about anything beyond the surface level of "the big blind gets a walk" or "someone had good cards and raised and nobody else had good cards so they folded". When in doubt, I just talk about myself. Fascinating subject for one and all...Â
Thanks Hobbes. Yes it is difficult to think on my feet for two hours with thousands... err... millions watching, but it gets easier as I get more and more shows under my belt. (BTW I have absolutely no idea what our ratings are like. I will say that we get many more emails/night than many major network shows I've shot, but PNL appeals to sort of a niche audience that is very computer literate.)
HoofHearted, BallNutz, etc etc. I'm just glad none of the $50/$100 Party players are there. I play against CaptainRimjob and EyeLuv2TittyFk among others.
That was probably me. I get fed up of the crazy blinds as well, but I also think that some of the early play--terrible or otherwise--can be instructive.
That's usually when I decide to berate the player who called with Q2o. Or, I talk about myself.
The game of choice is NLHE right now. Never has that been more evident to me than when I was at Turning Stone. Table after table of $100 max. NLHE, filled with screaming 18 to 20 year old guys, and the casino loving every minute of it. LHE is being moved to the back of the bus, like it or not.
Well... I actually try to discourage people from playing like some of the donks on the show... that's kind of the point of PNL. However, who knows if anyone listens or learns... maybe by showing some brutal plays we are somehow creating brutal players, but I doubt it. Although I did hear that someone was in a bar recently and they had PNL on with the sound turned down, so you never know!
Omaha and Stud aren't nearly sexy enough.
*pointing to myself, of course*
I like the show, like Devo and Johnny T and find Tina to be an exceptionally intelligent 'pretty face', which is a nice change from other (not specifically thinking poker) shows where the host knows nothing about the subject and is just there because they look good.
Gail seems to be new and learning. The biggest problem she has is she confuses cash games and sit&go's, and she likes to stare into the camera when the show goes to commercials. Other then that, despite what I just said, a host who asks very basic questions is useful because there's usually some viewer who's just started watching the show and new to poker (like I was)
Aubrey seems like a knowledgable player who needs to adjust to a format where she doesn't have a whole lot of time to make points before 2-3 hands have passed and we forget what she was talking about. Also, her accent doesn't come across well because PNL has terrible sound. Not just the hosts, but the theme music is very, very quiet, which means it's not clear because I have it cranked, then the commercials blow my eardrums out.
I'm pretty sure she's Canadian, although her accent isn't strong enough for me to place.
I would be happy to see low-limit games, even though they're useless for me right now (I've been playing poker for 2 weeks, so have been playing with fake money. I can imagine that you cannot protect a hand with low-limit, as people will just call all the way through)
I'd also love to see better players, perhaps an invitation tournament. Still, lots of mistakes are good. You can get very good at something by just eliminating all major mistakes.
Keep up the good work, all the cast. If I ever move to real money I'm sure it'll be due to the urge to play on PNL and hear my play discussed. If that ever happens, it's just Coyote. BD stands for Barking Dog, another name for the Coyote I named myself after, so you can just leave it out when you say: "And it looks like Coyotebd just took the sit&go with spectacular play"
Ahh, one can dream.
Coyotebd
lol, you think a posting on an online forum is goint to affect his career? How tenuous a career would he have to have for that to be true?
the fact that some of the posts under my name are from a often times drunken friend at should work in my favour, but i'll have my lawyer handy in case
I watched a few minutes the other night and I noticed that as well. I will mention something about this to the technical team when I go in tonight. I might be doing my first show with Gail... I forget if it's tonight or tomorrow night. Should be fun! I have no idea what to expect.
While I agree that a lot of mistakes give me a lot to talk about, if the play is REALLY brutal it almost borders on making a mockery of the game of poker. When that happens, I usually tend to talk a lot less, until the game becomes something that resembles poker again.
In general, I like that we show SNG's ranging from $2.50 to $50 buy-in's, but it would be interesting for me to comment on games at the level that I typically play, as well.
I'll keep an eye out for your username, and I will try to take it easy on you.Â
This may be the greatest oversimplification of all-time!
That game is full of zen proverbs and wacky simplifications. For example:
There is death in the hane.
six die but eight live
make a fist before striking
And my favorite Go theory:
Loose your desire to win, seek only to play the best possible game.
I like it because it works. I think it works for poker. Folding pocket twos in early position on a very loose board is a good play, whether or not you flop 4 of a kind (which I've done, folding 8s, then flopping 8, 8, something and having two people call all-in during the rest of the hand chasing flush draws)
So, just reformat the entire show then?
You on that Dev?
New chick doesn't know what she's talking about.
Could you please get the technical team to also post the Buy-In for the SNGs. Sometimes it seems like the players are playing like garbage, i.e 5.50$ buy in. Or other time they're playing pretty solid poker i.e 50$. I'd like to be sure though.
The third french announcer hasn't gotten into the groove yet.
Last comment, i find it hillarious the different styles of play between Devo and Johnny. I love the different comments you both make of the exact same situations.
Indeed.
It's not that easy. I believe that the feed we get is the feed we get, and we're probably (I'm guessing here...) not allowed to tamper with it, ie: add information to the screen.
I'll tell you what I'll do though... from now on I will always say what the buy-in is for any of the sit and go's I'm talking about. You'd be surprised... the solid play isn't always at the higher levels. Quite the opposite sometimes. And really, NONE of the SNG's are at anywhere even approaching big buy-in's. $2.50 to $50 is still in the same ballpark IMO.
I admit that I blinked a couple of times when I was watching the show for a few moments and heard her say: "The least prepared you are the better."Â I am sure though that like any of us, she has her fans and her naysayers.
While I would love to get a couple of examples of this, it doesn't entirely surprise me. I love John's advice... he tends to steer players towards a somewhat tighter game, which is a good thing, because many of the people who watch the show are fairly new to poker. I tend to lean more towards the risk-taking side of things. Hopefully what we are achieving is a nice balance, as opposed to completely mixed messages.
We've been getting a lot of emails about who is on and when. Here are the next couple of weeks if you are interested:
14: Gail/me
15: Tina/me
16: Tina/Johnny
17: Gail/Johnny
18: Tina/Audrey
21: Gail/Johnny
22: Tina/me
23: Tina/me
24: Gail/Johnny
25: Tina/Audrey
Thanks for your continued support of the show, please keep watching!
It is repetitive, the show lives or dies on the hosts/experts making things interesting.
Right now, my only feedback is to increase the buy-ins over time, or get an invitational sit&go with some of the better players.
Although I think player quality will improve on its own as the fan-base spreads.
Other than that, Gail seems to be getting better, as is Audrey (although not as much, Gail is getting more practice and has less work to do)
Anyway, just a quick note to say your doing a good job, keep it up.
Thanks... that was my first show in a week. My last one was with Gail too... I feel like I haven't seen Tina in forever. The two of us are doing one tonight though, so that should be fun. Old school!!!
A guy can dream...
Thanks for watching Joe, and for your feedback.
like checking to see if poker chips float? i laughed my ass off for a good 30-40 seconds when you did that one.
So can i hope for some larger SNG's any time in the near futur, or mabye some 5-10$ LHE cash games?
just a viewer's humble opinion
I think it looks like crap, I can see a ticker on a sports channel but not on a gaming channel.
And i doubt he has a big bulge in his pocket from poker.
Omega
93 baby
I heard the same from my sister's hairdresser's cousin...Clown is the donk of donks, no doubt
Well i am a clown, but I'm not on TV pretending not to be one.
I always forget is it 82 or 83? That's the hand you are infamous for at the Office.