In after daniel

Yeah that makes sense, it's not like James could stop talking for two seconds while you sneeze... really that'd be as obvious (if not more) a gaffe as a sneeze.

I would have loved to see the look on everyone's faces when you said "mindscrew" in your commentary... I was pretty surprised.

I'm sure they'll call you when they start live broadcasting Heroes of Newerth, Jimmy.

Enjoyed it very much. I wished I could have seen more play 5-6-7 handed (I didn't see the ESPN3.com coverage). Unfortunately, given the large stack size of just a couple players, I didn't think there was much multi-handed play (I realize this is very hard to control). The heads-up was very cool.

Some of my "less poker savvy" friends, they were often confused about who was calling, raising, etc. I know there was a picture of next to the name - but it wasn't always obvious who was who (unless you really know the players).

Also, the delay seeing the hole card on screen was sometimes confusing. If nothing else - get the hole cards on the screen faster.

I enjoyed this a lot, and would definitely watch more. I haven't read anything about David Williams yet. He did a great job during the breaks. I'd like to see him more involved as a broadcaster. Daniel did an excellent job, but why not tag-team with David?

A+

Dear ESPN,

Watch out for this guy. He's a freak and a very weird dude.



-"Howard"

IMO thats how TV poker shoulda been broadcasted since the beginning. I thought the coverage was great.

For the people saying it started to late, yes 10pm is late to start a marathon for us east coasters but we have to remember it was the first one and it started that time because it began after the dinner break. From a programming stand point, if you start it earlier, the dinner break throws a huge monkey wrench in there. Sure you could fill that time with a bunch of fluff stuff but it might be hard to be engrossed in watching something and then having to wait and hour to and hour and a half to come back for the conclusion.

Awesome job all around.

One thing that really bugged me that I have not seen yet was the stats. It took roughly 100 hands of heads up before any heads up only stats were shown. They kept using stats that included the entire duration of the broadcast from 8 players which were pretty much irrelavant once we were heads up.

I couldn't wait to see the all the hands at a final table, was a little bummed it started with only 5 players. After the 3.5 hours of heads up play, I totally understood why this had never been done before. Personally, I think it would be more entertaining to show all the hands at the final table from 10 players on down to heads up play, then edit the heads up play to finish it out.

The first 1.5 hours was the best poker on TV I had ever seen. The last 3.5 hours, although interesting to me to see, it was pretty dull except a half dozen hands. I think for entertainment purposes, the heads up portion just has to be edited down.

I did enjoy the commentary, and I think DN did great talking for that long and avoiding doing any impersonations, but individual player knowledge from a netboy would of been appreciated, as stated by others.

I hope it isn't the last final table I ever see live on my TV, but it wouldn't surprise me given how slow the heads up play is to everyone but a poker junkie.

I think the dinner break probably had very little to do with not starting earlier.

I don't think ESPN2 was prepared to air it during primetime, certainly not on the first go round. They were probably committed to some College Basketball game anyway.(not sure what programming led into the broadcast back east)

Also, if PokerStars did purchase the airtime from ESPN2 to showcase the PCA as many suspect, then the price to buy ESPN2 airtime at 10pm on Saturday night would be much more reasonable than earlier in the evening. Starting the broadcast at 6pm or so would have not only been a much more expensive daypart but the increased length of the broadcast to show the event to conclusion would have been cost prohibitive. 441 isn't cheap.

Thanks everyone. Keep it coming.

The PBA World Championship was ESPN2's lead-in Saturday night.

Commentary was pretty good but what couldn't stay interested because I knew nothing about any of these guys. Seen Stein and Sowers before - but they are pretty dull and broadcast didn't help me learn any more about them.

Give me more background! Gee, he's 20-something and plays on the internet. Did they even do interviews with any of the players?

Why should I root for or against Oliver, besides the fact that his wigger hat was annoying and he slouched in his seat too much.

Regarding ESPN3...

If you have an XBOX LIVE account there is a free ESPN video app you can download that is ESPN3 -- and far better quality than the online version.

It's quite awesome! ESPN2 has many hours of Australian Open tennis on right now, but XBOX ESPN has like 7 LIVE FEEDS running through-out.



Cliffs: If you have an XBOX Live account and like sports, download the free ESPN video app.

(Sorry slightly off topic, but lots of people don't know about the XBL ESPN app

I guess due to the length of the broadcast you need at least 2, 2-person teams to do the commentary, but only one of the two was really interesting this time - DN and Hartigan. But you've read that already.

One thing they did on a webcast of an EPT FT in the fall was to invite people in for mini-interviews and light commentary for a few minutes at a time. I suppose that's a lot easier when it's not hole-cards-visible, i.e., when you have a larger & more active rail, but it could add some interest.

Yeah online players seem to be killing televised poker tournaments. A recreational player would probably have no interest watching this final table. All it takes is a bit of effort to be presentable and have some kind of social skills. Players need to understand they have an obligation to the poker community to promote the game and from watching the last NAPT and watching this they are doing an absolutely awful job.

First of all, Galen Hall, the champion of this event, who is scheduled to attend Stanford Business School next fall, was very presentable and exhibited fine social skills in his post-event interviews.

Second, this is a competition for millions of dollars. The players' focus is on winning money, not being entertaining. This isn't a made-for-TV poker event, where the players were invited to play should be under an obligation to be entertaining. The players are under no obligation to anyone to do anything other than play to the best of their abilities.

Third, poker is a very popular game. The game as presented by a great commentary team (and this is one of the only times that has happened in the history of televised poker unfortunately) is interesting enough on its own without the players going out of their way to be entertaining (which more often than not just results in them being annoying). On this point, Phil Ivey is one of the biggest draws in terms of audience appeal, which stems solely from his skill in playing the game.

Agreed...it is the TV production team's responsibility to make us care about them and make them seem "entertaining". This is where commentators/ESPN/441 failed.

how did Bobby the Bus ferdinand do..

The show was absolutely fantastic! Commentary was great (as it usually is for PS events), there was lots of action, bluffs, big lay downs, obligatory all ins.

It would be awesome if there are 3-4 more final table broadcasts like that throughout the year. I am even willing to pay ($20-$40) per show.

I would too, especially if it was the WSOP ME (like they had the year Jerry Yang won).

There's no "app" for ESPN3 on Xbox that you have to download. You just have to go to "Video Marketplace" and it's like the second thing in.

I watched the coverage sporadically; I don't really have anything new to add. It would be nice to see all of the hole cards, and see them faster, but I realize there are technology limitations. I also found it hard to follow chip counts during the non-HU portions.

I was pumped to see that this was airing "live," and I think it can only get better in the future. It was even an improvement over the WSOP broadcast, maybe only because oof the commentators.

Thanks for all the positive feedback guys. Much appreciated!

In response, I can't really add anything to what Daniel's already said.

In the future, I'm sure there'll be more live shows from major events - and I'm confident the coverage will just get better and better.