Hey dom,

Fair criticism overall but... the witty intros are always jokes, so they can't be self-congratulatory, the Pokercast recording on Mondays when all big poker news happens on Tuesdays has been a running gag for some time.

As for Lee's segment. we were mostly trying to get as much of the key information out to the public as widespread as possible. Obviously, everyone wanted to hear from someone at Stars and we can never assume that everyone in our audience has read every bit of info that exists on the forums and the PokerStars blog/press releases. Many people tell us they listen to our show INSTEAD OF spending all day reading info that is available online. It's a mistake to assume our audience is already aware of things just because we are.

I actually notice many knowledgeable well-connected poker players still asking the most basic questions about the deal all over the internet even today. The story is still very new.

We did supplement Lee's general informational segment with extensive analysis and opinion as well. We knew there would be some questions he'd yet to have answers to but that people would still want to have us aske just in case.

Thx for listening as always.

You spent way too much time talking about what Howard might (but has not yet) said. then talking about how (what he hasn't said is wrong.
Let's wait til he says something or refuses to talk.

I scared the crap out of my wife yelling that while listening to the Pokercast on my headphones. lol

It's a shame that wasn't caught on tape!

I heard none other than former PokerCast guest Faraz Jaka being interviewed on National Public Radio this afternoon about what the deal means to poker players. He was asked whether he liked playing live or online better. Jaka said live was more fun, but online is necessary, and then tried to explain how playing online allows you to play thousands of tournaments a year (basically, trying to explain how it evens out the effect of short term swings). He said playing live exclusively is like asking a stock broker to make only 100 trades a year. The reporter, completely missing the point, said something like "but you know how bad stock trades go sometimes."

Nothing against Faraz Jaka, but given all the higher profile players out there, I'm wondering how he ended up on the radio.

Oh, hai thar Howard. Glad to see you're back out from under your rock =)

Count me as one of your many listeners who depends on the Pokercast to keep informed in the world of poker


I think you did an excellent job on detailing the settlement in your opening segment and I understand that many listeners,myself included, wanted and expected to hear directly from Pokerstars.

But if you had sent an advanced list of questions to Lee and he responded by saying he didn't know the answers to most of them would you still have wanted to have him on the show?


Still great job getting Diamond Flush on the show , she is an invaluable asset in the poker world


.

$85 will get you into 17 Wingnuts games.



It sounded like Diamond Flush was about to say U.S. players were net losers.

If only PokerStars were to introduce sync breaks in 18-mans, I think all my problems would be solved! I'm not exactly sure which way I'm going to go on this yet, and I still have an eye on next year.

Really?

We lined lee up late at night his time in IOM. We prepared the questions for the show while he was sleeping. Your suggestions arent real world logisitically possible. The story broke the same day we recorded the show which was in the middle of the night in europe.

thx for the show guys.

I also read the same thing. Where can we get access to the blog? He hasn't released it afaik?

42 good

Meh, don't sweat it.

Lee Jones said early on in his interview that a common answer will be "I don't know." (I recall one time he said "I'd rather not speculate" instead.) Under the circumstances, that's probably the best answer he can give to many of the questions we have right now.

Too often, interview and panel shows bring in experts to discuss some hot topic as it continues to unfold. Sooner or later, the interviewer/host will ask a question that simply cannot be answered at that point. Not wanting to look uninformed, said expert will reply with conjecture and speculation*. (That's on their better days. In most cases, you can replace "conjecture and speculation" with "says too much" and "talks out of his ass."**)

I don't necessarily HATE this practice, as conjecture and speculation is often the expert's role. But the audience will inevitably take this statement as hard fact, then hold it against the spokesperson or company or expert if events do not transpire exactly as guessed.

As for the notion of clearing a list of questions, I don't love that, either. Again, I'd rather you guys ask a question and have Lee reiterate that he or PokerStars don't know the answer right now, than to have you not ask the question at all and leave the NVG crowd to continue their guessing games.

Lee's interview was fine. Not exactly informative, and in that way, it still answered some of the questions I've had in the past few days. Sometimes the answer to the question really is "I don't know."


*For extra credit, look for the episode called "Why Is 'I Don't Know' So Hard To Say?" episode of Freakonomics Radio.

**See also Sebok, Joe. Sebok did not truly know the nature of UB while serving as its spokesman, but he gave assurances as if he knew for sure.

***I am now about to rival David Sklansky on the number of footnotes I put on the bottom of the page in a poker-related discussion.

****Also, I am not dismissive of the concerns in this thread, so much so that perhaps the photo on that banner should be of DF, not Lee Jones.

What do you mean, long weekend in Canada?