I almost believe you aren't being entirely geniune in your comments, sir.

I love Lon. He has a great voice and sense of humor and is very well informed about sports in general.

It's a weird spot for ESPN because Lon and Norm didn't really start out as poker guys and don't have the strategic acumen of today's foremost experts, but were instrumental in the 2003 WSOP broadcast that helped launch the poker boom. People don't like to go away from things that are successful and the Lon/Norm tandem has definitely been a big success overall. They helped put televised poker on the map and deserve a lot of credit. They still do some good work and I think they're a good fit for the pre-taped highlight shows.

Personally, I think the producers should keep them around in some prominent capacity, but I prefer the Schulman/Nejad tandem for long broadcasts of live poker. They're very funny together and Nick's analysis of hands is typically on-point. At some point ESPN will have to turn the page and those guys are an obvious choice for the future.

On the other hand, the average ESPN viewer doesn't know about "capped ranges" or "fold equity" and may not appreciate in-depth takes, so perhaps having "everyman" types in the booth is fitting. What they did last year was a reasonable compromise: Lon and Norm in small doses during prime time while Nick and Ali handle the off-peak hours traffic, where the viewership is likely to skew towards more serious players. They can pass the torch when ready or when it's necessary.

Those situations can get messy though, especially if the incumbents dig in their heels (look at Jay Leno vs. Conan O'Brien and what happened with the Tonight Show).

Your average Joe Blow Walmart loves the WSOP announce team and isn't watching / listening for in-depth hand analysis because it would just go over their head anyway.

In terms of personal taste, I think they both need to be shifted out for some new blood. The product needs some sprucing up, but at the same time, I know average T.V. viewers hate change, so I can see why they're still used.

I'm not going to quote any particular posts but I agree with all those who think Lon and Norm are doing a good job in the booth.

P.S. It's a poker tournament and it would seem a good idea to have the best possible commentators (Ali and Nick) talking about it while hands are being played for hundreds of thousands and even millions of dollars. Then maybe people will take poker seriously, instead of listening to corny jokes that have no place in a discussion about the play of the current hand. Of course, maybe the powers that be feel it is better to dumb down the telecast to appeal to whoever they think is watching. Or just maybe they'd rather stick with the same guys who have been doing this for years. You know the philosophy - If it ain't broke don't fix it! I don't know and neither do you. I do know who I think are the far superior commentators though.

Corny jokes. Yeah baby! lol

I actually can figure out the cards for myself so an in depth analysis doesn't do much for me unless, of course, it's Nick. So Lon, Norman and NIck would be perfect for me.

I think you left out how great it was with a big hand taking place to talk about that hand assuming the rules of a nonsense game Norm made up were in effect instead of those boring NL rules.

+1

My dream commentary team:

Gabe Kaplan
Ali Nejad

+1

dude is awful. and it's nothing to do with him not giving high level analysis, it's because he misreads the board/action on literally every single ****ing hand. Sure I can read them on my own but surely it's preferable to have someone who is at least somewhat competent at their job calling the action?

I feel kinda bad cos he seems like a really nice guy and has done a lot for poker, and was good with Norman on the highlight shows but yeah, time to go.

This complete post sums it up better than everyone else out there.

It’s the fricking ME of the WSOP and people are insisting it continue to be presented with all the professionalism of a church puppet show.

Glad to see some responses - thanks for not flaming a n00b.

Lon does seem like a nice guy. Great voice. That's not the issue. ^ quoted is right - twenty years, almost, Lon has been commentating. Can't figure it out. But of course Schulman goes based on one comment. Can't have that millennial viewership, let's get our old men players back who don't care about cards.

Anyhow, I'm simply pointing out high-level incompetence. I've never seen anyone in such a prominent sports position (games, w/e) be so BAD at his job. Never. So, people defend him... on what grounds? That he's "an institution"? OK well, institutions grow old and die.

Lon is awful for poker. That's it. I don't see how you can defend ANY of his commentary over the last week. It is pedestrian level, mental-patient level poker commentary. My dead cousin could do better than this.

Stop me when I'm wrong please.

I would be sad if Lon and Norm weren’t calling the WSOP.

The huberis of the anti Lon commentors is the reason poker is dying. WSOP coverage is not a RIO subscription replacement. The commentors are for entertainment only. In addition their job description requires that they appeal to the masses. The inverse of this is that they are specifically not attempting to appeal to .0002 of the population that comment in this thread. The thread is chock full of ignorance.

You think the masses like bad?

You tried so hard to sound intelligent in this post but all you came up with was “I like Lon and dont get why Im wrong”

Somehow you got the only things he didn't say.

How would you like a baseball announcer whose call is "Groundball to the shortstop and Jones is out at first base" when it actually was a groundball to the third baseman and Smith was safe at first base?

This type of criticism is valid. I wish Lon would clean up his board reading and other mistakes. By now, you would think he would have gotten better at it.

However, those that are expecting ESPN to cater to the small fraction of viewers that would rather see hardcore poker analysis are not understanding why ESPN televises poker. Having more strategy-based commentary on PokerGO and a lighter commentary on ESPN is smart programming.

They're both icons.

Yes, the fact that Lon has not yet grasped basic concepts like it is often a good idea to bet on the river when you have nothing and check on the river (or earlier streets) when you have show-down value does not bother me one iota. Of course, anybody who has played any amount of NLHE picked up these concepts very early in their poker career.

What bothers me is that Lon frequently offers strategy "advice" during hands and often that strategy advice is non-sensical and highly dependent on seeing every player's hole cards.

I get it. Lon plays the "Everyman" role on the broadcast. He voices what Joe Six Pack is seeing and thinking sitting on his couch at home. That's okay within limits and without the glaring mistakes in reading boards, etc.

I think they should have people with deeper poker knowledge for PokerGo and other streaming broadcasts that are almost exclusively watched by viewers that have at least some understanding.

ESPN on TV is a totally different animal. That’s for entertainment and viewers expect exactly that. If you talk to people 50+ (and that’s ESPNs target audience) about baseball on TV, they are slowly getting familiar with WAR and the last thing they want to hear about is advanced sabermetrics. If you asked 100 casual baseball fans if batting average or OPS is a more important statistic, many would say BA and be very confident in their answer.

Please don’t turn poker on TV into any kind of high end strategy game. Let viewers know that player A likes to go for long walks with his dog and not that his range is capped at JJ there.

Thanks for starting this thread OP. I couldn't agree with you more.