FAO BarryG re Tips From The Bear

[DRUK88]

Really like this stuff Barry, good work I always enjoy the content.

Just like to request if you could do a segment regarding the controversial Big Game episode in which DN and Tony G get into some dispute with Andrew Robl. I know you have done other episodes (because you were directly involved), but I think this is something you can definitely give an opinion on IMO.

This has been discussed in some other shows and forums, I'd just be really interested in your opinion in particular because of your morale standpoint.

Specifically, whether you think Andrew should have been straddling (and agree with Daniel's point) or whether you agree with Andrew that Daniel was stuck and maybe steaming so wanted to use his position as 'the face of Pokerstars' to intimidate everyone into straddling so that he could get even (from 2p2 pokercast interview with Andrew). Also, Tony's actions when not in the hand, and whether this is just good for TV despite not being the most gentlemanly act.

Anyway, thanks for you time reading this request.

DR

[Barry Greenstein]

Whenever a round of straddling has been asked for on the Big Game, I have been a little uncomfortable with it because it seems to take advantage of the Loose Cannon. We can debate whether the Loose Cannon should be playing looser than they have been, but the reality is that they sit around trying to stay even until they get a lucky spot to win one big key pot. Putting the straddle on probably won't help them out with this strategy. It will just cause them to bleed more quickly.

On the other hand, I would rarely object to anything that other players in a game agree to. I have never thought of objecting to straddling even though I have been playing much tighter than my usual game on these shows as I exploit players who want to dance around. I make some interesting plays, but they are usually interesting from a poker perspective (check-raise bluffs) more than the "I'm willing to gamble with any two cards" mentality.

I think Daniel and Tony G would agree that they were technically out of line, but this is somewhat of a reality TV show. The director wants people to talk and act out since he can decide how to edit it. It's not accidental that Tony G, Phil Hellmuth, and Daniel got invited to three of the six shows that were recently taped, and I only got invited to one.

[Imasmrtazz]

Originally Posted by Barry Greenstein

It's not accidental that Tony G, Phil Hellmuth, and Daniel got invited to three of the six shows that were recently taped, and I only got invited to one.

So they only had one more Asian Female Loose Cannon?

[listening]

Originally Posted by Barry Greenstein

The director wants people to talk and act out since he can decide how to edit it. It's not accidental that Tony G, Phil Hellmuth, and Daniel got invited to three of the six shows that were recently taped, and I only got invited to one.

Please tell the director that if I wanted to see Housewives of New Jersey, I wouldn't be watching a poker show. I want to see great poker played by great players. I'd like to see players on the way to maybe becoming great players like Nadia, who rose to the occasion as well as anyone could be expected to, I guess.

PokerStars is making a mistake. They aren't going to get new players into poker, they are going to scare them off.

I was struck with how often during the WSOP airings, I heard references to getting more women into poker. This crap won't do it.

Watching Vanessa take everyone's money can. Watching guys with quiet class like you, or players open and positive, like a lot of the young guys still gives great poker, and makes an environment someone would want to enter.

People watch trashy reality shows so they can feel superior to those they see; they don't want to become them. The demographic is shifting. If you want to draw viewers who don't play poker, you get celebs, you don't make a World Wide Wrestling on the GreenFelt show.



And enough with the "heart-wrenching loose cannon" already - I want to see some amateur bluff barryg - then I can pretend I might do it - I don't want to see the Little Match Girl get thrown under a bus in a blizzard - I don't want to imagine myself doing that

[DRUK88]

Listening makes a brilliant point, particularly about the intimidating actions of TonyG and Daniel more like to discourage than encourage new players. However, it does get more people watching the show, which I guess is all the producers are concentrating on. I know for a fact I only started watching the Big Game since I heard of this controversy, so I guess it was job well done by Tony and Daniel.

[DRUK88]

Barry, I started this thread with the hope of maybe getting a new "Tips from the Bear" episode, but tbh your reply in this thread has got me thinking, so let me know your thoughts on the following:

I am watching Tony and Daniel cause controversy and think "man, that's good TV I will watch this again" etc. However, it sort of backs up the common misconception of the poker sceptics ("all the players are hustlers", "it's an uncomfortable environment" etc), so I am not sure whether using controversy to increase ratings is helping or hindering new players coming into poker.

I mean, it's pretty obv Barry you are one of (if not THE) best role models and representatives of poker, but then again because you don't act like a total dbag and actually have some class your airtime is cut short for those who represent poker poorly. Seems pretty messed up to me.

What do you think about this Barry? Should Pokerstars think of the 'bigger picture' when decided how far to take a bit of controversy in terms of making poker look "approachable" to new players.

I personally think Tony G's outburts and rants are good for ratings (and in turn, good for increasing the chance of new people joining poker sites etc), but I think calling the clock on someone is taking it WAY too far.

Thanks for your time btw Barry.

[Barry Greenstein]

1. Not everyone watches poker to see insightful plays. If you watched some of this year's WSOP coverage, the most memorable plays seem to be some big suckouts by players who made bad calls accompanied by jubilant celebrations and emotional pain by the victims.

2. On the cash game shows, the players who make the most commotion tend to be good for the game from a financial viewpoint of the other players.

3. It's much more in PokerStars best interest to create awareness that they exist, rather than that they value good poker and good manners.

[listening]

Originally Posted by Barry Greenstein

1. Not everyone watches poker to see insightful plays. If you watched some of this year's WSOP coverage, the most memorable plays seem to be some big suckouts by players who made bad calls accompanied by jubilant celebrations and emotional pain by the victims.

WSOP on ESPN Ratings Down 16%

I'm not sure that worked very well.

DRUK:

Might have gotten you started watching it, but if it continues, they lost this viewer.

[DRUK88]

Originally Posted by Barry Greenstein

3. It's much more in PokerStars best interest to create awareness that they exist, rather than that they value good poker and good manners.

This is spot on.

My only concern is regarding the legality of online poker in the US. I mean, would it not be considerably better for Pokerstars if the law got passed? So much so, that they should maybe be thinking about thhe bigger picture in terms of how these actions look in the eyes of the sceptics.

But then again, the producer and everyone else is in a rating's business and probably doesn't care about 'the greater good', guess it's just the way the world is.