There’s no doubt that ESPN’s coverage of “World Series of Poker” is fast-paced and exciting. The series punctuates big pots, big hands, and big money. Some of the best players in the world sit flanked by monster stacks of hard-earned chips.
Players looking to up their skills may not realize that a highlights-based show set to the soundtrack of thousands of chips is a dangerous place to look for poker advice.
A more in-depth show is usually the better bet (and certainly easier on the wallet).
NBC’s “Poker After Dark” focuses on a single table tournament. The tournament is broken down into a week-long series of one-hour episodes. Most importantly, the show rolls on every single hand in the tournament. It doesn’t matter if a big pot rests on the river card or if everyone folds around to the big blind.
To a reckless, action-hungry player with unrealistic expectations, it sounds pretty boring – but those are the kinds of players that don’t stick around very long!
To a player that understands patience and discipline are two of the most important attributes of a good poker player, watching a table surrounded by pros mixing it up in big brother style coverage is a great learning tool.
The single table tournament allows you to watch every hand develop throughout the tournament. You’re offered the opportunity to analyze the tournament as a whole, not just the hand.
Why did Daniel Negreanu fold pocket kings? How did Chris “Jesus” Ferguson take down a huge pot with garbage hole cards? What sent “Poker Brat” Phil Helmuth Jr. into another of his infamous tirades?
Poker strategy is a lot easier to figure out when you’ve been watching the tournament hand after hand after hand.
As in “World Series of Poker” coverage, viewers have the advantage of seeing each player’s hole cards. However, they’ve also got the added ability to use previous hand outcomes to help them decipher what happens in hands that follow.
Take enough mental notes (or use the rewind button often on your DVR) and it becomes easier to see why a player decided on one course of action over another.
We keep promising Chicago Poker Club has something in the works to celebrate Chicago's sexiest women in poker.... in the meantime, courtesy of our content partner at Scotty Clark Poker, let's talk about the sexiest women in all of poker. Reprinted with permission:
Re-printed courtesy of our content partner Ante Up Magazine.
A commentary by Christopher Cosenza
Garth Brooks has a song called Unanswered Prayers, and in it he thanks God for not giving him what he had prayed for in the past because if God had, then he wouldn’t have what he has now.
The online poker world almost had one of these moments last month. Harry Reid, the Democratic senator from Nevada, very nearly pulled off the Herculean task of getting an online poker regulation bill put to a vote as part of bigger, must-pass legislation during the lame-duck session. It would’ve answered a lot of poker players’ prayers, but as Garth would point out, that’s not always such a good thing.
When players heard online poker regulation might actually get introduced there was joy on Fifth Street. But upon further review this bill smelled as fishy as a postflop check from an under-the-gun raiser. Yes, we all want online poker to be regulated; no one likes legally participating in a game that’s thought of as an illegal industry. But at what cost, and at who’s expense?
For the uninitiated, everything that happens on Capitol Hill comes with a catch. In this case, Mr. Reid nearly snatched an opportunity to pay back his IOUs to MGM Resorts International and Caesars Entertainment for their contributions to a re-election campaign that saw him squeak past Republican challenger Sharron Angle.
And wasn’t Reid an opponent of online poker once? Funny what money can do to a politician’s views, isn’t it? Once the big boys decided they wanted a slice of the Internet pie it suddenly became very important to Reid to get online poker regulated, and regulated just for his interests. But more on that later.Think back to when the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act was attached to the SAFE Port Act in 2006. Weren’t you about as livid as Phil Hellmuth Jr. after getting his kings cracked by 10-7 offsuit? How could these politicians attach something so clearly thoughtless and ineffective to such an important bill at the stroke of midnight during the last session before an extended break? Oh, wait, that’s how politics work. It’s disgusting, and it’s sad. And that’s exactly what Reid was trying to do. The old “good-for-the-goose-good-for- the-gambler ” strategy.