Awful news Ed, if this was your decision then fair enough but if this was Sky's then both they and us are the poorer for it. You were IMO the best regular analyst on the channel by far and your honestly was a big part of this. Do the majority of players/customers really enjoy losing money in ignorance?
This decision, if it were Sky's, to dispense with a “real” analyst is all the more shocking when I see analysts on 865 week in week out who add nothing more than a running commentary on a hand and another who constantly refers to Omaha when we are watching hold-em.
Maybe like myself you are not everyone’s cup of tea but you will be missed by many, an earlier poster was right, the shows with yourself and Rich were the most entertaining I have seen on 865. Good at your job, honest and entertaining these must be the reasons you have gone!
Good luck in the future Ed, if I ever meet you in person I will buy you a pint, it's the least I owe you for the enjoyment and education I gained watching your shows.
Hello Skypoker fans and forum viewers, I have indeed left skypoker. It has been an absolute delight to see the community grow. Much respect to the Skypoker bosses for the chance they gave me and I will always be greatful to them. When we started broadcasting in Feb 2007 the standard of play was simply shocking across the site, Skypoker had vision and their remit was to school the amateur player hence our jobs as analysts was to keep the analysis simple and directed towards the new player. Fast forward 5 years to a site where the best players on Skypoker are literally world class and a large percentage are BIG winning players, couple that with the standard of the skypoker regs who can mix it with anyone in the uk. I think we can safely say SkyPoker got it right. Congratulations to you the players for building the community it has been a pleasure to have been a very small part of it. I will be playing alot of live poker around the uk during the next few months before the cricket season starts so if I wasnt "too" honest about your play over the last few years please come say hi and if I was too honest Id be delighted to buy you a pint. Flop well Ed Posted by giddzo
Still got you on DVD with Rich analyzing my hands for the old TSP programme when i won it. Was pretty supsrised at the way you almost read my mind with some of the decisions i made
I,m sure we,ll see you back on there at some point in the future. I miss your shows with Rich
I heard you were running errands for Stuart baggs now Is it true
Awful news Ed, if this was your decision then fair enough but if this was Sky's then both they and us are the poorer for it. You were IMO the best regular analyst on the channel by far and your honestly was a big part of this. Do the majority of players/customers really enjoy losing money in ignorance? This decision, if it were Sky's, to dispense with a “real” analyst is all the more shocking when I see analysts on 865 week in week out who add nothing more than a running commentary on a hand and another who constantly refers to Omaha when we are watching hold-em. Maybe like myself you are not everyone’s cup of tea but you will be missed by many, an earlier poster was right, the shows with yourself and Rich were the most entertaining I have seen on 865. Good at your job, honest and entertaining these must be the reasons you have gone! Good luck in the future Ed, if I ever meet you in person I will buy you a pint, it's the least I owe you for the enjoyment and education I gained watching your shows. Posted by stien
Massive +1
I loved Ed's honesty tbh, and i rarley watch the channel now for the reasons stated. Theres being nice and being too nice tbh. Ed imo had the balance. He said it when he felt someone played well and stated when he felt otherwise. Purley imo, you cant learn if your not told straight what your doing wrong. Ed was probably the best at that imo.
I never played on here while Ed was still working on the show as I was underage, but I watched the channel since pretty much the beginning. As everyone else has said, he's probably the best analyst Sky Poker has ever had, and a massive loss to the site and the channel.
Totally agree that people really need to be told when they make a bad play - I loved in the ME when Jen Mason said something along the lines of "I hope he hits his 10", knowing it would probably cost the player his/her tournament if they did, because they'd played the hand terribly. Some people might not have liked Luke Schwartz, but the feedback on here suggested that the majority thought he was a brilliant guest because he wasn't afraid to tell people that they were playing badly.
In the Main Event the other night, I sent in a hand request where I raised AK in the cutoff, Dantb 3 bet with KQ on the button, sb folded, short stack in the BB called about 1/4 of his stack, I 4 bet, Dantb folded, the short stack called again, leaving about 1/3 of his stack back, then check/folded on the flop when I bet. I didn't need to see his cards to know that he'd played it terribly, and I saw when the hand was shown on TV that he had A4.
I think Tikay 3 or 4 years ago would've probably spent the next 5 minutes telling everyone how awful calling with Ace Rag is out of position, and to be honest, I think the show needs more of that to teach players. I can't remember what exactly was said about that hand, but it was pretty much "You can't fold when you only have 5 big blinds left, next hand". In cases like that, I believe players need to be told what exactly they did wrong and why. Saying "You can't fold with 5BB left" doesn't stop the player from calling a raise and a re-raise, then calling a 4 bet out of position with a rag ace.
I appreciate that everyone responds differently to criticism, and for some people, Luke Schwartz telling them they're awful at poker wouldn't work. However, there's no balance either. At the moment, I'd say all the analysts and presenters are less critical of bad play than they could be, and having someone who isn't afraid to tell people they've played a hand terribly would provide some much-needed balance to the analysis on the channel IMO. At the end of the day, the point of the channel is both to promote Sky Poker and teach people to play better, and I think more could be done to teach people.
I hear presenters and analysts saying things on the show about how much the site has moved forwards in terms of the standard of play, bigger tournaments, etc, and for the most part, I agree. However, the one area I don't think the channel has moved forwards is the program itself. Just because the standard on the site has improved doesn't mean that there's not new players out there who will make the mistakes that people were making back when the site began.
"This decision, if it were Sky's, to dispense with a “real” analyst is all the more shocking when I see analysts on 865 week in week out who add nothing more than a running commentary on a hand and another who constantly refers to Omaha when we are watching hold-em. "
^^^^^^^^^^^
this
could sky clarify whether this was there decision or mutual?
ed is a top bloke and a superb analyst, without naming names he is streets ahead of anything else sky have to offer
Sorry to hear that Ed, all the best in whatever you do next.
Its a real shame about that though, as it seems to be the same people on the show's all the time now and everything is feeling a tad samey. I used to Sky+ the main show's when Ed or TK was on with Rich and get a good laugh as well as an informative show on how to play the game but I no longer do so. Imo the shows need freshened up some more.
Also I wish we could have some Omaha being played on the show's - I know they say its technically hard to do, but I'm sure more people would end up playing it if they did.
Again & again, when we have had Guest Analysts on the Show, players have Posted on the Forum - "can we see more of these Guest Analysts, please"?
And so Sky Poker listened, & now there will be regular, scheduled appearances (not Guest appearances) by the likes of Scotty, Redmond, Stu Rutter, Thewy, & a few others recent Guests, (again, by popular request & demand) for whom Contracts are currently being signed...
With 3 Live Shows per week, there is not room for everyone you'd like to have on the Channel, it's that simple, cake & eat it comes to mind. If every Analyst & Presenter we ever had were retained forvever, they'd get a Show every 3 Months, & for the Presenters in particular, that's not a sustainable model, as they have a living to earn.
I note several references to the current Presenter & Analyst Team, & also that some folks still don't know the difference.....
I can only say this. NONE of us are Guaranteed any Shows, we get given Shows, or we don't, there is NO contractual committment from Sky Poker to ourselves, none whatsoever. We all have a "Service Agreement", which states that Sky Poker MAY use our Services as & when they see fit. Personally, I'm delighted (& a little surprised) to have survived for 5 years, but equally aware that it may all end tomorrow. This is absolutely bog-standard in the TV Industry, there is nothing unfair or unusual about it, it's how the business works, we are ALL freelancers, & both parties can continue or not, as they feel fit.
Sadly, many of the Posts in this Thread seem to misunderstand the role of the Analyst. It is wider - MUCH wider - than Hand Analysis. Promoting, & promoting well, the business as a whole, sensible Bankroll Management, Community Support, & much much more, counts for just as much with Sky Poker as Hand Analysis.
Pleasing some of the people, some of the time, is do-able. All of them, all of the time, not so much.....
Thank you all for the last posts, lovely to receive such messages. Just to say again would love to see you at future live events so please so "hi" Atb to the new batch of Skypoker analysts,hope you enjoy the expierience. Posted by giddzo
giddzo hope to meet you at one off your cricket matches, are you still playing for EASTBOURNE ? also loved your quote in the local,
if so when you start can you p`m me when and where ?
T I note several references to the current Presenter & Analyst Team, & also that some folks still don't know the difference.....
Thanks Tikay, but as a viewer of the channel for 2-3 years, there doesn't seem to be much difference in the role of the two once the action starts. The "presenter" may lead in the programme and in and out of breaks but apart from that the contributions just seem to mix. For instance, James H has sat in both chairs and done more or less the same job (as far as I can tell as a viewer), and when you're on you seem to "present" as much as whoever is in the other seat (not saying that's a good or a bad thing, just an observation).
In Response to Re: Ed giddins : Thanks Tikay, but as a viewer of the channel for 2-3 years, there doesn't seem to be much difference in the role of the two once the action starts. The "presenter" may lead in the programme and in and out of breaks but apart from that the contributions just seem to mix. For instance, James H has sat in both chairs and done more or less the same job (as far as I can tell as a viewer), and when you're on you seem to "present" as much as whoever is in the other seat (not saying that's a good or a bad thing, just an observation). Posted by FCHD
It may not seem to be much different, but it is.
The "Presenter" is a professional Broadcaster, & they have a much tougher job, & get paid a great deal more, too, & quite rightly.
The Analysts are essentially, poker players, "amateur" broadcasters if you like.
Yes, James can fill BOTH roles - a rare quality indeed, as could, back in the day, Norman Pace.
I cannot think of any others who had/have the ability to do both. In emergencies, I've taken the Presenter's Seat, but I can't say I've enjoyed it, or done an acceptable job, it's chalk & cheese. I don't really want - not really able to, in truth - sit in the Presenter's Seat, it's more links, intros & outros, asking questions rather than answering them, "driving" the Show, da de da.
In Response to Re: Ed giddins : Thanks Tikay, but as a viewer of the channel for 2-3 years, there doesn't seem to be much difference in the role of the two once the action starts. The "presenter" may lead in the programme and in and out of breaks but apart from that the contributions just seem to mix. For instance, James H has sat in both chairs and done more or less the same job (as far as I can tell as a viewer), and when you're on you seem to "present" as much as whoever is in the other seat (not saying that's a good or a bad thing, just an observation). Posted by FCHD
There is a BIG difference in the roles. The presenters have far more to do, but that may not come across on screen.
Also with regards to Ed he gave some excellent analysis and he was someone that I learnt a lot from.
Def had a more mathmatically approach to the game and when I am in the analyst chair on Saturday and Sunday that is something that I hope to bring to the table.
Comments
Awful news Ed, if this was your decision then fair enough but if this was Sky's then both they and us are the poorer for it. You were IMO the best regular analyst on the channel by far and your honestly was a big part of this. Do the majority of players/customers really enjoy losing money in ignorance?
This decision, if it were Sky's, to dispense with a “real” analyst is all the more shocking when I see analysts on 865 week in week out who add nothing more than a running commentary on a hand and another who constantly refers to Omaha when we are watching hold-em.
Maybe like myself you are not everyone’s cup of tea but you will be missed by many, an earlier poster was right, the shows with yourself and Rich were the most entertaining I have seen on 865. Good at your job, honest and entertaining these must be the reasons you have gone!
Good luck in the future Ed, if I ever meet you in person I will buy you a pint, it's the least I owe you for the enjoyment and education I gained watching your shows.
Defo agree with stein here in that some analysts dont add anything other than what prob most normal regs on the site could do as well.
All the best for the future, Ed.
I,m sure we,ll see you back on there at some point in the future. I miss your shows with Rich
I heard you were running errands for Stuart baggs now
GL with the future
As I've mentioned on another thread, no other analyst gives anything like the insight into the mathematics involved in playing a hand as Ed did.
I loved Ed's honesty tbh, and i rarley watch the channel now for the reasons stated. Theres being nice and being too nice tbh. Ed imo had the balance. He said it when he felt someone played well and stated when he felt otherwise. Purley imo, you cant learn if your not told straight what your doing wrong. Ed was probably the best at that imo.
Wish you best for the future Ed.
Totally agree that people really need to be told when they make a bad play - I loved in the ME when Jen Mason said something along the lines of "I hope he hits his 10", knowing it would probably cost the player his/her tournament if they did, because they'd played the hand terribly. Some people might not have liked Luke Schwartz, but the feedback on here suggested that the majority thought he was a brilliant guest because he wasn't afraid to tell people that they were playing badly.
I appreciate that everyone responds differently to criticism, and for some people, Luke Schwartz telling them they're awful at poker wouldn't work. However, there's no balance either. At the moment, I'd say all the analysts and presenters are less critical of bad play than they could be, and having someone who isn't afraid to tell people they've played a hand terribly would provide some much-needed balance to the analysis on the channel IMO. At the end of the day, the point of the channel is both to promote Sky Poker and teach people to play better, and I think more could be done to teach people.
PS: Spot Prizes ftw
"
Very sorry to see you go but best of luck on the live circuit in the coming year!
This is a no-win situation, I'm afraid.
Again & again, when we have had Guest Analysts on the Show, players have Posted on the Forum - "can we see more of these Guest Analysts, please"?
And so Sky Poker listened, & now there will be regular, scheduled appearances (not Guest appearances) by the likes of Scotty, Redmond, Stu Rutter, Thewy, & a few others recent Guests, (again, by popular request & demand) for whom Contracts are currently being signed...
With 3 Live Shows per week, there is not room for everyone you'd like to have on the Channel, it's that simple, cake & eat it comes to mind. If every Analyst & Presenter we ever had were retained forvever, they'd get a Show every 3 Months, & for the Presenters in particular, that's not a sustainable model, as they have a living to earn.
I note several references to the current Presenter & Analyst Team, & also that some folks still don't know the difference.....
I can only say this. NONE of us are Guaranteed any Shows, we get given Shows, or we don't, there is NO contractual committment from Sky Poker to ourselves, none whatsoever. We all have a "Service Agreement", which states that Sky Poker MAY use our Services as & when they see fit. Personally, I'm delighted (& a little surprised) to have survived for 5 years, but equally aware that it may all end tomorrow. This is absolutely bog-standard in the TV Industry, there is nothing unfair or unusual about it, it's how the business works, we are ALL freelancers, & both parties can continue or not, as they feel fit.
Sadly, many of the Posts in this Thread seem to misunderstand the role of the Analyst. It is wider - MUCH wider - than Hand Analysis. Promoting, & promoting well, the business as a whole, sensible Bankroll Management, Community Support, & much much more, counts for just as much with Sky Poker as Hand Analysis.
Pleasing some of the people, some of the time, is do-able. All of them, all of the time, not so much.....
Just to say again would love to see you at future live events so please so "hi"
Atb to the new batch of Skypoker analysts,hope you enjoy the expierience.
if so when you start can you p`m me when and where ?
Thanks Tikay, but as a viewer of the channel for 2-3 years, there doesn't seem to be much difference in the role of the two once the action starts. The "presenter" may lead in the programme and in and out of breaks but apart from that the contributions just seem to mix. For instance, James H has sat in both chairs and done more or less the same job (as far as I can tell as a viewer), and when you're on you seem to "present" as much as whoever is in the other seat (not saying that's a good or a bad thing, just an observation).
The "Presenter" is a professional Broadcaster, & they have a much tougher job, & get paid a great deal more, too, & quite rightly.
The Analysts are essentially, poker players, "amateur" broadcasters if you like.
Yes, James can fill BOTH roles - a rare quality indeed, as could, back in the day, Norman Pace.
I cannot think of any others who had/have the ability to do both. In emergencies, I've taken the Presenter's Seat, but I can't say I've enjoyed it, or done an acceptable job, it's chalk & cheese. I don't really want - not really able to, in truth - sit in the Presenter's Seat, it's more links, intros & outros, asking questions rather than answering them, "driving" the Show, da de da.