I have watched most of the new format shows. I was disappointed at the start, but they have improved greatly. And it is nice to feel that the forum views are being listened to.
So a few constructive criticisms, questions and suggestions, some of which may not win universal support.......
When a guest is an expert in a particular format of poker, should the shows content not reflect that more ?
When we have a guest on, is there room for competitions ? Nothing against them for a bit of variety, when it is a show with just presenter and in house analyst. But to me it seems to be a waste of a guests talents.
Should competitions not all be poker related ?
Is the fact that a players chipstack is not visible when a hand is in progress not making it really difficult for analysts, guests, and viewers too ?
Is the hour allowed for Top of the Pots too long? I enjoy watching it, although by its very nature most of the hands involve the same players they are usually worth watching. But generally there are about four or five hands which show interesting play, so we are too often watching hands which play themselves.
Is the selection of hands to be shown good enough ? Yes, its great being interactive and showing lots of hands requested by viewers, but it means we are showing hands where it is sometimes a case of someone just wanting to know what the other guy had. The hands have to be interesting for the analyst and other viewers too.
Are too many hands appearing without context? Too many times the analysts and guests are presented with a hand and understandably struggle to quickly identify what tournament it is from and what stage the tourny is at.
Could not more be done to please those of us who particularly enjoy watching tournaments ? A tournament is a progressive thing. Showing hands out of order and context at the end of the show is not satisfying. At least one night a week would it not be possible to dedicate a couple of hours to a particular tournament ?
And finally, could Aussie please correct the spelling of Emperor ? Each time I view this thread it brings out the grumpy old pedantic penguin in me !
I have watched most of the new format shows. I was disappointed at the start, but they have improved greatly. And it is nice to feel that the forum views are being listened to. So a few constructive criticisms, questions and suggestions, some of which may not win universal support....... When a guest is an expert in a particular format of poker, should the shows content not reflect that more ? When we have a guest on, is there room for competitions ? Nothing against them for a bit of variety, when it is a show with just presenter and in house analyst. But to me it seems to be a waste of a guests talents. Should competitions not all be poker related ? Is the fact that a players chipstack is not visible when a hand is in progress not making it really difficult for analysts, guests, and viewers too ? Is the hour allowed for Top of the Pots too long? I enjoy watching it, although by its very nature most of the hands involve the same players they are usually worth watching. But generally there are about four or five hands which show interesting play, so we are too often watching hands which play themselves. Is the selection of hands to be shown good enough ? Yes, its great being interactive and showing lots of hands requested by viewers, but it means we are showing hands where it is sometimes a case of someone just wanting to know what the other guy had. The hands have to be interesting for the analyst and other viewers too. Are too many hands appearing without context? Too many times the analysts and guests are presented with a hand and understandably struggle to quickly identify what tournament it is from and what stage the tourny is at. Could not more be done to please those of us who particularly enjoy watching tournaments ? A tournament is a progressive thing. Showing hands out of order and context at the end of the show is not satisfying. At least one night a week would it not be possible to dedicate a couple of hours to a particular tournament ? And finally, could Aussie please correct the spelling of Emperor ? Each time I view this thread it brings out the grumpy old pedantic penguin in me ! Posted by penguin7
be carefull, you know what happened to the last penguin !:))
I have watched most of the new format shows. I was disappointed at the start, but they have improved greatly. And it is nice to feel that the forum views are being listened to. So a few constructive criticisms, questions and suggestions, some of which may not win universal support....... When a guest is an expert in a particular format of poker, should the shows content not reflect that more ? When we have a guest on, is there room for competitions ? Nothing against them for a bit of variety, when it is a show with just presenter and in house analyst. But to me it seems to be a waste of a guests talents. Should competitions not all be poker related ? Is the fact that a players chipstack is not visible when a hand is in progress not making it really difficult f. or analysts, guests, and viewers too ? Is the hour allowed for Top of the Pots too long? I enjoy watching it, although by its very nature most of the hands involve the same players they are usually worth watching. But generally there are about four or five hands which show interesting play, so we are too often watching hands which play themselves. Is the selection of hands to be shown good enough ? Yes, its great being interactive and showing lots of hands requested by viewers, but it means we are showing hands where it is sometimes a case of someone just wanting to know what the other guy had. The hands have to be interesting for the analyst and other viewers too. Are too many hands appearing without context? Too many times the analysts and guests are presented with a hand and understandably struggle to quickly identify what tournament it is from and what stage the tourny is at. Could not more be done to please those of us who particularly enjoy watching tournaments ? A tournament is a progressive thing. Showing hands out of order and context at the end of the show is not satisfying. At least one night a week would it not be possible to dedicate a couple of hours to a particular tournament ? And finally, could Aussie please correct the spelling of Emperor ? Each time I view this thread it brings out the grumpy old pedantic penguin in me ! Posted by penguin7
One big thing for me when it comes to hand analysis is the stack size, when the table is shown the bet sizes aren't there in the middle of the hand, This is often crutial in making comments regarding the hand in progress.
I do love the new format though and it's getting better all the time
Penguin7 your post was great and exactly what we need to see!
I think this is now my longest post ever, but answers below.
Thanks and let me know your thoughts on it!
When a guest is an expert in a particular format of poker, should the shows content not reflect that more ?Ideally yes. The thing we are struggling with at the moment is people’s availability or reliability. We all know what poker players are like . Definitely working on this though!We also have to submit the TV schedules to transmission over a month in advance, for example the whole of March has already been sent. Therefore if you change the names of the show etc it’s a ridiculous amount of work, I’m talking days. This one is a little out of our hands, but we should adjust Sky Poker Schools to suit the guest. When we have a guest on, is there room for competitions ? Nothing against them for a bit of variety, when it is a show with just presenter and in house analyst. But to me it seems to be a waste of a guests talents.We can do competitions when guests are in but maybe adjust them around questions based on that person or the show content. Does make more sense to have competitions on the night when there is no guest.
Should competitions not all be poker related?Difficult one really. Some people think more people some want more entertainment. Was discussing some ideas with Orford the other day, but any quiz ideas people have do let us know
Is the fact that a players chipstack is not visible when a hand is in progress not making it really difficult for analysts, guests, and viewers too ?We are in the process of redesigning the onscreen table graphic (plus a few other exciting changes) and this will be added. Turn around is about 16 weeks as all the information has to be rebuilt. A little painful but at least it’s happening
Is the hour allowed for Top of the Pots too long? I enjoy watching it, although by its very nature most of the hands involve the same players they are usually worth watching. But generally there are about four or five hands which show interesting play, so we are too often watching hands which play themselves.Again a difficult one as some people love this show. Also depending on what’s happened on the tables some week we have great hands to show, others can be a little flat.
Is the selection of hands to be shown good enough ? Yes, its great being interactive and showing lots of hands requested by viewers, but it means we are showing hands where it is sometimes a case of someone just wanting to know what the other guy had. The hands have to be interesting for the analyst and other viewers too.Very true! Something we are working on with the hand selection, but as always if the viewers are involved or see something interesting get those hand ID’s in. Are too many hands appearing without context? Too many times the analysts and guests are presented with a hand and understandably struggle to quickly identify what tournament it is from and what stage the tourny is at.Scratching my head on this as might help when we redesign the tables and have tournament ID’s on them etc. Let me look into it. Could not more be done to please those of us who particularly enjoy watching tournaments ? A tournament is a progressive thing. Showing hands out of order and context at the end of the show is not satisfying. At least one night a week would it not be possible to dedicate a couple of hours to a particular tournament ?For the moment we could try to place more tournament hands in the first hour or part of SPS, Analyse My Play. However they wouldn’t be ‘live’. However if a few months down the line we don’t think certain parts of the programmes are working can definitely consider having this as a ‘live’ tournament hand section
One big thing for me when it comes to hand analysis is the stack size, when the table is shown the bet sizes aren't there in the middle of the hand, This is often crutial in making comments regarding the hand in progress. I do love the new format though and it's getting better all the time Posted by JockBMW
Hi Jock
Have a look at my reply to Penguin above as the tables are currently being redesigned to feature this
Given how successful the new format has been with regards to viewing figures, and the increase in number of analysts recently, what are the chances of Sky Poker broadcasting live more than 3 days a week?
Given how successful the new format has been with regards to viewing figures, and the increase in number of analysts recently, what are the chances of Sky Poker broadcasting live more than 3 days a week? Posted by EvilPingu
Programme 1 - One hour Final Table play from the previous live tournament evening. Programme 4 & 5 - Two hours "live" play from the evening's tournament.
then when you wish to schedule repeats you can sequence them so that Programme 4 & 5 is followed by Programme 1 from the subsequent live evening.
In Response to Re: 5 Hours of Live TV on 865 - Emporer's New Clothes : In my personal opinion, I think you're missing the point a little too, Rob. It's not a case of Sky Poker being ignorant of one set of views or another. At the end of the day though, the posts here are a certain type of viewer and a relatively small percentage of the total viewing figures. That's not to say we don't appreciate the views of you guys, as you're our most vocal and often best reasoned. But we have to taken a fuller view of Sky Poker TV and what it aims to achieve. A key part of Sky Poker TV's proposition is around education, and I don't think you can really teach as well in some formats. The one thing I think you can guarantee is that solid amounts of market research with customers - of differing backgrounds and skill levels - would have been conducted. After all, the move to the new studios needed signing off and rubber stamping from people pretty high up in BSkyB. They would want to see concrete reasons for something of this magnitude and details of the move, the reasons for it, and how it would be executed. I (on a personal level and not with my Sky t-shirt on, for a second) think the new format shows are more interesting and allow us to use the talent and analysts FAR better. Subjects such as BRM, floating, multitabling, etc etc.... whatever floats the strategy boat - can be given a fuller treatment, rather than being wedged in between hands from a tournament. Those clips can then be re-used throughout the week in one hour segments that make the repeats more varied. Remember how many people used to say "I don't want to tune in and see a repeat of a tourney from four days ago."? The new format tackles that and so much more. This is another example of a subject that people clearly feel strongly about. That's a good thing, as far as I see it. Posted by Sky_Dave
Do people really want to see repeats at all?
If i was a regular viewer I'd rather know from the start whether I have seen an "episode" before as I'd never want to watch a repeat, for me having a bunch of different shows some of which may have been seen before and others not would just get annoying and stop me from bothering
Thanks for your replies, Claire. I believe getting those chipstacks visible will make a big difference. When you get the omaha going dont forget us hilo guys !
Thanks for your replies, Claire. I believe getting those chipstacks visible will make a big difference. When you get the omaha going dont forget us hilo guys ! Posted by penguin7
For me I think it is the word 'LIVE' that is perhaps causing the possible confusion or opposing expectations.
When I see the word 'LIVE' in the programme title, I instantly expect to be tuning in to see a programme built around live coverage of that nights big event and if I am honest that is why I would tune into an 865 'LIVE' show.
Apologies for using a football analogy, but I think the audience and product have quite a few similarities.
Maybe it is SKY and its coverage of football that is to blame for planting the seed of misconception of what 'LIVE' should be!
As part of the complete SKY football package they have some excellent programmes.
Saturday morning brings us Soccer AM, (actually this is live, but they are excused of any misrepresentation as they don't call the programme 'Soccer Live'.
Saturday afternoon we have the excellent 'Gillette Soccer Saturday', this covers all the 3.00pm live games for the day, (another live programme, but this focuses solely on the live games of the day).
Saturday evening we get 'Football First', a chance to watch a game from earlier in the day (nothing live here).
Sunday morning brings us the Sunday Supplement, no live action here but plenty of analysis and insight from the games top journalists.
Sunday afternoon brings us 'Live Super Sunday', usually with 2 live games, certainly no recorded hilights from a game from midweek. The programme focuses 99% on the afternoons live action.
The same focus of attention applies for the various midweek 'LIVE' Programmes, 99% focus on that nights action.
***
SKY Poker has to its credit put together it's own mix of quality programmes to suit a varied audience sharing an interest in poker, though the key to all great sports packages and coverage is the 'LIVE' element.
For me a broadcast of Sky Poker 'LIVE', should be closer to the equivalent of Sky's soccer Saturday with the poker version of Jeff Stelling and the boys, providing plenty of banter, reports and analysis of the nights main tournaments, not the weekly edition of Sunday Supplement
Why not 4 guys / girls with laptops (or is it Ipads) focusing on 4 tables each from that nights tournaments?
You have a depth of varied quality presenters, players and analysts who I am sure could make the coverage of an online tournament both enjoyable to watch on an entertainment level but also on an educational / tutorial level in picking up on certain players successful strategy to going deep into tourney's and at the other end of the poker tourney spectrum, why certain players are not getting to the business end of the tourney.
There's countless options of how to spruce up the coverage, bringing personalities and audience participation to the forefront, side bets, side competitions, last longer tips, players in form, great play, bad play, bad beats, players most likely to succeed, players who are consistent, players who are erratic, etc. etc.
This should avoid some of the lame 'live coverage' we have now where people are asking for hands to be shown, where as Ryan alluded to, in isolation there isn't actually much of a story behind most of these hands, or the other pet hate I have which is people folding in a hand and then asking for the hand to be shown so they can see what the other player had (after the tourney OK, but not whilst the players are still in the tourney, please!).
All of this is not meant to detract from what are some quality programmes being put together at the moment, they should all have their place in the viewing schedule for Sky Poker.
But at the moment it feels like Sky Football in the summer, by the end of July, I can't wait for the live coverage to start again!
I agree. Ed Giddins telling his stories between poker hands ftw.. Posted by FINS
+1 - It does seem a little more serious now and reckon ppl watching for the first time would be a little bemused by it. When Orford and Giddins were on even my m8,s would put up with it who arn,t into really into poker. Hopefully we,ll see him back soon even if its just for a guest show or 2
Comments
So a few constructive criticisms, questions and suggestions, some of which may not win universal support.......
When a guest is an expert in a particular format of poker, should the shows content not reflect that more ?
When we have a guest on, is there room for competitions ? Nothing against them for a bit of variety, when it is a show with just presenter and in house analyst. But to me it seems to be a waste of a guests talents.
Should competitions not all be poker related ?
Is the fact that a players chipstack is not visible when a hand is in progress not making it really difficult for analysts, guests, and viewers too ?
Is the hour allowed for Top of the Pots too long? I enjoy watching it, although by its very nature most of the hands involve the same players they are usually worth watching.
But generally there are about four or five hands which show interesting play, so we are too often watching hands which play themselves.
Is the selection of hands to be shown good enough ? Yes, its great being interactive and showing lots of hands requested by viewers, but it means we are showing hands where it is sometimes a case of someone just wanting to know what the other guy had. The hands have to be interesting for the analyst and other viewers too.
Are too many hands appearing without context? Too many times the analysts and guests are presented with a hand and understandably struggle to quickly identify what tournament it is from and what stage the tourny is at.
Could not more be done to please those of us who particularly enjoy watching tournaments ? A tournament is a progressive thing. Showing hands out of order and context at the end of the show is not satisfying. At least one night a week would it not be possible to dedicate a couple of hours to a particular tournament ?
And finally, could Aussie please correct the spelling of Emperor ? Each time I view this thread it brings out the grumpy old pedantic penguin in me !
I think this is now my longest post ever, but answers below.
Thanks and let me know your thoughts on it!
When a guest is an expert in a particular format of poker, should the shows content not reflect that more ?Ideally yes. The thing we are struggling with at the moment is people’s availability or reliability. We all know what poker players are like
When we have a guest on, is there room for competitions ? Nothing against them for a bit of variety, when it is a show with just presenter and in house analyst. But to me it seems to be a waste of a guests talents.We can do competitions when guests are in but maybe adjust them around questions based on that person or the show content. Does make more sense to have competitions on the night when there is no guest.
Should competitions not all be poker related?Difficult one really. Some people think more people some want more entertainment. Was discussing some ideas with Orford the other day, but any quiz ideas people have do let us know
Is the fact that a players chipstack is not visible when a hand is in progress not making it really difficult for analysts, guests, and viewers too ?We are in the process of redesigning the onscreen table graphic (plus a few other exciting changes) and this will be added. Turn around is about 16 weeks as all the information has to be rebuilt. A little painful but at least it’s happening
Is the hour allowed for Top of the Pots too long? I enjoy watching it, although by its very nature most of the hands involve the same players they are usually worth watching.
But generally there are about four or five hands which show interesting play, so we are too often watching hands which play themselves.Again a difficult one as some people love this show. Also depending on what’s happened on the tables some week we have great hands to show, others can be a little flat.
Is the selection of hands to be shown good enough ? Yes, its great being interactive and showing lots of hands requested by viewers, but it means we are showing hands where it is sometimes a case of someone just wanting to know what the other guy had. The hands have to be interesting for the analyst and other viewers too.Very true! Something we are working on with the hand selection, but as always if the viewers are involved or see something interesting get those hand ID’s in.
Are too many hands appearing without context? Too many times the analysts and guests are presented with a hand and understandably struggle to quickly identify what tournament it is from and what stage the tourny is at.Scratching my head on this as might help when we redesign the tables and have tournament ID’s on them etc. Let me look into it.
Could not more be done to please those of us who particularly enjoy watching tournaments ? A tournament is a progressive thing. Showing hands out of order and context at the end of the show is not satisfying. At least one night a week would it not be possible to dedicate a couple of hours to a particular tournament ?For the moment we could try to place more tournament hands in the first hour or part of SPS, Analyse My Play. However they wouldn’t be ‘live’. However if a few months down the line we don’t think certain parts of the programmes are working can definitely consider having this as a ‘live’ tournament hand section
Have a look at my reply to Penguin above as the tables are currently being redesigned to feature this
Thanks
How about...
Programme 1 - One hour Final Table play from the previous live tournament evening.
Programme 4 & 5 - Two hours "live" play from the evening's tournament.
then when you wish to schedule repeats you can sequence them so that Programme 4 & 5 is followed by Programme 1 from the subsequent live evening.
If i was a regular viewer I'd rather know from the start whether I have seen an "episode" before as I'd never want to watch a repeat, for me having a bunch of different shows some of which may have been seen before and others not would just get annoying and stop me from bothering
When I see the word 'LIVE' in the programme title, I instantly expect to be tuning in to see a programme built around live coverage of that nights big event and if I am honest that is why I would tune into an 865 'LIVE' show.
Apologies for using a football analogy, but I think the audience and product have quite a few similarities.
Maybe it is SKY and its coverage of football that is to blame for planting the seed of misconception of what 'LIVE' should be!
As part of the complete SKY football package they have some excellent programmes.
Saturday morning brings us Soccer AM, (actually this is live, but they are excused of any misrepresentation as they don't call the programme 'Soccer Live'.
Saturday afternoon we have the excellent 'Gillette Soccer Saturday', this covers all the 3.00pm live games for the day, (another live programme, but this focuses solely on the live games of the day).
Saturday evening we get 'Football First', a chance to watch a game from earlier in the day (nothing live here).
Sunday morning brings us the Sunday Supplement, no live action here but plenty of analysis and insight from the games top journalists.
Sunday afternoon brings us 'Live Super Sunday', usually with 2 live games, certainly no recorded hilights from a game from midweek. The programme focuses 99% on the afternoons live action.
The same focus of attention applies for the various midweek 'LIVE' Programmes, 99% focus on that nights action.
***
SKY Poker has to its credit put together it's own mix of quality programmes to suit a varied audience sharing an interest in poker, though the key to all great sports packages and coverage is the 'LIVE' element.
For me a broadcast of Sky Poker 'LIVE', should be closer to the equivalent of Sky's soccer Saturday with the poker version of Jeff Stelling and the boys, providing plenty of banter, reports and analysis of the nights main tournaments, not the weekly edition of Sunday Supplement
Why not 4 guys / girls with laptops (or is it Ipads) focusing on 4 tables each from that nights tournaments?
You have a depth of varied quality presenters, players and analysts who I am sure could make the coverage of an online tournament both enjoyable to watch on an entertainment level but also on an educational / tutorial level in picking up on certain players successful strategy to going deep into tourney's and at the other end of the poker tourney spectrum, why certain players are not getting to the business end of the tourney.
There's countless options of how to spruce up the coverage, bringing personalities and audience participation to the forefront, side bets, side competitions, last longer tips, players in form, great play, bad play, bad beats, players most likely to succeed, players who are consistent, players who are erratic, etc. etc.
This should avoid some of the lame 'live coverage' we have now where people are asking for hands to be shown, where as Ryan alluded to, in isolation there isn't actually much of a story behind most of these hands, or the other pet hate I have which is people folding in a hand and then asking for the hand to be shown so they can see what the other player had (after the tourney OK, but not whilst the players are still in the tourney, please!).
All of this is not meant to detract from what are some quality programmes being put together at the moment, they should all have their place in the viewing schedule for Sky Poker.
But at the moment it feels like Sky Football in the summer, by the end of July, I can't wait for the live coverage to start again!
When Orford and Giddins were on even my m8,s would put up with it who arn,t into really into poker. Hopefully we,ll see him back soon even if its just for a guest show or 2
MP