[aislephive]

[ QUOTE ]
It failed because the concept was flawed. The commentary consisted of constant (and repetitive) poker lessons given by two unknown players. The talk was non-stop and frequently argumentative. It did not help that it was the same cast of players night after night.

High Stakes poker has good commentators - a witty and knowledgeable color man and a play by play guy who does not pretend to know anything. Poker after dark has a pretty good format too, with very little commentating. Both shows make the poker game the star of the show rather than the commentators. Both shows mic the players so you can hear what they are saying.

[/ QUOTE ]

You couldn't be much farther off if you tried.

The commentary, at least when it was Dave and Bart every night, was top notch. I'd take those two over AJ Benza and Gabe Kaplan any day of the week.

I'm not sure how business was going for LATB after they changed the show to subscription only, but when they were showing 10-20nl every night with the same cast and characters it was my favorite time watching LATB. When they switched it to predominantly 5/10 with unknown players and the absence of Dave is when the show went downhill, for me.

The reason that HSP and PAD are successful has more to do with super high stakes and tables full of poker superstars than the commentating. Not to mention the shows are on popular tv networks.

People who complained about paying $15 a month to watch the show and access the archives are pathetic. It was well worth the money and it was worth it just to support the show. It's a measly 15 dollars for christ sake, deal with it.