|
|
#31
02-05-2007, 03:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: What was wrong with the PPT?
[ QUOTE ]
- They need to select their featured tables better. For some reason, the PPT producers seem to think viewers like watch portly, mustachioed, nitish 55-years olds more than any of the players we see on Poker Superstars. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, I could swear they chose the feature tables based on highest mean age. The 'poker pit' on the other hand would show these great star-studded tables that any TV producer would drool over. Very strange. 
|
|
#32
02-05-2007, 05:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What was wrong with the PPT?
[ QUOTE ]
- They need to select their featured tables better. For some reason, the PPT producers seem to think viewers like watch portly, mustachioed, nitish 55-years olds more than any of the players we see on Poker Superstars. [/ QUOTE ] I LOL'd. I agree they had some kind of washed up, old players on there. Bigler, Daugherty, etc or token women like Jaffrey and Mimi Rogers . Also the freeroll aspect and small prize made the players and viewers alike take the proceedings less seriously. Add in lame commentary, piped in crowd applause, and a dingy kinda look and the show just didn't seem that exciting.
|
|
#33
02-05-2007, 07:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What was wrong with the PPT?
Actually out of all the poker TV formats, I like the WSOP the best. Norm and Lon, with their light banter and the show's side stories are the best of the lot. They also have that catchy tune as well.
Just straight poker can be dry and boring. That format with poker celebrities is only marginally better than stuff like Heartland Poker. Stab me in the eye with a table knife. I won't watch that stuff. Strangely for some reason, I like UPC Cash Poker. I think it's because of the lighting and background, it makes me feel like I'm in the poker room watching the game. Live! At the Bike has the same quality.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
