blonde poker forum

Poker Forums => The Rail => Topic started by: The Camel on September 24, 2012, 04:01:33 PM



Title: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 24, 2012, 04:01:33 PM
Last week I got in a bit of a tizzy about showing my hole cards on a live stream at the EPO.

Although the stream was delayed by 30 minutes, the players at the table were constantly checking their iphones to find out what players held in specific hands.

I think this is fundamentally wrong.

I don't want the other players to know what I rock I am.

Showing of cards totally changes the game imo and shouldn't be allowed.

I have added two polls, one for the players and one for the viewers to see if they have the same issues I do.

While I don't expect to change the minds of Fox or Grosvenor, I would hope if enough people agree with me, DTD might change their minds about showing hole cards in their live streams.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: smashedagain on September 24, 2012, 04:35:24 PM
I commend you for having the balls to go against the organisers and not show your cards Keith. Having spent so much money on the equipment I can't honestly see Dtd not showing the cards tho. I just don't think it makes for good viewing for joe public either.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 24, 2012, 05:30:36 PM
I commend you for having the balls to go against the organisers and not show your cards Keith. Having spent so much money on the equipment I can't honestly see Dtd not showing the cards tho. I just don't think it makes for good viewing for joe public either.

I think the thing that is being forgotten is the players and the integrity of the tournament are much more important than a live stream.

We are playing for tens of thousands of pounds and the showing of cards definitely affects the flow and course of the game.

Ridiculous really.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: tikay on September 24, 2012, 05:32:40 PM
I commend you for having the balls to go against the organisers and not show your cards Keith. Having spent so much money on the equipment I can't honestly see Dtd not showing the cards tho. I just don't think it makes for good viewing for joe public either.

I think the thing that is being forgotten is the players and the integrity of the tournament are much more important than a live stream.

We are playing for tens of thousands of pounds and the showing of cards definitely affects the flow and course of the game.

Ridiculous really.

....and the PLAYERS have paid an Entry Fee, + the Reg Fee, & get zilch back in recompense, whilst the stream viewers have paid nothing. I believe the players have "rights", whilst the stream viewers do not. 


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: action man on September 24, 2012, 05:33:20 PM
the viewers probably put more in the pool than the players


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: TightEnd on September 24, 2012, 05:54:19 PM
I think that as long as the organisers take the necessary steps to protect the integrity of the game, and make sure the players on a feature are all on the same footing, then its fine

So communication devices need to be taken off players until they are knocked out from a final feature table or players sequestered throughout

DTD does this. Furthermore you cannot access the stream if you are on the premises, whether on the rail or the table with the exception of a locked commentary room in an office

If this is not done, then the only solution is to show the stream in the club for all feature player tables to see (if hole cards are still being shown)

My problem with the EPO was that some players had info others did not

DTD have spent extensively on stream equipment but don't have the problems experienced last week in my opinion


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: Boba Fett on September 24, 2012, 05:57:08 PM
Could always just go back to the days where people show up to play poker tournaments and nobody in the world outside of the casino cares whats going on


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: Dewi_cool on September 24, 2012, 06:11:15 PM
Don't agree with showing hole cards, & I much prefer watching streams without too.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: smashedagain on September 24, 2012, 06:18:15 PM
I think that as long as the organisers take the necessary steps to protect the integrity of the game, and make sure the players on a feature are all on the same footing, then its fine

So communication devices need to be taken off players until they are knocked out from a final feature table or players sequestered throughout

DTD does this. Furthermore you cannot access the stream if you are on the premises, whether on the rail or the table with the exception of a locked commentary room in an office

If this is not done, then the only solution is to show the stream in the club for all feature player tables to see (if hole cards are still being shown)

My problem with the EPO was that some players had info others did not

DTD have spent extensively on stream equipment but don't have the problems experienced last week in my opinion
mates are still passing information onto players whilst they are railing at Dtd. They just have a mate at home watching who tells the railer the score who then relays the information to the player. They don't even wait for the break to do this and quite often you see players not involved in the hand out if their seats and on the rail chatting to mates.
Dtd do take more steps than most to preserve the integrity of the game but unless they have a seperate room for the feed table, what can they do?


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: CHIPPYMAN on September 24, 2012, 06:51:05 PM
I commend you for having the balls to go against the organisers and not show your cards Keith. Having spent so much money on the equipment I can't honestly see Dtd not showing the cards tho. I just don't think it makes for good viewing for joe public either.

I think the thing that is being forgotten is the players and the integrity of the tournament are much more important than a live stream.

We are playing for tens of thousands of pounds and the showing of cards definitely affects the flow and course of the game.

Ridiculous really.

....and the PLAYERS have paid an Entry Fee, + the Reg Fee, & get zilch back in recompense, whilst the stream viewers have paid nothing. I believe the players have "rights", whilst the stream viewers do not. 


 ;iagree; ;iagree; ;cheerleader; ;cheerleader;


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: cambridgealex on September 24, 2012, 06:57:28 PM
It doesn't bother me one bit.

Streams without hole cards require really good commentators to keep it interesting in my opinion, and they seem to be hard to come by these days.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: nirvana on September 24, 2012, 07:00:19 PM
Personally, I don't really care either way,

So few hands are played I'm not sure there's enough data to turn this into usable information.. even for very clev people.

Pretty sure most of us are already stereotyped by our competition, to a point where the actual cards won't change initial perceptions all that much


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: h on September 24, 2012, 07:05:14 PM
Cards should not be shown IMO

"DTD have spent extensively on stream equipment but don't have the problems experienced last week in my opinion "

  the same problem just less obvious IMO with hole cards shown your actions can potentially be viewed analysed  by a team of players and feed back to your opponents


The Camel exercised a choice  chose not to show

with the technology DTD uses i am not sure a player could opt out of showing


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: skolsuper on September 24, 2012, 08:00:22 PM
Personally, I don't really care either way,

So few hands are played I'm not sure there's enough data to turn this into usable information.. even for very clev people.

Pretty sure most of us are already stereotyped by our competition, to a point where the actual cards won't change initial perceptions all that much

agree with nirvana as usual


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: luckyblind on September 24, 2012, 08:17:35 PM
Interesting debate!

Fair play to you Keith for getting away with not showing your cards, did you actually sign a waiver that said you were required to at the beginning of the tournament?

I have to say that if it was at a tournament that I organised and you signed the waiver you would have been first warned, if you carried on given a penalty and if you persisted after that disqualified. As far I see it is the same as breaking any other tournament rule.

We do get asked occasionally by players who are about to sign these at our events if we will enforce it (we would) and I can only recall one occasion that the player decided not to play rather than sign it.

Personally I think there are better ways to make a live stream more interesting than showing hole cards. However when we live stream an event we do so at the organisers spec and if that includes having hole cards on a delay then that is their choice. The only event that we organise as well as stream that has hole cards is Goliath and I think that is the kind of event it should be reserved for. I also think that events shown live to a massive audience on TV or like the WSOP benefit but I think they should be filmed in a segregated area with no access to the stream or outside world. If you are not segregating then everybody should have access to the stream as it is broadcast. We have displayed a delayed stream in the room before and it went down very well.

At the end of the day the usual rules of supply & demand will come into effect and hole-cards will only be not shown on a regular basis if a) the players stop turning up because of it or b) the organisers decide it is not worth the cost.

In the UK at the moment players have the best choice they have ever had. With the likes of Dtd, Grosvenor, Genting and Pokerstars all either guaranteeing or adding money to events there has never been so much value or choice for the players. This will only stay if the organisers feel that the cost/risks are worth it. Part of the reason they do it is for exposure and live streams are part of exploiting this. Some obviously feel that hole-cards make a big difference, some not. I am sure debates like this will help along the way to how things develop for the future but to say players get nothing in return is not looking at the big picture. There are no games without someone to organise them.

Alex's point is very relevant and I am sure one of the reasons why hole-cards are so popular. A good commentator costs a lot more than having the hole-card technology...

DtD use the same technology as the EPO & ourselves, to not show your cards you just have to make sure they do not go on the RFID reader in front of you.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: skolsuper on September 24, 2012, 08:27:16 PM
How about everyone's cards are hidden by default but viewers of the live stream can pay say 10p to look at a certain hand, and then that 10p goes to the player. The players get rewarded for providing entertainment and the viewers get to see all the hands they want almost for free.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 24, 2012, 08:43:42 PM
Interesting debate!

Fair play to you Keith for getting away with not showing your cards, did you actually sign a waiver that said you were required to at the beginning of the tournament?

I have to say that if it was at a tournament that I organised and you signed the waiver you would have been first warned, if you carried on given a penalty and if you persisted after that disqualified. As far I see it is the same as breaking any other tournament rule.

We do get asked occasionally by players who are about to sign these at our events if we will enforce it (we would) and I can only recall one occasion that the player decided not to play rather than sign it.

Personally I think there are better ways to make a live stream more interesting than showing hole cards. However when we live stream an event we do so at the organisers spec and if that includes having hole cards on a delay then that is their choice. The only event that we organise as well as stream that has hole cards is Goliath and I think that is the kind of event it should be reserved for. I also think that events shown live to a massive audience on TV or like the WSOP benefit but I think they should be filmed in a segregated area with no access to the stream or outside world. If you are not segregating then everybody should have access to the stream as it is broadcast. We have displayed a delayed stream in the room before and it went down very well.

At the end of the day the usual rules of supply & demand will come into effect and hole-cards will only be not shown on a regular basis if a) the players stop turning up because of it or b) the organisers decide it is not worth the cost.

In the UK at the moment players have the best choice they have ever had. With the likes of Dtd, Grosvenor, Genting and Pokerstars all either guaranteeing or adding money to events there has never been so much value or choice for the players. This will only stay if the organisers feel that the cost/risks are worth it. Part of the reason they do it is for exposure and live streams are part of exploiting this. Some obviously feel that hole-cards make a big difference, some not. I am sure debates like this will help along the way to how things develop for the future but to say players get nothing in return is not looking at the big picture. There are no games without someone to organise them.

Alex's point is very relevant and I am sure one of the reasons why hole-cards are so popular. A good commentator costs a lot more than having the hole-card technology...

DtD use the same technology as the EPO & ourselves, to not show your cards you just have to make sure they do not go on the RFID reader in front of you.

No, I didn't sign a waiver. Obviously would have shown my cards if I had.

I would probably have grumpily agreed to show my cards if they had added money to the pool.

Interested to know what the viewing figures for these live streams are?

I've very rarely watched one, would only do so if I had a % of someone in a final. And would definitely never watch a stream before the ft. Far too boring.

Prefer written and interactive updates by far.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: luckyblind on September 24, 2012, 08:59:02 PM


No, I didn't sign a waiver. Obviously would have shown my cards if I had.

I would probably have grumpily agreed to show my cards if they had added money to the pool.

Interested to know what the viewing figures for these live streams are?

I've very rarely watched one, would only do so if I had a % of someone in a final. And would definitely never watch a stream before the ft. Far too boring.

Prefer written and interactive updates by far.

Well if you didn't sign a waiver there's not much they can do.

Obviously I can't publish viewing figures without consent of clients but the lowest we ever had was 700 uniques for a weekend and the most was 20k in a day. There is usually a lot more viewers watching online than there is at the venue. Due to the niche nature I would expect them all to be valid opportunities for marketing compared to a minutely small % of viewers watching a mainstream TV show. On average a viewer watches around an hour of a full day stream.

Other than professional interest I only watch a stream if a good friend or someone I have a % in is playing. After spending my early poker career as an updater I have seen enough poker hands to last me a lifetime. When I first got into the game I watched all the TV shows with great interest but now it is very rare that I continue watching  stream after I have got all the info I need from it. Sometimes if Jesse, Padraig or Neil are on good form I might stay listening for entertainment.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: Karabiner on September 24, 2012, 09:30:07 PM
I must say that ever since they were introduced I have felt uncomfortable about cards that can be identified by the individual micro-chips in them far more than the regular decks which are only seen via the under-table cameras and which can be avoided if so desired.

Does anyone else share my concern or am I being paranoid?


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: ripple11 on September 24, 2012, 09:31:25 PM

So few hands are played I'm not sure there's enough data to turn this into usable information.. even for very clev people.

Pretty sure most of us are already stereotyped by our competition, to a point where the actual cards won't change initial perceptions all that much

good point.

Also it would good tournament practice if the players/table changed regularly to nullify as much as possible, any information being accessed.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: tikay on September 24, 2012, 09:33:52 PM
I must say that ever since they were introduced I have felt uncomfortable about cards that can be identified by the individual micro-chips in them far more than the regular decks which are only seen via the under-table cameras and which can be avoided if so desired.

Does anyone else share my concern or am I being paranoid?

You can, if you so wish, easily " mask" the cards with your hands to hide them from the card-reader.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: action man on September 24, 2012, 09:40:05 PM
surely this si a case of vote with feet?


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: luckyblind on September 24, 2012, 09:55:46 PM
I must say that ever since they were introduced I have felt uncomfortable about cards that can be identified by the individual micro-chips in them far more than the regular decks which are only seen via the under-table cameras and which can be avoided if so desired.

Does anyone else share my concern or am I being paranoid?

The reader that takes the information of the chip on the card will only pick the data up if it is in very close proximity to the cards. If a more powerful reader (i don't know if they exist or not) was used by someone to try and get the info on what cards a player had then it would pick up all the cards on the table and be useless to them. Plus the chip is basically a long barcode and only the computer that is used for the table knows what barcode matches each card.

When we do this the computer that does all the reading of cards and graphic generation is not network connected so it cannot be hacked by anyone.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: MANTIS01 on September 24, 2012, 10:34:51 PM
I think that as long as the organisers take the necessary steps to protect the integrity of the game, and make sure the players on a feature are all on the same footing, then its fine

So communication devices need to be taken off players until they are knocked out from a final feature table or players sequestered throughout

DTD does this. Furthermore you cannot access the stream if you are on the premises, whether on the rail or the table with the exception of a locked commentary room in an office

If this is not done, then the only solution is to show the stream in the club for all feature player tables to see (if hole cards are still being shown)

My problem with the EPO was that some players had info others did not

DTD have spent extensively on stream equipment but don't have the problems experienced last week in my opinion

I would say building an image and being aware of that image are two fundamental elements of good poker, esp in the live game with people watching you closely. When hole card information is available it interferes with that process of building an image. So if for eg I want to build a tight image it's kinda inconvenient that the organisers show my oppos mid-game that isn't the case. And if I don't know whether or not other players have accessed my hole card info I wont have a clue how I appear to the various people at the table. Did seat 2 see my bluff or does he still think I had the nuts?

Before streams a player could build and trade off a chosen image and that player could be certain how he appeared to his oppos because all the info was there at the table. Anybody who organises a comp and then interferes with such basic elements of the game can't be regarded as taking steps to protect the integrity of the game.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: Karabiner on September 24, 2012, 10:41:44 PM
I must say that ever since they were introduced I have felt uncomfortable about cards that can be identified by the individual micro-chips in them far more than the regular decks which are only seen via the under-table cameras and which can be avoided if so desired.

Does anyone else share my concern or am I being paranoid?

The reader that takes the information of the chip on the card will only pick the data up if it is in very close proximity to the cards. If a more powerful reader (i don't know if they exist or not) was used by someone to try and get the info on what cards a player had then it would pick up all the cards on the table and be useless to them. Plus the chip is basically a long barcode and only the computer that is used for the table knows what barcode matches each card.

When we do this the computer that does all the reading of cards and graphic generation is not network connected so it cannot be hacked by anyone.

Thanks for the explanation, I feel a little more comfortable with them now.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: BorntoBubble on September 24, 2012, 11:21:31 PM
As a recreational player i think its very good for the game if i make a feature table then my friends and family will log in, the same friends and family maybe the people that ending up punting money into poker and with new money in the game it lines the pockets of the pros. I think the game needs things like this to get new players involved and sometimes the pros are going to have to sacrifice there imagine for 100 or so hands for the good of the game. These kind of things will get new players playing which is always good for the game. The key for me is when live streams are showing people should be using social media to get those outside of the poker world watching.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: DMorgan on September 25, 2012, 01:58:38 AM
How about everyone that wants to watch the stream has to chip in 5p

Then they can distribute those 5ps to all the players. Then the players have been compensated for the equity loss of having hole card cams and have made enough profit to buy a Curly Wurly on the way home too.

Magic.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: rfgqqabc on September 25, 2012, 02:05:40 AM
How about everyone that wants to watch the stream has to chip in 5p

Then they can distribute those 5ps to all the players. Then the players have been compensated for the equity loss of having hole card cams and have made enough profit to buy a Curly Wurly on the way home too.

Magic.


Much prefer to have any equity lost paid directly in Curly Wurlys at the table.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: scotty77 on September 25, 2012, 02:07:42 AM
Anything that increases exposure of the game is a good thing and live streams with hole cards are obv what people want.  It's clearly good for the game and I think that the information that can be gleaned during a few hours at a feature table is marginal at best.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: shipitonetime on September 25, 2012, 02:21:26 AM
Anything that increases exposure of the game is a good thing and live streams with hole cards are obv what people want.  It's clearly good for the game and I think that the information that can be gleaned during a few hours at a feature table is marginal at best.

This!


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 25, 2012, 03:01:13 AM
Anything that increases exposure of the game is a good thing and live streams with hole cards are obv what people want.  It's clearly good for the game and I think that the information that can be gleaned during a few hours at a feature table is marginal at best.

It's not looking like the players "obv want" hole cards to be seen.

4:1 against in the players poll atm.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: Yian on September 25, 2012, 03:52:02 AM
Surprised to read a couple posts to say otherwise but still pretty sure that a hefty majority of viewers would want hole cards for sure. I think a lot of people would tune out without hole cards especially when commentary is normally dull inaccurate babbling about poker, bad strategy theories and constant drops about their own poker career, what they once did and who they used to know (DTD and WSOP coverage excluded).

Why do we want people to keep watching these streams? Because the allure of not only the money and glory advertised but the apparent minimal feeling of fame by being on a live streamed final table is enough to entice their narcissistic personality needs. More people wanting to take their shot is good for the game, right?

So keep the hole cards display but do everything to defend the integrity of the game. Although it's not nice to have your phone taken off you, do this and maybe disable the wifi access to players in the club for the duration of the final table. I suppose there is still a way around this getting a mate from home texting a mate on the rail to feed the info to the participant but increasing the hurdles should reduce the likeliness of it. At DTD the rail is pretty intimate surrounding the FT; maybe they will reconsider the positioning of the feature table where the railers can't be so close to the action. I seem to remember some controversy about alleged signalling from a railer who saw Greek Jack's hole cards on the 'chip leader' FT, so some distance needs to be increased.

I don't think much can be done about players speaking on the breaks unless the club allocates separate areas for FT players and the rest of the club. Complete isolation may be ott Truman Show style. When the information is available to all and if so it's within their right to take full advantage, I would, but people are right in saying that the information is very little over a FT that it can't be utilised all that well. The reason I am personally adamant about players not being able to use the information is because it does add a dimension to the game that wouldn't otherwise be there in a game of poker; where you would play taking into account your perceived image and now you do not know what people know and what they do not know creating an unnatural decision making process. And if there is a live streamed table while there are still more tables in play in the same tournament a game with this factor should not be occurring whilst it is not on the rest of the tables.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: tikay on September 25, 2012, 06:45:43 AM
Surprised to read a couple posts to say otherwise but still pretty sure that a hefty majority of viewers would want hole cards for sure. I think a lot of people would tune out without hole cards especially when commentary is normally dull inaccurate babbling about poker, bad strategy theories and constant drops about their own poker career, what they once did and who they used to know (DTD and WSOP coverage excluded).

Why do we want people to keep watching these streams? Because the allure of not only the money and glory advertised but the apparent minimal feeling of fame by being on a live streamed final table is enough to entice their narcissistic personality needs. More people wanting to take their shot is good for the game, right?

So keep the hole cards display but do everything to defend the integrity of the game. Although it's not nice to have your phone taken off you, do this and maybe disable the wifi access to players in the club for the duration of the final table. I suppose there is still a way around this getting a mate from home texting a mate on the rail to feed the info to the participant but increasing the hurdles should reduce the likeliness of it. At DTD the rail is pretty intimate surrounding the FT; maybe they will reconsider the positioning of the feature table where the railers can't be so close to the action. I seem to remember some controversy about alleged signalling from a railer who saw Greek Jack's hole cards on the 'chip leader' FT, so some distance needs to be increased.

I don't think much can be done about players speaking on the breaks unless the club allocates separate areas for FT players and the rest of the club. Complete isolation may be ott Truman Show style. When the information is available to all and if so it's within their right to take full advantage, I would, but people are right in saying that the information is very little over a FT that it can't be utilised all that well. The reason I am personally adamant about players not being able to use the information is because it does add a dimension to the game that wouldn't otherwise be there in a game of poker; where you would play taking into account your perceived image and now you do not know what people know and what they do not know creating an unnatural decision making process. And if there is a live streamed table while there are still more tables in play in the same tournament a game with this factor should not be occurring whilst it is not on the rest of the tables.

Fine Post overall, & you may well be right, but who has the greater rights in this - the viewers, or the players?

If 90% of the viewers wanted to see hole cards, & 0% of the players wanted hole cards shown (& were getting zero recompense), what would your decision be, if you were the organiser?


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: jgcblack on September 25, 2012, 08:49:06 AM
I guess the players will go wherever the value and guarantees are.. But the viewers might only get involved in x or y or z streams.


Any developments next door?


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: dakky on September 25, 2012, 09:31:50 AM
Just stick up the stream in the venue


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: scotty77 on September 25, 2012, 09:42:04 AM
Anything that increases exposure of the game is a good thing and live streams with hole cards are obv what people want.  It's clearly good for the game and I think that the information that can be gleaned during a few hours at a feature table is marginal at best.

It's not looking like the players "obv want" hole cards to be seen.

4:1 against in the players poll atm.

Blonde isn't a fair representation of the poker economy tho.  The user base is generally far more advanced in their poker journey.  We don't need to be converted as we will go wherever the value is. The hole cards cater far more to the casual player and for that reason they should stay.

I would also imagine that you'd get the same kind of feedback over a certain live stream commentator.  Here it would be endless hate.....but if you did a random poll of the stream viewers then most would be very happy with the level of commentary.

We live in a kind of bubble in blonde and it's very easy to forget that and act/think accordingly.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: tikay on September 25, 2012, 09:58:12 AM
Anything that increases exposure of the game is a good thing and live streams with hole cards are obv what people want.  It's clearly good for the game and I think that the information that can be gleaned during a few hours at a feature table is marginal at best.

It's not looking like the players "obv want" hole cards to be seen.

4:1 against in the players poll atm.

Blonde isn't a fair representation of the poker economy tho.  The user base is generally far more advanced in their poker journey.  We don't need to be converted as we will go wherever the value is. The hole cards cater far more to the casual player and for that reason they should stay.

I would also imagine that you'd get the same kind of feedback over a certain live stream commentator.  Here it would be endless hate.....but if you did a random poll of the stream viewers then most would be very happy with the level of commentary.

We live in a kind of bubble in blonde and it's very easy to forget that and act/think accordingly.

Line of the week that, Ryan, nice one, & oh so very true.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: MANTIS01 on September 25, 2012, 11:44:04 AM
Let’s jump out of our bubble and look at some universal facts then. Poker is a game of incomplete information. So your job as a poker player is to gather as much info as you can and use it to produce optimum hand playing strategies against the various individuals at the table.

Let me say on behalf of all recreational players that we are underdogs when we sit down at a FT. Our best bet is to withhold as much info as possible from players more adept at processing it than we are. I find it incredible that casual players think it is a good idea to furnish better players with the very info they need to beat us even better. Allowing access to the most vital information gives better players more of an advantage. So really how are streams good for the casual player?

The reality for recreational players is that we are very likely to end up as the suckers at the table. Chilling on the sofa at home this seems like no big deal. But when you’ve battled across multiple days against a partisan local crowd this can feel like you are being cheated. People who are not part of the Blonde bubble have joined this forum to announce that’s exactly how they felt.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: jgcblack on September 25, 2012, 01:11:20 PM
Let’s jump out of our bubble and look at some universal facts then. Poker is a game of incomplete information. So your job as a poker player is to gather as much info as you can and use it to produce optimum hand playing strategies against the various individuals at the table.

Let me say on behalf of all recreational players that we are underdogs when we sit down at a FT. Our best bet is to withhold as much info as possible from players more adept at processing it than we are. I find it incredible that casual players think it is a good idea to furnish better players with the very info they need to beat us even better. Allowing access to the most vital information gives better players more of an advantage. So really how are streams good for the casual player?

The reality for recreational players is that we are very likely to end up as the suckers at the table. Chilling on the sofa at home this seems like no big deal. But when you’ve battled across multiple days against a partisan local crowd this can feel like you are being cheated. People who are not part of the Blonde bubble have joined this forum to announce that’s exactly how they felt.

Mantis - with this revelation alone.. realising this is the case i mean.  This single point makes you so much more advanced than your average recreational player.

You have to remember the average recreational player neither knows he is, nor accepts he is.  He may sometimes do something which happens to be a correct response/ reaction to this revelation, but this is almost always an accident.

The streams are good for the casual player because it placates their want for entertainment.. i see the stream as a possible source of income one way or another for me but they see it as fun.

This is the vital difference we need to realize in order to address.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: tikay on September 25, 2012, 01:21:48 PM
Let’s jump out of our bubble and look at some universal facts then. Poker is a game of incomplete information. So your job as a poker player is to gather as much info as you can and use it to produce optimum hand playing strategies against the various individuals at the table.

Let me say on behalf of all recreational players that we are underdogs when we sit down at a FT. Our best bet is to withhold as much info as possible from players more adept at processing it than we are. I find it incredible that casual players think it is a good idea to furnish better players with the very info they need to beat us even better. Allowing access to the most vital information gives better players more of an advantage. So really how are streams good for the casual player?

The reality for recreational players is that we are very likely to end up as the suckers at the table. Chilling on the sofa at home this seems like no big deal. But when you’ve battled across multiple days against a partisan local crowd this can feel like you are being cheated. People who are not part of the Blonde bubble have joined this forum to announce that’s exactly how they felt.

Mantis - with this revelation alone.. realising this is the case i mean.  This single point makes you so much more advanced than your average recreational player.

You have to remember the average recreational player neither knows he is, nor accepts he is.  He may sometimes do something which happens to be a correct response/ reaction to this revelation, but this is almost always an accident.

The streams are good for the casual player because it placates their want for entertainment.. i see the stream as a possible source of income one way or another for me but they see it as fun.

This is the vital difference we need to realize in order to address.

 ::)


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: Tal on September 25, 2012, 01:43:21 PM
Let’s jump out of our bubble and look at some universal facts then. Poker is a game of incomplete information. So your job as a poker player is to gather as much info as you can and use it to produce optimum hand playing strategies against the various individuals at the table.

Let me say on behalf of all recreational players that we are underdogs when we sit down at a FT. Our best bet is to withhold as much info as possible from players more adept at processing it than we are. I find it incredible that casual players think it is a good idea to furnish better players with the very info they need to beat us even better. Allowing access to the most vital information gives better players more of an advantage. So really how are streams good for the casual player?

The reality for recreational players is that we are very likely to end up as the suckers at the table. Chilling on the sofa at home this seems like no big deal. But when you’ve battled across multiple days against a partisan local crowd this can feel like you are being cheated. People who are not part of the Blonde bubble have joined this forum to announce that’s exactly how they felt.

Mantis - with this revelation alone.. realising this is the case i mean.  This single point makes you so much more advanced than your average recreational player.

You have to remember the average recreational player neither knows he is, nor accepts he is.  He may sometimes do something which happens to be a correct response/ reaction to this revelation, but this is almost always an accident.

The streams are good for the casual player because it placates their want for entertainment.. i see the stream as a possible source of income one way or another for me but they see it as fun.

This is the vital difference we need to realize in order to address.

 ::)

Eye roll of the week contender


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 25, 2012, 01:45:12 PM
Anything that increases exposure of the game is a good thing and live streams with hole cards are obv what people want.  It's clearly good for the game and I think that the information that can be gleaned during a few hours at a feature table is marginal at best.

It's not looking like the players "obv want" hole cards to be seen.

4:1 against in the players poll atm.

Blonde isn't a fair representation of the poker economy tho.  The user base is generally far more advanced in their poker journey.  We don't need to be converted as we will go wherever the value is. The hole cards cater far more to the casual player and for that reason they should stay.

I would also imagine that you'd get the same kind of feedback over a certain live stream commentator.  Here it would be endless hate.....but if you did a random poll of the stream viewers then most would be very happy with the level of commentary.

We live in a kind of bubble in blonde and it's very easy to forget that and act/think accordingly.

I think blonde represents the whole gamut of poker players.

From EPT and WSOP Bracelet winners to Mantis and Tikay.

Can't get much more of a wide cross section of the poker playing public than that.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: AdamM on September 25, 2012, 01:49:25 PM
Don't really watch live strams.
Don't have the time.

I watch a fair bit on TV because I Sky+ is and watch it in 15-30 minute stints.

I wouldn't watch TV poker without the whole cards being shown.
Last years WSOP where the cards were shown at the end of the hand was bad enough, but blind all the way would bore me.

That said, I'm not a fan of live streams as a concept.
If I was sat at a table and a player I had run a bluff against or made a big laydown to wandered over to the rail half an hour later to talk to a friend and came back to the table knowing what I had, I'd be gutted.

For me, showing hole cards for recordings is fine, but for streams, even with a little bit of a delay is a terrible idea.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 25, 2012, 02:06:42 PM
Don't really watch live strams.
Don't have the time.

I watch a fair bit on TV because I Sky+ is and watch it in 15-30 minute stints.

I wouldn't watch TV poker without the whole cards being shown.
Last years WSOP where the cards were shown at the end of the hand was bad enough, but blind all the way would bore me.

That said, I'm not a fan of live streams as a concept.
If I was sat at a table and a player I had run a bluff against or made a big laydown to wandered over to the rail half an hour later to talk to a friend and came back to the table knowing what I had, I'd be gutted.

For me, showing hole cards for recordings is fine, but for streams, even with a little bit of a delay is a terrible idea.

My thoughts exactly.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: MANTIS01 on September 25, 2012, 02:07:16 PM
Let’s jump out of our bubble and look at some universal facts then. Poker is a game of incomplete information. So your job as a poker player is to gather as much info as you can and use it to produce optimum hand playing strategies against the various individuals at the table.

Let me say on behalf of all recreational players that we are underdogs when we sit down at a FT. Our best bet is to withhold as much info as possible from players more adept at processing it than we are. I find it incredible that casual players think it is a good idea to furnish better players with the very info they need to beat us even better. Allowing access to the most vital information gives better players more of an advantage. So really how are streams good for the casual player?

The reality for recreational players is that we are very likely to end up as the suckers at the table. Chilling on the sofa at home this seems like no big deal. But when you’ve battled across multiple days against a partisan local crowd this can feel like you are being cheated. People who are not part of the Blonde bubble have joined this forum to announce that’s exactly how they felt.

Mantis - with this revelation alone.. realising this is the case i mean.  This single point makes you so much more advanced than your average recreational player.

You have to remember the average recreational player neither knows he is, nor accepts he is.  He may sometimes do something which happens to be a correct response/ reaction to this revelation, but this is almost always an accident.

The streams are good for the casual player because it placates their want for entertainment.. i see the stream as a possible source of income one way or another for me but they see it as fun.

This is the vital difference we need to realize in order to address.


Yo, the fact that most recreational players wont be aware of the disadvantage doesn't make the disadvantage any less real. I would say it's prob a responsibility of experienced players to debate this properly on behalf of the unwitting. Yeah you get ur face on the interweb how fantastic. But the price is the pro sitting next door is seeing ur cards. How fantastic.

The bolded line shows the difference in attitude to streams and hence why it is unfair.

Btw, I will accept your accusation that I am smarter than the average bear.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: Yian on September 25, 2012, 02:17:31 PM
Surprised to read a couple posts to say otherwise but still pretty sure that a hefty majority of viewers would want hole cards for sure. I think a lot of people would tune out without hole cards especially when commentary is normally dull inaccurate babbling about poker, bad strategy theories and constant drops about their own poker career, what they once did and who they used to know (DTD and WSOP coverage excluded).

Why do we want people to keep watching these streams? Because the allure of not only the money and glory advertised but the apparent minimal feeling of fame by being on a live streamed final table is enough to entice their narcissistic personality needs. More people wanting to take their shot is good for the game, right?

So keep the hole cards display but do everything to defend the integrity of the game. Although it's not nice to have your phone taken off you, do this and maybe disable the wifi access to players in the club for the duration of the final table. I suppose there is still a way around this getting a mate from home texting a mate on the rail to feed the info to the participant but increasing the hurdles should reduce the likeliness of it. At DTD the rail is pretty intimate surrounding the FT; maybe they will reconsider the positioning of the feature table where the railers can't be so close to the action. I seem to remember some controversy about alleged signalling from a railer who saw Greek Jack's hole cards on the 'chip leader' FT, so some distance needs to be increased.

I don't think much can be done about players speaking on the breaks unless the club allocates separate areas for FT players and the rest of the club. Complete isolation may be ott Truman Show style. When the information is available to all and if so it's within their right to take full advantage, I would, but people are right in saying that the information is very little over a FT that it can't be utilised all that well. The reason I am personally adamant about players not being able to use the information is because it does add a dimension to the game that wouldn't otherwise be there in a game of poker; where you would play taking into account your perceived image and now you do not know what people know and what they do not know creating an unnatural decision making process. And if there is a live streamed table while there are still more tables in play in the same tournament a game with this factor should not be occurring whilst it is not on the rest of the tables.

Fine Post overall, & you may well be right, but who has the greater rights in this - the viewers, or the players?

If 90% of the viewers wanted to see hole cards, & 0% of the players wanted hole cards shown (& were getting zero recompense), what would your decision be, if you were the organiser?

If it was as black and white to say that all or most players were to object to the live stream then yes you do have to give the reg-paying player first priority. The tournament is a supply for the player first and foremost. It's not like most televised sports where the coverage supplies a huge portion of the revenue; so these live streams should never have the power to dictate what happens in these games. But provided it can be carried out ensuring the integrity of the game and there is a demand from the viewer for these streams, I don't think players should object from them taking place.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: jgcblack on September 25, 2012, 02:35:38 PM
Let’s jump out of our bubble and look at some universal facts then. Poker is a game of incomplete information. So your job as a poker player is to gather as much info as you can and use it to produce optimum hand playing strategies against the various individuals at the table.

Let me say on behalf of all recreational players that we are underdogs when we sit down at a FT. Our best bet is to withhold as much info as possible from players more adept at processing it than we are. I find it incredible that casual players think it is a good idea to furnish better players with the very info they need to beat us even better. Allowing access to the most vital information gives better players more of an advantage. So really how are streams good for the casual player?

The reality for recreational players is that we are very likely to end up as the suckers at the table. Chilling on the sofa at home this seems like no big deal. But when you’ve battled across multiple days against a partisan local crowd this can feel like you are being cheated. People who are not part of the Blonde bubble have joined this forum to announce that’s exactly how they felt.

Mantis - with this revelation alone.. realising this is the case i mean.  This single point makes you so much more advanced than your average recreational player.

You have to remember the average recreational player neither knows he is, nor accepts he is.   He may sometimes do something which happens to be a correct response/ reaction to this revelation, but this is almost always an accident.

The streams are good for the casual player because it placates their want for entertainment.. i see the stream as a possible source of income one way or another for me but they see it as fun.

This is the vital difference we need to realize in order to address.

 ::)

Eye roll of the week contender


Key word is the average recreational player...

You clearly don't count as the average recreational player.

And Mantis, you are welcome sir, loving your slightly controversial posts all over the site!


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: Cf on September 25, 2012, 02:51:02 PM


If 90% of the viewers wanted to see hole cards, & 0% of the players wanted hole cards shown (& were getting zero recompense), what would your decision be, if you were the organiser?

This is basically what it boils down to.

As far as I'm concerned the players are the ones who make the tournament possible, and pay the entry fee, etc. For me their rights and opinions should come first. At the very least they should get some reimbursement. If hole cards being shown are such a good marketing tool then give the players some cash, or make the tournament reg fee free, or something. As it is the players are paying the organisers to use them for marketing/making money.

I accept that in tournaments such as WSOP, EPT, etc that the whole TV thing is a big part of the appeal and perhaps a reason why these tournaments are popular. The same can not be said for most of the UK tours. If a tournament here is gonna have a guarantee then that guarantee is going to be the same regardless of whether it is being streamed or not.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: tikay on September 25, 2012, 03:09:37 PM
I gather from some acerbic off-Forum incoming that some think I have a problem with Live Streams - well I don't!

I do think, however, that the player's opinion is paramount, far more so than someone sitting at home who has paid & contributed nothing.

They are designed as a Marketing tool of course. Whether that actually works, I have no idea. How many Live Stream viewers subsequently go play on the sponsors site as a result of the stream, or at their Live Event?

What if......the Stream were occassionally interrupted by an advert for the sponsors product, an upcoming Tourney or whatever?

The nut result would be to monetise the product better, imo. Then the players get a bit for their trouble, the sponsor covers or gets a contribution to his costs, & the viewers pay, just as they do to watch BBC, or Sky TV. 

If the Live Stream were pay-to-view - say a fiver - how many would cough up?


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: tikay on September 25, 2012, 03:15:48 PM
Anything that increases exposure of the game is a good thing and live streams with hole cards are obv what people want.  It's clearly good for the game and I think that the information that can be gleaned during a few hours at a feature table is marginal at best.

It's not looking like the players "obv want" hole cards to be seen.

4:1 against in the players poll atm.

Blonde isn't a fair representation of the poker economy tho.  The user base is generally far more advanced in their poker journey.  We don't need to be converted as we will go wherever the value is. The hole cards cater far more to the casual player and for that reason they should stay.

I would also imagine that you'd get the same kind of feedback over a certain live stream commentator.  Here it would be endless hate.....but if you did a random poll of the stream viewers then most would be very happy with the level of commentary.

We live in a kind of bubble in blonde and it's very easy to forget that and act/think accordingly.

I think blonde represents the whole gamut of poker players.

From EPT and WSOP Bracelet winners to Mantis and Tikay.Can't get much more of a wide cross section of the poker playing public than that.

A+ Mr Aitch.

So much so I've changed my sig.

Made my day that.

Not sure what MANTICS might think though.

We are both sort of looking at each other wondering who is most insulted, or complimented.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 25, 2012, 03:30:35 PM
Anything that increases exposure of the game is a good thing and live streams with hole cards are obv what people want.  It's clearly good for the game and I think that the information that can be gleaned during a few hours at a feature table is marginal at best.

It's not looking like the players "obv want" hole cards to be seen.

4:1 against in the players poll atm.

Blonde isn't a fair representation of the poker economy tho.  The user base is generally far more advanced in their poker journey.  We don't need to be converted as we will go wherever the value is. The hole cards cater far more to the casual player and for that reason they should stay.

I would also imagine that you'd get the same kind of feedback over a certain live stream commentator.  Here it would be endless hate.....but if you did a random poll of the stream viewers then most would be very happy with the level of commentary.

We live in a kind of bubble in blonde and it's very easy to forget that and act/think accordingly.

I think blonde represents the whole gamut of poker players.

From EPT and WSOP Bracelet winners to Mantis and Tikay.Can't get much more of a wide cross section of the poker playing public than that.

A+ Mr Aitch.

So much so I've changed my sig.

Made my day that.

Not sure what MANTICS might think though.

We are both sort of looking at each other wondering who is most insulted, or complimented.


You reckon my posts are throw together without a little thought?

Tut tut.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: tikay on September 25, 2012, 03:37:50 PM
Anything that increases exposure of the game is a good thing and live streams with hole cards are obv what people want.  It's clearly good for the game and I think that the information that can be gleaned during a few hours at a feature table is marginal at best.

It's not looking like the players "obv want" hole cards to be seen.

4:1 against in the players poll atm.

Blonde isn't a fair representation of the poker economy tho.  The user base is generally far more advanced in their poker journey.  We don't need to be converted as we will go wherever the value is. The hole cards cater far more to the casual player and for that reason they should stay.

I would also imagine that you'd get the same kind of feedback over a certain live stream commentator.  Here it would be endless hate.....but if you did a random poll of the stream viewers then most would be very happy with the level of commentary.

We live in a kind of bubble in blonde and it's very easy to forget that and act/think accordingly.

I think blonde represents the whole gamut of poker players.

From EPT and WSOP Bracelet winners to Mantis and Tikay.Can't get much more of a wide cross section of the poker playing public than that.

A+ Mr Aitch.

So much so I've changed my sig.

Made my day that.

Not sure what MANTICS might think though.

We are both sort of looking at each other wondering who is most insulted, or complimented.


You reckon my posts are throw together without a little thought?

Tut tut.

Absolutely NOT, quite the opposite. The beauty of your Posts is that we have to think about them, read between the lines, & sometimes we never know if we have had a haircut or a shave.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: smurf on September 25, 2012, 03:51:34 PM
hypothetically...if someone was disqualified from a final table for not showing their cards do they still receive the payout for that particular place...and if not what happens to it?


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 25, 2012, 04:00:36 PM
Anything that increases exposure of the game is a good thing and live streams with hole cards are obv what people want.  It's clearly good for the game and I think that the information that can be gleaned during a few hours at a feature table is marginal at best.

It's not looking like the players "obv want" hole cards to be seen.

4:1 against in the players poll atm.

Blonde isn't a fair representation of the poker economy tho.  The user base is generally far more advanced in their poker journey.  We don't need to be converted as we will go wherever the value is. The hole cards cater far more to the casual player and for that reason they should stay.

I would also imagine that you'd get the same kind of feedback over a certain live stream commentator.  Here it would be endless hate.....but if you did a random poll of the stream viewers then most would be very happy with the level of commentary.

We live in a kind of bubble in blonde and it's very easy to forget that and act/think accordingly.

I think blonde represents the whole gamut of poker players.

From EPT and WSOP Bracelet winners to Mantis and Tikay.Can't get much more of a wide cross section of the poker playing public than that.

A+ Mr Aitch.

So much so I've changed my sig.

Made my day that.

Not sure what MANTICS might think though.

We are both sort of looking at each other wondering who is most insulted, or complimented.


You reckon my posts are throw together without a little thought?

Tut tut.

Absolutely NOT, quite the opposite. The beauty of your Posts is that we have to think about them, read between the lines, & sometimes we never know if we have had a haircut or a shave.

 ;)


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: Da Bookie on September 25, 2012, 07:35:43 PM
Have found this a very interesting thread and do think the Camel puts his point across very well. My feeling is we have to look at the wider issues here. Firstly there are very few sports/games ( dont want to create a separate argument as to which poker is ) were the players pay their own prizemoney and are then charged a fee on top for the privilege. A fee which  some event organisers at the moment seem to think has no limit.
     If live streaming with hole cards leads to more marketing value to organisers and internet poker company's should we perhaps look at not weather we want it but Rather can it benefit us? and if so how. My feeling at the moment is that live poker lacks player power and until we acknowledge this we will continue to pay increasing costs and subjected to live streams or whatever.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 25, 2012, 08:13:51 PM
Have found this a very interesting thread and do think the Camel puts his point across very well. My feeling is we have to look at the wider issues here. Firstly there are very few sports/games ( dont want to create a separate argument as to which poker is ) were the players pay their own prizemoney and are then charged a fee on top for the privilege. A fee which  some event organisers at the moment seem to think has no limit.
     If live streaming with hole cards leads to more marketing value to organisers and internet poker company's should we perhaps look at not weather we want it but Rather can it benefit us? and if so how. My feeling at the moment is that live poker lacks player power and until we acknowledge this we will continue to pay increasing costs and subjected to live streams or whatever.

We missed the boat years ago Mike.

We should have done this when tv poker first came on the scene.

If players had refused to play unless money was added to tv tournaments, it would have been.

The Party Poker World Open. Headline sponsor adds nothing to the prizepool. Can you imagine Federer or Woods playing a similar event in their respective sports?

Instead a few players grabbed the opportunity to get their boats on tv and got a reputation far beyond their ability (prime example: Devilfish) and made fortunes in sponsorship money.

Meanwhile the majority of poker players got zilch from the tv boom.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 25, 2012, 08:18:28 PM
Meanwhile Barry fucking Hearn made fortunes from poker players just desperate to get their faces on tv.

Idiots.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 25, 2012, 08:25:43 PM
My phone rang once and when I answered the following conversation occurred:

"Hello, this is xxx from Full Tilt Poker"

"Hi"

"I'd like to invite you to participate in the Full Tilt Speed Poker Championship in London next week"

"Thanks. How much is the entry?"

"Five thousand pounds"

"How many in the field?"

"36"

"Nice. How much are you adding to the prizepool?"

"Errr. Nothing"

"Oh. How much will give me towards my expenses?"

"Ummm. Zero I'm afraid"

"Oh. So what incentive is there for me to play?"

"You might get the chance to play on tv against Phil Ivey, Patrik Antonious or Erik Seidel who are all confirmed entrants!"

I hung up.





Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: smashedagain on September 25, 2012, 08:55:28 PM
Meanwhile Barry fucking Hearn made fortunes from poker players just desperate to get their faces on tv.

Idiots.
him and Eddie also got turned over on a few occasions too :)


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: scotty77 on September 25, 2012, 10:45:49 PM
Anything that increases exposure of the game is a good thing and live streams with hole cards are obv what people want.  It's clearly good for the game and I think that the information that can be gleaned during a few hours at a feature table is marginal at best.

It's not looking like the players "obv want" hole cards to be seen.

4:1 against in the players poll atm.

Blonde isn't a fair representation of the poker economy tho.  The user base is generally far more advanced in their poker journey.  We don't need to be converted as we will go wherever the value is. The hole cards cater far more to the casual player and for that reason they should stay.

I would also imagine that you'd get the same kind of feedback over a certain live stream commentator.  Here it would be endless hate.....but if you did a random poll of the stream viewers then most would be very happy with the level of commentary.

We live in a kind of bubble in blonde and it's very easy to forget that and act/think accordingly.

I think blonde represents the whole gamut of poker players.

From EPT and WSOP Bracelet winners to Mantis and Tikay.

Can't get much more of a wide cross section of the poker playing public than that.

I agree that blonde has a massively wide range of players that participate on the site, but I think its fair to say that the average blonde will have put more time into their game, be more aware of whats going on in the poker scene, have more friends/acquaintances in the poker, have far more experience of the game and the environments it's played in. 

Of course there are many posters/lurkers here who are casual, but I think the vast majority probably dedicate a massive amount of their time in life to poker. 


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 25, 2012, 10:54:34 PM
Anything that increases exposure of the game is a good thing and live streams with hole cards are obv what people want.  It's clearly good for the game and I think that the information that can be gleaned during a few hours at a feature table is marginal at best.

It's not looking like the players "obv want" hole cards to be seen.

4:1 against in the players poll atm.

Blonde isn't a fair representation of the poker economy tho.  The user base is generally far more advanced in their poker journey.  We don't need to be converted as we will go wherever the value is. The hole cards cater far more to the casual player and for that reason they should stay.

I would also imagine that you'd get the same kind of feedback over a certain live stream commentator.  Here it would be endless hate.....but if you did a random poll of the stream viewers then most would be very happy with the level of commentary.

We live in a kind of bubble in blonde and it's very easy to forget that and act/think accordingly.

I think blonde represents the whole gamut of poker players.

From EPT and WSOP Bracelet winners to Mantis and Tikay.

Can't get much more of a wide cross section of the poker playing public than that.

I agree that blonde has a massively wide range of players that participate on the site, but I think its fair to say that the average blonde will have put more time into their game, be more aware of whats going on in the poker scene, have more friends/acquaintances in the poker, have far more experience of the game and the environments it's played in. 

Of course there are many posters/lurkers here who are casual, but I think the vast majority probably dedicate a massive amount of their time in life to poker. 

I think if you are going to tune into to a live stream of the EPO you are going to be pretty dedicated pokerist.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: jgcblack on September 25, 2012, 11:50:11 PM
My phone rang once and when I answered the following conversation occurred:

"Hello, this is xxx from Full Tilt Poker"

"Hi"

"I'd like to invite you to participate in the Full Tilt Speed Poker Championship in London next week"

"Thanks. How much is the entry?"

"Five thousand pounds"

"How many in the field?"

"36"

"Nice. How much are you adding to the prizepool?"

"Errr. Nothing"

"Oh. How much will give me towards my expenses?"

"Ummm. Zero I'm afraid"

"Oh. So what incentive is there for me to play?"

"You might get the chance to play on tv against Phil Ivey, Patrik Antonious or Erik Seidel who are all confirmed entrants!"

I hung up.






You're going up and up in my thoughts every day at this rate Sir Keith...

wp.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: gouty on September 26, 2012, 12:01:03 AM
I think the most important point is that a delayed live stream affects the play of the game due to players finding out within 1 orbit what their opponents were holding and more importantly folding.

It's a real shame that it only really affects the £500/1000 buy ins too, which is unfair to players trying to so called "breakthrough" to the next (ept) level.

It is quite clearly shit for players as it not like an edited wsop season episode where you may 2 hands every 100 played. You actually can see every hand dealt. It's like STT heaven after 3 orbits if you have a good buddy on the rail.

I would nearly go as far as to say I don't think the gambling commission would think it is gambling in a open and transparent way which is 1 of their only 3 remits.

Any live hole card transmissions should have 24 delay minimum surely?



Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: Boba Fett on September 26, 2012, 12:10:42 AM
Have found this a very interesting thread and do think the Camel puts his point across very well. My feeling is we have to look at the wider issues here. Firstly there are very few sports/games ( dont want to create a separate argument as to which poker is ) were the players pay their own prizemoney and are then charged a fee on top for the privilege. A fee which  some event organisers at the moment seem to think has no limit.
     If live streaming with hole cards leads to more marketing value to organisers and internet poker company's should we perhaps look at not weather we want it but Rather can it benefit us? and if so how. My feeling at the moment is that live poker lacks player power and until we acknowledge this we will continue to pay increasing costs and subjected to live streams or whatever.

We missed the boat years ago Mike.

We should have done this when tv poker first came on the scene.

If players had refused to play unless money was added to tv tournaments, it would have been.

The Party Poker World Open. Headline sponsor adds nothing to the prizepool. Can you imagine Federer or Woods playing a similar event in their respective sports?

Instead a few players grabbed the opportunity to get their boats on tv and got a reputation far beyond their ability (prime example: Devilfish) and made fortunes in sponsorship money.

Meanwhile the majority of poker players got zilch from the tv boom.

I can see your point with the stream/hole card stuff but I think you're way off with the TV comments.  So many players in the UK got into the game by watching it on tv, from as far back as the original Late Night Poker shows.  A large percentage of the player pool of any poker community live or online in the UK probably got into the game through watching it on tv.  The liquidity of the UK poker scene could theoretically be way worse off right now if, when they tried to arrange those tv shows, the players told them to GTFO because they didnt want to show their cards.

And to me it seems a decent amount of players that were on tv benefitted as I could name a bunch of them that seem to continually be invited to them and get sponsorship deals without having done anything of note for a good few years.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: DTD-ACES on September 26, 2012, 12:27:40 AM
If poker players don't like live streams of their hole cards can boycott these streamed events right, with the amazing online comps such as WCOOP, there is plenty of unstreamed poker action.

The reasons we introduced live streaming at DTD were;

1. Players partcipating in our bigger events asked us ' why dont you do streaming, we would like it'

2. We felt the expense of setting up the steaming may encourage recreational viewers to play our satellites to win their way into streamed events

On another point, our cash game players asked us a few months ago if we would stream their £2-£5 cash game Friday night, we said we might but we wud see it more of a service to those players and whoever wanted to watch a streamed cash game, rather than something commercial

Player demand dictates what happens in live poker, if players don't want streaming, they will not enter. Look at the popularity of the GPS, they have streamed from the start. I wud say overall, streaming is here to stay based on demand for it by the overall poker community. I remember when certain pros were up in arms about Late Night Poker showing their hole cards, they refused to play series 1 (I didn't mind), these same players were then the first to ring up the Late Night Poker organizers and try and get onto series 2! I remember there were a few interesting conversations about players who got onto future Late Night Poker series shows even though they had completely slated the first series and refused to participate.

As an ex professional player, I would say that if the poker industry had focussed on what the professional players wanted, it would be a much smaller industry. Maybe that's not such a bad thing, but that's what I think.

Cheers Aces


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 26, 2012, 12:35:56 AM
Have found this a very interesting thread and do think the Camel puts his point across very well. My feeling is we have to look at the wider issues here. Firstly there are very few sports/games ( dont want to create a separate argument as to which poker is ) were the players pay their own prizemoney and are then charged a fee on top for the privilege. A fee which  some event organisers at the moment seem to think has no limit.
     If live streaming with hole cards leads to more marketing value to organisers and internet poker company's should we perhaps look at not weather we want it but Rather can it benefit us? and if so how. My feeling at the moment is that live poker lacks player power and until we acknowledge this we will continue to pay increasing costs and subjected to live streams or whatever.

We missed the boat years ago Mike.

We should have done this when tv poker first came on the scene.

If players had refused to play unless money was added to tv tournaments, it would have been.

The Party Poker World Open. Headline sponsor adds nothing to the prizepool. Can you imagine Federer or Woods playing a similar event in their respective sports?

Instead a few players grabbed the opportunity to get their boats on tv and got a reputation far beyond their ability (prime example: Devilfish) and made fortunes in sponsorship money.

Meanwhile the majority of poker players got zilch from the tv boom.

I can see your point with the stream/hole card stuff but I think you're way off with the TV comments.  So many players in the UK got into the game by watching it on tv, from as far back as the original Late Night Poker shows.  A large percentage of the player pool of any poker community live or online in the UK probably got into the game through watching it on tv.  The liquidity of the UK poker scene could theoretically be way worse off right now if, when they tried to arrange those tv shows, the players told them to GTFO because they didnt want to show their cards.

And to me it seems a decent amount of players that were on tv benefitted as I could name a bunch of them that seem to continually be invited to them and get sponsorship deals without having done anything of note for a good few years.

Yeah, maybe you are right.

But my point is that the real winners of the poker boom are the online cardrooms (and the promoters and organisers of live poker tournaments).

Remember only about 5% of poker players are winners.

It wouldn't have hurt them at all to pump a few quid into the tv tournaments, and all it would have taken was for Devilfish, the Hendon Mob, Simon Trumper and a few others to say they weren't going to appear on a tv tournament unless the sponsor boosted the prizepool by 20%.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 26, 2012, 12:40:19 AM
Players who dont like live streams of their hole cards can boycots these events right?

 The reasons we introduced live streaming at DTD were;

1. Players partcipating in our bigger events asked us ' why dont you do streaming?'

2. It may encourage viewers to play satellites to the streamed events

Our cash game players have asked us if we can stream their cash game Friday night, we have said we might but it's not like we feels it's really commercial beneficial, we wud see it more of a service.

Player demand dictated what happens in live poker, if players don't want streaming, they will not enter. Look at the popularity of the GPS, they have streamed from the start.

I wud say overall, streaming is here to stay based on demand for it by the overall poker community.

I remember when certain players were up in arms about Late NIght Poker showing their hole cards, they refused to play series 1, these same players were then the first to try and ring up the Late Night Poker organizers and try and get onto series 2!




If you look at the player poll Simon, approx 80% of players are against live streaming with hole cards. You could easily do a stream without showing the pocket cards.

I have been asked to appear in tv tournaments at least 10 times and only agreed once.

Not because I didn't want to show my cards, but because I thought sponsors should add money to the prizepool.

I played in the William Hill tournament which added 50 grand (I think, it might have been more) to the prizepool and paid my expenses in full.

Hat's off to Mr bobby1, who worked for Hills in those days and who looked after the players brilliantly.



Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: DTD-ACES on September 26, 2012, 12:47:09 AM
Yes Keith, I get what you are saying. An interesting poll would be:

1. You 8 players have now made the final table out of 500 entries, do you want your hole cards to be shown?

2. You 492 that have been knocked out plus everyone else that didn't enter, do you want the 8 players at the final table hole cards shown?

It would be also interesting run 10 events with streaming + hole cards, and 10 of the same events without streaming (no hole cards), and see which events got more entries and therefore larger prize pools.

As far as DTD are concerned, I believe the cost/effort of streaming outweighs the business benefits, so if all our members prefer no live streaming, or streaming without hold cards, that would be no problem with us.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 26, 2012, 12:57:56 AM
Yes Keith, I get what you are saying. An interesting poll would be:

1. You 8 players have now made the final table out of 500 entries, do you want your hole cards to be shown?

2. You 492 that have been knocked out plus everyone else that didn't enter, do you want the 8 players at the final table hole cards shown?

I would be also interesting run 10 events with streaming + hole cards, and 10 of the same events without streaming (no hole cards), and see which events got more entries and therefore larger prize pools.


The players at the table and the integrity of the game is most important.

What was happening at the EPO was ridiculous.

Players were constantly on their iphones checking hands played 30 minutes previously.

If player X saw player Player Y open three times in 2 orbits with 72o, it would make him alot more likely to 3 bet with air, wouldn't it?

It undoubtedly changed the flow of the game.

Live streaming/tv coverage should not influence the course of the game imo.

I would be really surprised if the lack of hole cards would affect the popularity of the stream. Both Tighty and Vicky Coren said they it was better without showing the pocket holdings.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 26, 2012, 01:01:00 AM
Yes Keith, I get what you are saying. An interesting poll would be:

1. You 8 players have now made the final table out of 500 entries, do you want your hole cards to be shown?

2. You 492 that have been knocked out plus everyone else that didn't enter, do you want the 8 players at the final table hole cards shown?

It would be also interesting run 10 events with streaming + hole cards, and 10 of the same events without streaming (no hole cards), and see which events got more entries and therefore larger prize pools.

As far as DTD are concerned, I believe the cost/effort of streaming outweighs the business benefits, so if all our members prefer no live streaming, or streaming without hold cards, that would be no problem with us.

That's why I made two polls.

The players seem clearly and decisively against the showing of hole cards during a live stream.

Viewers it is less clear cut obv, although most agree they would watch the coverage with or without hole cards.

But, it's a case of who is more important, the players or the viewers?


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: TightEnd on September 26, 2012, 01:23:33 AM
"Both Tighty and Vicky Coren said they it was better without showing the pocket holdings."

A small point. I said I preferred commentating on action without hole cards. Not that it was better.

It's a stretch to say that watching without hole cards is better for the viewer, in my opinion. For the player involved who might worry about game integrity and game flow, quite possibly. I suggest that very very few of those who reach finals that I commentate on give a monkeys about game flow and game integrity being compromised by hole cards shown on a delay. They've cashed, often well into five figures, and they look to maximise that.

(and thats from the perspective of someone with nothing like the experience of many of the UK commentators including Simon Trumper)


On another point, and one close to my heart, the poker players lack an established trade body/association etc to lobby effectively other stakeholders in live and online poker such as organisers, sponsors, regulators etc.

A final point is the big big picture. Yes the players are important, but without the venue making an attractive return for putting on major tournaments, then the player has no game, or at best a more restricted choice than now



Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: The Camel on September 26, 2012, 01:37:16 AM
"Both Tighty and Vicky Coren said they it was better without showing the pocket holdings."

A small point. I said I preferred commentating on action without hole cards. Not that it was better.

It's a stretch to say that watching without hole cards is better for the viewer, in my opinion. For the player involved who might worry about game integrity and game flow, quite possibly. I suggest that very very few of those who reach finals that I commentate on give a monkeys about game flow and game integrity being compromised by hole cards shown on a delay. They've cashed, often well into five figures, and they look to maximise that.

(and thats from the perspective of someone with nothing like the experience of many of the UK commentators including Simon Trumper)


On another point, and one close to my heart, the poker players lack an established trade body/association etc to lobby effectively other stakeholders in live and online poker such as organisers, sponsors, regulators etc.

A final point is the big big picture. Yes the players are important, but without the venue making an attractive return for putting on major tournaments, then the player has no game, or at best a more restricted choice than now



Apologies, I didn't intentionally misquote you, I just didn't make the correct distinction. That is what Vicky said too.

Years ago I tried to organise a players association/union.

But no one could be arsed.

I really don't think the players have benefited to the extent they should have from the poker boom.

If players had been organised and properly represented from the start, we wouldn't have been ripped off by the likes of Barry Hearn, who once said he loved poker players so much because all he had to do was put them on tv and they were happy. (I'm paraphrasing obviously).

I doubt I'll be going back to the Fox or the EPO. The tournament had very little value, they took too much juice (even Dubai moaned about paying 9% on a 2 grand tournie), Fox is a horrible venue and I definitely didn't like the attitude of the cardroom manager when I expressed my concerns about their live stream.

Your final point is well made of course. But without the players there would be no venues.

It's a two way street, if they look after us, as DTD does, we'll show up in massive numbers.

If they treat the players like shit, they will lose custom. Look what has happened to the fields at the Bellagio.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: I KNOW IT on September 26, 2012, 02:09:13 AM
If poker players don't like live streams of their hole cards can boycott these streamed events right, with the amazing online comps such as WCOOP, there is plenty of unstreamed poker action.

The reasons we introduced live streaming at DTD were;

1. Players partcipating in our bigger events asked us ' why dont you do streaming, we would like it'

2. We felt the expense of setting up the steaming may encourage recreational viewers to play our satellites to win their way into streamed events

On another point, our cash game players asked us a few months ago if we would stream their £2-£5 cash game Friday night, we said we might but we wud see it more of a service to those players and whoever wanted to watch a streamed cash game, rather than something commercial

Player demand dictates what happens in live poker, if players don't want streaming, they will not enter. Look at the popularity of the GPS, they have streamed from the start. I wud say overall, streaming is here to stay based on demand for it by the overall poker community. I remember when certain pros were up in arms about Late Night Poker showing their hole cards, they refused to play series 1 (I didn't mind), these same players were then the first to ring up the Late Night Poker organizers and try and get onto series 2! I remember there were a few interesting conversations about players who got onto future Late Night Poker series shows even though they had completely slated the first series and refused to participate.

As an ex professional player, I would say that if the poker industry had focussed on what the professional players wanted, it would be a much smaller industry. Maybe that's not such a bad thing, but that's what I think.

Cheers Aces

This is so true, a lot of the players were regular at the Rainbow Casino.
How was the Poker Million on the Isle of Man done, as that is probably the first live tournament I can remember showing hole cards and no-one definitely passed on information on what John Duthie was playing, or the whole thing may have had a different result.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: aaron1867 on September 26, 2012, 02:14:02 AM
I don't see much point in not showing the hole cards, because it just limits the point of wanting to watch the live stream. I know many who say (including me) that they turn off when they watched the table 9 handed, as all you could see was the players back.

Without hole cards on view, it just makes it terribly boring.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: MANTIS01 on September 26, 2012, 02:54:21 AM
My god watching without hole cards would be so drab.

Obviously the majority want to see hole cards because the majority are knocked out. How things pan out from here doesn't affect them so all that's left is a good viewing experience. On the other hand the final players in an organised competition only want a good playing experience and how things pan out only affects them.

I think people will become more organised at using this information in the future and that will be to the detriment of the tournament experience of others.

btw people wanting to stream cash games for fun sounds like some kinda moody shit.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: aaron1867 on September 26, 2012, 04:50:34 AM

btw people wanting to stream cash games for fun sounds like some kinda moody shit.

Not moody, I think it's all about those players wanting to be "ohh look at me playing 2/5"

It is a ridic idea, imo.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: dik9 on September 26, 2012, 09:18:47 AM


On another point, and one close to my heart, the poker players lack an established trade body/association etc to lobby effectively other stakeholders in live and online poker such as organisers, sponsors, regulators etc.



Whatever happened to APAT btw  ;hide;


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: TightEnd on September 26, 2012, 09:21:18 AM


On another point, and one close to my heart, the poker players lack an established trade body/association etc to lobby effectively other stakeholders in live and online poker such as organisers, sponsors, regulators etc.



Whatever happened to APAT btw  ;hide;

Nothing happened to APAT, still operating very effectively and doing well. The Association side would have needed a real, almost full time, focus, which none of us had the time to give. Pretty sure its still an aspiration though.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: blueace on September 26, 2012, 09:51:14 AM
Interesting debate. I support the streams 100%. Not a big fan of my face being on the net, but its great that friends (and friends of friends), and family can watch the action and this will hopefully draw more people into the game.

Honestly, there was virtually nothing I could have been told about my fellow players on the streamed table that I hadn't (largely) worked out for myself by sitting playing with them. What I was told was just confirmation of my own thoughts 99% of the time. Besides, we all have the same advantage/disadvantage and if we're any good can adjust our play and gears to keep people off the scent.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: MANTIS01 on September 26, 2012, 02:21:59 PM
Interesting debate. I support the streams 100%. Not a big fan of my face being on the net, but its great that friends (and friends of friends), and family can watch the action and this will hopefully draw more people into the game.

Honestly, there was virtually nothing I could have been told about my fellow players on the streamed table that I hadn't (largely) worked out for myself by sitting playing with them. What I was told was just confirmation of my own thoughts 99% of the time. Besides, we all have the same advantage/disadvantage and if we're any good can adjust our play and gears to keep people off the scent.

The problem for these new players attracted to the game is they won’t be any good. So they won’t have the skills to adjust gears and throw people off the scent. That's why streaming gives a further advantage to better players, making the playing field less level for novice players. And I'm sure competition organisers don't want a less fair environment for newcomers.

Myself, I am not 99% certain of reads and would find hole card info very useful in determining strategy.

In business terms streaming makes perfect sense and in terms of increasing runners I guess it works but let’s not kid ourselves this measure is good for the novice player. I think it would be very easy for new players to feel colluded against if locals are huddling up in breaks, in fact I would feel like that.

A horse plays a big money final and his whole stable are doing a sweat session. At the break they deliver strategy updates based on 100% accurate ranges and any body language tells they have linked directly to actual hand strength. I would find that to be bollocks really and it would definitely ruin my tournament experience. I simply don't have a gang of pokerstove geek friends so don't see how I have the same advantage as the horse.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: AlexMartin on September 26, 2012, 02:46:28 PM
vote at the beginning of the comp? failing that keys' idea seems the most valid.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: blueace on September 26, 2012, 03:48:17 PM
Interesting debate. I support the streams 100%. Not a big fan of my face being on the net, but its great that friends (and friends of friends), and family can watch the action and this will hopefully draw more people into the game.

Honestly, there was virtually nothing I could have been told about my fellow players on the streamed table that I hadn't (largely) worked out for myself by sitting playing with them. What I was told was just confirmation of my own thoughts 99% of the time. Besides, we all have the same advantage/disadvantage and if we're any good can adjust our play and gears to keep people off the scent.

The problem for these new players attracted to the game is they won’t be any good. So they won’t have the skills to adjust gears and throw people off the scent. That's why streaming gives a further advantage to better players, making the playing field less level for novice players. And I'm sure competition organisers don't want a less fair environment for newcomers.

Myself, I am not 99% certain of reads and would find hole card info very useful in determining strategy.

In business terms streaming makes perfect sense and in terms of increasing runners I guess it works but let’s not kid ourselves this measure is good for the novice player. I think it would be very easy for new players to feel colluded against if locals are huddling up in breaks, in fact I would feel like that.

A horse plays a big money final and his whole stable are doing a sweat session. At the break they deliver strategy updates based on 100% accurate ranges and any body language tells they have linked directly to actual hand strength. I would find that to be bollocks really and it would definitely ruin my tournament experience. I simply don't have a gang of pokerstove geek friends so don't see how I have the same advantage as the horse.

So it follows that we will be unlikely to see these people reach a final streamed table? If they really are that much of a beginner the only way they can win a big torn is to find AA/KK every other orbit anyway.

Sadly I do not have a 99% hit rate on reads, but accurately gauging someone’s style of play is 100% essential. When playing the streamed final any information that I gauged (which was isolated and only in response to the fact someone openly quoted a hand of mine on the table) had little or no effect on the way I was treating each player, as I had already noted their styles and observed showdowns, etc.

I have in a previous post stated that it made me feel uncomfortable that a player was telling me about my hand from 20 minutes previously, but that’s not a good enough reason to stop streaming. Those ‘against’ are probably afraid of people scrutinising their play, irrespective.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: skolsuper on September 26, 2012, 04:14:46 PM
Interesting debate. I support the streams 100%. Not a big fan of my face being on the net, but its great that friends (and friends of friends), and family can watch the action and this will hopefully draw more people into the game.

Honestly, there was virtually nothing I could have been told about my fellow players on the streamed table that I hadn't (largely) worked out for myself by sitting playing with them. What I was told was just confirmation of my own thoughts 99% of the time. Besides, we all have the same advantage/disadvantage and if we're any good can adjust our play and gears to keep people off the scent.

The problem for these new players attracted to the game is they won’t be any good. So they won’t have the skills to adjust gears and throw people off the scent. That's why streaming gives a further advantage to better players, making the playing field less level for novice players. And I'm sure competition organisers don't want a less fair environment for newcomers.

Myself, I am not 99% certain of reads and would find hole card info very useful in determining strategy.

In business terms streaming makes perfect sense and in terms of increasing runners I guess it works but let’s not kid ourselves this measure is good for the novice player. I think it would be very easy for new players to feel colluded against if locals are huddling up in breaks, in fact I would feel like that.

A horse plays a big money final and his whole stable are doing a sweat session. At the break they deliver strategy updates based on 100% accurate ranges and any body language tells they have linked directly to actual hand strength. I would find that to be bollocks really and it would definitely ruin my tournament experience. I simply don't have a gang of pokerstove geek friends so don't see how I have the same advantage as the horse.

So it follows that we will be unlikely to see these people reach a final streamed table? If they really are that much of a beginner the only way they can win a big torn is to find AA/KK every other orbit anyway.

Sadly I do not have a 99% hit rate on reads, but accurately gauging someone’s style of play is 100% essential. When playing the streamed final any information that I gauged (which was isolated and only in response to the fact someone openly quoted a hand of mine on the table) had little or no effect on the way I was treating each player, as I had already noted their styles and observed showdowns, etc.

I have in a previous post stated that it made me feel uncomfortable that a player was telling me about my hand from 20 minutes previously, but that’s not a good enough reason to stop streaming. Those ‘against’ are probably afraid of people scrutinising their play, irrespective.


WARNING: MANTIS01 IS A TROLL. HE WILL NOT CHANGE HIS OPINION NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAY. HE DOESN'T EVEN CARE ABOUT THIS MATTER, HE JUST WANTS TO ARGUE.

Your posts have been good and I completely agree with them, but I just wanted you to know that any further replies to this guy will be a waste of your time. Good luck to you if you carry on.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: jgcblack on September 26, 2012, 10:47:52 PM
Interesting debate. I support the streams 100%. Not a big fan of my face being on the net, but its great that friends (and friends of friends), and family can watch the action and this will hopefully draw more people into the game.

Honestly, there was virtually nothing I could have been told about my fellow players on the streamed table that I hadn't (largely) worked out for myself by sitting playing with them. What I was told was just confirmation of my own thoughts 99% of the time. Besides, we all have the same advantage/disadvantage and if we're any good can adjust our play and gears to keep people off the scent.

The problem for these new players attracted to the game is they won’t be any good. So they won’t have the skills to adjust gears and throw people off the scent. That's why streaming gives a further advantage to better players, making the playing field less level for novice players. And I'm sure competition organisers don't want a less fair environment for newcomers.

Myself, I am not 99% certain of reads and would find hole card info very useful in determining strategy.

In business terms streaming makes perfect sense and in terms of increasing runners I guess it works but let’s not kid ourselves this measure is good for the novice player. I think it would be very easy for new players to feel colluded against if locals are huddling up in breaks, in fact I would feel like that.

A horse plays a big money final and his whole stable are doing a sweat session. At the break they deliver strategy updates based on 100% accurate ranges and any body language tells they have linked directly to actual hand strength. I would find that to be bollocks really and it would definitely ruin my tournament experience. I simply don't have a gang of pokerstove geek friends so don't see how I have the same advantage as the horse.

So it follows that we will be unlikely to see these people reach a final streamed table? If they really are that much of a beginner the only way they can win a big torn is to find AA/KK every other orbit anyway.

Sadly I do not have a 99% hit rate on reads, but accurately gauging someone’s style of play is 100% essential. When playing the streamed final any information that I gauged (which was isolated and only in response to the fact someone openly quoted a hand of mine on the table) had little or no effect on the way I was treating each player, as I had already noted their styles and observed showdowns, etc.

I have in a previous post stated that it made me feel uncomfortable that a player was telling me about my hand from 20 minutes previously, but that’s not a good enough reason to stop streaming. Those ‘against’ are probably afraid of people scrutinising their play, irrespective.


WARNING: MANTIS01 IS A TROLL. HE WILL NOT CHANGE HIS OPINION NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAY. HE DOESN'T EVEN CARE ABOUT THIS MATTER, HE JUST WANTS TO ARGUE.

Your posts have been good and I completely agree with them, but I just wanted you to know that any further replies to this guy will be a waste of your time. Good luck to you if you carry on.

picture?


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: blueace on September 27, 2012, 02:01:30 PM

[/quote]

WARNING: MANTIS01 IS A TROLL. HE WILL NOT CHANGE HIS OPINION NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAY. HE DOESN'T EVEN CARE ABOUT THIS MATTER, HE JUST WANTS TO ARGUE.

Your posts have been good and I completely agree with them, but I just wanted you to know that any further replies to this guy will be a waste of your time. Good luck to you if you carry on.
[/quote]


Lol thanks, Ive seen some good posts from him in the past but trollish at times I guess


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: MANTIS01 on September 27, 2012, 08:43:07 PM
Interesting debate. I support the streams 100%. Not a big fan of my face being on the net, but its great that friends (and friends of friends), and family can watch the action and this will hopefully draw more people into the game.

Honestly, there was virtually nothing I could have been told about my fellow players on the streamed table that I hadn't (largely) worked out for myself by sitting playing with them. What I was told was just confirmation of my own thoughts 99% of the time. Besides, we all have the same advantage/disadvantage and if we're any good can adjust our play and gears to keep people off the scent.

The problem for these new players attracted to the game is they won’t be any good. So they won’t have the skills to adjust gears and throw people off the scent. That's why streaming gives a further advantage to better players, making the playing field less level for novice players. And I'm sure competition organisers don't want a less fair environment for newcomers.

Myself, I am not 99% certain of reads and would find hole card info very useful in determining strategy.

In business terms streaming makes perfect sense and in terms of increasing runners I guess it works but let’s not kid ourselves this measure is good for the novice player. I think it would be very easy for new players to feel colluded against if locals are huddling up in breaks, in fact I would feel like that.

A horse plays a big money final and his whole stable are doing a sweat session. At the break they deliver strategy updates based on 100% accurate ranges and any body language tells they have linked directly to actual hand strength. I would find that to be bollocks really and it would definitely ruin my tournament experience. I simply don't have a gang of pokerstove geek friends so don't see how I have the same advantage as the horse.

So it follows that we will be unlikely to see these people reach a final streamed table? If they really are that much of a beginner the only way they can win a big torn is to find AA/KK every other orbit anyway.

Sadly I do not have a 99% hit rate on reads, but accurately gauging someone’s style of play is 100% essential. When playing the streamed final any information that I gauged (which was isolated and only in response to the fact someone openly quoted a hand of mine on the table) had little or no effect on the way I was treating each player, as I had already noted their styles and observed showdowns, etc.

I have in a previous post stated that it made me feel uncomfortable that a player was telling me about my hand from 20 minutes previously, but that’s not a good enough reason to stop streaming. Those ‘against’ are probably afraid of people scrutinising their play, irrespective.


WARNING: MANTIS01 IS A TROLL. HE WILL NOT CHANGE HIS OPINION NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAY. HE DOESN'T EVEN CARE ABOUT THIS MATTER, HE JUST WANTS TO ARGUE.

Your posts have been good and I completely agree with them, but I just wanted you to know that any further replies to this guy will be a waste of your time. Good luck to you if you carry on.

Hi blueace,

Above is an exchange between blueace, skolsuper and MANTIS01 in a thread about hole cards being on display in live streams. I would invite you to highlight which parts of this exchange you consider trollish.

Itt I have responded to a number of good posts from members who hold the opposite view to myself. I find challenging points and responding to the opposing view a good way to progress a debate. In fact a debate is pretty much opposing views coming together period. So I read your post and thought it was interesting so responded by presenting my opposite views. As far as I can see I offered you appropriate respect and didn't flame you and really just responded normally to the good points you made. Just because somebody doesn't agree with you it doesn't make them a troll. Debating is not trolling.

By comparison king of trolls skolsuper has offered nothing to this debate. A joke which wasn't funny and some proper serious capital letter trolling. It's obv to me he likes them juicy hole cards on display.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: blueace on September 27, 2012, 09:09:54 PM
Thanks, my response did indicate that I had read more than just this thread and that I liked the content of some of your posts. I had to agree with Skol though that they are often troll-'ish', or if you would prefer you tend to have strong opinions on issues..... I wasnt sure if skols reply was a bit tongue in cheek, but I guess not..


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: DMorgan on September 27, 2012, 09:22:28 PM
The theory goes that blonde created a bot designed to play devils advocate to multiply the length of threads and create more ad space.They called this bot Mantis.

Some of the management claim to have met this 'Mantis'. Conspiracy imo.



Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: MANTIS01 on September 27, 2012, 09:23:05 PM
Thanks, my response did indicate that I had read more than just this thread and that I liked the content of some of your posts. I had to agree with Skol though that they are often troll-'ish', or if you would prefer you tend to have strong opinions on issues..... I wasnt sure if skols reply was a bit tongue in cheek, but I guess not..

Nah skol's reply was trolling.

Will accept I have strong views. Don't write a whole line of text in capitals tho.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: smashedagain on September 27, 2012, 09:24:02 PM
Have you won much beside your big win Sean? I got heard your story was very similar to Robert who won the UKIPT and would love to here about it


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: skolsuper on September 27, 2012, 09:52:22 PM
Thanks, my response did indicate that I had read more than just this thread and that I liked the content of some of your posts. I had to agree with Skol though that they are often troll-'ish', or if you would prefer you tend to have strong opinions on issues..... I wasnt sure if skols reply was a bit tongue in cheek, but I guess not..

Mantis' "strong opinions" seem to depend a lot on the prevailing mood of the thread and what is opposite to it, even if that means arguing 2 conflicting opinions in different threads at the same time. You know what they say, opinions are like arseholes... Mantis has one at each end ;)


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: blueace on September 27, 2012, 10:22:26 PM
Have you won much beside your big win Sean? I got heard your story was very similar to Robert who won the UKIPT and would love to here about it
My first and my last hendon entry are Dtd deepstack firsts. Other than that no biggies, but iv only played in about 6 torns 500 or above. (3 ukipts 1 monte carlo and a couple of dtd 5's). I play what I can but only have every other weekend free. Not a big fan of travelling to play poker when DTD is around the corner.  I will play the big torns at dtd if im available so I dont know if that puts me in Mr B's camp.


Title: Re: Live Streams - Hole cards or not?
Post by: blueace on September 27, 2012, 10:23:43 PM
Thanks, my response did indicate that I had read more than just this thread and that I liked the content of some of your posts. I had to agree with Skol though that they are often troll-'ish', or if you would prefer you tend to have strong opinions on issues..... I wasnt sure if skols reply was a bit tongue in cheek, but I guess not..

Mantis' "strong opinions" seem to depend a lot on the prevailing mood of the thread and what is opposite to it, even if that means arguing 2 conflicting opinions in different threads at the same time. You know what they say, opinions are like arseholes... Mantis has one at each end ;)

I have a friend just like this. (I wonder if its him?)