Podcasts Poker Forums

I've only listened to few eps but this was easily the most interesting so far, I don't get the hate.

I'm plus one to liking to hear the back story, I think getting a rounded view of where people come from and what drives them adds to a wider understanding of who plays the game and how and why, and that that is both interesting and

I really liked Randy from hearing this show and I think that the criticism is overdone. Especially for someone who is from outside of the mainstream of the online poker world, doing a first interview, expecting it to be like listening to Krantz talking strategy (what did randy call him, an entertaining fellow? lol) is too much. I'd definitely be interested in hearing Nanonoko again, and I'm sure he would grow into a better strategic discussion as he got more comfortable.

Finally, I do miss the couple of hands that bart used to go over before the main interview - i think that they added an extra something to the podcast, but they seem to have dropped out of the last few episdoes.

Also, no need for the 5min intro foreplay on how they got into poker. We don't need to develop characters here, just go straight into the meat. Save the "interviews" for a longer different show. Your show is about cash game strategy.

Disagree, Even though a lot of the time the stories are really similar I still think they're really fun to listen to.

I enjoyed the podcast, even though it wasn't that insightful on Randy's part I think he did a decent job.

I completely agree with you MPHansen. I really enjoy hearing how people got into poker and worked their way up the limits.

I thought the interview was good. Not sure what people expected. I guess the hype built some people's expectations up to high. I'd love to hear a part 2.

This was amazing. He crushes so hard but can't articulate his thought process well at all. Just shows how much you can learn if you just keep playing and playing and playing

I think that people are being a little too hard on Randy here. It was obvious he has done few if any interviews, it was obvious he was a little nervous, but he has a lot of weight on his shoulders here and I think people need to put themselves in his shoes from the perspective of this interview.

He understands that all of these people look up to him/want to have his skills, he doesn't have a lot of friends in the poker community so he doesn't really fit in, and he knows how critical poker players can be. He also just signed a big deal with PokerStars and I'm sure they're expecting a certain level of professionalism etc. out of him. He's trying to build a brand but he's not experienced yet in doing so. Imagine if you had all of these expectations and then had someone sitting their asking you question after question for close to an hour. You know that thousands of people are gonna hear your answers. I think that Bart did all he could to keep it casual but still, I can understand how he could be nervous about it all and feel a lot of pressure.

I think that as time goes by with this, he'll get more media exposure/experience and he'll loosen up, until then, everyone needs to cut him some slack and hopefully he'll keep doing this stuff and we'll learn more about such an interesting player.

BTW, I totally 2nd or 3rd what some people are saying about the history/how did you get your start question Bart always starts his interviews with, I love it, if anything I wish Bart drilled down even further into dates and stuff to try to get an idea of when someone actually started winning, i.e., so you started playing in 2003, but when did you get a hang of the game (rough date) and actually start your winning ways, etc.

Again, good stuff Bart, keep it up!

You all may be right about why Randy wasn't a particularly engaging guest, and he did a relatively adequate job of answering the questions he was asked. It doesn't change the fact that it wasn't among the best interviews Bart has done.

I don't understand people thinking there is some huge hate-fest going on.

I only see a couple super negative responses. The others are merely valid opinions and critical responses to the tone and content of this episode. Most of the replies seem positive and supportive. Maybe one critical post was "overdone" but even then people are entitled to their opinions.

Yes there was some hype to this interview. We have also been spoiled by the charismatic/eccentric, verbose and eloquent poker minds especially here on DC from Krantz, FWF, Balugawhale, Flawless, etc. not to mention other epic interviews by Bart like Samoleus and Limon. Maybe that enters into our expectations of such a highly anticipated interview, justified or not.

The bar has been set high and we notice when it's not reached. We know not every episode will be epic but we can certainly voice our opinions when they don't seem up to par.

I don't see why we should be expected to adore every episode or guest.

While I think it would be disappointing (and kind of silly) if he chose not to do a part 2 because of a few comments from random poker players here; I don't think we should have to be overly polite just so he might do a part 2 at some point in the future. If anything seeing honest and critical reviews might be beneficial to how he approaches interviews in the future.

a part 2 would be sweet imo.

a part 2 would be sweet imo.

+2

What a fucking snoozefest. Typical geek nerd that is painful to listen to.

No strategy, no insight, soft ball answers, total waste of time and hype. The dude will not be a good instructor as he is not willing to put anything out. Perhaps after some negative comments and practicing he might become entertaining. Reminds me of durrr on cash plays.

Why no strategy talk when you are coming on to a poker strategy podcast? The fucking youtube video he put out is for play money players. Not even a 5nl player would learn something from that he piece of work.

watch your mouth here, show some respect

First off there was nothing wrong with the interview. Nano laid out how he thinks about the game in several interesting ways. What did you want to hear, him doing blow off hookers titties...... come on. Hes a kid, hes sedate and seems like a very nice guy.

If he listens to some of the advice being thrown around he will try to jam a square peg into a round hole for the next ten years and come of looking silly. He should be himself, he doesnt like casinos, whatever, he gets to be who he wants to be right. jeez.

Quite frankly, allthough its mildly amusing, you really have to think about whether you want to see Tony G and the like and all that silliness for the next twenty years. I very much hope the future of the public face of the game lies with talented and nice guys, not the blowhards, but somehow I think thats a longshot. Quite frankly, were I randly, Id just do my thing and let the 22 haters chew on each others cawks, he doenst need any of it.

btw i personally enjoyed this one a lot, it is clear that he thinks about poker a bit differently than a lot of people

-that entertaining fellow

Was a fine interview, glad to see a fellow UCDavis grad get some love.

To the haters:

Not everyone is as outgoing, well spoken and extroverted as you. Get over it. Yeah, he's a bit hesitant, and maybe isn't used to this type of conversation. Haven't you ever listened to a post-game interview? Some players cant even form coherent sentences, and are terribly awkward on camera.

I agree, maybe not as captivating as a as galfond and cts interview. Still, I thought there was good content, and it was nice to hear a non 2+2 approach to poker.

I just gave it a listen and found it to be an interesting interview tbh. It was refreshing to hear his take on poker and his approach because he comes across as quite atypical. It really reinforced the idea that there is more than one correct way to approach poker and if you are doing things differently, with success, then it's absolutely fine.

When it comes to playing a tonne of tables and still maintaining a decent win rate Nanonoko is obviously right up there as one of the best. It was interesting to hear how he thinks about poker.

Good interview. Thanks Bart and Randy for this.

Geez what's with the negativity. Getting an interview with nanonoko is pretty huge (has there ever been one before?!). GJ to both interviewer and interviewee and I would love to hear a second part.

The only part I didn't like was the rush poker discussion, why would you ask him about it when he hasn't even played it?