.

Eagle26

IMO James talks thru hands very well.

he does have a super-aggressive mentality tho which is similar to mine so I am biased.

Eagle26

.

Aski

I guess the question here that needs to be asked is not so much why you think others should be doing the analysts job, but why do you think James shouldnt be. You say that you dont feel he knows what he is talking about, but don't really expand on that. Is it more of a case that you don't agree with his assessment. and if so maybe you should give some examples, as I'm sure James will be the first to admit if his analysis could have been better

I think most people that watch will have a favourite analyst, and you will probably find that this relates to the way that the viewer plays. I will admit that whenever Mark Bannin is on, I'm an avid viewer, as his analysis gells with the way I play, thus from my own perspective it is easier for me to understand what he is saying.

Other presenters have different styles and different approaches to both presenting and analysing, and there are numerous times when I've been in total disagreement  with the way a hand has been analysed, but that doesnt actually make the analysis incorrect, it just means that they have looked at it in a different way to what I myself would have considered, and maybe that is actually a good thing, as it then makes you think a bit more about the situation, and thus add something to your game.

As Scotty says above, JH has a very aggressive poker style and he tends to analyse them from that aspect, although since Dohhh made his post about the way JH analysed hands, I think JH has been offering alternate views of hands, as just opposed to his own style.

I have to admit that there are lots of times when I've watched a hand analysed, by numerous presenters, and disagreed with the way they have gone through the play, but it doesnt make their analysis any less valid.

I am sure there are people that watch Sky, who have a super aggressive nature when it comes to poker, that wonder how Tikay can be an analyst, given his more cautious approach. I am sure Tikay will more than forgive my next comment ( or at least I hope so ) but I remember his first ever night on PNL as an analyst and wondered what on earth had PNL done, I was wanting to learn about poker, and here was some guy talking about train stations, and I wondered What The Flip (grrrr at stupid Sky Filter ), and yet now I'm more than happy to listen to his whitterings interupted by his occasional chat on the actual game of poker 

Aski