A Posting Handbook For Peace

[bisonbison]

It's been said that SS needed a posting guide, and it became clear that it wasn't writing itself, despite the fervent prayers of whoever. So you'll forgive me if I went and wrote it. Please do your best to confine the discussion in this thread to what I've written and not whether I am your hero or the biggest overhyped jackass on these forums.

Here is, in my opinion, a basic guide to posting on the 2+2 forums, with a particular eye to posting in strategy subforums like Small Stakes or HUSH. This isn't really a 2+2 newbie guide. I don't know exactly how I'd categorize it, except that this is what sprung to mind when I sat down to finally hash this stuff out.

Chapter 1: Where Should I Post This?
2+2 has more than twenty sub-forums, most of them with well-developed personalities, clear functional distinctions and regular reading/posting populations (which, thankfully, overlap across sub-forums).

However dumbfounded new posters may be by this welter of choices, a moment's consideration can ensure that subforums don't get clogged with repetitive or off-topic posts.

The basic rules:
1. Each forum has its own domain of topics.
2. Each forum has a population that wants to keep the noise level low and the signal level high.
3. It is each poster's responsibility to figure out where their post should go.

If you don't know what forum covers what, you can A) Read the descriptions on this page (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/ubbthreads.php?Cat=&C=1), B) Use the search function to find similar topics, and/or C) Lurk more until such wisdom is revealed to you. When in doubt, search. I know that 2+2's search function is kind of wonky and hard to use, but it does work.

Failure to put forth this basic effort will be met by one or more of the following attitudes: 1) contempt, 2) disdain, 3) pity, and 4) non-interest.

As a tactic of last resort, you can make a post in the Beginners' Forum (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=begin) asking "Where should this go?" Furthermore, if you don't understand the terms used in a post, either respond to thread in question or post about it in Beginners (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=begin).

If you're met with attitudes 1, 2 or 4 in the Beginners' Forum, rest assured that the responder is being a dick and you are in the right.

The basic idea:

If I am posting about PokerTracker, why not post it in "Books/Software"?
If I'm posting about table selection for hold'em, is it really specific to Micro or SS, or would it be better suited to the General forum?
If I have a question about sample sizes and my win rates, shouldn't it go in the probability or poker theory forums?
If I don't know where to find the converter, why must I make a thread about it? Wasn't I born with my own smidge of divine spark? Doesn't that mean anything to me?

Author's Note: In reality, the forums thrive on a sense of community: helpful, jovial, sarcastic, competitive, and everything else by turns, and there's certainly a place for off-topicness amid the topics, but please label these forays into self-indulgence as such (a simple [off-topic] in the title does the trick) and understand that stretching the bounds of topicality also stretches people's patience, whether or not they voice their concerns. If there's a call to Omaha hi-lo arms in the Small Stakes HE forum, don't create 10 new threads to encompass all the necessary trash talk. Keep it contained in the original thread.


Chapter 2: Titling Your Posts
Posters want responses, so they make catchy, interesting, novel titles. Readers want to know what they'll be reading, so they like precision and some memorable fidelity between what the title says and what the post contains.

These two urges are in conflict, but the outcomes aren't equal. When readers' desires are ascendent, the forum gets a little dry: "T9s in the CO" followed by "JTs in the CO" followed by "JTs on the Button". When posters' desires are ascendent, though, the forums get almost unbrowsable. Random song lyrics. Testimonies to the physical genius of Salma Hayek. Shoutouts to the shorties. Not good, and it causes a dropoff in the serious strategic discussion that keeps the forum going.

Luckily, there's a happy medium. Clarity and interest can coexist if you take ten seconds to think "Will this make any sense to anyone outside of my own head?"

Titles To Be Emulated:
pocket 4s in the SB
AKo in BB vs. EP Raise
KK UTG With Straight/Flush Flop
TP On The River - How is this fold?
Bottom two pair against a LAG.

Titles To Be Avoided:
C'mon!
Could I have saved money here?
Halle Berry and Tyra Banks
Dealt AA twice in a row!
Hero does the flush draw.
Invisible Touch.
Clueless
Help.

Benign Middle Ground:
JTs in MP, turn question - YANKEES SUCK
Pocket 8s miss the flop, Olivia Williams is purty.
Help, I am losing my shirt at Party 3/6.

Chapter 3: Making Good Hand Posts
There are a lot of different types of threads, but the backbone of most of the strategy subforums are discussions of specific hands played live or online.

A good hand post is not one that has been converted to look all pretty and regular. A good hand consists of four things: context, text, a prompt, and not results.

Context
Poker is a complex social game. It is not played in a vacuum and your opponents, though you may hold them in contempt, are not cardboard cutouts sent to shovel you their money. Context is vital to proper play. Context means reads.

If you don't understand that reads can change the play of even the simplest hands, then you're going to be forever shrifted on good advice. That's it.

So tell us what your opponents are like. Qualify as needed, but give us something. "Bob seems tight after two orbits" is a read and is much better than the damning "NO READS".

If you've got nothing to share about your opponents, tell us anything you know about the table: how long you've been there, whether it seems aggro or passive, whether it was a friday night or monday morning, etc, etc, etc. Give us something. Make an effort beyond clicking the post button and hold others to the same standard.

Text
The meat of a hand post is the hand itself. It doesn't need the converter to be a good hand to talk about, but it does need a certain level of detail.

In order to give you decent advice on any reasonably close decision, we're going to need to know the following:

A. your cards (ranks and suits, please)
B. Your position at the table.
C. the board cards for each round (ditto to A)
D. the number of opponents still active for each round
E. The size of the pot.
F. Any betting action that affects D or E.

If it's folded to you in MP, you can just say it's folded to you. If all the active players call, you can just say that everyone called, but if you bet and get two callers on the flop, it's vital to know which two callers. It matters whether it's the CO and the Button or the CO and the BB. So be precise.

A Prompt
The prompt in a hand post is often implied. Post a hand and you're basically asking "Does this look alright?/Did I mess this up?"

However, if you've got a more specific question, don't be shy about shaping the whole post around it. If you're not sure you did the right thing on a given flop, stop the hand text at your last flop action. If you're not sure about a fold, STOP at the fold. Don't taint the interpretation with info you didn't have at the time of the decision. Put us in your baffled shoes.

Not Results
I've written about this at length before, but basically: don't include results. They mess up the discussion.

Conclusion
This is not intended to be the be all and end all of posting guides, but I'm operating on the assumption that it's easier to revise than it is to start anew, and that you guys will realize that this is a good faith effort to start a discussion and not another attempt by me to impose my will on the forums.

So. Let me hear your thoughts.

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
So. Let me hear your thoughts.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this should be stickied immediately. Wonderful post, good scribe.

[helpmeout]

I think the best posts for the poster and the people responding have a lot of information about why they did such and such.

Eg I didnt bet the flop because I was fearful of my opponents folding. I had a monster hand so I hoped an opponent made a second best hand on the turn where I'd collect larger bets.

"Not just did I play this good". You played it good if your thinking correctly about the situation.

I also hate the stupid catchy titles just to get attention.

[brassnuts]

This is Bison's attempt to completely take over the SS forum. Please disregard.

Nice post.

Edit: "completely take over the SS forum" should be read as follows: "compltely take over the world."

[ddubois]

Not that I disagree with the contents, but I think it's too excessively long and wordy. FAQ-type posts are normally, and should be, much more concise and to the point - after all, you want them to be read as widely as possible. IMHO.

[private joker]

FYI, my Halle Berry & Tyra Banks title wasn't supposed to just be inane and off-topic; I assumed it would be understood that it was dealing with my Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif Q /images/graemlins/club.gif, and that's more interesting than a post just titled "QQ" or "two black ladies in the pocket" or whatever. But I'll refrain from such references in the future.

[KingSix]

Good Luck...

I think this could apply to almost every message board everywhere on the net. People don't search, don't spell check, blah blah blah and there have been exactly 4,584,222,678,001 people who have attempted something like this before. I've noticed that on almost every board I've ever read they've failed.

I also think that people just post where they think they can get a reply. Many just look at the 6,000 plus posts and post in SS, even if has a bit more to do with Poker Theory (651 posts).

Despite those facts, I applaud the effort, but if you personally aren't going to moderate it, spending hours and hours moving posts and the like, I think it is doomed to fail.

Everyone was new here once. It can be daunting and difficult for newbies to get up the courage to post, and I think that a long list of rules enforced by a cabal of long timers will just make them hesitant to post or sign up and join the community.

Personally, I think a sub-forum should be started for just hands that people want input about. I think that it would be much easier to "enforce" a specific form for "hands that want advice" in their own forum. Let SS be for everything else including the hands people don't want advice on ("funny hands", "crazy hands", etc.)

/images/graemlins/confused.gif

King

[bisonbison]

I got what you were getting at, and it doesn't bug me, but I think it bugs other people.

[Carmine]

As a newcomer(but lurker for awhile)I would say it is necessary to sticky this asap. It took me several weeks if not months to pick up on what makes up a good thread here (even though I don't post much)

If we're looking for criticism then I would say it is a bit lengthy. Attention spans dwindle quite quickly for most readers and after a few paragraphs most threads are interpreted as "blah..blah blah..blah.blah". Defeating the whole purpose of such thread.

One area that I feel could be greatly shortened is chapter two. I don't feel the catchy phrases are the worst thing to happen to a forum. At worst you are wasting a few seconds clicking on and quickly off the thread if you're not interested in replying. At best you might get a little chuckle from someone's wit.
Otherwise nice job (place "thumb's up" icon here).

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
If I don't know where to find the converter, why must I make a thread about it?

[/ QUOTE ]
Add a link to the converter and a couple sentences about what it is for. Since this is my request it would no longer be self-promotion for you to include it /images/graemlins/wink.gif.

I strongly prefer one hand per thread. I've stopped reading multihand posts in self-defense. If giving each hand its own thread creates too many threads, you are posting too many hands.

[ QUOTE ]
Here is, in my opinion, a basic guide to posting on the 2+2 forums, with a particular eye to posting in strategy subforums like Small Stakes or HUSH.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think this guide would be more effective if you focused on the specific goal of SS. What is on-topic in this forum? How do we like to see things done? If this works out well you can always do additional guides for HUSH, Micro, etc.

You need to address the inevitable question of what is SS: limit hold'em, ring game play, and appropriate limits.

[Bob T.]

2. Each forum has a population that wants to keep the noise level low and the signal level high.


Except maybe in the zoo /images/graemlins/grin.gif.

Otherwise, I think you did a fine job.

[MoreWineII]

Again, I sort of disagree with you regarding thread titles. I'm simply unable to title a thread "AT in the CO", "JT, how was it?", "Flush draw, bet the turn?"

Maybe I'm crazy that way. I'm anti-dullness. But if it really annoys other posters that much, I'm willing to let a co-worker or wife title my posts and I'll just fill in the body.

FWIW, I don't choose which threads to click by title anyway. It's usually by poster first, then by number of replies second.

[huxbux]

Agreed. The line of thought a player follows through the course of a particular hand is critical to the content of a post. With this included in a post, combined with player reads, it make a hand post vastly superior then even simple included reads.

More importantly, the inclusion of the poster's thought process provided a better position for responders to clarify, explain, and learn vital poker concepts. This, in turn, leads to a better understanding of the "why" behind poker play for anyone just reading the post, and might cut down on inane posts in the future pertaining to the same situation.

Part of the reason for so many repetitive posts might rest with the fact that so many posts fail to address the "why" and "why not". So, in sum, the content part makes or breaks a post.

[IndieMatty]

It's good.


As far as titles, short of beratement, I doubt there is something anyone could do to stop the "snappy" titles. (which I enjoy) If there are people who have issues with titles, they can simply avoid the 2 second waste of time it would take to click on the thread and move to the next "55 in MP" thread.

Overall, good job, thanks.

[Malcom Reynolds]

This should be stickied ASAP. If I read something like this when I first signed up on the forum, I would have been able to avoid a lot of the quick or sarcastic comments a lot of newbies face.

There's a certain culture on this forum that takes a little bit of time to pick up on. It's not very clear at first glance (if it was, there wouldn't be the current problems on the forum).

Anyway 1-table tournaments has a sticky, how do we get this to get the same status?

[sthief09]

one problem you didn't address is how sh[/i]itty threads keep getting bumped up. someone makes a dumb post, then 8 people make jokes about the original thread, then another people make jokes about those jokes. I'm guilty of this too (and possibly the most guilty), but I feel like someone (you) should make a post in the thread titled "THIS THREAD IS DEAD" to tell everyone to stop responding to that thread.

an example is that retarded thread we had last week that started with a .5/1 O/8 hand that ended up with like 150 responses and no content whatsoever. we kind of expected it to die out, but it didn't until the afternoon because every person who read it felt compelled to respond to it

[scrub]

[ QUOTE ]

You need to address the inevitable question of what is SS: limit hold'em, ring game play, and appropriate limits.


[/ QUOTE ]

As a public service to the overall community, this forum really ought to lay claim to 10/20 at a minimum. This may not have been the case 3 years ago, but it certainly is today.

Most PP 15/30 hands that get posted in mid/high belong in here as well.

scrub

[KingSix]

[ QUOTE ]
one problem you didn't address is how shitty threads keep getting bumped up. someone makes a dumb post, then 8 people make jokes about the original thread, then another people make jokes about those jokes. I'm guilty of this too (and possibly the most guilty), but I feel like someone (you) should make a post in the thread titled "THIS THREAD IS DEAD" to tell everyone to stop responding to that thread

[/ QUOTE ]

A great idea that could be fixed by someone with some "moderator" power...they could just lock the thread. I know that several boards have this type of policy for duplicate threads, locking them right away and letting them drift off into oblivion.

King

[IndieMatty]

Agreed, and 2-4 should go to Micro.

[Gatts]

[ QUOTE ]
Agreed, and 2-4 should go to Micro.

[/ QUOTE ]

No way. Some of the best posters here play 2/4.

[wuwei]

Great post.

[ QUOTE ]
A Prompt
The prompt in a hand post is often implied. Post a hand and you're basically asking "Does this look alright?/Did I mess this up?"

However, if you've got a more specific question, don't be shy about shaping the whole post around it. If you're not sure you did the right thing on a given flop, stop the hand text at your last flop action. If you're not sure about a fold, STOP at the fold. Don't taint the interpretation with info you didn't have at the time of the decision. Put us in your baffled shoes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is especially good advice, and something to which people should pay more attention.

[IndieMatty]

I agree with that. But realistically if the stakes were re-organized, 2-4 should probably be separated from 10-20.

[Derek in NYC]

A word about responses within a thread. While it is somewhat helpful to give a generic answer such as, "I dont like the call on 4th street with that board", more detailed responses that lay out your embedded reasoning are better. Nate the Great's and Stellar Wind's comments come to mind as what we should all strive to write. Rather than just stating their opinion, they nearly always back it up with a math, strategy, etc. justification. This is how I learn from the post.

Also, regular use of the subject line is helpful. For example, where I changed the topic from Bison's thread guidelines, I noted so by calling this subthread "on responses". It makes the overall thread much more readable.

[ElSapo]

[ QUOTE ]
agree with that. But realistically if the stakes were re-organized, 2-4 should probably be separated from 10-20.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, in some respects the forum names don't work at all anymore.

Micro - Beginner
Small - Intermediate
Mid-High - Advanced

Except that doesn't work because with the boom you have some strong players learning and playing low, and some bad players starting high.

Micro - Loose-loose passive-passive
Small - Loosive-passive
Mid-High - Tight agressive

Obviusly, this doesn't work either. 3/6 and 5/10 are decidedly small stakes, but you can find some wretchedly bad, tight, aggressive games at those stakes, most especially online. Then again, the other day I raised a 15/30 hand and got three cold-callers. Go figure.

Point being, the forum names and stakes aren't exact, as far as knowing what you'll be reading about. You could probably make an argument that a forum specifically for Party 2/4, 3/6 and 5/10 hands alone would work great -- and it probably would -- seeing how many of our hands are from there.

Anyways. Lot of words, not much content here. Oops. Guilty.

ElSapo

[stinkypete]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with that. But realistically if the stakes were re-organized, 2-4 should probably be separated from 10-20.

[/ QUOTE ]

they are currently separate. 2-4 = small stakes, 10-20 = mid-high. what's the problem?

[bisonbison]

King, I don't think this is going to work without content moderation. I've said that many times. But people have asked for this (or something resembling this), so I thought it might help if we can see if it has any salutory effect. At the very least, if you don't like a post, you can snidely link to this thread.

[bisonbison]

You need to address the inevitable question of what is SS: limit hold'em, ring game play, and appropriate limits.

Stellar, I think you're right and I'm thinking about this now.

[Jeff W]

I like the guide as a beginning. I agree with a previous poster that it needs to be edited for brevity and conciseness. I would like to see a list of overused topics to include:

Playing flopped quads/monsters to win the most money.
Bad beat posts with no content.
Pokertracker stats for inadequate sample sizes.
Winrate.

A list of linked posts covering general topics and archetypal hands would be another. If regulars post their favorite threads, we will have an excellent list.

A guide to using the search function properly would help out new posters and emphasize the importance of doing independent research.

[Boltsfan1992]

Hiya -

My first reaction to this was, "Is this to improve the readers' lives when reading the multiple posts or to improve the posters' lives so that they are accepted here quicker?" After re-reading it, my question still remains, but I think you are trying to help the new person succeed. So, here is my reaction...

Would this help me post for the first time? I would be much more aware of where things went and not ask the dumb question in an inappropriate location. If I made a mistake, and people jumped on me for it, then I would take the heat, use this stupid emoticon /images/graemlins/blush.gif and move on. I do realize that I don't have ego issues that need verification from strangers or from those I just met...but quite possibly other people are different...

Are these rules to help reduce the noise we hear from time to time by obnoxious people? I read those threads and always ask myself, why just ignore the guy so he'd shut up. These people crave the very attention we give him by responding. If these rules are to try to prevent that issue from occuring, well, in my mind it won't work. The small number of obnoxious people (and I know it gets larger with each month), are not going to read the rules anyway and the quality won't get better from that standpoint. As a reader, I have a responsibility to either respond or ignore what is written. When I find a thread spirialing downward, I usually give up and read something else. I skim pretty quickly. But the rules won't help those posters causing trouble...they'll just break them because they can...

The rules won't help the truly clueless either. How everyone here handles that one is up to him/her. Are people able to discern the difference between the utterly clueless, and a novice who doesn't know better? The only way a novice can be an expert is to practice and take risk. No matter what anyone does, there will be some people who won't ever understand (maybe they shouldn't be playing poker anyway, who knows?).

However, if we are speaking about a novice user who wants help and wants to be included here, and the others want him/her included as well, have the new user read your suggestions before they post here. But, I would re-write parts of it (if you don't follow these suggestions x,y,z might happen) so that a new person (again the person trying to write the right thing in the right place) would not be afraid to make a mistake. I would include something about knowing your audience and basic writing style (tone, ALL CAPS MEANS YOU ARE SHOUTING, and basic grammar, and attidude) - that might help a new person trying to learn.

The strongest piece of this is your discussion of how to write a hand post. I would read the hand discussions with greater regularity if posters followed these instructions.

FWIW

[MoreWineII]

[ QUOTE ]
Playing flopped quads/monsters to win the most money.
Bad beat posts with no content.
Pokertracker stats for inadequate sample sizes.
Winrate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Amen.

[KingSix]

[ QUOTE ]
King, I don't think this is going to work without content moderation. I've said that many times. But people have asked for this (or something resembling this), so I thought it might help if we can see if it has any salutory effect. At the very least, if you don't like a post, you can snidely link to this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you mean "content"(as typed) or "constant"?

Either way, I totally agree.

Don't get me wrong, I am 1000% for the entire set of guidelines and think they should be stickied, but IMO, it may still be a failure even if 80% of the people totally committed to follow them to a "T".

It only takes a handful of people to ignore the sticky post to plunge us back into what we have now. Add to that the fact that several posters can be a touch....um....."abrasive"....and I think you end up back where we started from. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

I do applaud your efforts becuase I am one apathetic fool and would have never taken the time to put this together. I end up just sorting through the noise.

Thanks.

King

[Malcom Reynolds]

What if these guidelines appear the FIRST TIME you use the hand converter? Then it saves a cookie so that you don't have to see it again.

That way everyone trying to use the converter won't have an excuse that they didn't know.

[Eratosthenes]

Three suggestions:

1) Encourage posters to proofread before they post.

2) Encourage them to use the converter; it really does help. I have pretty much stopped reading hand posts that don't use the converter.

3) Discourage all from posting to trolling threads. If the trolls don't get responses, maybe they will go away.

Thanks for your effort on this--it looks good.

[Aces McGee]

Hey Bison

Good stuff.

One thought: [ QUOTE ]
If you're not sure you did the right thing on a given flop, stop the hand text at your last flop action. If you're not sure about a fold, STOP at the fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd take it a step further, and stop before the fold...making the prompt something like "My action?" I do this on my rare hand posts.

I think it's relatively easy for responders to agree or disagree with a decision I make. In other words, if I fold, they concentrate solely on that decision, not other decisions I could have made. If I leave it up in the air, it forces people to consider all the option. Just a thought.

I also agree with sthief09; there's too much inside joke stuff that bumps silly threads. I also have a request to what appears to be the NYPC crowd (as well as various other posters who know the true identities of other 2+2ers):

If you're posting a hand with other 2+2ers in it, please consider using their 2+2 names, not their real names. I think I've finally figured out that Sthief09 is Josh and bdkclash is Brad and sfer is Dave/Wendell, but new posters won't and it just confuses things.

-McGee

[asofel]

[ QUOTE ]
please consider using their 2+2 names, not their real names. I think I've finally figured out that Sthief09 is Josh and bdkclash is Brad and sfer is Dave/Wendell, but new posters won't and it just confuses things.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know what you mean...I've been starting a little list to help keep things straight...unfortunately, I can't seem to figure out Evan's name......

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
2) Encourage them to use the converter; it really does help. I have pretty much stopped reading hand posts that don't use the converter

[/ QUOTE ]

I, for one, would prefer that people not be encouraged to use the converter, as long as they are encouraged to:

a)post all the relevant information in a hand (reads, positions, cards, action, pot size, etc)
b) NOT post raw hand histories

The reason is that I am in what must be the very small minority who would rather read a narrative hand history, rather than a converted one. The converter is great when compared to a raw hand history, but I find that "UTG folds, UTG+1 folds, UTG+2 folds, MP1 calls, MP2 calls, Hero raises, CO folds, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, MP1 calls, MP2 calls" is harder to read than "MP1 and MP2 limp, I raise in CO-1 with red kings. Folded back around to the limpers who both call."

I do agree that the converter has some good aspects, precise pot size, for one, and getting the action absolutely correct, for two. I also see its benefits; as I said, it's a million times better than a raw hand history.

Just wanted to give voice to those who may disagree but don't say anything out of respect for Bison. Not that I don't have respect and appreciation for him or the work he put into the thing; I'm just sure he can take it.

-McGee

[asofel]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2) Encourage them to use the converter; it really does help. I have pretty much stopped reading hand posts that don't use the converter

[/ QUOTE ]

I, for one, would prefer that people not be encouraged to use the converter, as long as they are encouraged to:

a)post all the relevant information in a hand (reads, positions, cards, action, pot size, etc)
b) NOT post raw hand histories

The reason is that I am in what must be the very small minority who would rather read a narrative hand history, rather than a converted one. The converter is great when compared to a raw hand history, but I find that "UTG folds, UTG+1 folds, UTG+2 folds, MP1 calls, MP2 calls, Hero raises, CO folds, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, MP1 calls, MP2 calls" is harder to read than "MP1 and MP2 limp, I raise in CO-1 with red kings. Folded back around to the limpers who both call."

I do agree that the converter has some good aspects, precise pot size, for one, and getting the action absolutely correct, for two. I also see its benefits; as I said, it's a million times better than a raw hand history.

Just wanted to give voice to those who may disagree but don't say anything out of respect for Bison. Not that I don't have respect and appreciation for him or the work he put into the thing; I'm just sure he can take it.

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]

reference a post by a 7 post stranger in small level nl/pl:

[ QUOTE ]
I tried to use the hand converter , but it said it was taking a week off or something? Wierd, anyway dont be TOO hard on me as im still pretty new.

[/ QUOTE ]

couldn't help laughing as he then proceeded to just cut and paste the history into his post, and that was it. I've already linked one new user to this thread, and I'm hoping others do as well...

[UsedToBeARock]

[ QUOTE ]
C) Lurk more until such wisdom is revealed to you.

[/ QUOTE ]

If only more people just took this simple advice...

Well written!

[Richard Berg]

Great post, bison. Nitpicks:

* Halle Berry and Tyra Banks -- I think this is perfectly clear if you think for a second (which you should be accustomed to if you're on a strategy forum)
* Make a list of things not to do.

[spamuell]

[ QUOTE ]

* Halle Berry and Tyra Banks -- I think this is perfectly clear if you think for a second (which you should be accustomed to if you're on a strategy forum)

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't get it. I think a lot of people don't just think of them and think "black", it didn't even occur to me. Whatever though, I don't mind reading threads with lame titles.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]


Not Results
I've written about this at length before, but basically: don't include results. They mess up the discussion.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is one of those opinions that somehow has evolved into fact simply by virtue of repetition. I, for one, like to have quick access to the results. I have seen no evidence that posting the results skews the discussion.

And for those of you who cling to the belief that posting the results up front is bad, is it really not good enough to simply post them in shaded white? I would like to continue to see shaded results, even if on more than one occasion I read a reply from one of the youthful posters here stating "Please don't post the results here, even in white, because [I'm so immature and impulsive] I will read them anyway even though I don't want to."

[Octopus]

[ QUOTE ]
"Please don't post the results here, even in white, because [I'm so immature and impulsive] I will read them anyway even though I don't want to."

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you mean, "Please don't post the results here, even in white, because *others* are so immature and impulsive (or curious or whatever) and will read them anyway even though it skews their commentary."

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"Please don't post the results here, even in white, because [I'm so immature and impulsive] I will read them anyway even though I don't want to."

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you mean, "Please don't post the results here, even in white, because *others* are so immature and impulsive (or curious or whatever) and will read them anyway even though it skews their commentary."

[/ QUOTE ]

1) As part of my trying to be the kinder, gentler poster, I thought I edited out the "immature and impulsive" clause. Mea Culpa. /images/graemlins/blush.gif

2) The original quote actually was made by a poster, who was claiming that he preferred that results not be posted at the outset because he couldn't control himself from looking at the results before coming to his opinion. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Malcom Reynolds]

I think the idea with results is that they can only hurt the strategy discussion, with no real potential benefits other than satisfying human curiousity.

[StellarWind]

1. Many posters do read the results posted in white before analyzing the deal. Like it or not, right or wrong, this is unquestionably true.

2. It is virtually impossible for a person with knowledge of the results to analyze objectively as if they did not have knowledge of the results. The analysis is completely tainted. Appeals of "unauthorized information" rulings at duplicate bridge tournaments have established this beyond a shadow of a doubt.

3. Analysis that *might* be tainted because results were available to the author is less valuable to me because I cannot trust its objectivity.

4. Some posters lack the self-confidence to express an opinion that looks foolish in light of the results. The play they like would have been a disaster so they say nothing to preserve face.

Based on these four points, this ...

[ QUOTE ]
I've written about this at length before, but basically: don't include results. They mess up the discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]
... is a major understatement.

[nothumb]

Dammit bison, how can there be peace when you don't post those poems you promised? I spent at least 5 minutes on the one I wrote for you. I was really hurt.

NT

[bisonbison]

Okay guys, Mat Sklansky tells me that he'll sticky an appropriate posting guide type post if we make one, so my idea is to revise what I've written until people are reasonably satisfied, add a chapter between 1 & 2 called: "what belongs in the SS forum", have a chapter called "the x most important posts you could ever read", and expand the "not results" section of "making good hand posts" to include an actual argument. Then I'll start a new thread with a boring, clear title and ask Mat to sticky it.


What I picked up from other people's responses:

1. shorten it up, so that someone might actually read the whole thing.
2. Define Small Stakes clearly (limit ring, certain stakes...)
3. Links to threads that cover overdone topics like downswings, PT stats, winrates, blah blah blah (PLEASE POST YOUR SUGGESTED LINKS)
4. explain the converter
5. other stuff I'm sure I've ignored.

I'll post a revised version of my original post soon (it will be a reply to this thread). Please make any suggestions you think I'm blind to - I'm not in charge of this, I'm just taking charge of this.

[bisonbison]

Welcome to the Small Stakes (SS) Forum, 2+2's biggest and handsomest place to post. If you're new to 2+2 or small stakes, please take a moment to read through this short guide. It'll help you fit in and keep this hectic place a little closer to fine.

There are 4 basic things to cover:
1. Where should I post this?
2. What goes in the SS forum?
3. Keeping SS Readable.
4. Hand Posting Etiquette.


1. Where Should I Post This?
2+2 has more than twenty subforums, and while the options can be a little overwhelming at first, a moment's thought can keep these subforums from getting clogged with repetitive or off-topic posts.

The basic rules:
1. Each forum has its own domain of topics.
2. Each forum has a population that wants to keep the noise level low and the signal level high.
3. It is each poster's responsibility to figure out where their post should go.

If you don't know which forum covers what, you can A) Read the descriptions on this page, B) Use the search function to find similar topics, and/or C) Lurk more until such wisdom is revealed to you. When in doubt, search. I know that 2+2's search function is kind of wonky and hard to use, but it does work.

Failure to put forth this basic effort will be met by one or more of the following attitudes: 1) contempt, 2) disdain, 3) pity, and 4) non-interest.

If A, B and C fail you, you can make a post in the Beginners Forum (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=begin) asking "Where should this go?" or "What does this term mean?" If you're met with attitudes 1, 2 or 4 in the Beginners Forum (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=begin), rest assured that the responder is being a jerk and you are in the right.

That having been said: the Small Stakes forum is for discussion of fixed limit Hold'em ring games with stakes between 2/4 and 15/30.

What about: 1/2 and lower? Microlimits (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=micro)
Higher stakes? Mid/High (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=mediumholdem).
Short-handed games? HUSH (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=headsup)
Tournaments? 1-table Tourneys (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=singletable), Multitable Tourneys (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=tourn), and The WPT and TV Poker (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=tv)
No-Limit and Pot-Limit Hold'em? Here (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=ssplnlpoker)


2. So What Goes In The SS Forum?
Well, like I said: fixed limit Hold'em ring games with stakes between 2/4 and 15/30.

Now, there's a lot under that umbrella. The forum's bread and butter are posts about the play of specific hands (This one time, I had AKo in a 2/4 game blah blah blah); but we also cover more general questions about how to approach, say, middle pair heads-up against an aggressive opponent or a weak draw in the middle of a raising war; as well questions about moving up; table selection; opponent reads; evaluating your own leaks and so on and so forth.

We're not all business here, but off-topic posts that aren't explicitly labeled (off-topic) in the subject line tend to get a very negative response. To save yourself some anguish, you might want to entertain these kinds of questions before you hit "Submit":

If I am posting about PokerTracker, why not post it in Books and Software (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=books) or on the official PokerTracker forums (http://www.pokertracker.com/forum/)?
If I'm posting about table selection for hold'em, is it really specific to Micro or SS, or would it be better suited to the General Hold'em Forum (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=holdem)?
If I have a question about sample sizes and my win rates, shouldn't it go in the Probability (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=probability) or Poker Theory (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=genpok) forums?
If I don't know what X is and everyone else seems to, shouldn't I either ask about it in a thread or make a new post in the Beginners Forum (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=begin)?

The other kinds of posts that are frowned upon are those that have been covered here, in depth, a hundred times. Most of the regular posters here have been playing hold'em seriously for several months or more. None of us care if your pocket aces got busted by 72o or if you made your first straight flush. The things we prefer to discuss are: "Am I thinking about this the right way?" and "Did I play well, given what I knew?"


3. Keeping Small Stakes Readable.
When you make a new post, you get to pick a title. Posters want responses, so they make catchy, novel titles. Readers want to know what they'll be reading, so they like precision and some kind of fidelity between what the title says and what the post contains.

These two urges are in conflict, but the outcomes aren't equal. When readers' desires are ascendent, the forum gets a little dry: "T9s in the CO" followed by "JTs in the CO" followed by "JTs on the Button". When posters' desires are ascendent, though, the forums get almost unbrowsable. Random song lyrics. Testimonies to the physical genius of Salma Hayek. Shoutouts to the shorties. Not good, and it causes a dropoff in the serious strategic discussion that keeps the forum going.

Luckily, there's a happy medium. Clarity and interest can coexist if you take ten seconds to think "Will this make any sense to anyone outside of my own head?"

Titles To Be Emulated:
pocket 4s in the SB
AKo in BB vs. EP Raise
AJs against Gus Hansen and another 2+2er.
TP On The River - How is this fold?
Bottom two pair against a LAG.

Titles To Be Avoided:
C'mon!
Could I have saved money here?
Dealt AA twice in a row!
Hero does the flush draw.
Clueless
Help.

Benign Middle Ground:
JTs in MP, turn question - YANKEES SUCK
Pocket 8s miss the flop, Olivia Williams is purty.
Help, I am losing my shirt at Party 3/6.


4: Hand Posting Etiquette
There are a lot of different types of threads, but the backbone of Small Stakes is discussion of specific hands played live or online.

You'll probably notice that a lot of the hand posts here look alike. Many have been formatted using bisonbison's hand converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi). All you have to do to convert a hand is take a hand history from one of the supported sites (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/sites.html), paste it into the top box, hit "Convert Hand" and paste the contents of the bottom box into your 2+2 post.

Despite the converter's popularity, there's more to a good post than a pretty face. A good hand for discussion has four things: context, text, a prompt, and NO results.

Context
Poker is a complex social game. It is not played in a vacuum and your opponents, aren't cardboard cutouts sent to shovel you their money. Context is vital to proper play. Context means reads.

If you don't understand that reads can change the play of even the simplest hands, then you're going to be forever shrifted on good advice. That's it.

So tell us what your opponents are like. Qualify it as needed, but give us something. "Bob seems tight after two orbits" is a read and is much better than the damning "NO READS".

If you've got nothing to share about your opponents, tell us anything you know about the table: how long you've been there, whether it seems aggro or passive, whether it was a Friday night or Monday morning, etc, etc, etc. Give us something. Make an effort beyond clicking the post button and hold others to the same standard.

Text
The meat of a hand post is the hand itself. It doesn't need the converter to be a good hand to talk about, but it does need a certain level of detail.

In order to give you decent advice on any reasonably close decision, we're going to need to know the following:

A. your cards (ranks and suits, please)
B. Your position at the table.
C. the board cards for each round (ditto to A)
D. the number of opponents still active for each round
E. The size of the pot.
F. Any betting action that affects D or E.

If it's folded to you in MP, you can just say it's folded to you. If all the active players call, you can just say that everyone called, but if you bet and get two callers on the flop, it's vital to know which two callers. It matters whether it's the CO and the Button or the CO and the BB. So be precise.

A Prompt
The prompt in a hand post is often implied. Post a hand and you're basically asking "Does this look alright?/Did I mess this up?"

However, if you've got a more specific question, don't be shy about shaping the whole post around it. If you're not sure you did the right thing on a given flop, stop the hand text at your last flop action. If you're not sure about a fold, STOP at or even before the fold. Don't taint the interpretation with info you didn't have at the time of the decision. Put us in your baffled shoes.

NO Results
When you post a hand and either include ("Button shows 9h 9d, three of a kind nines) or indicate ("Should I slow down anywhere here?" "Any place I can fold this?" "You won't believe what UTG raised with") the results, you tell the reader to ignore certain possibilities. You provide information that wasn't available to you at the time of the first round, the flop, the turn or the river. You lock responders, however subtly, into the the hand your opponent did have, instead of the ones he could have had. And you'll never know whether the advice you've gotten is really what others would have done in your place. So don't include results.

[bisonbison]

Well guys, I'm just bumping this cause I want comments.

[arkady]

Great post, but I am more than sure that you are one of the individuals that started the crazy title trend. I recall a time several months ago where some of the titles were simply baffling and while you were letting your creative juices flow the rest of the people abused the hell out of it. No reason for me to point out this hypocrisy I suppose, especially given the fact that you are trying to rectify the matter.

[bisonbison]

hehe, in other posts I've definitely acknowledged my role in starting the shitty title avalanche.

[sfer]

Add a line that says something like "If you think Party is rigged, don't worry, you might actually suck at poker and that can be fixed."

[Rico Suave]

bison:

Nice. I like it mucho! A sticky post like this is a great idea.

The only thing I might change is perhaps just leaving out the section on "Making SS readable." While I certainly understand where you are coming from, it seems a bit much to give guidelines on how to title ones post.

--Rico

[marand]

For a complete newbie like me it was very helpful.

I just love your hand converter, great tool /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
The only thing I might change is perhaps just leaving out the section on "Making SS readable." While I certainly understand where you are coming from, it seems a bit much to give guidelines on how to title ones post.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure I would go as far as this comment, but I do agree that you have devoted too many words to an unimportant subject. Not to mention that most of the abuses were not the work of newcomers.

I'm pretty flexible about titles to hand posts. I really only want immediate recognition that it is a hand post. Sometimes posts look like general questions, random whines, or preflop chart issues but are actually a specific hand. That's a good way to have me not even consider it.

Other things besides titles that could go in this section:

1. Someone suggested that you recommend changing the title when a response is off-topic, explores a subtopic, or makes a new point. I still think that's a good suggestion.

2. Please tell them to stop putting multiple hands in the same thread.

The revised Guide is a big upgrade. I really like it. Nice work.

[bisonbison]

Alrighty, version 3:

Welcome to the Small Stakes (SS) Forum, 2+2's biggest and handsomest place to post. If you're new to 2+2 or small stakes, please take a moment to read through this short guide. It'll help you fit in and keep this hectic place a little closer to fine.

There are 4 basic things to cover:
1. Where should I post this?
2. What goes in the SS forum?
3. Keeping SS Readable.
4. Hand Posting Etiquette.


1. Where Should I Post This?
2+2 has more than twenty subforums, and while the options can be a little overwhelming at first, a moment's thought can keep these subforums from getting clogged with repetitive or off-topic posts.

The basic rules:
1. Each forum has its own domain of topics.
2. Each forum has a population that wants to keep the noise level low and the signal level high.
3. It is each poster's responsibility to figure out where their post should go.

If you don't know which forum covers what, you can A) Read the descriptions on this page (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/ubbthreads.php?Cat=), B) Use the search (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/search.php?Cat=) function to find similar topics, and/or C) Lurk more until such wisdom is revealed to you. When in doubt, search. I know that 2+2's search function is kind of wonky and hard to use, but it does work. The FAQ (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=1282525&page=0&view=colla psed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=1) for the Internet Gambling forum has some helpful tips on using Search (3rd item from the top in the FAQ).

Failure to put forth this basic effort will be met by one or more of the following attitudes: 1) contempt, 2) disdain, 3) pity, and 4) non-interest.

If A, B and C fail you, you can make a post in the Beginners Forum (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=begin) asking "Where should this go?" or "What does this term mean?" If you're met with attitudes 1, 2 or 4 in the Beginners Forum (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=begin), rest assured that the responder is being a jerk and you are in the right.

That having been said: the Small Stakes forum is for discussion of fixed limit Hold'em ring games with stakes between 2/4 and 15/30.

What about: 1/2 and lower? Microlimits (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=micro)
Higher stakes? Mid/High (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=mediumholdem).
Short-handed games? HUSH (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=headsup)
Tournaments? 1-table Tourneys (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=singletable), Multitable Tourneys (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=tourn), and The WPT and TV Poker (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=tv)
No-Limit and Pot-Limit Hold'em? Here (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=ssplnlpoker)


2. So What Goes In The SS Forum?
Well, like I said: fixed limit Hold'em ring games with stakes between 2/4 and 15/30.

Now, there's a lot under that umbrella. The forum's bread and butter are posts about the play of specific hands (This one time, I had AKo in a 2/4 game blah blah blah); but we also cover more general questions about how to approach, say, middle pair heads-up against an aggressive opponent or a weak draw in the middle of a raising war; as well questions about moving up; table selection; opponent reads; evaluating your own leaks and so on and so forth.

We're not all business here, but off-topic posts that aren't explicitly labeled (off-topic) in the subject line tend to get a very negative response. To save yourself some anguish, you might want to entertain these kinds of questions before you hit "Submit":

If I am posting about PokerTracker, why not post it in Books and Software (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=books) or on the official PokerTracker forums (http://www.pokertracker.com/forum/)?
If I'm posting about table selection for hold'em, is it really specific to Micro or SS, or would it be better suited to the General Hold'em Forum (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=holdem)?
If I have a question about sample sizes and my win rates, shouldn't it go in the Probability (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=probability) or Poker Theory (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=genpok) forums?
If I don't know what X is and everyone else seems to, shouldn't I either ask about it in a thread or make a new post in the Beginners Forum (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=begin)?

The other kinds of posts that are frowned upon are those that have been covered here, in depth, a hundred times. Most of the regular posters here have been playing hold'em seriously for several months or more. None of us care if your pocket aces lose to 72o or if you made your first straight flush. No one thinks that Party is rigged, and no one wants to hear about your affiliate program. The things we prefer to discuss are: "Am I thinking about this the right way?" and "Did I play well, given what I knew?"


3. Keeping Small Stakes Readable.
Poker is thriving right now, and small stakes games and the SS forum have never been busier. Since 2+2 doesn't have moderators for content, every poster is responsible for keeping SS readable and usable in these boom times.

We're not asking a lot. If you're making a new post, it really helps if you keep an eye on titling it clearly. We all enjoy the occasional snappy reference to Salma Hayek at the top of a bankroll thread, but everyone will appreciate it if you take the ten seconds needed to ask "Will this make any sense to anyone outside of my own head?"

Some people browse in "flat" mode, where every response in a thread is displayed at once in chronological order. Others browse in "threaded" mode, where replies are displayed one at a time with different linked branches of replies and sub-replies. These different views can make it hard to track the flow of the discussion, so it helps a great deal to title your replies informatively if you're digressing or making a new point. And if your reply is a response to what someone else has written, include the specific text you're responding to (either with the UBB quote function or by putting the text in question in quotes or italics).


4: Hand Posting Etiquette
There are a lot of different types of threads, but the backbone of Small Stakes is discussion of specific hands played live or online.

You'll probably notice that a lot of the hand posts here look alike. Many have been formatted using bisonbison's hand converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi). All you have to do to convert a hand is take a hand history from one of the supported sites (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/sites.html), paste it into the top box, hit "Convert Hand" and paste the contents of the bottom box into your 2+2 post.

Despite the converter's popularity, there's more to a good post than a pretty face. A good hand for discussion has four things: context, text, a prompt, and no results.

----------
<font color="blue">Context</font>
Poker is a complex social game. It is not played in a vacuum and your opponents, aren't cardboard cutouts sent to shovel you their money. Context is vital to proper play. Context means reads.

If you don't understand that reads can change the play of even the simplest hands, then you're going to be forever shrifted on good advice. That's it.

So tell us what your opponents are like. Qualify it as needed, but give us something. "Bob seems tight after two orbits" is a read and is much better than the damning "NO READS".

If you've got nothing to share about your opponents, tell us anything you know about the table: how long you've been there, whether it seems aggro or passive, whether it was a Friday night or Monday morning, etc, etc, etc. Give us something. Make an effort beyond clicking the post button and hold others to the same standard.

<font color="blue">Text</font>
The meat of a hand post is the hand itself. It doesn't need the converter to be a good hand to talk about, but it does need a certain level of detail.

In order to give you decent advice on any reasonably close decision, we're going to need to know the following:

A. your cards (ranks and suits, please)
B. Your position at the table.
C. the board cards for each round (ditto to A)
D. the number of opponents still active for each round
E. The size of the pot.
F. Any betting action that affects D or E.

If it's folded to you in MP, you can just say it's folded to you. If all the active players call, you can just say that everyone called, but if you bet and get two callers on the flop, it's vital to know which two callers. It matters whether it's the CO and the Button or the CO and the BB. So be precise.

<font color="blue">A Prompt</font>
The prompt in a hand post is often implied. Post a hand and you're basically asking "Does this look alright?/Did I mess this up?"

However, if you've got a more specific question, don't be shy about shaping the whole post around it. If you're not sure you did the right thing on a given flop, stop the hand text at your last flop action. If you're not sure about a fold, STOP at or even before the fold. Don't taint the interpretation with info you didn't have at the time of the decision. Put us in your baffled shoes.

<font color="blue">No Results</font>
When you post a hand and either include ("Button shows 9h 9d, three of a kind nines) or indicate ("Should I slow down anywhere here?" "Any place I can fold this?" "You won't believe what UTG raised with") the results, you tell the reader to ignore certain possibilities. You provide information that wasn't available to you at the time of the first round, the flop, the turn or the river. You lock responders, however subtly, into the the hand your opponent did have, instead of the ones he could have had. And you'll never know whether the advice you've gotten is really what others would have done in your place. So don't include results.
----------

Finally, if you want to include multiple hands for discussion in one thread (which we discourage), please post each hand in a separate reply (Hand 1 goes in your original post, Hand 2 goes in a reply to that...) to help keep clear which hand is being discussed.


Conclusion
No one's going to ban you if you fail to live by these guidelines, but they were designed through long, public conversations among the SS community, with the goal of keeping the forum as useful as possible. Many people, myself included, have 2+2 to thank for their success at the poker table and new members are always welcome here. We just hope that these guidelines will help make that entry seamless.


thanks go to: the posters of the 2+2 forums. sup champs.