ALL MICRO LIMIT POSTERS PLEASE READ!

[Rev. Good Will]

I am tired of starting my responses to posts with
[ QUOTE ]
reads?

[/ QUOTE ]

just a friendly little reminder that in these marginal situations that you present to us, the very strong, influencial factor that usually indicates a correct, +EV decision is....

reads

tell us any read you have, particularly loose/tight, aggressive/passive, or maybe an example of how they acted in certain situations.

[bottomset]

I agree

and I'm sick of the endless supply of NC posts

[newfant]

[ QUOTE ]
and I'm sick of the endless supply of NC posts

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I think this board has quite a bit of content. The other forum I frequent is single-table tourneys and that forum is filled with NC stuff.

[btspider]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree

and I'm sick of the endless supply of NC posts

[/ QUOTE ]

its been really bad the past two weeks. i'm taking a break from micro until it settles.

also, stat posts are running rampant again.

[MrWookie47]

I also agree. However, if a poster is confused about a hand in which he or she has no read, don't be afraid to post that that's the case. People do have to make decisions during their first 30 hands at the table, and sometimes they're toughies. What is really the problem is when someone just cuts and pastes from the hand converter with no question, no reads, no thought processes, and no other text. In general, the more effort you put into your post, the more people will put effort into a making a good response.

As for the bounty of NC posts, maybe I'll make a designated thread to concentrate all the NC stuff into one. We had one of those a while ago, but it got lost like everything else. It won't last forever, but it'll be a decent temporary solution.

[McGahee]

I agree, sort of...
I mean, if you're serious about this game all you have to do is notice how newbs never have any reads and people like Enity & Nate tha' Great always have thorough breakdowns of their opponents - that ought to tell you something.
However, in terms of analyzing posts, I don't think there's anything detrimental in making people think about what the best line is to take against an unknown 1/2 villian - because the situations come up all the time where nobody stays at a table for more than 30 minutes.

[LoaferGee12]

Don't you agree that it is also nice to know how to play something against a typical/unknown opponent. At the lower limits there is a constantly new people coming in to your table, not to mention you're constantly switching tables to find the best one. There are many times where playing the hand like you would against a typical opponent is better than using a read that could be off-base due to small sample size.

[Rev. Good Will]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't you agree that it is also nice to know how to play something against a typical/unknown opponent. At the lower limits there is a constantly new people coming in to your table, not to mention you're constantly switching tables to find the best one. There are many times where playing the hand like you would against a typical opponent is better than using a read that could be off-base due to small sample size.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm, a point that i didn't bring up, but wanted to

Sorry for the overall vague rant, its just that i'm tired of these posts that just have a hand and that's it. If villian is unknown, then they should tell us.

[bottomset]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Don't you agree that it is also nice to know how to play something against a typical/unknown opponent. At the lower limits there is a constantly new people coming in to your table, not to mention you're constantly switching tables to find the best one. There are many times where playing the hand like you would against a typical opponent is better than using a read that could be off-base due to small sample size.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm, a point that i didn't bring up, but wanted to

Sorry for the overall vague rant, its just that i'm tired of these posts that just have a hand and that's it. If villian is unknown, then they should tell us.

[/ QUOTE ]

how about posting your thought process, attempt to put a typical opponent on a hand range, etc .. trying harder than just copy/paste from the converter

[LoaferGee12]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Don't you agree that it is also nice to know how to play something against a typical/unknown opponent. At the lower limits there is a constantly new people coming in to your table, not to mention you're constantly switching tables to find the best one. There are many times where playing the hand like you would against a typical opponent is better than using a read that could be off-base due to small sample size.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm, a point that i didn't bring up, but wanted to

Sorry for the overall vague rant, its just that i'm tired of these posts that just have a hand and that's it. If villian is unknown, then they should tell us.

[/ QUOTE ]

how about posting your thought process, attempt to put a typical opponent on a hand range, etc .. trying harder than just copy/paste from the converter

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm all for it.

[LoaferGee12]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Don't you agree that it is also nice to know how to play something against a typical/unknown opponent. At the lower limits there is a constantly new people coming in to your table, not to mention you're constantly switching tables to find the best one. There are many times where playing the hand like you would against a typical opponent is better than using a read that could be off-base due to small sample size.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm, a point that i didn't bring up, but wanted to

Sorry for the overall vague rant, its just that i'm tired of these posts that just have a hand and that's it. If villian is unknown, then they should tell us.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am also saying that even though I may have a read, there may be common situations where I would like to know the best plan of action against a typical opponent. I'm not saying that all hands are like this but there are definitely times where this comes up. I still do agree that the majority of the time, reads should be posted.

[BritNewbie]

That is one awesome avatar.

[beset7]

I really like this forum (I'm somewhat new to it)...

But, what it needs in aggressive moderator with a clear and direct mandate to lock NC threads and replace stat posts with a form message referring posters to the posting guidelines. Just a thought.

[Nfinity]

The lack of some of our more prominent pooh-bahs has a little bit to do with this. Grunch and Miles are on their respective sabbaticals, Shillx is spending more time working on his game I think, and I haven't seen Entity around in a bit. Leaving the like of people like Davelin carry on their stead.

I have been trying to do my best to make more elaborate posts when I reply. With the lack of reads in a post I'm trying to include what I would do if player blahblah was "this" or "this". It's a little hard because of the self-doubt in my own advice, I'm still learning too. It's hard to take a definetive stance on something when there's no Miles or Davelin(some of the time) to come behind me and publicly oust me. Yesterday I found myself pulling down TOP HPFAP and SSH just to reply to one post.

The point is I'm making the effort on this end. The worst fallacy you can fall into when dealing with a large group of people is that they will conform to the march that is the path of least resistance. That would be too easy. Understand that this is the Micro-Limits forum, where everyone starts. So the guy who joined yesterday and doesn't even own PT doesn't really know the way things are supposed ot go down.

Another thing I don't like that goes along with this rant is the lack of content in peoples responses. Everyone's "Grunching" and that's great, but take the time to elaborate on your responses. A two line sentence stating what you would do doesn't cut it for this crowd. There should be MORE explanation in the why's and how's in this forum than the Small Stakes and Mid-High, not less.

Also check back over the posts you've responded to. Nothing pisses me off worse than seeing 6 or 7 responses to a question all stating a different line. A different opinion is good, it incites discussion, but if someone comes up with something you think is better than the advice you posted, comment on it. If someone posts advice that you feel is sub-optimal, call 'em out, tell them why their logic is flawed or why your line is better.

No one likes being told they are wrong, but if you do it in a concise intelligent manner, they'll get over it. They should, how else are we gonna learn here.

EXPLAIN EXPLAIN EXPLAIN!!!!

[Rev. Good Will]

[ QUOTE ]
The lack of some of our more prominent pooh-bahs has a little bit to do with this. Grunch and Miles are on their respective sabbaticals, Shillx is spending more time working on his game I think, and I haven't seen Entity around in a bit. Leaving the like of people like Davelin carry on their stead.

I have been trying to do my best to make more elaborate posts when I reply. With the lack of reads in a post I'm trying to include what I would do if player blahblah was "this" or "this". It's a little hard because of the self-doubt in my own advice, I'm still learning too. It's hard to take a definetive stance on something when there's no Miles or Davelin(some of the time) to come behind me and publicly oust me. Yesterday I found myself pulling down TOP HPFAP and SSH just to reply to one post.

The point is I'm making the effort on this end. The worst fallacy you can fall into when dealing with a large group of people is that they will conform to the march that is the path of least resistance. That would be too easy. Understand that this is the Micro-Limits forum, where everyone starts. So the guy who joined yesterday and doesn't even own PT doesn't really know the way things are supposed ot go down.

Another thing I don't like that goes along with this rant is the lack of content in peoples responses. Everyone's "Grunching" and that's great, but take the time to elaborate on your responses. A two line sentence stating what you would do doesn't cut it for this crowd. There should be MORE explanation in the why's and how's in this forum than the Small Stakes and Mid-High, not less.

Also check back over the posts you've responded to. Nothing pisses me off worse than seeing 6 or 7 responses to a question all stating a different line. A different opinion is good, it incites discussion, but if someone comes up with something you think is better than the advice you posted, comment on it. If someone posts advice that you feel is sub-optimal, call 'em out, tell them why their logic is flawed or why your line is better.

No one likes being told they are wrong, but if you do it in a concise intelligent manner, they'll get over it. They should, how else are we gonna learn here.

EXPLAIN EXPLAIN EXPLAIN!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

well put, this is a better version of what I wanted to say

[Jaran]

What I am about to write is not to disagree with anything you have said in your post, however, there are times when a short response is to get the original poster thinking. When I first started posting here, most of the responses were on the curt side. If you didn't understand the reason behind a certain line, then you would ask (and most likely be given another equally terse response which would lead you into a different way of thinking about it). Of course, with especially dense posters, such as myself, it would occasionally reach the point of a straight forward explanation. It sorta comes back to that old "if you give a man a fish..." adage. I don't mind a short response. What does get to me is when there is a discussion going on about two alternate lines to take in a hand, and, rather than pointing out the reasons for liking a specific play over another, a poster will simply state that the other way is wrong. Drives me crazy.

-Jaran

[Disconnected]

[ QUOTE ]
What I am about to write is not to disagree with anything you have said in your post, however, there are times when a short response is to get the original poster thinking. When I first started posting here, most of the responses were on the curt side. If you didn't understand the reason behind a certain line, then you would ask (and most likely be given another equally terse response which would lead you into a different way of thinking about it). Of course, with especially dense posters, such as myself, it would occasionally reach the point of a straight forward explanation. It sorta comes back to that old "if you give a man a fish..." adage. I don't mind a short response. What does get to me is when there is a discussion going on about two alternate lines to take in a hand, and, rather than pointing out the reasons for liking a specific play over another, a poster will simply state that the other way is wrong. Drives me crazy.

-Jaran

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is basically right. I think it comes down to who is making the replies. There are some people (like me) here primarily to learn, and we should have more thoughts/reasons in our posts, I think.

There are others here primarily to teach. #1, the learners should be thankful for anything we get from them -- curt or not. When they reply with "standard" or even a "do you see why," it's up to us learners to figure it out (and articulate it), or ask for an explanation.

#2, if we collectively want the teachers to remain, we need to make sure that our posts are high in content. I don't think every hand needs to be the most interesting one in the world, but they should generally be marginal situations (to the person that posts them, if not to everyone that replies). If they're marginal situations, that means that the OP should have had to go through some sort of thought process and have some pros and cons of their choices, and those should be included in the post. If you're trying to learn, you should be doing that anyway, since the action you take is less important than the reasoning behind that action, and anyway, that gives all the readers a chance to learn something else as well.

Hmm, didn't mean for this to be such a long reply. But anyway, it's an important topic ongoing for this (and all forums). Thanks for listening.

[KingOtter]

[ QUOTE ]
What I am about to write is not to disagree with anything you have said in your post, however, there are times when a short response is to get the original poster thinking. When I first started posting here, most of the responses were on the curt side. If you didn't understand the reason behind a certain line, then you would ask (and most likely be given another equally terse response which would lead you into a different way of thinking about it). Of course, with especially dense posters, such as myself, it would occasionally reach the point of a straight forward explanation. It sorta comes back to that old "if you give a man a fish..." adage. I don't mind a short response. What does get to me is when there is a discussion going on about two alternate lines to take in a hand, and, rather than pointing out the reasons for liking a specific play over another, a poster will simply state that the other way is wrong. Drives me crazy.

-Jaran

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the worst thing possible.

(just kidding!)

I've found it very hard to reply to anything lately in Micro. Mostly because by the time I see the thread there are 15 replies, and the last thing I want to do is add to it. I read it, confirm whatever I was thinking, or correct whatever I was thinking, and move on.

I think replying without reading the replies is a valuable exercise, but I think it has added a lot of noise the the boards as every new person comes in starts trying it out. I mean, can't we read a post, think what we would say in your head, and then read the replies to confirm/deny it? And then post something to the effect of, 'Boy, when I first read it I thought xxx, but this post made me see yyy'. I mean, the first thing you have to do in poker is to be able to self-evaluate honestly. If you can't do it here, where can you do it?

It seems when I first started posting there was much more talk about how hands applied to the theory behind the poker play, rather than how to play vs. players with reads. A lot more EV calculations, and pot equity discussion than simply out-calculation.

Heck, I learned about pot equity of flush and OESDs here, not from a book. I went back and confirmed it in the book, of course... but when I read it there at first it didn't sink in.

KO

[Greg J]

[ QUOTE ]
Also check back over the posts you've responded to. Nothing pisses me off worse than seeing 6 or 7 responses to a question all stating a different line. A different opinion is good, it incites discussion, but if someone comes up with something you think is better than the advice you posted, comment on it. If someone posts advice that you feel is sub-optimal, call 'em out, tell them why their logic is flawed or why your line is better.

[/ QUOTE ]
Here here!

[ QUOTE ]
Grunch and Miles are on their respective sabbaticals, Shillx is spending more time working on his game I think, and I haven't seen Entity around in a bit. Leaving the like of people like Davelin carry on their stead.

[/ QUOTE ]
A brotha can't get no dap? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Seriously, there are several still here: Davelin, Aaron W, Wook, KO, Shadow, and several others (hard to name them all), plus some high quality posters that are getting there (@b luck, bottomset, Rev. GW, kapw7, and bozlax, among others).

[Rev. Good Will]

of course not! who can forget the awesomeness (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=micro&Number=1991448&f part=&PHPSESSID=) that GregJ contributes

btw, just started phase 2, BOOYA!

[Guthrie]

The absence of information might also be construed as no information. Why is it necessary to say "no reads" if no reads were available? Why isn't it enough to simply provide those reads if they are available?

Not everyone uses HUDs. Many difficult hands come in the first orbit. Should those simply be ignored, or is it really necessary to preface them with "no reads" so you won't have to waste your precious time prefacing your posts with "reads?"?

[Cosimo]

[ QUOTE ]
The absence of information might also be construed as no information. Why is it necessary to say "no reads" if no reads were available? Why isn't it enough to simply provide those reads if they are available?

[/ QUOTE ]

Saying it communicates to the reader that, yes, you know you should be providing reads, but the reason you didn't this time was because you just sat down (etc). It focuses the responses to say, "what do you do against a typical player here, because in this case I didn't actually have any reads?"

It's hard for us, the reading audience, to figure out if you're not posting reads cuz you're a clueless n00b. I'm definitely not going to write down the names of people that have explicitly noted that when they don't say anything about reads what they really mean is "no reads."

[TomBrooks]

[ QUOTE ]
and I'm sick of the endless supply of NC posts

[/ QUOTE ]
There are too many posts on this forum for me to read them all most days.

[aK13]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
and I'm sick of the endless supply of NC posts

[/ QUOTE ]
There are too many posts on this forum for me to read them all most days.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup. Turning into Small Stakes =(. I find myself reading/replying to less and less posts everyday, which sucks (for me anyway).

btw, Rev, your avatar is likely to give me a seizure.

[MrWookie47]

[ QUOTE ]
Not everyone uses HUDs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good reads don't come from HUDs. Good reads come from watching your opponents play and noting what hands they bet, raise, and fold. Knowing that an opponent loves to donkbet any flop from the BB in a blind defense situation is infinitely more valuable than knowing his postflop aggression factor is 1.68.

If you're not using a HUD, you should be striving to make these kinds of reads, since that's all the info you'll have at your fingertips. If you use a HUD, don't let that substitute for trying to get a real read.