reputation

[curtains]

When I first started posting on 2+2 I was met with a lot of resistance and people who criticized my ideas. Now I admit I was a weaker player then and made quite a few more incorrect posts, but however I notice that as my reputation as a "solid" poster grows, the level of resistance my ideas are faced with also diminishes.

The main reason I bring this up is because I have posted a few things in the MTT section in the past 2 days or so, and am facing a lot more resistance there, where I'm not well known at all. I've already been called weak tight for advocating a flat call with JJ after an UTG raise and 2 callers in a deep stacked WPT event.

Anyway my main point is that people probably worry too much about whose posting and thus when they feel that someone is wrong, they can be scared to post as such due to the poster's reputation. Even though my ideas are basically on the same level in the MTT and STT forums, I am criticized a great deal more there at the moment.

[skipperbob]

Why don't you eat your own poop and then stab someone /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[KramerTM]

I don't think I've made a single post in this forum without someone criticizing either my thoughts or punctuation if they had to.

Maybe when my posts get to above 1000 I'll have some more credibility.

While we're on the topic, if you feel someone has made a post that is "a waste of time" or a "stupid post," realize that responding to it negatively only makes it twice as wasteful and twice as stupid.

[KramerTM]

BTW, curtain. This post is stupid. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Apathy]

quiet, n00b

[Iamafish]

I completly agree with you. I posted something way back in the limit forum, quiet different than your post, and got flamed. They had no right to do so, they knew what I was talking about but gave me sh*t anyway. That place is f*cking BS, everyone is so friggin' anal its ridiculous.

Anyway, Ive just recently seen the same question asked agian in the limit forum and in the zoo. People gave there deep honest theory's, 'cuz c'mon, the poster has 3000 posts.

Understand that people are narrow minded about poker. Your play is wrong to them maybe becuase you did not succeed.

If you won, and got a million dollars. You'd be their hero, and you would have "made an amazing play with JJ".

[Iamafish]

lol...Im the only one?

[curtains]

Well hey, I have 4000 posts in the MTT section too. Or at least it shows up next to my name.

[lacky]

with all respect, you are the weak tightest player I know. You make it work very well for you in sng's, but mtt's are a completely different thing. You spend your entire time building a stack in mtt's, because if you dont you quickly find yourself having to push all in against an entire table, most of whom will have enough chips they can call and not have it effect them greatly.

Having 5 players bust at your table doesn't improve your situation any in a mtt, the bubble is still so far away it doesn't matter, and the low money doesnt matter anyway.

Mtt's are all about taking the top few places, out of hundreds of players. That takes lots of chips, which means taking lots of chances and living with the outcome.

Although I cannot play your approach well in sng's, I do understand it, and the same thinking will not work in mtt's.

Steve

[curtains]

You have no idea how I play MTT's. Trust me it's not the same way as I play sit and go's. I like to believe I'm good enough to actually adjust my play due to a different structure of poker.

If you really think I play the same style you have to be very naive. However thanks for the free multitable tournament lessons. I never actually considered all of those factors.

I posted a few MTT hands on this forum before...let me find them, its been a while. You can tell me how weak-tight they are. I don't have many recent ones since Ive been focusing mainly on sit and gos for a bit.

[lacky]

ok, fair nuff, I'll go to my room now /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[curtains]

These are all from a $150 buyin on Stars


easy game....

PokerStars Game #1894124252: Tournament #8870990, Hold'em No Limit -
Level II (15/30) - 2005/06/13 - 21:32:55 (ET)
Table '8870990 26' Seat #7 is the button
Seat 1: farmboy (750 in chips)
Seat 2: Williamhill (3260 in chips)
Seat 3: curtains (4540 in chips)
Seat 4: Sandrine (1845 in chips)
Seat 5: flower2 (3875 in chips)
Seat 6: dmkay (1590 in chips)
Seat 7: legggggggggy (1060 in chips)
Seat 8: SWING 80% (1270 in chips)
Seat 9: WIZ69 (1230 in chips)
SWING 80%: posts small blind 15
WIZ69: posts big blind 30
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to curtains [4s 7s]
farmboy: folds
Williamhill: folds
curtains: raises 50 to 80
Sandrine: folds
flower2: folds
dmkay: folds
legggggggggy: calls 80
SWING 80%: calls 65
WIZ69: folds
*** FLOP *** [4d Js 4h]
SWING 80%: checks
curtains: bets 120
legggggggggy: folds
SWING 80%: raises 120 to 240
curtains: calls 120
*** TURN *** [4d Js 4h] [Td]
SWING 80%: bets 300
curtains: raises 3920 to 4220 and is all-in
SWING 80%: calls 650 and is all-in
*** RIVER *** [4d Js 4h Td] [Qd]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
SWING 80%: shows [8h 8d] (two pair, Eights and Fours)
curtains: shows [4s 7s] (three of a kind, Fours)
curtains collected 2650 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 2650 | Rake 0
Board [4d Js 4h Td Qd]
Seat 1: farmboy folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: Williamhill folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: curtains showed [4s 7s] and won (2650) with three of a kind,
Fours
Seat 4: Sandrine folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: flower2 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: dmkay folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: legggggggggy (button) folded on the Flop
Seat 8: SWING 80% (small blind) showed [8h 8d] and lost with two pair,
Eights and Fours
Seat 9: WIZ69 (big blind) folded before Flop

[valenzuela]

1)The noobs need to berate a weaker player, its very easy to disagree with someone everybody else disagrees.
ON THIS FORUM..I have seen posters who have never posted any thoughts about poker besides obivous answers to some typical A5 push
Here is a typvial thread.
Noob: what do i do here.
lastchance( who its one of my favourite posters becuase he simply answers the question..not a deep explanation but he gives u the answer..push or fold.): obvious push.
3 more posters: duh, push donk.( i used to be one of those 3 posters...now I usually like to act like i have a clue unless im the first ansering)

so my guess is ure thread probably look preety similar

[curtains]

PokerStars Game #1894169937: Tournament #8870990, Hold'em No Limit - Level II (15/30) - 2005/06/13 - 21:38:26 (ET)
Table '8870990 31' Seat #6 is the button
Seat 1: mdsmith (590 in chips)
Seat 2: LuckyBoots (3010 in chips)
Seat 3: BreakRibs (2975 in chips)
Seat 5: curtains (5860 in chips)
Seat 6: AgilityMD (2190 in chips)
Seat 7: lrellis (1680 in chips)
Seat 8: flukert (1970 in chips)
Seat 9: riverthenuts (2705 in chips)
lrellis: posts small blind 15
flukert: posts big blind 30
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to curtains [Qd 8s]
riverthenuts: folds
mdsmith: folds
LuckyBoots: folds
LuckyBoots is sitting out
BreakRibs: folds
curtains: raises 55 to 85
AgilityMD: folds
lrellis: folds
flukert: calls 55
*** FLOP *** [Jc 9d Th]
flukert: checks
mdsmith said, "what does Agility md mean?"
curtains: bets 120
flukert: calls 120
*** TURN *** [Jc 9d Th] [Ts]
flukert: bets 180
curtains: raises 300 to 480
flukert: calls 300
*** RIVER *** [Jc 9d Th Ts] [5s]
flukert: checks
Astrom is connected
curtains: bets 5040
flukert: calls 1285 and is all-in
*** SHOW DOWN ***
curtains: shows [Qd 8s] (a straight, Eight to Queen)
flukert: shows [Ah As] (two pair, Aces and Tens)
curtains collected 3955 from pot
LuckyBoots has returned
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 3955 | Rake 0
Board [Jc 9d Th Ts 5s]
Seat 1: mdsmith folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: LuckyBoots folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: BreakRibs folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: curtains showed [Qd 8s] and won (3955) with a straight, Eight to Queen
Seat 6: AgilityMD (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: lrellis (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 8: flukert (big blind) showed [Ah As] and lost with two pair, Aces and Tens
Seat 9: riverthenuts folded before Flop (didn't bet)

[curtains]

PokerStars Game #1894362898: Tournament #8870990, Hold'em No Limit - Level IV (50/100) - 2005/06/13 - 22:01:38 (ET)
Table '8870990 19' Seat #8 is the button
Seat 1: duchinator (995 in chips)
Seat 2: AawwNutz (2380 in chips)
Seat 3: OLATOO (900 in chips)
Seat 4: mr. casual (1790 in chips)
Seat 5: ChicagoSlims (2115 in chips)
Seat 6: curtains (8995 in chips)
Seat 7: Crisper (2090 in chips)
Seat 8: TheBeat (1790 in chips)
Seat 9: rurouni143 (1435 in chips)
rurouni143: posts small blind 50
duchinator: posts big blind 100
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to curtains [Ad 9c]
AawwNutz: folds
OLATOO: folds
mr. casual: folds
ChicagoSlims: calls 100
curtains: raises 350 to 450
Crisper: folds
TheBeat: folds
rurouni143: folds
duchinator: folds
ChicagoSlims: calls 350
*** FLOP *** [3d Tc 5c]
ChicagoSlims: bets 400
curtains: raises 8145 to 8545 and is all-in
ChicagoSlims: folds
curtains collected 1850 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 1850 | Rake 0
Board [3d Tc 5c]
Seat 1: duchinator (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 2: AawwNutz folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: OLATOO folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: mr. casual folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: ChicagoSlims folded on the Flop
Seat 6: curtains collected (1850)
Seat 7: Crisper folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: TheBeat (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: rurouni143 (small blind) folded before Flop

[curtains]

These are all plays I'd be unlikely to make in a sit and go.

[skierdude1000]

I think newer posters feel intimidated

[Jay36489]

I agree people sometimes shrug off someone who doesnt have a good reputation. There is some bad advice on this forum, but that is to be expected. It is an open discussion group. A post should be judged on content, not the reputation of the poster, and I think people could be more open minded about it.

The bottom line is that we are here to learn, not to compete with eachother with respect to our poker knowledge (e-penis). If you have posted good responses and gotten [censored] for it, [censored] 'em.

[lacky]

well, you trying to prove your point after i already conceded to you.

However, your trying to prove your not weak tight by showing me hands where you flop what is clearly the best hand, then bet it. I don't understand what that has to do with weak tight.

But, it doesn't matter.

your smarter than me, you make more than me, you post more than me, we are agreeing

Steve

[curtains]

Its no big deal, I was only showing a few hands I posted here as I dont really have access to any others.

I posted those before I even saw your post /images/graemlins/smile.gif But okay the point is that I play those hands drastically different as to how I would were it a sit and go. Whether you think they aren't weak tight or not I don't know.

Sorry to get all snippy, but I just found it unbelievable that someone would expect me to play in a similar fashion in a 10 player tournament that pays the top 3 players as I would in an extremely large tournament that pays a top heavy prize fund to the final table.

[Sponger15SB]

This stuff happens in the mid-high limit forum all the time. A well respected poster will make a completely absurd play that would be flamed mercilously if a newbie made it, and everyone collectively takes out there hand and strokes the well respected posters e-penis.

[curtains]

hehe yea. I have posted plenty of things that would get totally flamed if I posted anonymously. I might try that from now on...make new handles just to post controversial hands and see the reaction, so be careful flaming random posters, this is my new strategy.

[Jason Strasser]

Curtains,

You make a good point. It's definitely true that a repuatation will definitely effect how people read a post. But here's the thing... Because of the sheer volume of posts that are generally pretty off on a given topic, if you are a beinning player you are still much better off listening to what an experienced poster has to say and then going from there.

With regards to flat calling with JJ in a WPT event... Jesus that sounds familiar (I busted last week reraising an EP raiser with JJ in Paris). I'm not sure why anyone would call you weak tight to me but it is probably just some donkey. An idea to keep in mind though is that if you are playing NL and extremely deep, like say 400bb or something (you really might be this deep I think in the first level of some of the events out there), you should try to build up the pot size with hands like JJ or even 66 because a reraise wont often cause you to fold preflop which is a big concern with reraising pf with a hand like a pair that you really want to see a flop with.

-Jason

[johnnybeef]

I think that it has less to do with your rep, and more to do with the fact that your posts (in this forum at least) are spot on. That being said, I didn't like your advice in the mtt forum on the mcevoy problem. there is no way in hell i will ever get away from a king high flush with only three of my suit on the board in an early level of a tourney (but then again, i hate plugging away in a mtt with an average stack so i tend to play long ball early and then switch gears to small ball when i get the biggie.)

[lacky]

well, it probably was because my sng play is much closer to mtt and ring play, and i really dont understand yours at all. I know it works for you and many others, and I've tried that style, but it is so unnatural for me that I can't do it. I spose I assumed that to be true in the opposite direction for you, an unfair assumption

Steve

[curtains]

Well ok I could see calling sometimes too. Dont forget this was like a WPT event or something and the pot is raised and reraised in front of you. The reraiser is saying he has the nuts, so you have to decide whether or not hes an idiot. I think they would have to be pretty insane to 3 bet there with the queen high flush.

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]
king high flush with only three of my suit on the board in an early level of a tourney (but then again, i hate plugging away in a mtt with an average stack so i tend to play long ball early and then switch gears to small ball when i get the biggie.)

[/ QUOTE ]

You are at a table of pros. Think about what hands might be in the hand and what will risk their whole stack.

Then compare that to a typical online table. In an online table, no, you are correct. Vs. Pros, that hand is a fold.

[PrayingMantis]

OK, a little hijack:

Jason, how about a paris trip report? here or on your site? After all you WERE the chip-leader (or 2nd stack?) it's not like you busted at the 3rd level or something. Should be interesting I think.

And now more to the point:

Curtains, MTTs and SNGs surely play differently, any intelligent player understands this, you sure know it too. I didn't have a chance to read all the discussion you're talking about in the MTT forum, but I think that there are cases in which people can be labeled "weak-tight" there, even if they are only slightly risk-aversed in certain situations. 2+2 MTT forum is extremely laggy in these days, and there are sure other ways to play strong winning MTT poker. I can imagine how something that you (curtains) write there might appear as weak-tight.

About the issue of "reputation", well, sure reputation counts, in any field in life. People can say very stupid things, but if they have an important function in society, academy, or anything, they are considered knowledgeable and smart, and many times this is complete BS. I think that in most cases, posters who have tons of posts but have very bad advice, don't get too far. A very good example was Cris Brown, who was very popular in a way and had many posts and was talking about poker in a very authoritative way, but actually had very little idea what she's talking about. She got seriously flamed couple of times, and her "reputation" didn't help. People can still judge objectively.

Anyway, the REALLY interesting thing could be an open discussion between Lacky and curtains about _general_ SNG strategy, since there seems to be some essential difference between their approaches. So if you dont mind, let us hear, at least some of it, here. It could be very interesting.

[Winwood]

If the posters on your forum rate a poster (read - STT forum + Curtains) then you rate him. Thats easy. If no-one knows the poster then you don't rate him. Thats also easy, if you lurk often.

If you don't know much about poker, you can't decide what is good advice and what isn't.

You need other factors to help you decide. How the hell am I supposed to know if flat-calling with JJ UTG+3 in a 2000 MTT is right? Well, its cos the respected poster said so, and he knows better than me.

So don't be surprised if people who don't know you do not accept your ideas straight away. Its a mistake for a lurker on this site to do so. You need to rate the poster before rating his advice.

[The Don]

Interesting enough I just posted my stats with a lot of praise for curtains without even seeing this beforehand. Without a doubt in my mind he is the most valuable poster on this forum and defintitely deserves his esteemed rep.

[Degen]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree people sometimes shrug off someone who doesnt have a good reputation. There is some bad advice on this forum, but that is to be expected. It is an open discussion group. A post should be judged on content, not the reputation of the poster, and I think people could be more open minded about it.

The bottom line is that we are here to learn, not to compete with eachother with respect to our poker knowledge (e-penis). If you have posted good responses and gotten [censored] for it, [censored] 'em.

[/ QUOTE ]

great avatar...i love that movie

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]

When I first started posting on 2+2 I was met with a lot of resistance and people who criticized my ideas. Now I admit I was a weaker player then and made quite a few more incorrect posts, but however I notice that as my reputation as a "solid" poster grows, the level of resistance my ideas are faced with also diminishes.

The main reason I bring this up is because I have posted a few things in the MTT section in the past 2 days or so, and am facing a lot more resistance there, where I'm not well known at all. I've already been called weak tight for advocating a flat call with JJ after an UTG raise and 2 callers in a deep stacked WPT event.

Anyway my main point is that people probably worry too much about whose posting and thus when they feel that someone is wrong, they can be scared to post as such due to the poster's reputation. Even though my ideas are basically on the same level in the MTT and STT forums, I am criticized a great deal more there at the moment.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow, great post, right on

I thought about this today, I was reading through a post of yours regarding a call with 3 people left, where you held A9 diamonds and had around half the chips and middle stack with about two fifths of the chips went in. You felt it was an instacall, which I agreed with, but others disagreed somewhat. Gigabet then also disagreed with you, and you should see how much more negative the responses are against your call. After Gigabet disagrees, most people immediately agree with him and do not think about it, which is bad. Think for yourselves. But that is what respect is, and I must say that I favor posters that I "respect" more simply by reading what they wrote opposed to what others write. Usually, there is a reason you and others are respected, and if you make good posts and back it up with play, people respect that obviously. Weak tight though? They obviously have never seen you play.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]

So don't be surprised if people who don't know you do not accept your ideas straight away. Its a mistake for a lurker on this site to do so. You need to rate the poster before rating his advice.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is only true for people who don't have much sense for what's going on. For more experienced players/readers, rating the player comes through rating the advice.

[Degen]

I agree man, but its not really a bad thing...and also, wouldn't you say that you are probably more advanced as an SNG player than as a MTT player?

I got a lot of flack for strategy stuff at first, and now i get very little from newer poster, tho the old guys still like to rip into me.

I think this hand (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2799802&page=&view=&s b=5&o=) is a perfect example of what you mean.

If Giga had posted this, I think it would have been seen as genius by the masses (right or wrong) but he didn't, so it was a bad play (i'm not saying it was good or bad, only what the perception would have been).

[AliasMrJones]

[ QUOTE ]

Dealt to curtains [4s 7s]
farmboy: folds
Williamhill: folds
curtains: raises 50 to 80


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree this isn't weak-tight. I think of it more along the lines of suicide...but then again I play a lot more STT's than MTT's.

[lacky]

Well, it's just the two general approaches to sng's. You can either play very few hands early, play only when you have a large edge and avoid risk while waiting for the fish to bust out, then play a perfect push fold game later. Or, you can play relativly lots more hands, activily trying to gain chips from the fish playing poorly and steal chips from the good players avioding risk at all cost.

Curtains is firmly in the 1st camp. I can't play that tight even when I try, so am in the second camp by default. The funny thing is they both work. I don't have any real experience in $215's and beyond, but in $109's and $55's both approaches result in a decent win rate if applied well.

Steve

[microbet]

I'm curious about how much of the difference between camps on this site is philosophical and how much is measurable.

Do both of you track things like VP$IP by level?

[bugstud]

I am quite glad you are posting in MTT now. you are quite an asset to these forums.

[axeshigh]

You deserve the reputation /images/graemlins/laugh.gif I just thought it was hilarious to get flamed like hell when I said the same thing you later said in a certain post. Actually, it doesn't seem to be worth it to post here if you aren't respected. Looks better to read, learn, and shut up.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
If the posters on your forum rate a poster (read - STT forum + Curtains) then you rate him. Thats easy. If no-one knows the poster then you don't rate him. Thats also easy, if you lurk often.

If you don't know much about poker, you can't decide what is good advice and what isn't.

You need other factors to help you decide. How the hell am I supposed to know if flat-calling with JJ UTG+3 in a 2000 MTT is right? Well, its cos the respected poster said so, and he knows better than me.

So don't be surprised if people who don't know you do not accept your ideas straight away. Its a mistake for a lurker on this site to do so. You need to rate the poster before rating his advice.

[/ QUOTE ]


My real point is that people shouldn't accept people's advice right away just because they have a reputation. It's fun being called an idiot every now and then.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought about this today, I was reading through a post of yours regarding a call with 3 people left, where you held A9 diamonds and had around half the chips and middle stack with about two fifths of the chips went in. You felt it was an instacall, which I agreed with, but others disagreed somewhat. Gigabet then also disagreed with you, and you should see how much more negative the responses are against your call. After Gigabet disagrees, most people immediately agree with him and do not think about it, which is bad. Think for yourselves. But that is what respect is, and I must say that I favor posters that I "respect" more simply by reading what they wrote opposed to what others write. Usually, there is a reason you and others are respected, and if you make good posts and back it up with play, people respect that obviously. Weak tight though? They obviously have never seen you play.

[/ QUOTE ]


btw I still think that A9s is a clear call. The reasons given for not calling were very vague and based on future hands where the dissenters were expecting everything to go perfectly. SNG Power Tools, which didnt exist back then, has it as a resoundingly clear call, as I beleive I checked it out recently for nostalgic purposes.

[curtains]

I don't think my sit and go play is more advanced than my MTT play. I was almost primarily an MTT player before I got into sit and gos. I have always had very good results in them and I think that now with my new sit and go experience and stronger math understanding, I will do even better.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, it's just the two general approaches to sng's. You can either play very few hands early, play only when you have a large edge and avoid risk while waiting for the fish to bust out, then play a perfect push fold game later. Or, you can play relativly lots more hands, activily trying to gain chips from the fish playing poorly and steal chips from the good players avioding risk at all cost.

Curtains is firmly in the 1st camp. I can't play that tight even when I try, so am in the second camp by default. The funny thing is they both work. I don't have any real experience in $215's and beyond, but in $109's and $55's both approaches result in a decent win rate if applied well.

Steve

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm quite sure that there are many ways to win. I wouldn't be shocked that someone could probably play about twice as many hands as me in the early rounds, on average, and win as much as or more than I do.

I've just found a style that works for me as has been working over my first 3000 sit and go's 8 tabling. Lacky what is your VPIP for the first round, just out of curiousity.

[johnnybeef]

[ QUOTE ]
Interesting enough I just posted my stats with a lot of praise for curtains without even seeing this beforehand. Without a doubt in my mind he is the most valuable poster on this forum and defintitely deserves his esteemed rep.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh oh drapes, you've got some competition....

[fnord_too]

I'm not quite sure I understand this post. If you are complaining because people cowtow to you here due to your rep, then I understand that. If you are complaining because people in MTT are beligerent, I can understand that, too. If you are complaining because people voice counter oppinions, I am at a loss, that is the whole point of these forums: to discuss our views.

I get mildly annoyed when I don't get people trying to poke holes in my play or suggestions. I have never been involved in a thread where my ideas were criticized that I did not learn a lot. I haven't been posting there much lately, but I became a reasonably respected in that forum, and got less and less discussion (partly because my understanding improved). Honestly, the best threads are the ones where really good players energetically debate play.

[curtains]

Cmon man, read some of the above posts. I think it's a big mistake to trust someone based on their reputation and that if you disagree with them, you should respectfully let the poster know. It's also something I feel happens a lot on this forum, especially with guys like Gigabet. Gigabet is likely a HUGE winning player, but I think that some of the stuff he's posted would be ridiculous for 99% of the readers here to think about trying, and of course that includes me since I disagree with a lot of it.

By no means am I saying that people should blindly listen to me because I've made a bunch of posts or anything like that.

I just noticed a signifigant difference between the tone people took with me on the MTT forum compared to the tone they take here, and it reminded me of when I first started posting in the 1 table forum and had numerous people comment on how they disagreed with every single post I ever made. These people have for the most part stopped doing this, although it's possible their opinion hasn't changed.

[fnord_too]

I skimmed most of the thread, but did not pick up that bit about it being a tonal thing. (I noted in my post that if that was it I could understand your displeasure. I use a lot of if's in my posts). Things like people saying you are weak tight don't imply tone to me. Also, I tend to not notice or ignore tone and focus only on ideas (that's just my personality, I care a lot less about someone's manner, to a large degree, than their substance).

Oh, here is a respectful criticism: Use the hand converter! /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[curtains]

I don't mind pepole saying I'm weak tight. I wasn't even complaining about it, I was just noting how the fact that I didn't have a "reputation" there, led to responses that I don't regularly receive here. Whether I should receive them or not was not the question.

Honestly I really hate not being critical of posters just because they are thought of as "good" posters. If someone posts something that seems absurd, call it like it is, no matter who they are.

[Jay36489]

[ QUOTE ]
Bad news. Your little car's gonna drown. And you're gonna die, wearing that stupid hat. How does it feel?

[/ QUOTE ]

[lacky]

Hard to know exactly, as my stats are scattered between accounts and databases, but should be about 18% to 19%. I doubt I play tons more hands than you, because you play more hands than some around here, but I play much more aggresively after the flop in the early levels, more like nl ring play. I pick up alot of pots with nothing other than a willingness to bet at them, but I also lose chips when someone does have a hand they want to play. After a while everyone concludes I'm usually fill of, well you know, but they still dont want to risk the chips to stop me, and my real hands get paid off well. But, my play doesn't go along well with the sng math, and alot of smart people have stated it's not optimal, so I stopped argueing/advicating it along time ago. Works for me though, and is fun. I get bitched out alot and told I suck at the tables, an added benifit.

Steve

[Mr_J]

Well, you're probally not nearly as well known in the MTT forum. There you are just another poster. Here, your've built up alot of respect due to the amount of good advice and success you have achieved.

At least you're respected enough to create alot of discussion when it comes to HHs. I'd really like more replies to my posts. The main reason I post is to get feedback on my opinions/thoughts. I guess I could force this by posting HHs.

[Vasquez]

shake the h8ers of curtains.

-vas

[The Don]

I wouldn't mind being weak-tight if I was beating the $215s for 18% /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Mr_J]

"I wouldn't mind being weak-tight if I was beating the $215s for 18%"

I wouldn't mind being labelled as anything if I could beat them for half that.

[yabastid]

Yeah, you're right. So? I face that [censored] all the time posting here. That's the way life is. You have to prove yourself and then people will jump on your bandwagon. I encourage you to look at how you would respond to a post by Raptor or Yugo or Ilya or Citanul vs. someone you don't know nor necessarily know if you respect as a player. So what's the point of this post? Are you ready to change your ways as well? Or do you just not like it when your not immediately respected? And flat calling JJ deep stacked is weak tight.

yabastid

[Nottom]

I'm sure its just becasue I respect you so much, but without any specific info on the JJ hand you mention doing anything other than flatcalling seems absurd.

[curtains]

Dude MY GOD THE POINT IS THAT PEOPLE AREN'T CRITICAL ENOUGH IN GENERAL, not that Im upset about getting flamed. How many times do I have to say that.

[Mr_J]

See my post??

I'll make a deal with you. If you point out any of my mistakes, I'll try to find something wrong with yours /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[45suited]

The thing is, reputation has to play a part in evaluating a post IF there are no explanations given behind an answer. If I post a question and get simple responses such as "that's weak-tight" or "push" without explanation from unknown posters, it doesn't mean very much. The same answers from known, good players carries more weight.

The thing is, the best posters, my favorites at least (such as Curtains, Lorinda, NegativeEV, many more) also give detailed explanations and look at the problem in depth. So it's the best of both worlds.

But as for Curtains' OP, he wasn't whining about getting criticized, just commenting on the role that reputation plays. He's right about that, but for me, getting criticized doesn't bother me. I'm here to learn... part of that process will be exposing my ignorance at times. IMO, posters often get too thin skinned and defensive when challenged on an opinion.

I think also that there are certain biases (maybe I should call them playing tendencies) on this forum. That's fine, but often people (especially those with lesser reps) who think a little bit differently are too quickly criticized for their play which doesn't always fit the 2+2 style.

The Don is a perfect example. He has written that he plays a style that is somewhat different than most 2+2ers, but his results are very good. I think what people need to realize is that, while in many situations (especially in the SNG format), there is a "right" play, in many other situations, poker allows for some flexibility and creativity. It's important to play "correctly", but within reason, it's important to play your own style.

This distinction needs to be made rather than blindly criticizing someone's style (where there is not an obvious correct play) when it does not fit they style of the average 2+2er. As Lacky and Curtains have discussed, two players could very well have very different styles while at the same time having similar results over the long run.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
Hard to know exactly, as my stats are scattered between accounts and databases, but should be about 18% to 19%. I doubt I play tons more hands than you, because you play more hands than some around here, but I play much more aggresively after the flop in the early levels, more like nl ring play. I pick up alot of pots with nothing other than a willingness to bet at them, but I also lose chips when someone does have a hand they want to play. After a while everyone concludes I'm usually fill of, well you know, but they still dont want to risk the chips to stop me, and my real hands get paid off well. But, my play doesn't go along well with the sng math, and alot of smart people have stated it's not optimal, so I stopped argueing/advicating it along time ago. Works for me though, and is fun. I get bitched out alot and told I suck at the tables, an added benifit.

Steve

[/ QUOTE ]

I play more hands than some around here!! But you called me the most weak/tight player youve ever seen! Maybe I play my hands very weakly postflop?

At least we both get bitched out and cursed out a lot at the tables. Btw my 1st level vpip I believe is about 14-15%.

[lacky]

yes, the term weak tight only applies to post flop play. The "tight" refers to preflop hand selection, the "weak" refers to post flop play. So you can have:

weak-tight
loose-aggresive (maniacs)
tight-aggresive
loose-passive

A weak tight player plays in a manner in which you almost always know where you stand, becouse they playback or call with the nuts, fold if they dont have a hand.

this post:

Re: $215s - Controversial AQ Hand

Ok but please note that Im embarrassed everytime I do this when I flop a good top pair type of hand into a big field in a sit and go.

I would check the flop, and I would fold to the 90 chip bet on the turn.


Let me know once and for all that I can never correctly play your style. And I'm not saying that in a bad way. I can see the benifits, and tried the approach for several months. But I never had it right, because I never understood how much you guys alter your play to conserve chips until I read that post and all the comments that followed.

Fortunately a fairly tight-very aggresive approach works also. I have no idea which approach has the greatest earning potential, but they are both pretty close.

Steve

[curtains]

You realize that AQ hand was a very special case for me. I actually do bet sometimes with nothing. However when the field is 5-7 handed and the board is coordinated, you are going to know that if I bet into a field, I have something very good, and I think this is universal for everyone.

Of course my method of playing there is unorthodox. I can't even remember the details but okay it's really not so important as I don't flop top pair top kicker in 6-7 way pots that often in sit and go's.