PROPOSAL (this affects you guys, please read): mid- and high- forums

[bobbyi]

There is a discussion going on in mid-high (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Number=3950769&an=0&page=0# Post3950769) right now that is very relevant to you guys. It grew out of TStone's open letter to the forum (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Number=3924073&an=0&page=0# Post3924073).

The proposal is to rejigger the current split of the limit holdem forums. This directly affects small stakes. Today, the mid-high forum has become mainly a discussion of 30/60 and up. 15/30 and 20/40 hands often get no responses and sometimes get a hostile reaction from the regular posters. The result is that many people, including me, have started posting any hands they have at these limits in small stakes rather than mid-stakes if they post them at all. A few years ago, the situation was very different as 15/30 and 20/40 were almost exclusively posted in mid-high.2

Many have stated that having the small stakes forum try to encompass all limits from 2/4 to 20/40 isn't sensible. Also, many have stated that they have stopped posting 15/30 and 20/40 hands on twoplustwo entirely because these limits no longer have a home.

Thus, the proposal is that rather than having small and mid-high, we would have small, mid and high. The new mid-stakes forum would be for roughly 10/20 through 20/40 limits. The new high forum would be for roughly 30/60 and up, making it very similar to today's midhigh forum. In my opinion, this change will actually have a larger affect on small stakes than on midhigh.

I think that this change would be good for twoplustwo and I think that with this split all three of the forums (I'm ignoring micro-limit in this post since I think they will be relatively unaffected) will get enough to have good discussions and foster a community, but no so much that posts immediately disappear off the front page as can happen on overloaded forums, which is the ideal. I would be very excited to get some lively discussions of 15/30 hands going again and I think the small stakes forum will be stronger with a clearer focus on a manageable set of limits.

Since this change directly affects all of you, I am curious what you guys think.

[SmileyEH]

This makes sense. I'd love to see it implemented.

-SmileyEH

[private joker]

Interesting. I think the values of micro/small/mid-high should change instead of making 3 forums 4.

My proposal:

Micro: 2/4 and below

SS: 3/6 to 15/30

Mid-high: 20/40 and up.

[toss]

Aren't there a lot of 15/30 and 20/40 posts in SS already? Anyway I can't see an extra forum being any good.

[Redd]

So is it planned to merge microlimits into the "small" forum, or will there be four limit ring forums in total: micro, small, mid, and high?

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
So is it planned to merge microlimits into the "small" forum, or will there be four limit ring forums in total: micro, small, mid, and high?

[/ QUOTE ]
Four forums. As the plan is currently discussed, the boundary between small and micro would be unchanged.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
My proposal:

Micro: 2/4 and below

SS: 3/6 to 15/30

Mid-high: 20/40 and up.

[/ QUOTE ]
The reason some have objected to this is that 15/30 and 20/40 are very similar so it would be nice to have them on the same forum. In particular, on Party Poker, where a lot of poster play, the 15/30 and 20/40 have a shared player pool and play the same (as I understand it; I only play 6-max, so this is all second-hand), while the jump from 20/40 to 30/60 is quite large in terms of the game changing.

[flair1239]

[ QUOTE ]
Interesting. I think the values of micro/small/mid-high should change instead of making 3 forums 4.

My proposal:

Micro: 2/4 and below

SS: 3/6 to 15/30

Mid-high: 20/40 and up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think 10/20 has more in common with 20/40, than 3/6 does to 15/30.

[shant]

I like SS how it is. People post 20/40 and 15/30 here hands a lot. I don't see what the point of a mid forum would be.

[Jake (The Snake)]

I would generally be for any plan that reduces the number of threads that appear in small stakes. There are simply too many threads, and the good threads don't get as many replies as they should because they are bumped off the front page.

That being said, I don't really want to see the slightly higher limit hands taken from here either because they are often the only hands that end up getting good discussion.

I don't know. I kind of like PJ's idea, but I can see the opposite side of that too.

What I would really really enjoy is a limit to the amount of threads a poster can start, like 1 or 2 per 24 hours or something like that. I believe it was Clark who used to emphasize the importance of responding to threads instead of starting new ones. I don't know the numbers, but I would guess that the average mid/high thread gets twice as many replies as the average SS thread.

[TStoneMBD]

You all know where I stand. /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

[PSW]

Moving to 4 forums seems silly to me. Just because the "high" folks won't answer "basic" 15/30 questions, doesn't mean you should take away the 10/20 posters that ARE helping out the 3/6 to 5/10 crowd. I realize that 10/20 folks could still slum in the new SS, but it will take away a fair bit of readership. Folks should post where they get good answers. If you have to, you could just create the 15/30 & 20/40 if you think these guys are the same folks.

Once I actually start thinking about how the limits should be broken up, I get:

Micros <1/2
SS: 1/2 through 5/10
Mid: 10/20 through 20/40
High: > 30/60

psw

ps. I remember when I was playing 1/2 and felt like the micros just weren't the place for my posts.

[tonypaladino]

[ QUOTE ]
ps. I remember when I was playing 1/2 and felt like the micros just weren't the place for my posts.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't like the micro forum. I post my 1/2 here, and as a result get ignored a lot. Oh Well.

[MyTurn2Raise]

4 forums is fine with me. It would probably cause this forum to lose some posts from quite a few quality posters. However, there is enough traffic and quality posters yhere to make it worth it.

[shant]

This is a good point. I remember when I was playing 3/6 and was interested to get advice from players who were playing 15/30. I think I got a lot of great help from those posters. A huge part of learning comes from hearing advice from people who have been there.

I think there's far too much ego involved in this decision because some Mid-High posters think SS is full of bad players and won't answer posts from 15/30 they think are standard. That's why I like this forum. People play anywhere from 3/6 to 20/40 and post them here and we get discussion no matter what the limit. The folks who think they can't post a 15/30 hand here are mistaken.

[TStoneMBD]

with the intent of trying to withhold my true feelings for the sake of others, i am not mistaken.

[shant]

[ QUOTE ]
with the intent of trying to withhold my true feelings for the sake of others, i am not mistaken.

[/ QUOTE ]
Do you think you won't get the proper advice? I'm not saying I give good 15/30 advice, because I doubt I do, but the same players that I learned a lot from still posts hands here. I think you'll get a lot more discussion from players who have played and are playing the same limits as you.

Who do you think is going to be posting in the Mid forum? Do you think the 30/60 players in Mid-high are going to start answering posts in there?

[B Dids]

A few random thoughts

A- just playing 3/6 shouldn't prevent you from posting or reading a higher forum. I'll throw in the occasional post in mid high if I think I've actually got something to say*

B- I think that logically 15/30 is closer to 3/6 than it is to 100/200, where the dynamics shift a ton.

C- All of these suggestions do have the negative of creating a ghetto for microlimit posters, and I think the micro and ss forums will require pretty agressive moderation to help them stay viable.

*- hopefully I'm using good judgement there, and I think this is a lesson that a lot of people could take. Posting for the sake of posting=the suck.

[shant]

One good thing I can see coming out of it is threads will be less cluttered since the players who post will already be playing those games/levels and won't need to explain certain things.

[sfer]

I wrote a longer response but I don't think it's that important. Anyway, whatever changes happen, I hope things turn out well.

[Greg J]

Right now we are getting a lot of 2/4 up to 4/8 (b and m) posts in ML. And I don't have a problem with that (I'm a ML mod for those of you that don't know). Occasionally Entity has been known to post a higher limit hand he thought would help out some of the guys there. At the same time, the overwhelming consensus is to split mid high -- so it's probably a good idea.

But for the record, and LHE poker related content is welcome in ML. Hell, you can come post a 100/200 hand if you want and explain the complex nuances if you want! In fact, I would love it if you did! (This is not to suggest that it goes the other way of course -- no .5/1 is high limit obviously, since that would not have much to offer.)

I guess I'm saying that the most important thing, regardless of limit, is substantive content. Obviously, the higher the limit the more advanced the content, hence the reason for splitting up forums. There are limit lines yes, but is it really the end of the world if they remain blurry?

[TStoneMBD]

ill post some hands in the microlimit forums explaining my thoughts if itll help some other players out. i feel a little silly posting a hand teaching others how to play rather than posting a hand for my own benefit. it doesnt feel right to me. also, i think that if microlimit players want to learn how higher limit players think they could just read higher limit forums. of course by higher limit players posting hands in their territory they can feel comfortable asking questions and receiving feedback which im sure can be helpful.

[brettbrettr]

As a new 10/20 player, I like this very, very much. I think 10/20 is much closer to 20/40 than it is to 2/4. And I'd like to be able to read the 20/40 hands that aren't being posted in preparation...

[BoxLiquid]

I definetely think that 10/20 , 15/30, and 20/40 should have their own place. I've been hesitant about where to post a 20/40 hand and I doubt everyone in the small stakes forum has the experience to answer questions about those limits.

Anything above 30/60 should definetely be considered "high" stakes.

[Greg J]

I would GREATLY appreciate this. I read MH and post some here (I don't post in MH -- just lurk quite a bit). Many of the posts I make in ML are instructive hands and essay posts for newer guys. (Why you don't open limp in LP, etc.) I'm a teacher by nature (have a degree in education, former middle school teacher, and am aspiring to be a college professor currently writing my dissertation), so I enjoy it. Laying stuff out helps me grasp it better myself.

I think there should be some exchange between the forums, though obviously there is some trickle down tendencies (naturally). I don't think we should ghetto-ize ourselves into our forums.

[B Dids]

[ QUOTE ]
As a new 10/20 player, I like this very, very much. I think 10/20 is much closer to 20/40 than it is to 2/4. And I'd like to be able to read the 20/40 hands that aren't being posted in preparation...

[/ QUOTE ]

The biggest issue where is that people who have been playing 2/4 and 3/6 forever consider SS "home". I hope this doesn't reak of ego, but the fact that I play 3/6 has a lot more to do with spending and my frequency of play than my ability (I hope) and I wouldn't welcome the (very logical) move of 2/4 and 3/6 into the micro limits.

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
I've been hesitant about where to post a 20/40 hand and I doubt everyone in the small stakes forum has the experience to answer questions about those limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please.

[TStoneMBD]

do you think the family like atmosphere of small stakes might actually stunt the growth of some players as they fear the idea of moving up and out of the 3/6 birdnest?

[B Dids]

I don't think this is a concern. The people who call this forum "home" still post 15/30 here. The people who care about posting in "cool" forums post them in mid-high. Such is life.

I do think there's a ton of SS players who should move up though, but that's just because I have liberal ideas about bankroll and think that the lower limits tend to be a lousy learning environment if you want to get good at poker (being both a low limit player and potentially bad at poker, I am likely just making things up here).

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
Thus, the proposal is that rather than having small and mid-high, we would have small, mid and high. The new mid-stakes forum would be for roughly 10/20 through 20/40 limits. The new high forum would be for roughly 30/60 and up, making it very similar to today's midhigh forum. In my opinion, this change will actually have a larger affect on small stakes than on midhigh.

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/heart.gif /images/graemlins/heart.gif /images/graemlins/heart.gif

[paperboyNC]

I like the idea:

Micro: up to 1/2
Small: 2/4 to 5/10 (higher limits live)
Mid: 10/20 to 20/40
High: 30/60+

[shant]

I've given it some more thought and think it's not a bad idea. I would be fine with whichever way things went.

[W. Deranged]

All right, so I got a bunch to say about this:

I think it is important to maintain the continuity of forums and not to have too many of them. The reason is that forums thrive on having a core of consistent, competent, intelligent, and committed posters. New posters can read and get a sense of who forms that core. Their ideas dictate discussions and can help to keep the forum an arena for intelligent discussion rather than sporadic comment-making. In small stakes I feel that "core" has in recent months gotten quite strong (recovering from the well-documented disaster of the early summer): Jason, Shant, Harv, Flair, Evan, Rob (Entity), BigEndian, Nick Royale, Hobbs, Brett, and so forth.

Interestingly, many of these players play in limits that at least would be considered for mid-limits. Many of us post online hands at the 10/20 and 15/30 level. Particularly after Vegas, people posted hands at 30/60 live (which is clearly within the realm of mid-high) and I know for a fact that within the past week one Cantabrigian poster posted a couple of hands played at the Foxwoods 50/100.

I've found the discussion of the hands at those mid-limits to be quite intelligent, personally. With the exception of the hands of one notable poster who was a long-time small stakes poster who made a dramatic exit from the forum in June, hands played in 15/30 live games and even similar online often don't get intelligent discussion in mid-high.

What concerns me about creating a new "mid" forum is that much of the strength of the small stakes forum would be lost. I feel that this forum has so much to offer as it forms the crucial educational point for players who are beyond the basics but really need to learn the crucial skills necessary to becoming long-term winning players. Mid-high discussions are wonderful but much of what they offer pertains to skills involved ONLY at the higher levels (metagame things, mixing up play, advanced hand-reading skills, attacking particular kinds of aggressive players like DERB, etc...)

Another thing to consider is the way that movement in limits works at the small stakes level. It is quite possible for committed, skilled small stakes players to move between limits quite quickly. For most, the 10/20 to 20/40 online level is quite attainable. I think it is very useful to have a resource for players moving through the limits to discuss hands, and not to feel constantly forced to change forums and have to develop a new sense of who to listen to and learn new nomenclature and so on. As the limits get higher, it becomes harder to move between them. My fear is that the "small" forum would just become a very transient stop-over point for players on the way to "mid."

The conclusion is that I think that such a four-level structure would cause the death of the "small" forum. The "mid" forum would be awesome, and, if this whole thing went into effect, I'd probably just go ahead and make my new home there, because that's where many of my favorite fellow posters would go and that's probably more reflective of the limits I play (though I play 5/10 to 10/20 online and anywhere from 10/20 to 30/60 live).

My personal preference would actually just be a slight realignment. I think 2/4 should probably go in micros, and I think 20/40 and down should stay in what is now "Small Stakes." I think this new forum should be retitled the "Small-Mid Forum," and the forum above us for all the fourth-level thinkers renamed simply "High Stakes Limit Hold'em."

Just my two cents.

Oh, and I think that there should be some effort made to delineate how live limits relate to online limits. I think everyone would agree that 15/30 live hands should be posted in small stakes.

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]
All right, so I got a bunch to say about this:

[/ QUOTE ]

Shocker.

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All right, so I got a bunch to say about this:

[/ QUOTE ]

Shocker.

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[TimsterToo]

I'm all for this.

I do think that the posters from higher levels should every now and again have a quick look in the lower and see if you could answer some questions. I'm reasonably a noob myself but I try to have a look in "General" and "Beginners" and answer some stuff just to help the newbies out. If a couple can get this in your routine it would make sure that the information at least leaks down a bit.

I do feel that I would feel more at home in small stakes if it would be confined to 2/4 - 5/10ish

[ellipse_87]

If there are players of a certain limit who need a new home because they can't get the feedback everyone else gets, then of course they have to be accommodated.

But the limit levels are very crude proxies for the quality of the strategy discussions. Some 2/4 players are at the end of their first year, some have money and just started out, some are very good players re-building bankroll.

The three forums now really translate to Beginning, Intermediate, and Advanced.

I think it would be cool if the forums (whether 3 or 4) were to be re-named in this way, with a required field where posters identified the stakes and site for the hand.

[Luv2DriveTT]

A significant part of the problem is not the stakes, its the quality of play. As we all know 2/4 online is closer to 10/20 live than it is to 2/4 live.

Regardless, I'm going with the flow.

TT /images/graemlins/club.gif

[WillMagic]

I don't really see a need to split the forums...SS is really good right now as is. Lots of good posters and intelligent discussions. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Will

[uw_madtown]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, and I think that there should be some effort made to delineate how live limits relate to online limits. I think everyone would agree that 15/30 live hands should be posted in small stakes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I stopped reading most of your post because it was long and I disagreed with what I read, but I /images/graemlins/heart.gif this part and I think it'd be important for stickies in each forum what belongs where -- for both online and live hands. For example, micros should probably be 1/2 and lower online, 4/8 and lower live. SS should be 2/4 - 5/10 online, 5/10 - 20/40 live. MS should be 10/20 - 20/40 online, HS should be 30/60+ online (didn't do live limits for those last ones as I'm not sure where they'd divide at).

Anyway.

My opinion is that a lot of 10/20 - 20/40 players are clamoring for a clear place to post their hands. They feel they're unwelcome in MHS, and they feel that while SS generates some good discussion, the hands feel out of place here. I think that makes sense and I think a MHS split in the vein discussed will alleviate that problem and take a little traffic off SS (usually a good thing).

Everyone concerned about losing the community of SS (which I /images/graemlins/heart.gif as most of us do) probably shouldn't be. A lot of the people named as central players also have started playing more 6m than full, but they still read and post here. They may not post hands in SS much (if at all) if a MH forum is made, but many will still read and respond to threads here. And if you're eager to read their hands, just read the MH forum -- and you'll probably see more hands than you do now, because they won't be hesitant to post them.

While I think many people do identify a certain forum on 2p2 as "home," whether it be micros, SS, MHS, HUSH, the Zoo, or OOT for that matter, I don't think you necessarily "lose" posters when they move up, or a new forum alignment comes in.

Look at Entity -- dude has posted a ton in micros and small stakes even after moving to mid-stakes shorthanded games. Same can be said for lots of others and I won't list in fear of leaving someone out, but he's a great example.

Anyway, :thumbsup: to the split of MHS. I don't read it much now unless someone links me to a thread, but I can imagine reading MH a lot given the posters likely to populate it. Also, big /images/graemlins/heart.gif to TStone for his NVG thread that seems to have finally put a lot of these forum changes into action. I hope they also follow through with that Events forum he mentioned.

[SackUp]

I like it how it is.

[flair1239]

[ QUOTE ]
With the exception of the hands of one notable poster who was a long-time small stakes poster who made a dramatic exit from the forum in June,

[/ QUOTE ]

Who was this?

Or is it an inside joke?

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
All right, so I got a bunch to say about this:

I think it is important to maintain the continuity of forums and not to have too many of them. The reason is that forums thrive on having a core of consistent, competent, intelligent, and committed posters. New posters can read and get a sense of who forms that core. Their ideas dictate discussions and can help to keep the forum an arena for intelligent discussion rather than sporadic comment-making. In small stakes I feel that "core" has in recent months gotten quite strong (recovering from the well-documented disaster of the early summer): Jason, Shant, Harv, Flair, Evan, Rob (Entity), BigEndian, Nick Royale, Hobbs, Brett, and so forth.

Interestingly, many of these players play in limits that at least would be considered for mid-limits. Many of us post online hands at the 10/20 and 15/30 level. Particularly after Vegas, people posted hands at 30/60 live (which is clearly within the realm of mid-high) and I know for a fact that within the past week one Cantabrigian poster posted a couple of hands played at the Foxwoods 50/100.

I've found the discussion of the hands at those mid-limits to be quite intelligent, personally. With the exception of the hands of one notable poster who was a long-time small stakes poster who made a dramatic exit from the forum in June, hands played in 15/30 live games and even similar online often don't get intelligent discussion in mid-high.

What concerns me about creating a new "mid" forum is that much of the strength of the small stakes forum would be lost. I feel that this forum has so much to offer as it forms the crucial educational point for players who are beyond the basics but really need to learn the crucial skills necessary to becoming long-term winning players. Mid-high discussions are wonderful but much of what they offer pertains to skills involved ONLY at the higher levels (metagame things, mixing up play, advanced hand-reading skills, attacking particular kinds of aggressive players like DERB, etc...)

Another thing to consider is the way that movement in limits works at the small stakes level. It is quite possible for committed, skilled small stakes players to move between limits quite quickly. For most, the 10/20 to 20/40 online level is quite attainable. I think it is very useful to have a resource for players moving through the limits to discuss hands, and not to feel constantly forced to change forums and have to develop a new sense of who to listen to and learn new nomenclature and so on. As the limits get higher, it becomes harder to move between them. My fear is that the "small" forum would just become a very transient stop-over point for players on the way to "mid."

The conclusion is that I think that such a four-level structure would cause the death of the "small" forum. The "mid" forum would be awesome, and, if this whole thing went into effect, I'd probably just go ahead and make my new home there, because that's where many of my favorite fellow posters would go and that's probably more reflective of the limits I play (though I play 5/10 to 10/20 online and anywhere from 10/20 to 30/60 live).

My personal preference would actually just be a slight realignment. I think 2/4 should probably go in micros, and I think 20/40 and down should stay in what is now "Small Stakes." I think this new forum should be retitled the "Small-Mid Forum," and the forum above us for all the fourth-level thinkers renamed simply "High Stakes Limit Hold'em."

Just my two cents.

Oh, and I think that there should be some effort made to delineate how live limits relate to online limits. I think everyone would agree that 15/30 live hands should be posted in small stakes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoever suggested I change your title was right on the money.

[KDawgCometh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With the exception of the hands of one notable poster who was a long-time small stakes poster who made a dramatic exit from the forum in June,

[/ QUOTE ]

Who was this?

Or is it an inside joke?

[/ QUOTE ]


if its who I'm thinking of, it wasn't as much dramatic as it was him just suddenly stop posting cause of him being back home for the summer in the land of the hosers and when he got back to school not posting again

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With the exception of the hands of one notable poster who was a long-time small stakes poster who made a dramatic exit from the forum in June,

[/ QUOTE ]

Who was this?

Or is it an inside joke?

[/ QUOTE ]

There was a former SSer who now posts exclusively in mid-high who is a big loss to this forum in my opinion. He likes to post hands and they always generate discussion because he's a good guy, and I kind of wish some of those discussions (about 15/30 live, primarily) would be taking place here where I think a lot of the concepts would be good to discuss.

I don't want to name this poster simply because I mean this comment in no way to reflect anything about him because he's a great contributor. I simply think it's an example of why some clarification might help everyone.

[SackUp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With the exception of the hands of one notable poster who was a long-time small stakes poster who made a dramatic exit from the forum in June,

[/ QUOTE ]

Who was this?

Or is it an inside joke?

[/ QUOTE ]

Zito is a wanker?

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With the exception of the hands of one notable poster who was a long-time small stakes poster who made a dramatic exit from the forum in June,

[/ QUOTE ]

Who was this?

Or is it an inside joke?

[/ QUOTE ]


if its who I'm thinking of, it wasn't as much dramatic as it was him just suddenly stop posting cause of him being back home for the summer in the land of the hosers and when he got back to school not posting again

[/ QUOTE ]

It was quite dramatic.

[KDawgCometh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With the exception of the hands of one notable poster who was a long-time small stakes poster who made a dramatic exit from the forum in June,

[/ QUOTE ]

Who was this?

Or is it an inside joke?

[/ QUOTE ]


if its who I'm thinking of, it wasn't as much dramatic as it was him just suddenly stop posting cause of him being back home for the summer in the land of the hosers and when he got back to school not posting again

[/ QUOTE ]

It was quite dramatic.

[/ QUOTE ]


then I don't think that its who I'm thinking of. I must've missed it when I was out of town in early june

[cpk]

Yes. There's enough traffic to support three Limit Hold Em forums.

[flair1239]

I think a split is a good idea. I think a 10/20- 20/40 forum would be great.

I don't think anybody would be opposed to people who don't play those levels adding their input in the posts.

It would just make them easier to find. And also help keep threads on the first two pages longer.

The annoying thing now is if somebody does not include the stakes in their post it sometimes does make a difference.

In that (although this is not always the case) a LAG at 2/4 and a LAG at 10/20 are often two different animals (mostly as it relates to hand reading skills as opposed to misdirected aggression), and it can make a difference in how to play a hand.

I would imagine a 10/20 to 20/40 forum would be more Blind vs. Blind, and Big Bet street focused than the current Small Stakes Forum, which has a tendency to gnerate many PF and flop discussions (which are interesting sometimes).

[tonypaladino]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ps. I remember when I was playing 1/2 and felt like the micros just weren't the place for my posts.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't like posting in the micro forum. I post my 1/2 here, and as a result get ignored a lot. Oh Well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just a clarification, because I'm a moron and don't preview before I post, and made a mis-type.

I don't "not like" the micro forum, I just don't like posting there compared to posting here. There are a few reasons, I play live 4/8-10/20 so I feel this forum is more condusive to my level of play, and my 1/2 play is primarily at Absolute Poker, which plays much tougher than the Party 1/2 tables. I also have played 2/4 and 3/6 online, and I feel I have the ability to do so, but play 1/2 because of poor money management.

This is combined with the fact that I'm more familiar who many of the regular posters in here are, and I've met a few of them in person, so I kinda give more respect to advice from them then random posters.

In any case, the 1/2 posts are not well received and so I'm probaby going to switch to the micros, or just stop posting hands altogether.

[SippinSoma]

Looking forward to this split.

[BigEndian]

I like it. I think the community has been missing focused discussion on the 10-20 to 20-40 limits.

There's only two reasons to not do this imo:

1) A lot of posters in SS learn from the 10/20+ hands posted here. But, of course, they can always read the hands in the mid-stakes.

2) The 20/40 players may feel like they aren't getting put in the right category. Merits discussion.

- Jim

[ErrantNight]

ni han.

not being around... and probably just blanking... who made a dramatic exit in june?

(bison? i thought he was gone before then...)

[ErrantNight]

pokerbob? but he still posts here from time to time. just not hands so much.

josh and dave don't post much in here anymore... but they definitely just float around...

i feel like this deserves an in-depth investigation because i don't have enough to do today.

[MaxPower]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a good point. I remember when I was playing 3/6 and was interested to get advice from players who were playing 15/30. I think I got a lot of great help from those posters. A huge part of learning comes from hearing advice from people who have been there.

I think there's far too much ego involved in this decision because some Mid-High posters think SS is full of bad players and won't answer posts from 15/30 they think are standard. That's why I like this forum. People play anywhere from 3/6 to 20/40 and post them here and we get discussion no matter what the limit. The folks who think they can't post a 15/30 hand here are mistaken.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Some of these mid/high people need to drop the ego. The point of these forums is to learn. Sometimes people post a question that they feel is too basic - so what? People do that on Small Stakes all the time. I either post a polite answer or just ignore it.

[BigEndian]

Unfortunately, it's very difficult to seperate ego from poker. Some of us are effected dramatically, others of us much less so. But it's always there. And some posters are just such nimrods they can't temper their egos.

The moderators here have always been hands-off. On other boards, people are chastised for just being a dick. Whatever, that's the way it is.

Split or not splitting is not going to change that too much. If nothing else, it'll foster discussion for those playing 10/20 to 20/40 away from what is the highest density of assholes on the site.

- Jim

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
josh and dave don't post much in here anymore... but they definitely just float around...

[/ QUOTE ]

I like to float.

[KDawgCometh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
josh and dave don't post much in here anymore... but they definitely just float around...

[/ QUOTE ]

I like to float.

[/ QUOTE ]

imitating shant now are we /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ZootMurph]

This makes perfect sense to me. You can't expect the same feedback on a 20/40 hand from a player just recently moving to 2/4 from Micro as you can from a player going from 5/10 to 10/20. Also, many of those 20/40 hands would not have as much relevance to a 2/4 or 3/6 player as to higher limit players.

All in all, a good idea. It's a shame that the high stakes people have become too snobby to lower themselves to commenting on the lower end of the spectrum, though.

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
pokerbob? but he still posts here from time to time. just not hands so much.

josh and dave don't post much in here anymore... but they definitely just float around...

i feel like this deserves an in-depth investigation because i don't have enough to do today.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was thinking of PokerBob, who is a funny and interesting guy who used to be a very active presence here and now has basically vanished to Mid-, High-.

Josh and Dave are great and definitely still make contributions.

QTip, among others, has recently come back to the forum and we are all the wealthier for it.

[BigEndian]

[ QUOTE ]
QTip, among others, has recently come back to the forum and we are all the wealthier for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I had thought about making a gimmick account named Cottonball at one point but never could bring myself to follow through. I'm just not very gimmick-talented.

- Jim

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
It's a shame that the high stakes people have become too snobby to lower themselves to commenting on the lower end of the spectrum, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

For some I think it's genuine arrogance; for others, I think they just get tired of rehashing things, particularly when generally confident and brash people insist on being proven wrong. That gets tiresome, and, after a while, one wonders why they should bother helping someone so argumentative.

But I think the intent with the split is a good one. The jump to 15/30+ is a tough one. Today I was talking to a very good player who is making the jump from 10/20 6-max to 20/40 on Party and he said that 20/40 is much more aggressive, which might be surprising to people here who see the 10/20 short games and consider that texture to be near maniacal.

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
QTip, among others, has recently come back to the forum and we are all the wealthier for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I had thought about making a gimmick account named Cottonball at one point but never could bring myself to follow through. I'm just not very gimmick-talented.

- Jim

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, EarAche is clearly the right gimmick account for QTip.

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
QTip, among others, has recently come back to the forum and we are all the wealthier for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I had thought about making a gimmick account named Cottonball at one point but never could bring myself to follow through. I'm just not very gimmick-talented.

- Jim

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, EarAche is clearly the right gimmick account for QTip.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think "WaxyBuildUp" is a bit better, in my opinion.

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
QTip, among others, has recently come back to the forum and we are all the wealthier for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I had thought about making a gimmick account named Cottonball at one point but never could bring myself to follow through. I'm just not very gimmick-talented.

- Jim

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, EarAche is clearly the right gimmick account for QTip.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think "WaxyBuildUp" is a bit better, in my opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Winner.

[Harv72b]

I'm grunching everything that happened after the first 20 replies. So if I say something that was covered already on page 2 (or whatever page it is for you), oh well.

I have posted a few 15/30 hands on MH, but for the most part I just post here. I've skimmed through MH a bit as well, but I certainly can't say that I "know" any of the regular posters there. So take my 2 cents for what they're worth.

Anyway, if you ask me (and you did, indirectly), I think the problem lies with the regular posters on the MH forum. I can't tell you how many times I've tried to provide what insight I can to a question posted here concerning a 1/2 or even .50/1 hand. It's really no big deal--you preface your post with something like "this should be posted in the microlimit forum and it's been a while since I played at this limit, but...". Simple. I don't think that the answer to a few regular posters apparently feeling it is beneath them to type "standard" or "nice hand" in reply to a 15/30 hand is to create a whole new forum, and shuffle around the existing ones. Sorry, that's just how I feel.

As others have said, we get all kinds of posts on SS regarding all kinds of limits (and quite a few no-limits). Some people don't like this because they feel it clutters the board. I do like it, because I think it creates an open atmosphere which encourages people to bring up new topics. If a particular thread really does contain something worthy of a lengthy discussion, it generally gets it.

If it is decided to divide the limit forums even further, what I think you'll end up with is less meaningful discussion on each board, with the regular posters (in particular, those who feel the SS forum is now too cluttered) now having to skim through two forums instead of just 1. Even though I no longer play at 15/30, I enjoy reading the odd thread on here about a hand played at that limit (and being able to discuss it with familiar screennames). I've also seen some very good discussions develop out of 1/2 hands which were posted on SS.

However, if it makes those playing 100/200 happy, I can see redefining "small" and "mid-high" to better focus the traffic. If any new forum should be created, it should be a Nano format...something along the lines of:

Nano: play money - .10/.20
Micro: .25/.50 - 2/4
Small: 3/6 - 20/40
Mid/High: 30/60 & up

Keeping in mind that I've never played above 15/30, that's where it seems like the big dividing lines are drawn in terms of overall game play. At least on Party.

[DocMartin]

Split sounds good to me. 2/4 would probably be better off in micros (I thought that while I was slogging through it and still do) and appropriate live hands 15/30, 10/20 etc should continue to be discussed in SS as well.

Good idea, sounds like it would benefit the forums in general and keep relevant threads around a little longer in my strategy forum of choice.