Jeez Louise
 

Y'all need to stop and read the threads that are out there instead of just posting hand after hand. There are like 20% of the hands in the top 3 pages with zero-two responses and like 10-20 total views.

Slow down and go for quality over quantity, find the threads with discussion and digest them, there's some good stuff.

Just an observation from a Small Stakes lurker.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

http://ebaumsworld.com/forumfun/positive4.jpg

Re: Jeez Louise
 

Cool, maybe people will listen now that you are saying this (seriously). I have (unfortunately) stoped readin most of the SS posts because there are just too many of them to keep up with and develop any useful discussion.

responding to threads >>> starting new threads

Re: Jeez Louise
 

awesome.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

Alright, I'm done for tonight. I hope some of you *cough* (gaming mouse) *cough* try posting a few less hands and spend more effort reading more evolved threads that have better contributions, while posting fewer yet more interesting threads yourselves.

Remember, there are like 5 pages of threads just from the last few hours. Stop and read them all and respond to a few *before* you post any new hands of your own.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

I feel dirty doing this but....

what the heck is that avitar you have?

ThisHo

Re: Jeez Louise
 

alizee

Re: Jeez Louise
 

Alizee

*EDIT*

I can't believe my avatar hasn't caught on like the Alizee pics did.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

I hereby nominate this thread to be stickied.


peace

john nickle

Re: Jeez Louise
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have (unfortunately) stoped readin most of the SS posts because there are just too many of them to keep up with and develop any useful discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

How long ago did this happen?

Re: Jeez Louise
 

I always thought it would be nice to have some sort of unooffical rule where we should try to respond to at least twice as many hand posts as we post ourselves.

First, threads get more responses. Second, I think one can learn a lot from responding to other people's posts. Finally, it would keep people from posting tons of hands and ignoring the rest of the board.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

Probably Novemberish. The post count in this forum just got overwhelming all of the sudden. I spend way to much time on here to start with so when I can't keep up with it I think that's a fair measure of too-many-ness.

I mainly read posts that people I know started/posted in/IM to me. That keeps me busy enough. It would be cool if I had time to write decent replies to hundreds of posts every day but as is the case I do not.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

2:1 wow that sounds really low. I'm running at about 200:1 now in tearms of replies:posts. Mostly useless.

Nice post Clark. I will send the micro crowd here for sure as the same problem takes place there.

Brad

Re: Jeez Louise
 

It doesn't have to be 2:1, it just seemed a good place to start. More important is that everyone makes a conscious effort to respond to other's posts, especially when they've been posting a lot of their own hands.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

bizzump

Re: Jeez Louise
 

[ QUOTE ]
Alright, I'm done for tonight. I hope some of you *cough* (gaming mouse) *cough* try posting a few less hands and spend more effort reading more evolved threads that have better contributions

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] Sorry about that. I was having a bad session last night and posting more hands than usual. I will be more careful about starting new threads in the future.

gm

Re: Jeez Louise
 

this is another phantom bump. but I guess it's not so phantom...

Re: Jeez Louise
 

This thread is totally on point. Way too many hands that are basically the same being posted. Way too many people functionally spamming converted hands w/o content.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

[ QUOTE ]
Y'all need to stop and read the threads that are out there instead of just posting hand after hand. There are like 20% of the hands in the top 3 pages with zero-two responses and like 10-20 total views.

Slow down and go for quality over quantity, find the threads with discussion and digest them, there's some good stuff.

Just an observation from a Small Stakes lurker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks, Clark. This has been said before but perhaps people will listen to you. I hope so.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

[ QUOTE ]
Alright, I'm done for tonight. I hope some of you *cough* (gaming mouse) *cough* try posting a few less hands and spend more effort reading more evolved threads that have better contributions, while posting fewer yet more interesting threads yourselves.

Remember, there are like 5 pages of threads just from the last few hours. Stop and read them all and respond to a few *before* you post any new hands of your own.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who does this guy think he is? Clarkmeister? oh uh yeah, he is [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: Jeez Louise
 

Well then let me apologize in advance for contributing to additional clutter. Can you (anyone) point me to the Clarkmeister Theorem post? I have heard about it but haven't been able to locate it. Would appreciate being able to see for myself what is mentioned so often. Cheers!

Re: Jeez Louise
 

Clarkmeister Theorem: If the forth flush card hits on the river and you are heads-up and first to act, bet out no matter what you have.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

When you are out of position and headsup and the 4th card of a flush suit comes on the river, bet into your opponent no matter what you have.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

I've learned much more by responding to posts than by posting my own hands. In fact, that is why I respond to posts most of the time.

I learned nothing from this response though.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

To follow up to this. Last night I spent about 2 hours doing nothing but responding to Small Stakes posts and I was astounded at how many threads had like 0-2 posts and less than 25 views.

I responded to posts as far back as 3 pages behind, and some of those were only inactive for 3-4 hours! There were some very good discussions and threads that got buried simply because the forum gets littered with new hands so dang fast.

By the time I was done responding, the first thread I had responded to was already at the bottom of page 2! It's obvious from the views that people aren't even bothering to go that far back to read, which is a shame. These are poker hands, the discussion doesn't become invalid or "old" after a few years, let alone a few hours.

So, really, I encourage everyone here to try reading a full 3 pages back. Every thread. Respond to as many as you have questions on. Give advice. When you are done with that, and it took me well over 2 hours, then go back and post follow-ups in those threads you responded in if there are comments or questions to your posts. And *then*, post a hand or two if you still have a burning question. But many of you will learn far more from giving shitty advice to someone else and getting called on it, than you will from selectively posting hands that you know you played "sort of bad", but not "terrible".

Anyways, if everyone did this, I think they would not only learn better, it would make the forum a more condusive learning environment with less clutter. Worry more about how you can learn from what's already out there and how you can contribute to other people's threads rather than the "please everyone help me on *my* hand" concept. It's a give and take, and the more you give, the more you get out of it. If all you try and do is take, you are just cheating yourself and clutting the forum to boot.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

No problemo. You were far from the only one I saw, unfortunately, you were just the most prolific at the time. Nothing personal.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

Sorry to be pedantic about this, but I'm trying to understand. So far in my limited experience A and K of the flush suit are sticking around to the river no matter what waiting for the 4th of the flush. Assuming I have none of that flush or something low and folding to a raise - the number of times I take this down makes the bet into my opponent worthwhile?

Re: Jeez Louise
 

in my very limited experience, the following parlay makes this bet cool.

1) if we have a flush but it's not too high, this may be a value bet.
2) we usually don't get raised unless they have at least the Q.
3) if we don't have a flush, we could get a better (but non flush) hand to fold.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry to be pedantic about this, but I'm trying to understand. So far in my limited experience A and K of the flush suit are sticking around to the river no matter what waiting for the 4th of the flush. Assuming I have none of that flush or something low and folding to a raise - the number of times I take this down makes the bet into my opponent worthwhile?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is one of those things that makes me wish I was better at poker so I could think of them. (Thanks Clarkmeister.)

The essense is that almost all opponents will fold at least as often as 1 in however big the pot is (no matter how big it is). Also, assuming you have it, most opponents will call this bet more often than they will bet themselves. (e.g. Anyone with a baby flush will call, but the same person will probably not bet. The same applies to worse hands.) So whether you have it or not, betting is better than checking.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

[ QUOTE ]
3) if we don't have a flush, we could get a better (but non flush) hand to fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

You could also get a better, small flush hand, to fold. Bonus points when they fold it face up and tell you, nice catch!!!

b

Re: Jeez Louise
 

Y'all need to stop and read the threads that are out there instead of just posting hand after hand. There are like 20% of the hands in the top 3 pages with zero-two responses and like 10-20 total views.

What happened to 'props to Bisonbison's hand coverter'!?!?

Re: Jeez Louise
 

I agree. It seems many think they have to have a hand posted to learn or get anything from it. Many seem to be afraid to be called on their shitty advice. That's one of the quickest ways to learn it. Yes, ones ego may take a beating. So what?

[ QUOTE ]
These are poker hands, the discussion doesn't become invalid or "old" after a few years, let alone a few hours.

[/ QUOTE ]

Makes me long for the time when our old threads would still be going strong after a week. Now they seem to have a 2 day lifespan. Typically, when I see 5+ posts from 1 poster right next to each other, barraging the forum,I skip em all. Just like I skip the ones that post 4+ complete hands in 1 post. Except I'd give more consideration for the latter.

I also tend to look at posts more that are posted by posters who are more involved than just in their own threads. Meaning, familiarity with knowing the poster will be more likely to be involved with his thread as he is with others. Back in the day, we were so involved in each others threads we didn't have time to post 10-20 hands a day.

Not to mention, many times the same 'type' of hand/concept is already posted in those few hours. If some just took the time to look, they can save the time typing out their hand and just join in that discussion that could be well ahead of starting a whole nother thread about it. *lightbulb clicks on*

*LB*= Maybe it was because back then we had to type out our HH (among many other things) that we were more selective. Obviously more thought goes into them when you have to type them yourself as you have to remember a bit more, or you actually try to remember more. Now with the converters, you can just cut and paste them that much faster and not really have to 'worry' about taking the time to look for a hand similar. hmm. Maybe, maybe not.

Bobbyi and me were talking the other day about the lack of quality on the boards from what it used to be. Due to the volume, as you're pointing out, many great threads are buried by the normal, run of the mill, look at my hand even though someone posted it 30 posts down with a good discussion already going threads.

Sometimes it's like watching moss grow in your yard. Their are still good threads, likely the same amount as before, but they are overrun by even much more crap.

Here's hoping this thread is like mosskiller and will let the lush grass grow a bit more.

Im not holding my breath.

b

Re: Jeez Louise
 

Well, an hour and a half since the last reply, and it's already on the third page. Hmmm....

Re: Jeez Louise
 

Bump. SHEESH.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

You must be viewing in threaded mode. I recommend flat mode. You get 26 threads per page that way.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

[ QUOTE ]
You must be viewing in threaded mode. I recommend flat mode. You get 26 threads per page that way.

[/ QUOTE ]

While you're there (My Home -> Display preferences)

Change "Total parent posts to show per page:" to 50.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

While we're on the topic, do you recommend reading others responses before posting one of your own? A lot of time I feel like I find an interesting hand, and read the responses before posting, then can't find anything unique to say because the other responses have already influenced me. Do most people mind potentially duplicate reponses?

Freakin

Re: Jeez Louise
 

I do it both ways, depending on how much time I have.

Look at it like this, if you post a duplicate response, what's the harm?

Re: Jeez Louise
 

I miss the days when Bernie would say , "it depends" and then everyone would yell at him. Then he would get really pissed off and quit the forum.

Just kidding Bernie, I'm glad you came back.

Re: Jeez Louise
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You must be viewing in threaded mode. I recommend flat mode. You get 26 threads per page that way.

[/ QUOTE ]

While you're there (My Home -> Display preferences)

Change "Total parent posts to show per page:" to 50.

[/ QUOTE ]

50? Wowie!

(oh, and I was set to 20/page)