On the value of hand historys and of telling a tale

[happybhoy]

Before I start i'd just like to point out that I am not flaming the posting of hand histories per se. They generate some great discussions and theorising but my question is I see a lot of advise or opinions posted about these that seem pretty set about how this or that should be played. Now I've been playing a couple of years now but still consider myself relatively green, althought the boys got some game, so if I'm talking out my arse I apologise.

I can't see how HH's can really adequately describe the situation. They are so removed from the context of the game that aside from highlighting some strategy points I can't see a massive use in them. In any hand i've played your decision is made from cards, position, chips, reads, the past five hands, the past ten hands, that hand right at the start where billybigcards pulled a snazzy move, in short I think each game as a tale. If 3-way I've folded 10 hands then I can afford to put in a large bet with 22 as I've 'bought' respect for my raise. Conversely if I hit a rush and have won the past 6 hands unseen by min-raise preflop and all-in of the flop (with justification) then I can consider mucking that KT as people are primed to come over the top of me because I've sold the respectability of my raises and I don't want to face an all-in re-raise. (PS I'm talking about late stages of an SNG in these examples).

As I said before I'm not trying to flick peebles at the hornets nest and if I'm wrong then I'm open to being convinced but my instinctive position is negative.

<*Lights blue touch paper and retreats to safe distance*>