Calm down newbies...

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
Qtip do u ever think about occasionally doing a thread about how ur doing professionally ala david ross or something like that. I thought u said that ur were quiting a job or something to play professionally. I apoligize if that s not the case and have u mixed up with someone else.

[/ QUOTE ]

oh...don't you worry, an update post will be coming down the pipe. I've been playing to pay bills since Jan 1st and have given a couple of updates on that in my pooh bah post and my carpal tunnel post. Also, I started a small blog that's in my profile. I'm just getting started with it, but I'm planning on keeping that updated with my experience playing full time as well. If you didn't catch my thread (one of the money) on going pro, that was a good one with lots of great thoughts. Titled "Schoonmaker on going pro" or something like that.

Anyway, Friday is my last day of work, so I start full-time on Monday.

[jstewsmole]

[/ QUOTE ]
It's more like the kid in class who gives an answer and while the teacher and the rest of the class is telling him the answer is wrong - he continues to defend his position as the absolute truth.

I think this is was Q was referring to - and I agree. It's great to hear the beginning players post their thoughts and perspectives. But please - when you hear from not 1, not 2 but 3, 4 or more respected posters that your thinking/line/concept/understanding/etc is wrong - give in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I totally agree with this.

[flair1239]

I like what Jstewmole said about the forums being the icing on the cake.

I have never viewed these forums as a primary learning source. In a post a while ago I was flamed for saying that the best thing these forums have done for me is refer me to Pokertracker, and pointing me in the right direction as far as what books to read.

I use the forums as kind of a refinery, to clarify concepts that I am unsure of. Also usually when I respond to a post, I am doing so mainly just because I think better when I write and it helps solidfy some of my thoughts.

Now there have been times when a post here has really woken me up to something. But I can count these moments on one hand.

The way I view the forums probably has a lot to do with why I am not frustrated by the same things that seem to agitate other posters. I don't mind the AK missing posts, because occasionaly I like to review and refresh the thought process. I don't mind the bad beat posts, because occasionally I like to here how other posters deal with frustration. I don't usually mind the "is 10bb/100 sustainable posts (unless I am running bad), because it is good to examine variance sometimes.

Anyhow I am off track, but basicaly I don't think these forums are suited to be somebodies main resource.

I am also suspicious of some of the veterans with the "I've seen it all" attitude. I think even the posters who are perceived as "the best" players still have much to learn (as do we all), I think some of them might be suprised how much they might be able to improve their thought processes in seemingly mundane situations, if they would allow themselves to come down off the mountain top and participate in these "boring" threads. It might be suprising to see where some of those threads lead.

One other thought, on the one word answers that are meant to provoke thought. Clarkmeister actually responded to one of my complaints about this a while back. He said he thought the more threads he responded too the better it was for the forum. I disagree. Instead of seeing 20 "standard" responses. I would rather see (1) well thought out essay response leading us through the thought process of an expert player (ala John Feeney in "Inside the Poker Mind"). As a matter of fact when I read a reaponse I usually don't care about the reccomendatiion.... I want to see how you got there... and I mean everybody. I think the thoughts leading up to a decision are so much more interesting than the decision itself.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
Clarkmeister actually responded to one of my complaints about this a while back. He said he thought the more threads he responded too the better it was for the forum. I disagree. Instead of seeing 20 "standard" responses. I would rather see (1) well thought out essay response leading us through the thought process of an expert player

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know you that well, so I can't really make a comment on how well you play, but if you truly believe this you are almost certainly doing yourself a disservice. You seem to be well aware that short responses are a trend amongst many of the great posters on 2+2 (Astro, Clark, James, etc.). Do you really think that all these guys are just too lazy to tell you what they're thinking? Do you think they got as good as they are by being lazy? No and no.

They all realize that there is way more value to anyone reading their posts if they keep their answers short and leave the rationalizing to the reader. This isn't like you're just learning to play poker and need to be spoon fed the basics (for those people we have some wonderful features on this site such as the Micro forum and the Begenners forum); if you're reading posts by the people that do this (at least the ones that do it for valid reasons) then you should already have a grasp on the basic concepts and be able to expand on them with a little prodding.

If you honestly don't like that these guys post like that then I'd say there's a fair chance that you're just not ready to read those posts, which is fine, but it is not the fault of the posters/posts. I've spent a lot of time talking to James282 and once in a while something he says to me just makes no sense at all. 100% of the time I eventually realize that I wasn't ready to do whatever he was saying at the time. However many days/weeks/months later I figure out what he was talking about I am better off for it. Had he decided to be really "helpful" and explain exactly what he meant and how to apply what he was saying I would have ended up trying to do things I wasn't ready for and wasted a lot of money.

Basically what I'm saying is that you have to crawl before you can walk. The types of 'bad' posts that you are talking about are poker's equivalent of walking, if you will. It's fine that you don't prefer that method of teaching, there were/are times that I feel the same way. But please be fair to those you are criticizing and realize that the shortcoming is your own.

[Catch of the Day]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Clarkmeister actually responded to one of my complaints about this a while back. He said he thought the more threads he responded too the better it was for the forum. I disagree. Instead of seeing 20 "standard" responses. I would rather see (1) well thought out essay response leading us through the thought process of an expert player

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know you that well, so I can't really make a comment on how well you play, but if you truly believe this you are almost certainly doing yourself a disservice. You seem to be well aware that short responses are a trend amongst many of the great posters on 2+2 (Astro, Clark, James, etc.). Do you really think that all these guys are just too lazy to tell you what they're thinking? Do you think they got as good as they are by being lazy? No and no.

They all realize that there is way more value to anyone reading their posts if they keep their answers short and leave the rationalizing to the reader. This isn't like you're just learning to play poker and need to be spoon fed the basics (for those people we have some wonderful features on this site such as the Micro forum and the Begenners forum); if you're reading posts by the people that do this (at least the ones that do it for valid reasons) then you should already have a grasp on the basic concepts and be able to expand on them with a little prodding.

If you honestly don't like that these guys post like that then I'd say there's a fair chance that you're just not ready to read those posts, which is fine, but it is not the fault of the posters/posts. I've spent a lot of time talking to James282 and once in a while something he says to me just makes no sense at all. 100% of the time I eventually realize that I wasn't ready to do whatever he was saying at the time. However many days/weeks/months later I figure out what he was talking about I am better off for it. Had he decided to be really "helpful" and explain exactly what he meant and how to apply what he was saying I would have ended up trying to do things I wasn't ready for and wasted a lot of money.

Basically what I'm saying is that you have to crawl before you can walk. The types of 'bad' posts that you are talking about are poker's equivalent of walking, if you will. It's fine that you don't prefer that method of teaching, there were/are times that I feel the same way. But please be fair to those you are criticizing and realize that the shortcoming is your own.

[/ QUOTE ]

STFU NoOB.

Catch-

[istewart]

Pretty good post man.

[jjacky]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Clarkmeister actually responded to one of my complaints about this a while back. He said he thought the more threads he responded too the better it was for the forum. I disagree. Instead of seeing 20 "standard" responses. I would rather see (1) well thought out essay response leading us through the thought process of an expert player

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know you that well, so I can't really make a comment on how well you play, but if you truly believe this you are almost certainly doing yourself a disservice. You seem to be well aware that short responses are a trend amongst many of the great posters on 2+2 (Astro, Clark, James, etc.). Do you really think that all these guys are just too lazy to tell you what they're thinking? Do you think they got as good as they are by being lazy? No and no.

They all realize that there is way more value to anyone reading their posts if they keep their answers short and leave the rationalizing to the reader. This isn't like you're just learning to play poker and need to be spoon fed the basics (for those people we have some wonderful features on this site such as the Micro forum and the Begenners forum); if you're reading posts by the people that do this (at least the ones that do it for valid reasons) then you should already have a grasp on the basic concepts and be able to expand on them with a little prodding.

If you honestly don't like that these guys post like that then I'd say there's a fair chance that you're just not ready to read those posts, which is fine, but it is not the fault of the posters/posts. I've spent a lot of time talking to James282 and once in a while something he says to me just makes no sense at all. 100% of the time I eventually realize that I wasn't ready to do whatever he was saying at the time. However many days/weeks/months later I figure out what he was talking about I am better off for it. Had he decided to be really "helpful" and explain exactly what he meant and how to apply what he was saying I would have ended up trying to do things I wasn't ready for and wasted a lot of money.

Basically what I'm saying is that you have to crawl before you can walk. The types of 'bad' posts that you are talking about are poker's equivalent of walking, if you will. It's fine that you don't prefer that method of teaching, there were/are times that I feel the same way. But please be fair to those you are criticizing and realize that the shortcoming is your own.

[/ QUOTE ]

i disagree. if i read a one liner like "standard" (if i assume that the answer is correct 100% of the time, what i do virtually never. one reason for that is that i am new to the forum and i don`t know who the extremely high skilled posters are) there are two possibilitys:
1) my level of skill is sufficient to find the correct play myself, allowing me to understand the post
2) my skill is insufficient, i am not ready for the one liner if you want to put it this way.
in case one the post is of very limited value for me since if i take the time to think it through i come to the correct conclusion anyway. in the second case the post is obviously useless for me.
but when i read a well thought out post with a good reasoning i have a chance to find a concept that i didn't know or didn't appreciate enough or too much in certain situations. that greatly helps me to improve my game imo.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't read the other responses but I think what you're saying can be misinterepreted pretty badly. New posters should be encouraged to respond to threads. The difference is that they should not be saying, "you should do XYZ." Rather, they should be saying, "I think I would do XYZ because reason XYZ." Then if they are wrong, they can be corrected with sound reasoning.

It's much better IMO that new posters post in other threads than post a whole bunch of their own hands which just ends up creating forum clutter.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're absolutely right and you've got a great avatar to boot!

[thirddan]

nice post evan...

also, before dismissing a person like Clarks short posts, do some thinking about why they think whatever they posted...

i remember about 6 months ago when Clark was making the rounds in SS, there was a post that i would have played very passively, but Clark would play it aggressively...the main question was should Hero call or raise a turn bet with a vulnerable hand, Clarks post said "Raise", no explanation, just one word...i took some time to look over the hand again and i just didn't get it, so rather than move on or call him a jerk or whatever, i posted my own reasoning for my decisions and then some possible reasons for his decision, he can back and responded to my questions, which led to more questions and so on...i think over the course of an hour or so we went back and forth 7/8 times and by the end of the hour it made more sense...so don't put off the short posts as avoiding the question of something egotistical, the best posters are willing to help but they don't want the input to be one sided with them just giving the answers, you gotta work for it a little bit...

[Evan]

Unfortunately this forum requires two very different skill sets to be deemed 'excellent'--poker and writing. While you seem to think that a long, detailed post explaining someone's thought process is flawless, it is not. There have often been people on these forums who were extremely talented writers but not particularly good poker players. In these cases I would bet that they could covince you of plays that were downwright wrong through clever diction and lucid prose.

Tommy Angelo and bisonbison come to mind as examples of this type. This is not to say that either of them are not good players, they are, but they are surely not as good as 2+2's impression of them would have you believe.

The fact of the matter is that you are using a very poor metric for deciding who is worth listening to around here.