ALL Forum Splitting Comments/Suggestions Go here!

[betgo]

[ QUOTE ]
I said some of this in another post, but:

1. I think that allowing players to self-select "Advanced" status would work. No snubs since nobody is kept out, and I think that most players have a pretty realistic view of themselves. Honestly, how many $5-20 players like me would have the chutzpa to say, "Hey, I'm one of the most insightful posters here."

2. Sort of a variant on the "Play a hand with the Masters." Have a forum where only advanced players can make the origial post, but anyone can reply. That cuts out a lot of the "Should I fold AA pre-flop?" stuff, but still allows people like me to be involved.

Just my my two cents.

Sam

[/ QUOTE ]

I think self selection makes the most sense. A lot of times the elementary questions get little response or sarcastic replies from me or others. So I think most people would post the elementary questions in the right forum.

I don't think a cutoff by buyin is appropriate. There is not that high a correlation of buyin to level of question. Also how do you compare buyins of a $120 live tournament, a $10 rebuy, a $25 turbo 2-table tournament etc.

[ QUOTE ]

1. I think that allowing players to self-select "Advanced" status would work. No snubs since nobody is kept out, and I think that most players have a pretty realistic view of themselves. Honestly, how many $5-20 players like me would have the chutzpa to say, "Hey, I'm one of the most insightful posters here."


[/ QUOTE ]

Even when you divide forums by stakes, people jump forums regularly. Regulating forums by self-assessed skill just won't work.

[Jurollo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

1. I think that allowing players to self-select "Advanced" status would work. No snubs since nobody is kept out, and I think that most players have a pretty realistic view of themselves. Honestly, how many $5-20 players like me would have the chutzpa to say, "Hey, I'm one of the most insightful posters here."


[/ QUOTE ]

Even when you divide forums by stakes, people jump forums regularly. Regulating forums by self-assessed skill just won't work.

[/ QUOTE ]
I believe the suggestion was to 'block' others from access to that elite forum. This wouldnt be good either obviously.
~Justin

[ansky451]

Obviously the elite forum would work best. We could make several tiers. The semi elite would be those who have won FIVE poker tournaments. The elite would be those who have won TEN tournaments. Then the super-duper amazing elite, could be those who have won TWENTY tournaments!!!

Obviously we could make the ultimate elite forum, for those who have won 1 billion dollars playing poker, but I would be the only one, so I wouldn't be able to share all my secrets of winning.

[ClaytonN]

I fully back this idea.

Ansky has upper level management skills written all over him.

[beenben]

I don't think wins of MTTs is a good measure of elite. For example, I've won more than five MTT tournaments but I don't consider myself elite enough to post in an elite forum. (I'm including 30 people home game MTTs).

Also, what constitutes a "win"- I won one MTT online with several hundred entries or did I get third? It depends on how you count chops.

Also, random things tend to happen at final tables, especially when the blinds get so high relative to the stacks, and variance is higher with fewer players.

A better measure might be 10 final tables or 20 final two tables. Perhaps also factor in buy-in amount and number of entires- a sort of formula.

But anyway, I'm against an elite forum or splitting the fourm in any regard.