Should i use names instead of #s in posts????

[B Dids]

People have been encouraged to name names once just saying the very well known names is more descriptive than a 4 sentence read. I.E., saying "hands vs. Spirit Rock" tells you more by saying less and doens't give away any information that people don't already know. So unless you're playing somebody like that, I just say good descriptions (and that numbers basically suck anyway).

[Turning Stone Pro]

The only folks who are interested in knowing the s/ns are the lurkers who aren't qualified to play at the level (or even the 30 game, for that matter), and therefore are not qualified to comment on hands played at that level.

Even though pretty much everyone knows my s/n, I wouldn't want it to be used in a hand analysis at 1-2 or 50-100.

TSP

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
If a player wants to take a shot at the bigger games, they should put in their own work to find out if player X is tricky or too loose in the blinds or whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is simply drawing the line at where it's most convenient for you. There are a number of players who think using PT and other tools is wrong. If one of them said to you "you should put in your own work by playing the players and figuring it out on your own without using software programs" I bet you would dismiss that. Right?

FWIW, I think all high limit hand posts would be better with names.

[casinogosain]

I understand what you are getting at, in that the 50/100+ are much smaller player pools, so generalizing situations doesn't work as well as a 15/30 hand, but it still doesn't seem right.

I think you should put as much information about your read and the opponents tendencies into the post as possible, but reserve the actual player names for discussions in non-public venues (e.g. voice conversation, IRC, email, etc).

-Ash

[gonores]

My argument is that Party has made it pretty clear they don't like player info being publicly accessible (with their stance against pokeredge or whatever it is). There isn't much difference between publicly accessible databases and publicly listing a player's stats.

Party has seemed to tolerate thusfar the mining of HHs.

BTW, I think we had this argument before a year or so ago with ZeeJustin's LAG list of 10/20 players.

[sam h]

I am all for using names, and I think the arguments to the contrary are pretty flawed.

One argument is that it hurts those discussed. But having good players discuss your tendencies and weaknesses is going to help the subject of the conversation the most, as long as he or she willing to take the criticism and work on their game.

Another argument is that it is a privacy issue. I think this is nonsense, since poker is played publically, and that it speaks more to an insecurity that many players (including myself) have about having their games openly critiqued in hands they don't select for posting. I think this insecurity is ultimately -EV.

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
My argument is that Party has made it pretty clear they don't like player info being publicly accessible (with their stance against pokeredge or whatever it is). There isn't much difference between publicly accessible databases and publicly listing a player's stats.

Party has seemed to tolerate thusfar the mining of HHs.

BTW, I think we had this argument before a year or so ago with ZeeJustin's LAG list of 10/20 players.

[/ QUOTE ]

you mean his 10/20 "shark list" .. yeah that was a funny post.

diablo is correct

[mike l.]

you should use both.

[ QUOTE ]
I am all for using names, and I think the arguments to the contrary are pretty flawed.

One argument is that it hurts those discussed. But having good players discuss your tendencies and weaknesses is going to help the subject of the conversation the most, as long as he or she willing to take the criticism and work on their game.

Another argument is that it is a privacy issue. I think this is nonsense, since poker is played publically, and that it speaks more to an insecurity that many players (including myself) have about having their games openly critiqued in hands they don't select for posting. I think this insecurity is ultimately -EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why give your opponents a chance to improve their game?

[ike]

[ QUOTE ]
Why give your opponents a chance to improve their game?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is definetly not the issue. The guy who plays 40% of his hands in 100/200 isn't gonna shape up even on the off chance he does actually read this forum and sees his play criticized. A more valid concern IMO would be that he realizes there are people who make a living exploiting him and stops playing.