A reinvention of the microposter: Session Studies

[bosoxfan]

I would like to try this. Lord knows I need the help.

[MrWookie47]

It's looking like we have enough for two teams. Anyone want to lead a second?

[lautzutao]

I'll be a hub

[LoaferGee12]

Awesome idea. I'd love to do this but I'm not sure if I have the time [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] I'll have to get back to you on that.

[Disconnected]

I'd like to do this as a reviewer/reviewee, not as a leader. Great idea.

[nomadtla]

Yeah the idea is that you would not just be a reviwer but would also send in your sessions to be reviewed. Your reviewer would know who's it is so that they could Email you their notes back. As I said I have no prob being a hub or a leader.

To answer the guy who's job keeps him away. You could still join and on the weeks you're around you send one and review one. Then on the weeks you're away you don't send in yours and the leader would not send you one. It's that simple.
After this started anyone who wanted to join could easily do so by just sending a hand history to the leader (or one of them if we have 2) and bingo they're in. I see no problem with counting 6-max in the mix. Perhaps have one hub for full ring and one for 6-max or just interchange. I'm sure us ring guys could stand to benefit from reviewing some 6-max and interacting with the sender to learn why they made a different move in 6-max, and 6-maxers also may learn things from the ring guys. For maximum variance I'd like to keep as many in each group or whatever. Perhaps the 2 hubs could coordinate and send half their HH from their senders to the other Hub to be reviewed by people in the other team or whatever. I want this to be as easy as possible for all involved but I also want it to be interesting for all involved so people stay interested. So I'd like to not seperate groups any more then necessary because I want all of us to have the chance to see how everyone else plays because we all have our different strengths. I'd like to review as many different ones (and have my hands reviewed by many of you) as possible and I hope you all would too.

Wanna leave this out another day or so and see how many are interested over-all. Then we can get down to the organization of the thing. to all who respond in the future and all who have responded, post whether you play 6 or full and any other ideas you have to these questions.
1: Should 6 and full be seperate?
2: Should there be one leader or several?
3: If several should the teams be totally seperate or trade HH between them?
4: How many hands per session? Wouldn't need to be exact but a # to shoot for. I want a static # for us to keep it around so people don't get bogged down reviewing hours of play.
5: What days, frequency, should we do this? I think sending your HH to a leader by Monday morning (since most here put in hours on weekends). The leader would then send out all the sessions some time Monday or Monday night. Then you review the sessions and get back with their owner Tues or Wed. This makes me think a bi-weekly schedule would be best giving enough time for the reviewer/sender to discuss properly.
6: Should it be 1 for 1? That you are reviewing the same persons session who is reviewing yours. Or mix it up and tell each person who got their session, while they are reviewing someone elses session? I think 1 for 1 is less confussing so you only have to hunt down one person at a time.
As with usual session reviews I think hands that give questions or disagreement between both sender/reviwer should be posted with both players ideas expressed in the hand.

Glad there is intrest and of course I'm in and willing to be a hub or a leader, I think this could be outstanding if we all put just a tad of effort in it for eachother.

1: I play full usually though plan to go 6-max for the learning in december or the start of next year, I think interchanging them is good.
2: Several leaders make it easier for them, but divides the group.
3: A solution that answers 3rd question as well. On Saturday I can post the list of those involved and what leader is their hub this time. Then the next time I switch them up a bit. I was planning on having a Saturday reminder post anyways to keep people aware of it.
4: I think 100-200 hands is a number that will show some patterns but not be to much to go through for the reviewer.
5: every 2 weeks, sessions to leaders by noon on Monday, sessions to reviewers by midnight monday, reviewers do their job Tues, Wed, or Thursday, return and discuss with sender some time that weekend or in the following week. Lather, rinse, repeat.
6: I stated my feelings on the 1 for 1, yes.

Thanx in advance for the input and I hope this will rock for all involved.
Nomad

I think this is a great idea and I'm in if you guys will have me.

[ QUOTE ]
6: Should it be 1 for 1? That you are reviewing the same persons session who is reviewing yours. Or mix it up and tell each person who got their session, while they are reviewing someone elses session? I think 1 for 1 is less confussing so you only have to hunt down one person at a time.
As with usual session reviews I think hands that give questions or disagreement between both sender/reviwer should be posted with both players ideas expressed in the hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is a good idea. I think then, the reviewer/reviewee could get on AIM for like half an hour or hour sometime afterwards and discuss hands that they might disagree on, and then post those hands on the forum that they think might be of interest.

[nomadtla]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
6: Should it be 1 for 1? That you are reviewing the same persons session who is reviewing yours. Or mix it up and tell each person who got their session, while they are reviewing someone elses session? I think 1 for 1 is less confussing so you only have to hunt down one person at a time.
As with usual session reviews I think hands that give questions or disagreement between both sender/reviwer should be posted with both players ideas expressed in the hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is a good idea. I think then, the reviewer/reviewee could get on AIM for like half an hour or hour sometime afterwards and discuss hands that they might disagree on, and then post those hands on the forum that they think might be of interest.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed

[mvoss]

I would like to join in as I have recently made the switch to 6-max.

4. 100-200 sounds good.

5. Bi-weekly sounds reasonable.

6. I like the 1 for 1. I would like to exchange HH's with different people throughout this thing though.