REVOLUTIONARY IDEA: the play scale

Most of the threads here are about how well a hand was played. I think that a standard scale will help a player thats wondering how it was played. Here it is :

The stussy2k scale:


5: Perfectly played. Really no way to comment or improve on the hand.

4:Very well played. Minor errors (eg. not betting out sets to maximize EV, not betting the river.)

3:Marginally played, obvious errors in play (eg. Not protecting your hand against draws, calling without adquate odds.)

2:Poorly played. -EV. Nearly every street must have been messed up. (eg. Chasing runner runner straights/flushes heads up, cold calling or calling a 3 bet with high card. various other ridiculous fish like moves)

1.Ungodly poor play. Take your money, make a wish, and throw it off a building. (very few examples. Mostly tilt related play. Calling a 3 bet from UTG with 72os. something just bizzare.)

[SCfuji]

its funny how you gave the lower numbers more attention =]

i liked #1

[Hojglad]

[ QUOTE ]
its funny how you gave the lower numbers more attention =]

i liked #1

[/ QUOTE ]
I like your avatar. Who is that?

[Highn]

To me hands are either, good(also known as normal), or bad(erronous.. if thats how you spell it). It doesn't matter much if the errors are huge or tiny, they need to be improved.

I don't see why having a rating scale would be usefull.

I think there is. If you categorize play by sections, you will probably see a pattern of hands that you have a problem with, whereas if you just say this was good or this was bad, its harder to isolate your leaks.

[benneh]

i give this idea a 1. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[SCfuji]

i am an avatar thief

[Eeegah]

This would be about as #1 as the worthless "raise pf" posts that plague threads. Advice is meaningless without explanation or justification IMO.

[adsman]

[ QUOTE ]
This would be about as #1 as the worthless "raise pf" posts that plague threads. Advice is meaningless without explanation or justification IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

A much more respected poster than I had this to say on this subject. I'm paraphrasing. If a good poster responds to a thread with, raise, fold, call, etc, ask yourself WHY they wrote this. Spend some time coming up with not only what you would do but your thought process behind it. Then post it and see if you're corrected. This way you learn.

Don't ask, What should I do in this situation? Ask instead, What do you consider in this situation before deciding what to do? A lot of posters here seem to want quick and easy answers. If someone posts, "raise preflop", take the time to understand why.

[VoraciousReader]

I think there is already a defacto scale in place. It's not official, and it's pretty loose, but it's as close as you can get to a standard scale in such a situational game.

Here it is:

Standard: absent a conflicting read or crafty opponents you need to trick, play the hand this way.

Misplayed 1 Street: what this says.
Misplayed 2 Streets: ditto
Misplayed 3 Streets: ditto

I HATE THIS: misplayed every street.

But really, it's hard enough on people when they get an answer like "fold preflop" "bet turn".

I don't really think they want to open their thread and see a series of:
1
3
2
1
2
2.

Although I agree, def for #1 is a classic.