Obligatory semi-regular improve forum quality post

[durron597]

I think 5/10 hands that are very obviously basic should be moved as a matter of course to MSNLPL.

[mustmuck]

You seem to be talking about an "Advanced Strategy" forum rather than a forum based on any particular stakes. If you base the forum on particular stakes, it seems silly to say that a particular hand played at the required stakes doesn't qualify.

[bobbyi]

FWIW, in the limit forums we consider 30/60 to be borderline between our mid- and high-stakes forums, so interesting situations from 30/60 regulars can go in high stakes, but "line check" posts and very straightforward 30/60 hands especially from people just taking a shot at the limit are considered to belong in mid-stakes. This seems to be working fine for us, so if you were to do the same thing over here with 5/10 NL as the borderline it could be successful.

[ZeeJustin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What about 5/10 6-max? I think that a lot of the play there is very advanced.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is nothing against you dude but I can't stop laughing. I want 5/10 in here too but I agree w/ Diablo that a lot of the hands that get posted are so basic and could easily be handled by ZeeJustin and his medium stakes crew.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you have to be an ass? I post here trying to improve my cash game play. I know a suck (to clarify, this means I'm a small winner at the 10/20 and have a winrate I'm not happy with). I post hands that I think I may have played terribly because I think that's the best way to learn. Do you have a specific problem with my posts, or are you being an ass for no reason? If you read through some of my past posts (in both this forum and other forums), you'll see how helpful I've been to players that are still learning the game.

[edge]

I don't like the 5/10 or 10/20 posts where no reads are provided and no mention of the poster's image. Those are basically dumb hands and are pretty pointless. The stakes aren't so important, since 5/10 hands can be interesting too if basic information is provided.

[whitelime]

I hope you realize that someone posting something that's "basic" or has a "glaring mistake" in it obviously doesn't have the discretion to determine that it belongs in a different forum.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
I hope you realize that someone posting something that's "basic" or has a "glaring mistake" in it obviously doesn't have the discretion to determine that it belongs in a different forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think that he realizes that, i think that he's making a call for the mods to superimpose their disgression on the posters'.

c

[RikaKazak]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like the 5/10 or 10/20 posts where no reads are provided and no mention of the poster's image. Those are basically dumb hands and are pretty pointless. The stakes aren't so important, since 5/10 hands can be interesting too if basic information is provided.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think we should just "outlaw" all hands that don't have relevant reads and past history info (although past history can be we've stayed out of eachothers way but I think the hands where "I just sat down so no reads" are too hard to talk about anything "worthwhile")

[hit_the_set]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like the 5/10 or 10/20 posts where no reads are provided and no mention of the poster's image. Those are basically dumb hands and are pretty pointless. The stakes aren't so important, since 5/10 hands can be interesting too if basic information is provided.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a great point. Most hands people post on here have no information about the opponents or what the opponent thinks about hero.

[CavMan]

sometimes hands come up where the hero actually has no reads and it makes the decision harder, and doesn't mean it's a bad post. obviously it helps to have a read, but sometimes there isn't one, but a decision still has to be made. i think bad posts are ones with an obvious decision where reads don't really even have to be considered.