Dare I say it

[Bond18]

First of all, clayton, that was pure genius. I cracked up so hard.

Okay, but on to business. Recently i've written quite a few more elaborate posts about more theoryish stuff such as reraise sizing, general MTT situational questions, squeezing, etc. Unfortunately, after it gets some responses it normally falls deep into the pages and good discussion drops off.

Also, even though i already post a lot of hands, i often have a lot more i'd like to post but i feel bad about clogging the forum with my own hands when theres a lot of guys who also have questions. However, seeing as you guys say its a question of traffic/post volume then i will start posting everything i have questions about and writing more theory posts because i really feel splitting the forums would be good for everyone.

So i guess if what you guys need to see is commitment to content, then you'll get what you asked for, at least from me.

[augie_]

[ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]

[Nate.]

Jurollo --

Roughly one out of every three hundred of my posts is negative; I hope you'll take this seriously.

I think you're way out of line in this thread. Ansky and others have responded point-by-point, so I'll just make some general reaffirmations.

You say you want MTT to be a place where everyone can learn; right now it's a place where nobody learns. I find it nearly unusable. If you're not inclined to trust me, look at a guy like Foucault; he's smart and generous with his time/analysis. He's given and continues to give tons to this forum. He's not satisfied with MTT, and he's in favor of the split, and he's no elitist.

I know tons of emerging, eager MTTers who mostly sit around MTTc and spiel on about bankroll requirements, etc. They aren't learning from MTTF. Right now MTT, as a culture, has very little to do with serious poker thinking. What's the ratio of {posts about your avatar} to {solid strategic posts}?

I don't know if you're still reading this thread--you seem to have indeed stomped away--but if you are, look at the limit hold'em forums. The split has been wonderful. MSLHE is my first home on 2+2. It's full of thoughtful, active participants; those participants don't include Bicyclekick and Paluka, and that's fine. (Not that big-name MTTers wouldn't contribute to SSMTT.)

In short, let me just reaffirm that (a) a split deserves way more consideration than you seem to be giving it and (b) that your behavior in this thread was shocking (given your long history of being a cool guy/mod) and sort of appalling. (...so much so that I bothered to make this sort of post, which I almost never do.)

All my best,

--Nate

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
2p2: where germans are more important than high stakes tournament players

[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe we just need sponsorship. What are those vehiclechooser.com guys up to these days?

[SnareSound]

Not sure if anyone will read this since I don't post very much. I do read a very high percentage of posts on this and the strat forum.

As a lower buy-in player, I would be concerned that some low stakes wouldn't get the attention, but I don't disagree that the players who willingly post to those and don't play those stakes would still do so.

My question is this: are we trying to split this to encourage more high buy-in players to read and respond to the higher buy-in posts (rather than someone like me), or to discourage players like me from posting?

I don't post a lot of questions. Most of my questions don't always apply to s specific hand, but maybe certain situations. I feel like I learn the most when I jump in coversations in some other higher buy-in hands. I'm not noticed for the most part, and I don't expect to always be. Splitting the forums won't help or hurt this, I'd expect.

Anyway, if you're looking to split to keep players like me out of the forum, and you expect that that, in turn, will keep the higher buy-in players posting... that probably will not work. You'll see less hand questions, but probably just as many bad/inaccurate comments from lower level players.

Anyway I have a suggestion. If the split does not occur, please add a posting requirement that you must list the buy-in level when posting specific hands. Right now this is merely a part of the suggested titles. Maybe this will encourage some players to return even if it is not split. It would certainly make it easier to cruise through some things they might not want to read.

[Bond18]

I'd like to hear from Sideshow Mel. Or perhaps Aejones, can't tell the two apart anyway.

[Sherman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But I really do agree that a forum split is probably necessary. My only real complaint is that I will have to open 3 browsers instead of two. Which is a [censored] while multi-tabling.

[/ QUOTE ]
Seriously dude and for the love of God, download Internet Explorer 7.0 or Firefox, so you can have tabs and forget about tons of windows. You must be the last ph.d. on Earth not to have done this [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Also, my name is Soulman, and I approve of a forum split.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have IE v. 7.0. I think the tabs thing is just as useful as opening multiple browswers. It's not really a complaint anyway. More of a trivial argument which indicates that we should split the forums. However, I somehow think you realized that and I am being levelled.

[Foucault]

Snare,

The intention isn't to prevent less experienced players from posting, it's to keep posts that usually require less discussion from crowding out those that require more. My feeling is that at the moment threads that deserve a lot of attention get bumped off the radar screen too soon, both because there are a ton of simpler hands getting posted and because the players with the most to contribute to those discussions don't stop by much. I feel like a forum split would solve both of those problems without discouraging smaller stakes players from posting.

I'll concede that this will mean simpler hands get less responses from more experienced players than they do now, but I don't see that as a decisive problem for two reasons:

a) On a hand with a pretty straightforward answer, a $50 player can provide almost as much insight as a $500 player. Basically, while I feel strongly about giving back to the forum and trying to help out, I don't think that explaining why cold-calling a 5x UTG raise with KQ in a 4/180 is incorrect is the best way for MLG to give back.

b) The value of having more high-quality posts and discussion, in which anyone would be able to participate, outweighs whatever value would be lost to smaller stakes players when they get fewer responses from Bond and Cornell.

[RonFezBuddy]

[ QUOTE ]
So i guess if what you guys need to see is commitment to content, then you'll get what you asked for, at least from me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bond, you're awesome. Thanks for the quality and volume of your posts.

Regarding the split: I am low stakes and I would be for the split. I think you'll find that if you do separate the forums an order will evolve in the low stakes that makes up for the dropoff in traffic/posting by higher stakes players.

I wasn't around for the cash games split but it looks like they have some resident experts at each level. I just tend to think things like this happen naturally when you are dealing with social circles.

Of course, it would be nice if the high stakes guys who came up through here would drop in and offer advice at times. However, I think we'd have to learn to be sufficient on our own. (It also might make posting less intimidating).

[Body Man D]

[ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]

That might be the funniest post i've ever seen on this board. NH