Why can't we talk about players?

[bobmarley]

Just wondering why this policy was ever implemented here. I think it would be helpful to talk about various players and there styles. It could only help. I notice that in the higher n0-limit forums they often do. ANyways sorry if this post wasted anyones time.


GL at the tables, BM

[carnivalhobo]

the answer most likely that the player turnover is much greater at uNL than it is in the other segments. There are fewer regulars, and they move up stakes faster so the info would be close to useless. Also, many of the concepts disucssed in this forum are general in nature and talking about specific opponents would be a waste of time.

[Check_The_Nuts]

I think its just because its not polite to out someone withuot their premission/concent. No 2p2er wants to get followed aruond by a nit who keeps exploiting leaks in his game.


Thats what I always figured at least. I don't see why saying a villians name should be a big deal if he's a big fish. Although there's so many fish it's pretty unlikely anyone else has hands on him.

[banana182]

In my opinion, the players are irrelevant.

If you want to play +EV winning poker in the long run, the focus should be on YOUR play and ensuring that you are making good decisions with hands. If you do that, it doesn't matter if you're facing the fishiest fish or Phil Ivey.

Badmouthing other players or breaking down the styles of other players will not help you improve or make good decisions.

[carnivalhobo]

[ QUOTE ]

breaking down the styles of other players will not help you improve or make good decisions.

[/ QUOTE ]

wrong, so very wrong.

[banana182]

yeah, you're right. That's probably an exaggeration but I'd say MOST of the focus should be on you...agreed?

[4_2_it]

Mentioning who the villain is in a hand (if it's likely to help with reads) is fine.

It's lame to have a thread where one poster says XYZ sucks, but watch out for ABC and then have another poster start arguing a different point. In HSNL, it makes more sense.

If anyone can present an argument on how they are beneficial teh mods are willing to listen.

[Check_The_Nuts]

I have a ton of hands played in 10NL, so if someone was on a 10NL table and mentioned one of the regulars, I could give much more player specific advice on that guy. If he was a fish I might be able to do the same.

On the same note, it would [censored] suck for people to be discussing how often I squeeze, reraise light, with what hands, which cards I tend to bluff, etc...

I doubt many people are doing a lot of that tho....

[dd323]

[ QUOTE ]

On the same note, it would [censored] suck for people to be discussing how often I squeeze, reraise light, with what hands, which cards I tend to bluff, etc...


[/ QUOTE ]

At 10NL I would hope that that information would be never, never, and a little bit with a good read. And that is why there is no need to discuss specific players at Micro stakes..

[4_2_it]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a ton of hands played in 10NL, so if someone was on a 10NL table and mentioned one of the regulars, I could give much more player specific advice on that guy. If he was a fish I might be able to do the same.

On the same note, it would [censored] suck for people to be discussing how often I squeeze, reraise light, with what hands, which cards I tend to bluff, etc...

I doubt many people are doing a lot of that tho....

[/ QUOTE ]

Your example is in the vein of "The following hand hand was played against 4_2_it at NL$10: [Insert HH]"

There is no problem with this.

A thread saying how good/bad or whatever about 4_2_it really serves no strategic purpose. This type of thread is what we are trying to discourage.