Posting results in strat

[4_2_it]

[ QUOTE ]

I like to form my opinion, then read through other people's ideas, then find out who was correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because everyone 'guessed wrong' on villain's range doesn't invalidate the discussion that occurred. If villain is an unknown and played a certain hand like a draw, but held the nuts, then the only things hero can hope to do 1) Understand why everyone thought villain was on a draw 2) make a note that villain plays very strong hands in an unorthodox way.

Results oriented thinking is rampant and posting results only reinforces it.

[XXXNoahXXX]

4_2_it,

obviously results suck when the OP posted the hand so that everyone would put him on a range and then be like "LOL he had 27os GUYZ" but when everyone is putting him on a hand, and then we find out he has a different hand, its cool to go back to the HH and figure out why he played it the way he did and whether it was simply played poorly or if he disguised his hand well intentionally. it's almost giving you two shots at analyzing the same hand.

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
4_2_it,

obviously results suck when the OP posted the hand so that everyone would put him on a range and then be like "LOL he had 27os GUYZ" but when everyone is putting him on a hand, and then we find out he has a different hand, its cool to go back to the HH and figure out why he played it the way he did and whether it was simply played poorly or if he disguised his hand well intentionally. it's almost giving you two shots at analyzing the same hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

true.. but mandating results is bad policy. It should be on a case by case basis as defined by the readers of the thread and the OP.

[diebitter]

Being focused on results reinforces -EV thinking.

Forget results.

[4_2_it]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
4_2_it,

obviously results suck when the OP posted the hand so that everyone would put him on a range and then be like "LOL he had 27os GUYZ" but when everyone is putting him on a hand, and then we find out he has a different hand, its cool to go back to the HH and figure out why he played it the way he did and whether it was simply played poorly or if he disguised his hand well intentionally. it's almost giving you two shots at analyzing the same hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

true.. but mandating results is bad policy. It should be on a case by case basis as defined by the readers of the thread and the OP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Great answer.

[iron81]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
true.. but mandating results is bad policy. It should be on a case by case basis as defined by the readers of the thread and the OP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Great answer.

[/ QUOTE ]
I just looked at the various strat forum stickies, about half handle it this way and half have a blanket "no results" policy. My point was that results at the end of a thread are generally helpful and should be encouraged.

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
true.. but mandating results is bad policy. It should be on a case by case basis as defined by the readers of the thread and the OP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Great answer.

[/ QUOTE ]
I just looked at the various holdem forum stickies, about half handle it this way and half have a blanket "no results" policy.

[/ QUOTE ]

They are talking about in the original post ldo.

[4_2_it]

iron,

With the volume of threads that uNL and SSNL get, I really do not want to see 100 of yesterday's hands bumped to the top with results. New threads are bound to get lost in the shuffle.

We have never had complaints from regulars or new posters wanting to see results posted. This just doesn't seem like an issue right now.

[iron81]

Good point. The main strat forum I read is Other Poker, where we really don't have that problem. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]

[citanul]

iron,

is this about that fwf hand?

edit: obviously it's "nice" if people do choose to post results at some point, but wtf, it's not like we're going to force people to go back and post results if they don't feel like it.

ie, this isn't your emo blog.