I think a lot of good strat posters usually either get bored by the content of the op or get tired of posting something and then having to answer deeper questions about it. It's ok to ask a question about an idea you don't understand, but really, a good poster should be making younger players think for themselves, not holding their hands and having to explain every little thing. I browsed the old hsnl for years and never wanted to ask questions because I wanted to think about these great posts on my own and see for myself during game play what they were talking about. It takes longer, but in the end you will have a better understanding of the game. Never understood the withholding discussion argument though. Motivated players seek to be better anyway and fish don't care. Since online is dead for awhile I would think some of the great players could participate in interesting live threads. It's not like us live donkeys are going to use those discussions to take the online world by storm when it returns.

I guess one problem is that it takes some time to put together a post with a sound range analysis and reasoning for your response to that range - much quicker just to say "here's what I'd do". And as SKnight points out - many of the hands that come up are just are not that complicated.

For example, I saw one yesterday, and thought - well that's an obvious blocking bet by V but in the situation looks like the V would not call with worse, so OBV a call looks right. But truthfully it did look obvious. so why bother saying it? And by the time I thought, well probably could still give a response, others had already done it

But having said all that, I think this forum still offers the best place for strategy discussion on this site at least at this point in time.

Too true. But that wasn't always the case (thanks jloc.)

Happy New Year MHFR! I'd like to sincerely thank you all for being a part of this community and putting forth the time and effort. It is much appreciated.

Happy new year jloc. Thanks for all your work.

mmix- I figure I'd answer this inquiry here so as to not to derail StandardDeviates thread.

I have never been a proponent of naming names in hand histories. In fact, back in the day, this was extremely frowned upon and basically off limits as the point of an online forum is to be/stay anonymous. It was viewed as a major breach of etiquette to out posters real identity or speak of real names when discussing strategy or that individuals game, tendencies, etc..

I do understand times have changed and many of you have outed yourselves as well as become friends with fellow 2p2ers. But do keep in mind that many still have not and their privacy should be respected. Also keep in mind that this site has grown exponentially from the days of old and more and more people now come here to view and/or participate. Just because you may not think your opponent doesn't read the forums doesn't make it so.

In a practical sense, you shouldn't be naming names for the sake of good business. Why would you want to educate that individual on how to play him/her? Why would you want to risk embarrassing them where they may not want to play with you moving forward? Why would you want to bring attention to a person that you can profitably exploit by allowing others to now be on the look out for said person thus hurting your bottom line since now the "fish" gets divvy'd up amongst the lot of you? Why would you want your opponent to now learn how you view him/her in a very detailed way where they can now make adjustments against you?

I have always thought a detailed description of your opponent (not looks but play) was more then suffice to allow the forum to offer solid feedback and incite good discussion. It keeps the integrity of privacy intact while being able to discuss strategy against that type of opponent and similar ones alike. It carries none of the negatives that outing a player does while still allowing the ability to dissect the play of the hand accurately and in depth.

Don't forget, we play this game to make money (well, most of us) and for some/many it is our livelihood. It seems counter intuitive to intentionally hurt our business or damage our ability to continue to do our job in the most profitable way possible.

Some may argue that strategy posting in general hurts us. I understand that argument and respect those who have chosen to cease posting. The posting of hands and the discussion that ensues though is also a way to improve ones own game so even though you may feel we are educating the "fish" with our posting, I choose to see it as educating ourselves as well. The anonymity aspect was a key component in not allowing our posting to backfire. And of course the "giving back to the community" aspect is very real and very commended. It is a sign that not everything in poker has to be selfish.*

*I can understand how some can see a contradiction here but it is a fine line I choose to walk. Again, if it is contradicting in your world (fine) then not posting yourself solves that problem for your own moral dilemma.

Now, as for mentioning high profile/professional players being the same....in an ideal world I would like for them to not be mentioned either. In these cases it's not about "protecting the fish" or our bottom dollar as it is about respect to privacy, alleviating any possible embarrassment that may come of their actions/play, or simply because it is unnecessary when a small detailed description about the tendencies of the player will do.

The slight difference I see with naming amateur names vs high profile ones, is that high profile players should expect to be in the public eye and spoken about (not always in strategy threads, uhh NVG anyone) if for no other reason then it comes with the territory. Just as a professional in any line of work should not be taken aback when they see their name mentioned in print in the forum of their respected field. Whether that be sports, politics, business, etc, those people have ascended to the point of interest of the public within those fields. Fair or not it is the way of the world/media/internet.

There is no hard rules set for who can be mentioned by name and who can't but it shouldn't be difficult to figure out when it is inappropriate or out of line. If I am wrong on this position, I am all ears..

Happy new year, and best wishes jloc. I pretty much figured that was the case with the edit (was not aware it was etiquette.) So many of us know each other it didn't seem unnatural to clarify the identity of this very unusual villain.

It's so true that we walk a fine line getting and giving information here. It has not gone unnoticed that a number of veteran posters give one line answers while enticing the OP to divulge more info on their play. It's a bit of a cat and mouse game at times but, it works. I trust everyone, and am never disappointed. By that I mean we are all poker players, and we sometimes bend the truth or conceal information. I trust all posters behave accordingly, and I'm never disappointed.

With that said, I thank you again jloc for your uncommon honesty and dedication. If we should ever meet, dinner is on me :-).

I've been searching for the donkey crusher thread. Either about aba or townsend and when they used to play fr live. Can one of u donkey crushers post it up

It's on the Live Low-stakes Forum

Cleaning House at Live 1/2 and 2/5 NL

Just a quick reminder:

2+2 will be going to a new VB update and in doing so will force all threads that have not been posted in this month to be archived. If you would like to keep some of the better threads active when 2+2 officially makes this transition (which will be at the end of February), please hunt them down and bump them so they can be on the new server and not archived.

Now this forum has definitely gone through a wholesale change in regards to quality, tone, and temperament for the positive and I would like to see this continue, so please don't bump a bunch of threads that goes against the integrity of this forums objectives/goals.

There seems to be a growing trend of posters either including results in their OP or very shortly after a few have responded. This defeats the whole purpose of people using this forum to dissect, critique, and discuss the finer nuances of the hand.

This sub-forum in particular generates less traffic then other strategy forums in regards to new threads. Frankly, I view this as a positive as it allows for the community to really ponder the hands posted and let them resonate for a bit before offering ones thoughts. And because of this, it incites more thoughtful discussion where posters are spending time putting their thoughts down to be examined, analyzed and ultimately critiqued. Posting results cuts this process short.

If results are never posted, it'd be far better then posting them too early.

Agree 100%. Frankly results are irrelevant and people who care about the results of a hand someone else played have pretty flawed thinking imo.

I've done it both ways in the past, posted results (too early when I first got started) and not posted them. It is not crucial to post the results but it occurs to me that if someone is planning to be a regular hand poster it might help the quality of future responses if the group knows how the person handled the previous situations.

How are results irrelevant? While they certainly don't prove anything, they do add to everyone's sample. They also confirm hand reading successes and failures in spots where a lot of information is provided. They also let people really delve into a villain's possible thought process- given their starting point. Lastly, they can very often be indicators of how games might be changing at different stakes.

I pay people to show their hand sometimes after I fold in tough spots. And seeing hands (results) is just invaluable information, in a game where information is obv king. I think every op should post results after the discussion has run it's course (no new replies in a day or two or whatever).