NL__Fool- That is a funny and accurate depiction of the state of many threads. Those are exactly the type threads that will no longer exist in this forum.

I agree the glory days are behind us. But as you said there are still some nuggets here and there and that is what we all search for. I hope to make this forum filled with those nuggets and if we can have threads that won't get derailed or trolled, we will have the best shot at making that happen. What I do is find posters whom I respect and then follow there posts. There are still a handful of posters who continually offer great advice and different perspectives and I make sure to soak it up.

Granted the pool of good posters has decreased immensely over the years but again, I tend to view the world with the glass half full. It's just better than the alternative. Negativity and hostility bore me.

Speaking as a lurker... I play a lot of 200NL FR and although I am rolled for 2/4 I don't dip my toes in very often, partly because I'm fairly new to FR (used to only play 6max and HU but needed to diversify). I read this forum daily just to see what good players are thinking and what kind of situations they find difficult... same reason I read SSNL, HUNL and MSNL. I check the regs threads just to see how people are feeling about the state of the games and the little changes in online poker e.g. FTP raising the min buy-in from 20bb.

Given how small the player pool is for FR at mid-stakes and above, it's not too surprising that people are pretty guarded about giving up information. I've never played a hand of stars midstakes yet I recognize the vast majority of people at the tables just from this forum, which I doubt would be true at almost any other form of poker (6max, limit, small stakes, tournaments, omaha etc etc). At 200NL the poker economy is just so huge and tons of players just aren't part of forums or other online learning tools; at midstakes the money becomes more real and people become more ruthless. Yes there is more discussion at MSNL but it gets very trolly and so so much of it is snappy one-liners like "call obv terrible wtf."

2p2 is just a gathering place for people who play poker seriously, a sort of social club mostly. As someone in MSNL put it 2p2 has "gone hollywood" and can't ever go back to the smaller community days (which I obviously wasn't part of, see my join date).

As far as improvements, I really agree with Hurt that FR would best be chopped up into low stakes, medium stakes including 200NL, and live as its own separate thing. I'm surprised 2p2 is so opposed to this given that there is a brick and mortar forum but I guess it has to be that way.

The live threads are generally pretty terrible. Unlike most people on 2p2 I have no IRL serious poker friends, the people I know who play poker is super-fish live donks or losing micro players... and like EVERY hand they want to talk about involves either folding AK/QQ/KK preflop or making some hilariously tight postflop fold (my favorite being folding KK on a JT4 two tone board closing the action and getting 12:1 because he "knew he was beat.") I guess the best answer is just to mod all those live 2/5 threads down to micro NL where they belong.

Obviously I also check daily for updates on "Internet vs. Live" which is tied with "truly awesome sharkscope graphs" for the greatest ongoing 2p2 thread

Verstehen- I deleted the pics copied from the live vs online thread because I don't want to have this thread turn into a pic filled thread. It is meant for discussion on ways to improve the forum.

What I think many are missing or are ignoring is that I understand why some don't want to post strategy and why strategy threads have diminished in quality and quantity. I have only asked those that don't wish to participate to please refrain from any activity within them....not an unreasonable request, no?

Also, if you have any more funny pics/sayings, I urge you to continue to post them in the live vs online thread. It is the gift that keeps on giving.

if you ask me, these 2 statements clearly contradict eachother.

how do you, in one breath, say that you cannot include 200NL hands because of applicability of advanced concepts and the fact that it takes an "ABC game" to beat 200NL, and in another say that a live forum cannot created?

clearly, live games generally play loose/passive/soft and play way closer to microstakes games than to 200NL online games. i think it's a given that the skill gap between 200NL and 400-1kNL FR is orders of magnitude smaller than the skill gap between your average live game (minus maybe nosebleed stakes) and 400-1kNL FR.

why is it that the "higher ups" do not want separate live forums? are they open to changing their stance on the matter?

jlocdog, are you an online poker player? I'm curious, and if so do you mind sharing your username?

Hurt- A live forum cannot be created because people with more power than me says so. That's how I come up with that statement. There should be no further debate on that subject if only because it will lead to nowhere. Whether I agree that a live forum should be created is either here nor there as my opinion on this matter does not count. I have accepted that and moved on. I suggest everybody else do the same to keep the bits of sanity you may still have or else you will be essentially arguing against a brick wall. As of right now the issue has been discussed at length to the point of no further discussion is being held at this time. I apologize if this goes against your ideals for these boards (you are not alone) and or infuriates you. Lets now be proactive in finding solutions to co-exist.

I never said I could not include 200NL. In fact if I recall, I said, "If the masses feel I am wrong with this and wish to add lower limit play into this forum, I will absolutely address the issue and make the proper changes."

Also, I hope everybody has noticed the vibe within the strategy threads as of late. People are more helpful and good debate is being created out of good discussion. I am pleased at the way posters are carrying themselves.

Doublfly- What do you suggest we use as this carrot? I am intrigued.

Jumaji- I do play some online and usually in the stakes of 1/2 to 3/6. I choose not to share my username though for obvious reasons.

it doesn't infuriate me, it's just peculiar that arguing with the "people with more power" is synonymous to arguing with a brick wall, especially since most people that visit these boards are open-minded and rational. we are poker players after all.

Actually I don't know why you won't tell us who you are. Care to enlighten me?

Hurt- I used that analogy because in-depth discussion has already taken place over the course of 5 years, 30 threads, 7 forums, and many mod wars. It has already been decided on. They have taken into account the pros and cons of such a forum and deemed it not worthy. I can't believe you have never seen any of these threads or heard the arguments from the other side (again not that I fully agree with them). And if you have read some of the threads, you would know that I have thrown my hat in the ring for a trial period for a live forum and would even moderate it.

Dealing with higher ups is not synonymous with arguing with a brick wall....the discussion about a live forum is.

I am more than ok with their decision though as I can understand both sides of the argument. Either way, what does it matter? Why can't you just not open threads that you know you will not like to participate in?

Jumanji- Actually I don't know why you care so much. And I'm sure you can come up with a handful of reasons why I don't want my screename to be outed. If not, I apologize and hope it won't bother you for too long.

Beyond that, I have no clue what my screename or even poker playing ability has to do with anything. I have never once asked anyone of you to do something you didn't want to do nor have I said that my opinion on strategy advice is always right (so why you feel you need credentials is beyond me). I've only asked you show common courtesy and respect to others and when entering a strategy thread to please not troll, level, or derail it.

I actually do think you're ability in poker would be relevant. You say you are looking for advanced concept chat but the fact you say you have read every thread and still allow live threads baffles me. How exactly are live threads going to be magically better just because there is no trolling? In fact the only reason most people read the live threads are because of the trolling. The best part of it all? Most of the people getting leveled don't even realize it because they are NOT advanced players.

I would hope by this point that my posts can speak for themselves as to whether or not you or anybody else thinks that I have sufficient enough knowledge of the game. I am always up for a debate on a given play or hand and offer my thoughts in full. If you or anybody else ever cares to participate in one of these debates, you can find me in many of the strategy threads offering my opinions. I eagerly await your thoughts (I am serious).

I have just begun to attempt to make this forum more friendly. I am not even a month old to the job and thought it would be best to observe before I acted. I am now acting. I am instilling a no tolerance zone for derailing strategy threads. I thought I had made myself abundantly clear on this matter. Though a few of you may be upset with this "common courtesy" rule, I assure you many more are happy that they will have a place to post and discuss hands, theory, concepts, etc..

It seems to me that you and/or others may be just be upset that you are not allowed to have the whole forum as one big '**** thread' but rather are now relegated to just a few individual threads to spread your joy. Why this bothers you is beyond me since many have already stated that they either/both never go into strategy threads because they are terrible or choose not to offer good advice because its bad for their game, etc.. Whats the big deal or issue here? I am thoroughly confused.

Reading through this discussion I find it quite curious that all live threads are horrible - simply because they are live. Although I believe that you are an advanced player, and concede that many live threads are too basic for discussion at this level, I believe you are being irrational in your prejudices against live threads.

For example, previously in this thread I posted a link to couple of recent live 1/2 threads that, while perhaps not advanced enough for HSNL-FR, were certainly not simple or basic. One poster from this forum gave a couple of brief takes on them, which I appreciated. However, not to be a dick, but both of his comments looked as though he really hadn't considered the situations very closely, and I'll bet if he took more time to consider them, he'd take his comments back. He actually proves my point that a lot of you guys just dismiss live post - irrationally, imo - without considering that they are sometimes not as simple as you might believe.

I looked at both hands (regret it already), and both plays were incredibly simple just like previous poster said. If he said anymore then he did, he'd be holding the person's hand he was writing to. If you think they are wrong then why don't you say why. I'd love to hear why you do following if he's wrong. On hand 1, you would fold pre or 4b/fold? He said the other 2 options are fine. On hand 2, you would not jam turn? What would you do? He's right in both hands and if you disagree I'd love to hear your analysis.

Those hands are more than welcome to be posted here if you think they will evolve in good discussion. If this is the case, please make a thread containing these hands and have a debate. This thread should stay on track about this forum and whats best for it and how we can live together in harmony.

You can read my analysis as well as many other players' analyses in the threads themselves.

You'll find that the moderator of the forum and coach, Split, thinks we should fold preflop in hand 1, which is in direct disagreement with what Rosa said. This should at least illustrate my point a bit, that this hand isn't as simple as you are have already assumed.

On hand 2, I wouldn't necessarily jam the turn, because in this game I'm likely to be beat much of the time. I think if you look at the hand closely and perhaps follow some of the logic discussed in the thread, you might agree. If not, please post your reasoning in the thread itself, we would all benifit from your expertise.