Awful plays from Pokerstars' SNG regs

Originally posted by savage1981

Originally posted by feursturm

I guess I was a little bit malicious, however the point of the thread was just to have a bit of fun more than anything. You do make an interesting point though. But would you say that quoting somebody saying something stupid and then revealing their identity is bad etiquette too?

Of course the hands are still fun no worries on that but it's better for you in the long run too if you keep the identity a secret because you want as much extra information as you can get that no one else has

Well maybe you were being a LITTLE bit malicious Savage but it was obvious to me anyway that you really did only intend your post as a bit of fun...(probably because I recognised that I have played like that villain you caught...on more than one occasion!!...so maybe you did tap the tank a bit????? :P) And yes, in answer to your question, I think that it would be bad etiquette to reveal someones identity to all and sundry for saying something stupid...we can all cringe at something we said and then wish we hadn't so the fewer people who hear it the better!! lol

I do think you brought up a really interesting point though..even if this wasn't your original intention. I did think the hands were interesting but replied to the post mainly because of what Ghaleon said to you in reply. Yes I agree with the point about not revealing a players screen name,and I do get the Moderators argument as well, it is a fine line...but I have certainly heard numerous coaches describe a player as " the fish in the Big Blind...the weak tight guy in the CO who is really exploitable..." etc with the individuals name displayed on screen for all to see. Ok, it's not quite the same as posting a hand and saying "omg look at this donk and the 82 soooted he sucked out on me with...but to have your bad play immortalised on video is, in my opinion, much worse. A forum tilt rant is soon forgotten, but a video will be viewed by new members and re viewed by current members for a lot longer.

I think that if you are going to take the view that it is bad etiquette to reveal a villains name in a hand posted for discussion in a forum, and bring this to the posters attention, then it's only fair that this should apply to any medium through which hands are discussed on the site. Imagine settling down to watch a coaching video on pokerstrategy and seeing your name on screen and your "fishy" play or wharever being described to every member who watches it....it would certainly upset me.

I do think it was a good point Ghaleon made and one I agree with as I said. But I also feel that this should apply across the board no matter what the medium.

Originally posted by feursturm

Imagine settling down to watch a coaching video on pokerstrategy and seeing your name on screen and your "fishy" play or wharever being described to every member who watches it....it would certainly upset me.

I do think it was a good point Ghaleon made and one I agree with as I said. But I also feel that this should apply across the board no matter what the medium.

Well if you are the type of player to sit and watch a vid and the coach is being professional it would probably be helpful to you we all make fishy plays sometimes and we don't fix the problem until someone tells us it's there.

For me there is a huge difference between identifying the fish at the table (this is what we need to do as quickly as possible when we sit down) as a coach in a video will say "i have a little history with this guy, seems pretty fishy and we've already seen him call a pot size river bet with bottom pair" and ridiculing a player in forums saying "lolololol this guy sucks" (again not talking about this thread i understand this is a bit of fun )

Well what you say is true.. I agree with what you say 100% as regards it being helpful to have a Coach point out our mistakes as it will help improve our game and hopefully make us better players.

However,my issue would be with the implication of the original comment made by Ghaleon in response to the post i.e that it was "....bad etiquette..." on the posters part to mention or include a players screen name when posting a hand for discussion (or illustration of poor play by "regs" in this instance).

Again, fair point, and the original poster I think acknowledged as much. I do not in any way disagree as this observation is correct and it's being respectful towards the other player(s) involved in the particular hand(s) not to mention names. We are after all only concerned about our play in particular spots and/or against particular types of opponents..their screen identity is entirely irrelevant and should remain anon.

But my point is, if a Coach is going to post a reply on a pokerstrategy forum admonishing someone for posting screen nicks, then surely it follows that anyone, Coaches included, using any medium, be it hand forum or instructional video, who includes a players screen identity is also guilty of "bad etiquette"? Why then are Coaches making instructional videos/hand history reviews (for any training site) not having this brought to their attention seeing as this will be viewed by a much wider audience?

I have watched a number of videos where players are identified only as UTG 1, UTG +1 etc, or the players VPIP/PFR stat was used to illustrate their player type and the best method of playing against them and is in my opinion the format that should be standard.

*faarcyde joins lobby*
*any other reg joins lobby*

Well in coaching or videos I try to use terms like "casual player". Though I have to agree I slip some "fish" or "beef" term now and then. But overall I think it's better to try to be polite. E.g. I don't see anything good coming if I see some reg to start tilting in chat especially versus some casual player on how his play was so damn horrible... We all want casual player to feel good for his play and game overall. Versus reg it would on other hand work as suggestion to improve his game or at least double check that situation.

If I see bad play I do tend to say it was bad play whatever we have live coaching or video. Obviously to make it clear for those who are following the content and not as saying THAT player suck. But obviously its important to notice how players play and categorize them accordingly for future situation.

In videos we could change game nicks before hand, but it does bring problems in many cases. E.g. playing 4 tables at once where there obviously can be same opponent in multiple tables and in many cases it's important to know that it is same opponent.

In these sort of fun posts I tend to just say that "one reg wanted to spew a bit" or something like that

Originally posted by faarcyde
*faarcyde joins lobby*
*any other reg joins lobby*

Yes, point taken.

For me those examples are psychologically comforting because if winning regs make such a bad mistakes, then the limit is still relatively easily beateable.

And so i think we should change the real names for smth like "winning reg" or "X% roi reg" or w/e.

And so i think we should change the real names for smth like "winning reg" or "X% roi reg" or w/e.

In one of the examples the guy making the poor plays 'taniaftw' would hardly be considered a reg. If you look at this stats the only regular thing about him is his ability to lose.

I agree with you in that these examples show that the stakes beatable and act as encouragement to players like myself to work hard and move up.

I don't agree however with many people in this thread saying 'you are only helping people improve', yes okay, regs reading this are gonna pick up a few things. But if they are the sort of reg to read threads and take notes about players, then will also pick up notes on the table when the hand happens.

As for the bad players making the clear -ev calls the likelihood of them finding a thread like this and thinking 'oh i must now improve my game' is minimal. They are more likely going to seek to improve their game because of the money they are consistently losing.

Originally posted by dogma18
In one of the examples the guy making the poor plays 'taniaftw' would hardly be considered a reg. If you look at this stats the only regular thing about him is his ability to lose.

That person played >2600 FR STTs this month. If that is not a reg, I don't know what is

i would classify a reg as a winner, probably wrong about this. but wouldn't someone who loses be considered a fish. for example if you have him tagged as reg, you might be tightening up vs his opens, adjusting vs his shoves bvb etc.

I would rather classify a guy like this as a high volume losing player, not necessarily a reg. If i was tagging a player like this then i would rather go for 'mark' as i call them.

Originally posted by dogma18
i would classify a reg as a winner, probably wrong about this. but wouldn't someone who loses be considered a fish. for example if you have him tagged as reg, you might be tightening up vs his opens, adjusting vs his shoves bvb etc.

I would rather classify a guy like this as a high volume losing player, not necessarily a reg. If i was tagging a player like this then i would rather go for 'mark' as i call them.

Well, a reg is short for regular. If you play on a site regularly, you're technically a reg. Whether you're a winning or a losing reg is a different matter. That person is still probably making money post-rakeback, although I'm not sure.

That's why it might be a good idea to colour code regs. Say split them for regs with 5+% ROI, 3-5%, 1-3% and break even and assign 4 different colours. The rest are fish.

Poker Stars $13.89+$1.11 No Limit Hold'em Tournament - t100/t200 Blinds + t25 - 4 players - View hand 2026350
DeucesCracked Poker Videos Hand History Converter

SB: t2062 M = 5.16
Hero (BB): t1440 M = 3.60
CO: t8201 M = 20.50
BTN: t1797 M = 4.49

Pre Flop: (t400) Hero is BB with 3 9
1 fold, BTN raises to t1772 all in, 1 fold, Hero calls t1215 all in

Flop: (t3030) T 4 4 (2 players - 2 are all in)

Turn: (t3030) 5 (2 players - 2 are all in)

River: (t3030) 9 (2 players - 2 are all in)

Final Pot: t3030
Hero shows 3 9 (two pair, Nines and Fours)
BTN shows K T (two pair, Tens and Fours)
BTN wins t3030

Originally posted by savage1981
Poker Stars $13.89+$1.11 No Limit Hold'em Tournament - t100/t200 Blinds + t25 - 4 players - View hand 2026350
DeucesCracked Poker Videos Hand History Converter

SB: t2062 M = 5.16
Hero (BB): t1440 M = 3.60
CO: t8201 M = 20.50
BTN: t1797 M = 4.49

Pre Flop: (t400) Hero is BB with 3 9
1 fold, BTN raises to t1772 all in, 1 fold, Hero calls t1215 all in

Flop: (t3030) T 4 4 (2 players - 2 are all in)

Turn: (t3030) 5 (2 players - 2 are all in)

River: (t3030) 9 (2 players - 2 are all in)

Final Pot: t3030
Hero shows 3 9 (two pair, Nines and Fours)
BTN shows K T (two pair, Tens and Fours)
BTN wins t3030

Hahhaha

you did change the names...

but you forgot to mention that bb is (supposed to be) a good reg there though ♦

Originally posted by Luupainaja
but you forgot to mention that bb is (supposed to be) a good reg there though ♦

Well, the Hero is me, obviously. The funniest bit is that the villain is taniaftw. It's at times like this my atheism is put to the test and I wonder if I get punished for my bad deeds.

Misclick or you saw it as 99 or something?

QQ