Beginners Circle Suggestions Thread

[spoonitnow]

I guess now that I'm the new BC regulator I'll take suggestions on things you would like to see in the BC. Or something. Anything suggested to add/remove fromt he sticky, etc. gl me

Edit: Also considering talking some midstakes players into doing well posts here. Thoughts?

[Micro2Macro]

pron

[BooG690]

How about we create a thread to request & get sweats together? This'll add to the BC community, have low stakes players help microstakes players, etc.

[Donachello]

How about we create a thread to request & get sweats together? This'll add to the BC community, have low stakes players help microstakes players, etc.

+1000000

[surviva316]

i guess this is somewhat more of a general observation than a very specific question, but:

i find that the structure of the BC is set up so that the majority of the population (beginners, ldo) comment on what they feel comfortable commenting on, which bumps those threads, and may read and take interest in threads with some actually interesting/difficult turn spots, etc, but have no comment. so what ends up happening is that threads like "fold KK PF to 1/2 stacker?" and "how's my turn 1/10 PSB with top set on wet board vs fish?" get bumped 30 times a day and are in public view sometimes for weeks, whereas things like "exploitation in deep-stacked spots" are very short lived in public view and 90% of the time generate disappointing results.

i don't mean to sound bitter or elitist or anything, but i think we can all agree that the forum has more potential than to read a bunch of threads that's nothing but facepalm emoticon's and captain obvious answers.

A few potential solutions to aforementioned more general observation:

1. Locking threads when they've reached their full potentiality: i suggest this at the risk of coming off as elitist. by no means do we need to lock every thread that has AA or a set in it immediately or anything, but with a lot of these threads, someone like XTR'll come along by response #3 and say the obvious answer, and it seldom necessitates much expounding upon. so once the obvious is stated, if OP doesn't have any followup questions or clarifying questions of importance, relevance, or generally interesting game theory, then i think the thread can be considered to have fully realized it's potentiality (leaving room for more interesting thread).

bj did a good job of getting some clutter out of the way right off the bat with introductory-type threads, and i thnk that did a bit to help

2. BCers can take it upon ourselves to be more courteous toward people who say something that isn't necessarily wholly correct: probably part of the reason that tough turn spots and complex poker theory doesn't continually get bumped to the top of the stack like it could is because most posters generally don't comment on things that they're not 1000% sure is correct. and the most likely reason that is is because if they post something that is one way or another incorrect, they are certain to get quoted and shat upon and made to feel like they know nothing about poker. it's actually interesting because even SHNL, which has much better players posting on it whom you would think would be more up on their pedastol, doesn't shit on other people even like 1/10th as much as happens in the BC. prolly 'cause when you're crushing 600nl, you don't need to shit on other people in order to legitimize your poker career.

3. bumping old goodies: some people like dranger do this from time to time, and i think it gives us the opportunity to get our eyes on some good, fresh stuff and reignite old, unsettled discussions without having to actually create anything new. it increases the probability of some sort of depth of discussion being reached in what might have been a disappointing thread, but even if that doesn't happen, it at least gives BCers something good to read and oftentimes does much in the way of covering general topics that are brought up on a weekly basis like the BC is an episode of groundhog's day.

prolly having like a Bump of the Day would be putting to much work on the admins, but this could also be something that us BCers could take upon ourselves. (could range anywhere from general theory to specific HH to simple math shortcuts to how to's [like how to put someone on a range or how to post a HH], etc.)

4. everyone could tell me to stop fucking making these long ass posts because they're all tl;dr. not to mention i'm a grad student and could be spending this precious time working on my portfolio or something.

5. simply have spoonitnow jerk off on the BC and have his magical (yet often unpleasant) sperm demons extract all the suck out of the forum.

[jyms]

Spoon,There are some well type posts made by Spenda, Goat and I think Griffey that may be can be added already. Others may have done something similar as well. I think they have been going with an "Ask me" type of post, if that helps.

[rong]

'cause when you're crushing 600nl, you don't need to shit on other people in order to legitimize your poker career.

Thats a good point, people get frustrated which I understand, but this is the beginners circle,wtf do you expect, it's almost like bullying people sometimes, except that it's the smart kids rather than the tough kids (kinda cool in that respect).

Perhaps to some extent you need to expect dumb questions. Unless there's any way you could make it that you can't make your first post until you type a meaningful response to one of the stickies to demonstrate your understanding and the fact that you have bothered to read it?

[kiwiMark]

You guys think spoon is the mod that's gonna get rid of ridiculing people?

(<3 spoon)

[Hoopy]

A thread where people can post some interesting value bet spots since it's one of the most important things to learn for beating the micros.

[Micro2Macro]

I think well posts are a good idea, also a sweat request thread, which could be marked as a sticky to keep it in the open.

[tomato paste carnage]

I like the sweat request idea. It'd be good for the community as a whole and players individually.

[spoonitnow]

@BooG690, Donachello, and others - A common request so far is a sweat session thread as a sticky in this forum. Ask and you shall receive: http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...en-t92429.html

@surviva316 and others - In regards to dealing with the dumb questions we get and the flaming that ensues, I think the Beginner's Circle FAQ has become sort of obsolete and it could be reorganized a bit to answer some of the dumb questions we get from time to time.

Along a similar line of conversation, I'm not a fan of locking threads just because the OP's question has been answered because it prevents further elaboration.

@jyms, I'll try to dig those up. I'm also going to encourage other small/mid-stakes players to post more often.

As far as trolling goes, that's going to happen too and we as a community have to do the best we can to discourage it. Oh the other hand, if someone can't handle a facepalm smiley in reply to their 2nl hand history post, then they don't have much of a future in poker anyway and there's nothing we can do to help that.

Keep up the suggestions guys.

Also, would anyone support a FTR BC IRC channel to chat in?

[BooG690]

Also, would anyone support a FTR BC IRC channel to chat in?

We already have one. It's called #flopturnriver.

[Xianti]

Great start, Regulator.

[d0zer]

can we all just step back and laugh a little at how FTR's biggest troll was appointed supreme commander of BC?

:h FTR

[kmind]

Oh good god was is the world coming to fuck this shit

P.S. me likey your edit in the OP

[daven]

identify the thread from each of the other spots (FR/SH/etc) with the best or most interesting content each week. Link these to the BC. This could also act as an archive/digest type of thing for each of these fora.

i mentioned it to xianti way back when, but i haven't got around to doing anything about it - i don't think i even mentioned it to stax!

Sure! Any topic, in ANY forum, that you feel could help a beginner improve his game or get them thinking about good concepts should be suggested in the Beginners Digest. I don't believe the Digest should be limited to only the BC forum's topics. You can tell Stax I said so. I'm pretty sure he'll agree.

[JR9477]

I suggest getting rid of the beginners winners circle sticky, since we already have Tales of Poker. That thread is just a mess.

[oskar]

+1 on removing the winners circle.

Digest could use some cleaning up.

[spoonitnow]

Also, would anyone support a FTR BC IRC channel to chat in?

We already have one. It's called #flopturnriver.

can we all just step back and laugh a little at how FTR's biggest troll was appointed supreme commander of BC?

Standard x2.

I agree with the people who say the winner's circle thread is a mess and really unnecessary. The problem is that it's a long-standing part of the forum and I don't want to just come in and start changing big things around just yet when I don't know everyone's opinion. To deal with this and justify doing it, I've started a poll in this thread http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...ad-t92436.html where you can vote and plead your case.

On a similar topic, I would like to combine the Beginner's Digest with the Guide to Posting Hands post and the FAQ and some other things and create a master BC sticky.

In general, the current state of things in the sticky area is probably about to get revamped in a serious way, and hopefully that will help some of the problems this forum has about dumb questions (in terms of beats), other common questions that are easily answered, and things of that nature.

[Xianti]

I agree with the people who say the winner's circle thread is a mess and really unnecessary.

I voted and commented in your poll.

On a similar topic, I would like to combine the Beginner's Digest with the Guide to Posting Hands post and the FAQ and some other things and create a master BC sticky.

Actually, I don't like this idea. It would be one monster of a topic. The Digest should only contain above-elementary strategy threads and other, more specifically helpful topics and links. You could consolidate Guide to Posting Hands and the FAQ into one "READ BEFORE POSTING: Beginners Circle and Poker Primer" topic. All general forum directives and often-asked/answered basic poker concepts should go in this topic. This would make more sense, imho.

[spoonitnow]

Actually, I don't like this idea. It would be one monster of a topic. The Digest should only contain above-elementary strategy threads and other, more specifically helpful topics and links. You could consolidate Guide to Posting Hands and the FAQ into one "READ BEFORE POSTING: Beginners Circle and Poker Primer" topic. All general forum directives and often-asked/answered basic poker concepts should go in this topic. This would make more sense, imho.

I didn't mean just mashing everything together into one thread, sorry for the confusion. Traditionally there are two main stickies in a forum like this. One is a digest-type thread which is like what you described above, and the other is a FAQ-type thread that also provides a general guide to the forum.

[!Luck]

Suggestion:

What about we make a thread every month titled Stat Review Only - Month X

Requirements to post would be Min. 15k Hands.

We would have poeple post positional stats, general stats.

And their C bet flop Fold to C bet flop stats.

Then the pros or other BCers like me can commit on what we like and don't like, this way we can avoid all those random stat threads. Plus develop a base where everyone looks at stats and can compare to their own without even asking questions.

!luck

[BooG690]

Suggestion:

What about we make a thread every month titled Stat Review Only - Month X

Requirements to post would be Min. 15k Hands.

We would have poeple post positional stats, general stats.

And their C bet flop Fold to C bet flop stats.

Then the pros or other BCers like me can commit on what we like and don't like, this way we can avoid all those random stat threads. Plus develop a base where everyone looks at stats and can compare to their own without even asking questions.

!luck

This would get rid of all the "How are my stats?" threads that we get a shitton of anyway. Throw it all in one thread.

[kdawgy80]

Lovin' the new mojo around here!

Don't really have anything groundbreaking in terms of suggestions. I'd agree with most of what's been said. I think adding as much as possible to a new faq would be great. There really are Soooo many similar threads so hopefully it would help in that regard. I think its a bit more constructive to yell at someone and tell them to read the stickys rather than yelling and telling them to stop being such a dumbass. Would probably make our lives a bit easier too to be able to just refer to a sticky.

My main suggestion to is more seconding what has already been said about adding wells. Personally that's my fav type of post to read and I think can really be beneficial to readers. I am willing to write some myself too but I know there are way more ppl way more qualified than myself.

[spoonitnow]

I'd just like to add to this thread that I'm going to be locking the crap out of threads where someone posts a hand with no reads or stats or whatever and I would like to know how everyone feels about this.

[BooG690]

^ Love it.

[ChezJ]

I think someone needs to write an updated NL strategy guide for beginners. Renton's stuff was great in 2006, but the game is a lot different now. I think many beginners find their way to this forum from the homepage, hoping to learn how to beat NL games online, but the material currently in the digest doesn't really cut it. Again, no disrespect to Renton, but the 2006 guide contains little discussion of critical concepts like how to put your opponent on a range. So it's no wonder newbies come in here and post hands without mentioning ranges.

Of course I am not volunteering to write a new guide, and I don't know who would want to. At a minimum, maybe the sticky should list some recommended books like NLHE Theory and Practice. That book totally changed my game after months of floundering without proper conceptual grounding.

ChezJ

[caddie444]

I'd just like to add to this thread that I'm going to be locking the crap out of threads where someone posts a hand with no reads or stats or whatever and I would like to know how everyone feels about this.

I'm all for this but I think to help out the noobs you need to direct them to posts focused on what stats/reads/ranges etc are b/c a lot of them don't have a clue. The "guidelines for posting hands" sticky states that these need to be provided, but doesn't link to any posts about forming ranges, posting meaningful stats, relevant reads etc...

[ChezJ]

agree with caddie.

another suggestion: delete the "Announcement: READ BEFORE POSTING: Beginners Circle FAQ" and turn the "Guidelines for Posting Hands" into an Announcement.

[kiwiMark]

I think an example post, be it a fictitious perfect post or a link to a good one from some time, would go well in the sticky, so people have an idea what's expected of them.

[Erpel]

Story time. Yeah, you know me.

Ok, so I ask myself, if I was new coming to the forum and I came to the BC to learn what would I hope/expect to find, what would be valuable to me and what would confuse the hell out of me?

One thing that could be argued is currently not as obvious as would be useful to an abject beginner is a filter that tells us what is standard and what depends - what is just an opinion. Another side of this is information overload - it is sometimes good to see the same thing described in three or four different ways by people who understand them slightly differently - it aids in deeper understanding - but for the initial fix the simplified explanation is probably better off standing alone.

The point I'm trying to get at is.. while a digest has a wealth of information on a variety of topics the quality and content coverage of the digest-worthy posts is not consistent. What I would treasure above all else is if we could distill the wisdom of these posts into structured essays that cover a subject. Spoon's recently bumped post about hand combinations and blockers is a classic example of the kind of distillation that makes other posts on a similar topic obsolete.

Also, I do not think these posts ideally live in a vacuum. Ideally there will be a structure - how to think about poker - whereby subjects are connected to other subjects and you can see how what you learn in one area begins to apply in other areas. Maybe it's not so much a structure as it's an intelligent hyperlinking of subjects one to another that I'm thinking about.

Let me see if I can think of some examples. Some good ideas in this thread already. Actually Bankroll Management is a classic example of this done well. The text is automatically transformed into a link to the classic strategy article on the topic. Similarly "hand combinations" or "blockers" could link to the above mentioned spoon post. Maybe a wiki-like resource could be used to take down the best, most succinct coverage of discreet topics and provide that auto-link when terms are used. Maybe the poker dictionary could be expanded to provide this type of functinonality.

Once again, I am not looking for numbers. I'm not looking for hundreds of thousands of posts, tens of thousand of threads, thousands of poker dictionary entries or hundreds of strategy articles. The number available is completely unimportant to me. What's important is that we have a high quality authoritative article at the heart of every discreet topic - or at the very least at the heart of all the beginner topics. An article that presents simply the unvarnished truth without backstory or opinion.

So, am I looking at taking Renton's classic strategy articles or Pyroxene's odds tables and discarding them? Kind of yes. For each topic I am thinking to consider carefully what the brief article on the topic must cover, draw inspiration from everything already posted, maybe rewrite parts of 5-10 existing digest posts to provide succinct coverage of the topic and then elevate this new best and authoritative description above all the alternatives. Do I want to throw away all the gold that is produced over the years? No, obviously not. But I would relegate it to a "further study" section rather than the immediate answer. And I would structure that, so it is more serviceable.

In a digest I would have a section for the current wisdom that lists the topics that are important covered in the best possible factual way. Below that would be a link to "The Wisdom of the Ages" - which will contain one link to each year, and within each year there will be one link to each month. Within each month will be the solid valuable posts produced during that month. One way of determining which ones they are is the star rating. Say if a post results in a 4 or more star rating it is linked from the "best of the month" post that becomes part of "Wisdom of the Ages". That way a lot of mediocre posts will fade further into the background and the good ones will be easier to find for those who want to do further study. I am not proposing doing this for the entire post archive - I'm proposing putting the structure in place and maintaining it going forward.

Many of these topics will have exercises against them. By exercises I don't mean one specific exercise that you can go through to put someone on a range or calculate EV in a situation. I mean it should outline how you pinpoint the information that allows you to do an exercise in this area and shows an example of how it is done. Like a hand range topic could refer to (a distillation of) Robb's posts on range practice. So each exercise will contain the process that is the exercise and an (excessively illustrated/explained) example.

What I am proposing is a project of some scope. The basic idea is to identify discreet topics, for each topic give some thought to and describe what the coverage of that topic must address - what the scope of the article must be - make a write-up of that topic - get feedback on it and get rid of fluffy language, opinions and unnecessary justifications - explain what topics are associated and in which way they are associated - identify potential exercises in the area and do the same for the exercise article.

Then when a newbie comes to the forum, posts a hand and is clueless - we'll quickly read it over, link him to the relevant 2-4 articles, tell him in this situation he needs to make an EV calculation (link to exercise telling him how to do that), put the opponent on a range (link to exercise telling him how to do that) come back to this post and post his results/thoughts based on what we ask him to do. Then when he comes back we say that he needs to spend some more time understanding equity - tell him to spend 6 hours on equty calculations with hand ranges (link to exercise etc) and then come back with another hand where he shows us what he's learned.

Complicated questions are complicated. Some things are style, some are opinion, some are strategy or based on image and flow. But some things are basic, and for the basic things we should have the truth on tap instead of having to construct it every time someone asks about it.

The other thing is that with a defined set of exercises (calculate showdown equity, put people on a range, calculate fold equity etc etc) - if these exercises are well enough described we can suggest as I mentioned in the example above that the person in question use x hours on this specific type of exercise. Rather than say "go study" and then when people are lost they don't learn and continue asking stupid questions - in this way we can suggest to them exactly the kind of study and exercise they should do.

This whole project is completely not worth it, if the results are going to be on the same level as and just an alternative to existing poker articles and the poker dictionary and so on. The process needs to cut to the bone of each topic and be universally seen as being true with no fluff or opinion so it can become not just true but also (hopefully) eternal. And for this the outcome of this project would need to be guaranteed a privileged place. The bankroll management style auto-linking is an obvious candidate, but even preferred treatment in the beginner's digest (as mentioned in the Wisdom of the Ages section) would be completely sufficient. But it would need to be clear which is the authoritative piece of truth and that should be a default answer that people stumble upon without reflection or research.

In terms of attribution (to authors) I'm a bit cold. The article that is the simple truth should not have the character of the author - or the opinions, backstory or justifications of the author. And it should also not be sacred. Let's say I write up something on hand ranges, we all agree that it's a solid piece and we put it up as the entry - time goes, I get hit by a bus and die, and it is found that my piece while fine is missing some crucial dimension. I would want it to be updated to be more correct and more true without bloating it with references to how I was the initial author and it was amended by this person for this reason yada yada. If using it as a resource all of that bloat is bad - the pure simple truth of the topic is what should be found when it is looked up.

When we get to advanced topics where style, strategy and preference become more of an issue there is much more room for author-styled, -justified, -argued and -attributed articles, but the core articles should focus on delivering the simple truth as simply as possible.

I'd be quite happy to contribute. I'm not particularly suited to writing articles of this type and would tend to put in lots of unnecessary fluff, but I certainly wouldn't mind giving it a stab - and I am particularly keen on the first and third stages - formulating the scope of an entry and defluffing it to make it as clean and simple as possible.

[rong]

Wow! Your WPP must have just doubled.

[spoonitnow]

Thank you Erpel for your contribution to the thread.

Unfortunately that will never happen because not enough people care enough to do it. This is not unreasonable -- people have spent tons of time and effort to get better at poker, and by helping others it incrementally makes the game harder, thus reducing their own bottom line. Just for an example, a few members, including more than one FTR moderator at the time, asked me to delete the hand combinations/blockers post you talked about above right after I made it because they thought it was too good to have just laying around in the open. I often question posting things like that myself, especially when it seems like 99 out of 100 people in this forum need to be spoon-fed (pun intended). But I enjoy helping people more than I enjoy making money, so yeah.

Anyway, what you described is basically what I used to do. I made those types of posts on blind stealing, raising after limpers, blocker/hand combination topics, a number of basic poker math topics, etc. The process you described very much reflects my teaching style.

@ChezJ and others, if I lock a post for those reasons I'm going to link them to the guidelines for posting. If they don't know what stats are or what reads are, then it's time for them to hit the search button.

In general, there's a line between facilitating the growth of a player and spoon-feeding them, and I'm usually going to tend to err on the side of avoiding spoon-feeding.

[nickatina-69]

more videos please?

[nickatina-69]

more microstakes videos would be sweet.

[Jason]

One thing that could be argued is currently not as obvious as would be useful to an abject beginner is a filter that tells us what is standard and what depends - what is just an opinion.

If you play 6 tables or less, it almost always depends. If you play 10 to 24 tables, it's almost always standard ... this is all my opinion

[ChezJ]

i like erpel's post a lot. sometimes when i am looking for posts about a certain topic, say "pot control," the search function is basically useless because of the overload of posts that mention either one of those words in passing. renton's guide doesn't even use the term as far as i can tell.

maybe all that is needed is for the "learning begins here" sticky to be updated to include more definitive posts on certain concepts. after all, it already includes links to a bunch of good posts. just need to poll the community on what posts they think should be added to the sticky list.

for example, the moderator could come up with one concept or subject per week and let people nominate posts, then at the end of the week, add the one best post to the sticky.

ChezJ

[spoonitnow]

Could also do a concept of the week type thing. Thoughts?

[Erpel]

Could be homework for beginners. Not necessarily concept for the week - maybe concept for the month? Encourage beginners to write up their own essays and post them - maybe have a concept of the week/month thread.

[celtic123]

Ill give it a go , give me something to research for a week , Ill see what I can come up with. And post a thread " what I tried to master this week"

I dont mind a flaming , its been a while.

[Dragon Slayer]

Could also do a concept of the week type thing. Thoughts?

That could be a lot of work. Concept of the month maybe. You could have a thread where beginners put their thoughts on the subject or some HH they feel relate to the topic.

[dranger7070]

Could be homework for beginners.

I actually really like this idea. It will encourage a lot of the new players (and myself) to actually sit down, study the material, then post thoughts and relevant HHs on that weeks/months 'assignment.' We could start it off with really basic stuff like value betting, pot odds, implied odds, and just delve deeper and deeper. Then you could just sticky the previous assignments original posts so that the new guys that show up after its started can catch up and won't feel lost.

[dranger7070]

3. bumping old goodies: some people like dranger do this from time to time.

Your welcome. That is all.

[TonyB73]

Wow! Your WPP must have just doubled.

um, that was actually pretty short for him

[spoonitnow]

It will encourage a lot of the new players (and myself) to actually sit down, study the material, then post thoughts and relevant HHs

If you're not doing this already, then what ARE you doing? Maybe you should put up the signature you had going there for a while.

[rong]

Could be homework for beginners.

That's a brilliant idea. Would encourage people (and specifically me) to take study more seriously.

[Erpel]

Kind of spoon to pretend to be aghast at the revelation that dranger doesn't do as much studying as he should.

The problem is... noone ever really tells you exactly how much you need to study or almost more importantly why.

The things you need to know to play poker well are all pretty simple. But to play poker well you need more than to know them. You need to structure the correct way to view and think through a hand and then you need to repeat this process even if it has no challenge and lots of boredom a million times very deliberately and let the brain become optimised in doing this process. The brain itself will develop shortcuts and your understanding will become deeper and deeper, but repetition is key.

Most often what beginners do is to hesitantly get to something that approximates the right process, pat themselves on the back and move on to the next topic. Getting something right once is not really helping anyone. You need to practice practice practice until you get better.

Like I saw something absolutely retarded on TV last night where karate katas were mentioned and my wife made a comment. When she started karate there black belts came on afterwards to do some playing with sticks (kendo?) and as part of their warm up they did the same katas that the newbies were learning. But when they did them it was like a different world - there was so much more precision, speed and power in their movements. Why? Because they were black belts? Because they had learned other fancy moves? No, because they had repeated those katas so many times that they were just really really good at them.

So here it is - if you want to study poker define one meaningful exercise. Like EV calculation or putting someone on a hand range, or do some hand combination additions or whatever. Once you have decided your exercise you formalise how you practice it. Then you prepare a huge stack of exercises for yourself so all the information is there and you just need to run through it. Then you do exercises for 1 hour and count how many you do. And you do the same type of exercise 1 hour a day for a month and by the end of the month you are hopefully completing twice as many exercises (or more) as you do the first time.

That way you get yourself into good habits (going through the right process) which helps stave off tilt - you will be more inclined to auto-pilot in the direction of the ingrained processes. Your brain becomes optimised in doing these kinds of processing and along with the speed with which you can carry out the exercise comes a more profound understanding of it which allows you to better understand connections between different poker topics and apply concepts more correctly more of the time.

Edit note: The key to real mastery of any topic is to get the basic process right and then through repetition achieve an EFFICIENCY| in doing the right thing.

[dranger7070]

It will encourage a lot of the new players (and myself) to actually sit down, study the material, then post thoughts and relevant HHs

If you're not doing this already, then what ARE you doing? Maybe you should put up the signature you had going there for a while.

I'm not saying I don't study, it's just that I don't take it nearly as seriously as I should, and that you will probably come up with 'homework' assignments that I'll never have considered doing in the first place.

[EasyPoker]

How about looking at the stickies in the digest and maybe adding/updating them a little?

I remember posting about Renton's strategy early in my posting career here, and someone responded that it was a long time ago pre UIGEA and thus much of it may no longer be as relevant...

[spoonitnow]

It wasn't that long ago, and it certainly wasn't pre-UIGEA. I get the feeling that a lot of people want to be spoon-fed instead of working their asses off. God I love that pun.

[Micro2Macro]

It wasn't that long ago, and it certainly wasn't pre-UIGEA. I get the feeling that a lot of people want to be spoon-fed instead of working their asses off. God I love that pun.

This.

Renton's guide is fine for getting yourself to a starting point in NLHE full ring games. I studied the guide myself when I was starting out at 2nl last year and made pretty good use of it. 2nl has likely not changed significantly at all within the last year.

[Erpel]

I said it long, now I say it short. Learning poker isn't about reading the right reading material. It's about APPLYING yourself.

Don't do as I do, do as I preach.

[iloveaces]

Rentons guide is ok. I'd like to see some points clarified though. It's not so bad now I have some experience and I know what he's talking about but it confused the heck out of me when I first read it. I think it's still relevant.

[Erpel]

Btw, if you want a homework exercise - I put one in my hand thread from yesterday:
http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...ow-t92537.html

[kiwiMark]

Could we have a thread where the internet just reaches out and instills perfect poker knowledge and ability in my head without my having to do anything? I really feel like this would help my game right now and I'm sure others want the same! Stop being holdouts, smart people who want all the money for themselves!!

[ChezJ]

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but UIGEA passed in Oct 2006 and came into effect about 6 months later. Renton's guide is dated July 2006. It is clearly pre-UIGEA.

Personally, I tried using Renton's guide to beat $2NL when I finally made the switch from LHE last year. I'm sorry to say it is woefully inadequate and I lost a shitload playing penny-level games. Furthermore, when I went into the forums to try to understand what was wrong, all I read about was ranges and stats and pot control... none of which are discussed at any length in Renton's guide.

So don't tell me the existing material is adequate, it's just not true. I'm not asking for a spoon feed, either. I'm asking for either a new guide with modern material or a reference list of useful articles/books that provide the correct concepts needed to beat NL and post intelligently in the forum.

Bottom line, the "Beginner's Digest" needs to be updated, or newbies will keep coming in and posting stuff that drives spoonitnow crazy. Don't believe me? Go ahead and read the sticky yourself.
http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...re-t36037.html

ChezJ

[spoonitnow]

Neato. Time flies, I was thinking he wrote them in 2007. The date is fairly irrelevant though. For example, Theory of Poker was written before the UIGEA as well. Additionally, I think existing material is adequate, or no one would make it out of the microstakes. As always, I'll recommend people looking for good NLHE material pick up No-Limit Hold'em: Theory and Practice, then Professional No-Limit Hold'em, and finally Small Stakes No-Limit Hold'em.

I've noticed that the people who make it out of the microstakes the fastest tend to have studied the most and put the most time and effort in. New material every 3-6 months on the "cutting edge" isn't going to change that, and probably wouldn't really help that much. The truth is there's only so much you have to be decent at to beat micro and small stakes, but if people aren't putting in the necessary hours to acquire these skills, there's nothing you or I or anyone else can do about it.

[Micro2Macro]

[ ] 2nl has changed significantly since pre UIGEA

[Sasquach991]

Start an "Advanced Beginners" Thread

You have to do homework and learn the material before you are allowed in. Once spoon or someone else decides you are ready to participate in other threads by:

-determining ranges using pokerstove
-understanding odds/outs
-combinations
-etc.

Then you are allowed access to the AB thread where everyone there has proven that they are worthy and when spoon screams at them about a "goddamn range" then he will know that they are capable of determining a range as they have done so in the past. If you are a slacker once you are in the AB thread you get demoted back into the BC.

Selected people from the AB thread are then required to submit articles to be posted in the BC digest. There will always be new posters in the AB thread hence new material to be included in the BC digest after being reviewed by the "smart folks".

This will force people to study if they want to get better.

[!Luck]

Honestly man,

I am one arrogant prick IRL and I think my shit doesn't stink. But, if i applied that thought to poker and thought that I would come up with a new creative way to beat 2nl, I would fail. All you need to know to beat 2nl is to listen. Listen to what poeple tell you. Do not go on say that open limping AA is better because when you raise everyone one folds. It happens and it sucks. If you look at most poeple AA wins tons of small and medium pots. In my database of 8k 2nl hands I was dealt AA 41 times. I had winnings of over 1.5 dollars only 3 times. And the majority was me taking the blinds. But you know what? I beat 2nl? And then I beat 5nl. In that time I have never stopped raising AA to be cute. I just worked and accepted that I am not as special as my mother and my 1st grade teacher told me. I can't do anything and be anyone. But I can follow simple directions and not spaz out. That is what made me beat 2nl.

And if you just relax and stop trying to blame the poker gods or the poker forum master conspiring against you will to.

I wish you the best of luck and remember the world doesn't hate you.

P.S. Spoon might hate you, but most other don't.
!luck

[spoonitnow]

This will force people to study if they want to get better.

People are already forced to study if they want to get better.

[kiwiMark]

This will force people to study if they want to get better.

People are already forced to study if they want to get better.

QFT.

Some of the ideas in this thread expect ludicrous amounts of sustained work by more senior forum members and for this reason just aren't feasible.

Yes it would be swell if someone was going to tutor each beginner with potential because each one is a unique snowflake that can flourish with love and care, or if someone redid the paint-by-numbers guide, this time tailored specifically to you, bolding the bits you didn't read - or more likely decided to ignore - the first time round, but it's so much work for little gain on the part of the contributor, and more to the point wholly unnecessary, given how much material/help is out there already.

That all said, if you want a classroom environment the closest you're gonna get is IRC, so jump on in.

Now clearly the BC could be better, and I believe it's going to get better, but the way forward is to find and facilitate ways of beginners helping beginners, or to make it easier for experienced players to swing by and contribute, not telling them they're looking at a 2-3 month commitment and they're going to need to go to walmart and buy gold stars and certificates if they want to make a difference.

I'm gonna try and come up with something more positive/constructive later as I feel like most of my posts in here lately have been kinda troll-y, but I'll leave this here as my pre-morning-coffee two cents.

[Sasquach991]

This will force people to study if they want to get better.

People are already forced to study if they want to get better.

QFT

But then again it was a suggestion, which is the whole point of the thread?

IRC is a good place to learn but there's too much other discussion going on not poker related. I guess I need to select "ignore" for a few people and I may actually get something out of it. People that type 2 words per line and have 20 lines in a row without much to say makes it hard to keep up with the conversation.

[spoonitnow]

This will force people to study if they want to get better.

People are already forced to study if they want to get better.

QFT

But then again it was a suggestion, which is the whole point of the thread?

IRC is a good place to learn but there's too much other discussion going on not poker related. I guess I need to select "ignore" for a few people and I may actually get something out of it. People that type 2 words per line and have 20 lines in a row without much to say makes it hard to keep up with the conversation.

As kiwiMark noted earlier, a lot of the suggestions in this thread are asking too much. But things can definitely be better on beginners than it has been before, and that's what we're looking to do.

As for IRC, we have a little bit of a problem. The #flopturnriver channel should be a place where people can chill and just talk about whatever, but we don't seem to have enough people to have a strictly-poker channel, though I'm considering doing it anyway. I'll have an update on this before the end of the month.

[dranger7070]

I can say that I'm one of those that doesn't contribute to the poker conversation nearly as much as I should, and I'm also one of those spam typers, in no small part thanks to yaawn lol. A good portion of the time tho, if you post a hand with reads, or ask a question(s) poker related, most people will stop talking about whatever and take the time to help you. Don't be afraid to interrupt, no one will care lol.

[spoonitnow]

Prompted from the need to separate the general talk from the poker talk, we now have this http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...om-t92588.html

[EasyPoker]

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but UIGEA passed in Oct 2006 and came into effect about 6 months later. Renton's guide is dated July 2006. It is clearly pre-UIGEA.

Personally, I tried using Renton's guide to beat $2NL when I finally made the switch from LHE last year. I'm sorry to say it is woefully inadequate and I lost a shitload playing penny-level games. Furthermore, when I went into the forums to try to understand what was wrong, all I read about was ranges and stats and pot control... none of which are discussed at any length in Renton's guide.

So don't tell me the existing material is adequate, it's just not true. I'm not asking for a spoon feed, either. I'm asking for either a new guide with modern material or a reference list of useful articles/books that provide the correct concepts needed to beat NL and post intelligently in the forum.

Bottom line, the "Beginner's Digest" needs to be updated, or newbies will keep coming in and posting stuff that drives spoonitnow crazy. Don't believe me? Go ahead and read the sticky yourself.
http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...re-t36037.html

ChezJ

Far from wanting to piss spoonitnow off, whom I have partially reconciled with (he has replied to my PMs without a hint of animosity) ChezJ's post is pretty much what sums up my own thoughts on this.

there's no denying that 2nl on the main two sites is more difficult, the plethora of threads and co-signs by even pooh-bah posters on 2p2 is further evidence of this and I've found the current digest, which I am re-reading regularly, to be quite outdated in *some* of its assumptions/assertions.

If you're not currently playing there, then how can you comment that it "hasn't changed since the UIGEA"?

[EasyPoker]

Oh yeah, and can someone sort of indicate what articles are more relevant to 6max or full ring?

I've just read an article and made a few small notes on it, only to find the next post saying

"Whatever I write isn't applicable to 6-max"...

It's a bit pointless...

I'm unsure whether the short handed forum is where I should be or here.

[kiwiMark]

^ links to such articles, plz?

[EasyPoker]

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...ts-t32893.html

[kiwiMark]

Jesus christ, why does that post even exist. FWIW, as far as this post is concerned, I disagree that '6max is a whole different bird'. IF (big IF) you wanted to follow that flowchart at fullring, I think you could do it at 6max with the same results.

But yeah, I agree that it's pretty weaksauce that there's a whole bunch of strategy followed by "Oh btw this doesn't apply to you lot over there"

[spoonitnow]

Yeah, just go ahead and ignore anything aokrongly ever wrote until I get around to reworking the digest and all that.

[Renton]

I think someone needs to write an updated NL strategy guide for beginners. Renton's stuff was great in 2006, but the game is a lot different now. I think many beginners find their way to this forum from the homepage, hoping to learn how to beat NL games online, but the material currently in the digest doesn't really cut it. Again, no disrespect to Renton, but the 2006 guide contains little discussion of critical concepts like how to put your opponent on a range. So it's no wonder newbies come in here and post hands without mentioning ranges.

Of course I am not volunteering to write a new guide, and I don't know who would want to. At a minimum, maybe the sticky should list some recommended books like NLHE Theory and Practice. That book totally changed my game after months of floundering without proper conceptual grounding.

ChezJ

No one is going to do something like this for free these days, sorry to say.