3

I just asked a hand history question. Is there a certain tone or amount of information we are aiming for? Do we want hero-insight vs. a third-party view of the hand? What about hands with multiple decision points?

Are hand histories going to be "too localized"? If so, how can we make them appropriate for the site?

| |
2

I do not think hand histories are too localized. If they are too localized then I do not personally think this beta will succeed.

I think your example was great. Include whatever relevant information/reads you have.

If there truly are multiple decision points that you are asking about then I suggest asking multiple questions (maybe with a link). Using your example, I wouldn't classify your point about the turn bet being too small as a separate decision point though, so I think yours was fine as a single question.

EDIT: I'll add that it's probably best not to include the final results of the question. That can bias answers, and perhaps as importantly, it can bias voting.

| |
  • 1
    I definitely agree about results, and we should aggresively edit posts containing them to remove them – Chris Marasti-Georg Jan 10 '12 at 23:37
2

It is very important that we provide a special coloring of the hand-history tag.

Furthermore, I think it's very important that we guide visitors to add the hand-history tag to their ignore list if they are rather turned off by such posts. Is just including instructions in the FAQ enough? I don't know.

This site will quickly be overwhelmed with hand-histories.

For me, I think this is great. Each hand-history is a catalyst for all kinds of theory discussion. However, I think we need to serve the other, more abstract, participants.

There will be a good class of visitors who want to participate that are turned off by all the hand histories that will be posted.

I do believe a good percentage of high-quality participants will want to see the site in a cleaner fashion.

Since so many of the visitors to the site will be new to the stack-exchange model, I do not think a very large percentage of them will realize they can just ignore that tag.

This may even justify an announcement for first-time users (logged in). "Don't want to see hand histories? Add the tag to your ignored tags list"

| |
2

IMHO, every good quality hand history question should include this subjects;

  1. What do you think your villain's poker style? (Tight, Aggresive, Loose, Pasive..)
  2. Where are you playing? (In which casino, in which web site)
  3. What are your positons? (BB, SB, CO)
  4. What are your stack sizes? (How many BB)
  5. What are villain's statistic? (VP / PFR / AF over how many hands)
  6. What is your opinion? (Personal comments about villain)

This 6 subjects make hand history questions more beautiful, answerable questions unlike just giving a hand history.

| |
1

Simply put, a hand history is a recount of your thought process.

If it isn't and you're telling it like a story, with mystery, intrigue, and extraneous nuance that's unrelated to the hand, your opponent, and your mind at work, then it's not great. I'm all for adding some personality to a thread, and as long as the hand history doesn't get lost in the explanation I like it.

Posting a HH is a way to improve your own thought process by way of feedback. The greater emphasis and clarity on your reasoning benefits you and the community here much more.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .