---

Poker Video: Limit Hold'Em by FoxwoodsFiend (Mid Stakes)

Definitely appreciate the commentary...no offense taken from your first post. This was the very infancy of my limit experience and I think you'll manage to glean a lot from my future discussions with DeathDonkey and that my solo videos will give you alot of hands to think about.

Yeah. It was mostly just a reaction for not getting the weekly DeathDonkey commentary. I certainly think it's worth-while to hear your commentary in order to understand the (possible) mistakes you're making and in this regard the approach makes sense.

Hi,

Before I say anything I just want to underline that I love this site. I've watched pretty much every video and read dozens of posts, and my understanding of the game has improved greatly as a result. I don't post very much (I contribute a lot to other poker sites and have limited time due to family commitments and trying to learn NL) but Deathdonkey's limit videos and forum contributions in particular have been hugely beneficial to me personally, and I've learned tons from Entity, Joe and the guest pros. The amount of time the pros here put into responding to forum posts and ensuring high quality videos is far greater IMO than similar sites to which I also subscribe.

I'm as excited as everyone else about the new format, and I'm definitely interested in and open to new teaching approaches. I love the look of the new site and the quality of the NL vids seems to be just as high as the limit vids we've all come to enjoy.

However Entity, I was very disappointed to read your responses to Javjvirta's OP in this thread. You clearly feel very strongly about the quality and educational philosphy of the site, and I'm sure that this in part is what makes this site so outstanding. But in my view your replies were condescending, patronising and insulting. I think this is unacceptable coming from an admin, and particularly so when the poster in question is a long-standing member and very active contributor to the forum.

This thread is for members to give their view of, or ask questions about, a particular video. There's even a rating system which underlines the 'assessment' aspect of the thread. If you don't want members to give an honest opinion, don't provide a thread to do so. The OP is entitled to his opinion, and FWIW I thought his opening post was polite, considered and respectful. He was just being straightforward and honest. He didn't "derail" the thread at all. In fact if you hadn't have "stepped in" IMO unecessarily, I'm sure a number of other members would have given their considered views, both for and against. If anyone derailed this thread, you did.

He didn't like the video, he didn't feel he got any additional value from it, as opposed to watching the "usual" format. You have a different view clearly, that's fine. But you have to accept that members will sometimes have a different view to your own. To suggest that he's effectively 'just not trying hard enough' and wants 'information to be thrown' at him is just insulting. FWIW I agree with everything he said. I didn't like the format at all, and other than it offering hands that can be discussed I much prefer to watch a video from one of the limit pros, or at least a commentary similar to the first video in this series.

I don't see what extra value is to be gained from watching a NL pro struggle with limit concepts, as opposed to the value I can get from watching (say) DD play or commenting on others' play. Both formats produce a wealth of hands to discuss, but in the case of watching DD I get a high quality commentary and see the results of correct play 99.9% of the time.

Most experienced limit players will be able to spot errors made in this vid, and I don't see how asking myself "why" a NL player might make a particular error by virtue of them being a NL player adds to the value I get from watching. And this is in the context that I play both limit and NL and I have a decent understanding of the often profound differences in strategy as a result of the different betting structures.

Sure, I know why a NL player might three bet small suited connectors or cold call with QJo on the button (for example), but what extra value does that add? Even if I was just learning limit and knew nothing about NL (not an unreasonable assumption for many of the members, given the origins of DC), what value would I glean from this video? Without an understanding of the differences between NL and limit I don't see what additional value is to be gained? So who exactly is this video geared towards?

I also disagree with you when you say that Jav's OP wasn't constructive. You might not have liked his wording, but IMO that shouldn't be your concern as an admin unless he was deliberately offensive to a particular individual. He didn't like the video and gave a brief explanation of why, and from a business perspective you should take that on board and accept it, regardless of whether or not you agree. If you disagree strongly then by all means explain why, but do so in a respectful way. Jav is quite capable of being able to assess whether he can get value from this video by himself. He doesn't need your help with that.

Members should be able to air an opinion (within reason obviously), and I fear your replies might disuade other less forthright members from giving an honest opinion in future. Jav's OP obviously touched a nerve with you, but IMO you should really be thanking him. He was honest about his opinion and it's well known that a business survives or dies on it's ability to listen to and communicate with it's customers.

I would hope that despite your own personal educational and teaching philosophy, if the general feeling of your customers is that this (or later) format sucks, you would take this on board and cease to produce similar videos. To say that you won't keep an open mind about comments that you deem not to be "constructive", seems to me to be both arrogant and also foolish from a business perspective. Not everyone is here to take part in deep discussion about the finer points of educational philosphy. Some (most?) members just like to watch videos of professionals playing poker. To you, DC is an education site. But to many of the members it may well just be a video site. From a business perspective I would have thought it wise to take on board and value your customer's views, even if they differ from your own. The two ideas needn't be mutually exclusive.

In short it may be a good idea to recall Joe Tall's oft quoted words: "This is your site. We just work here". Although obviously slightly 'tongue in cheek', I think this is an excellent philosophy to have for an instructional site like this, and I sincerely hope this continues to be the case.

(By the way FoxwoodFiend, please don't take any of this as a personal criticism of you or your play. I don't intend that at all, and I'm confident the series as a whole will be valuable. It's great that you're now part of the DC community and hopefully at some point you can make a NL vid, because my NL sucks balls )

I know this sounds weird but I agree with everyone, as you all have the right to say what you wish. And the worst thing out of this would be jajvirta, nomdeguerre, and even my partner, Rob, to stop posting like this or saying things like this. This is what makes this site different from the rest as it's clear to me, after reading this, you all have one thing in common:

You all care.

The day that you stop caring, is the day we have fcked this place up. Now, mind you, this stuff gets convoluted and misinterpreted in such a one-dimensional format. If this were a phone call it would be 1/3 the length and way behind us.

One thing I did was not watch the series episodes and tried to avoid the site development discussions as I wanted to get perspective from the users angle. I can hear your comments as this video stands alone. I see what you are saying here. However, what I do know though is to be patient as the series develops. That's what I am looking forward to. Maybe there will be more lessons to be learned, but either way, FWF and DD put a ton of time, effort and thought into this series, and they are both fantastic players, so I'm sticking around just on those merits.

I hope you all can agree with me to get the thread back on track and leave the rest behind for now.

(By the way FoxwoodFiend, please don't take any of this as a personal criticism of you or your play. I don't intend that at all, and I'm confident the series as a whole will be valuable. It's great that you're now part of the DC community and hopefully at some point you can make a NL vid, because my NL sucks balls )

Oh, just wait...from what I've heard, I cant' wait! Even though I can take sneak peaks, I'm not going to!

jajvirta has every right to say what he thinks, as does everyone else around here.
perhaps jajvirta was a little quick to judge the value. But we were not given all the information, only one vid at a time. he commented on this video only, not the series as a whole, or any person.

Entity, knowing how much work goes into all this. took offense, when none was meant.
and I think thats key...no offense was meant. Everyone here, is doing the best they can, even when it may not seem that way.
Entity, ...I applaud the vigor in which you defended your friends and your site...and all the hard work.
when the fight breaks out...I want you covering my back.

nomdeguerre..I hope you can find time to post more..I like the way you think.

note: myself and mr stephennuts took the same english writing class...

and Mr Tall....It may be the beginning of the end...cause I read what you wrote..
AND I AGREE! ......*wink*

Hey guys,

I do think I may have come across too harshly but this probably isn't the first time you've seen it (if it is, you just haven't seen me post that much) and it certainly won't be the last. I'm usually worse than this when I talk to DD and Joe about hands/issues we debate, and just because I write the responses I do doesn't mean I think badly of jaj as a poster -- in fact it means that I think a ton of him.

When I write someone off, I don't respond, I ignore them, I chalk it up to whatever and just walk away. But that's not how I feel about you guys, or this place, and since that's the case you guys are occasionally going to see this side of me: I can be arrogant, headstrong, and I will debate just about anything, sometimes for the sake of debating it and sometimes because I feel very strongly about it (this is the latter). While I don't want you guys to get the wrong opinion of me, I'm not always going to be nice -- or alter how I write -- because you are customers or because I'm an admin, and while it's pretty obvious that I have to use a bit more decorum than I may have in that post, I'd hope that you wouldn't ask me to change how I write things based on the fact that you are customers. To an extent, that changes the dynamic between us and I feel like we have the most to gain when you can tell me off, but if you do, you have to be ready for me to tell you off and tell you why I think you're wrong -- and I'm HAPPIEST when you send another shot back my way and counter what I've just said, until we reach a useful compromise of opinions. That's where we learn the most, as long as there isn't too much attrition along the way.

As I've stated in plenty of ways earlier in the thread, I was very upset by jaj calling the videos pointless and 'kind of useless,' without actually justifying it, in the first post of a thread. I do want everyone to post your opinions. But I'm very serious about teaching, and if you just post that you hated something, I can't promise that I won't take you to task for it in the future. The second that I stop responding to posts like that is the second that I've started caring less.

In the end, you guys are here to become better poker players, and I'm here to help you on that path. If that means that you only want to watch DD tell you why he's doing what he's doing, well, I'm going to try to convince you that you're only getting about 20% of what you could be getting...and unfortunately, I may not always be the nicest guy when I'm doing it. In this case, I think I was a bit too impolite, but I do have to say that if I drop the arrogance, or ever try to be too wishy-washy with letting you guys just think whatever you want, then I'm not really being myself; while this might be good for business because it comes across professionally, it's not good for the business I'm in -- which is making you guys as good of poker players as I can.

All of this being said, I have to say in all honesty that I'm happier with this thread being a 35-post storm of all of us arguing, bickering, and everything else than I would be with just having left the first post, or said "Sorry you feel that way, we'll see what we can do in future episodes." I think that says a ton for our approach and for what we value the most here at DC, and what you can export more in the future. And finally, hopefully if you guys don't like something in the future you'll be a little more willing to say exactly why that is.

Rob

I just want to comment shortly.

1. I also think the discussion has been worth-while. I think Rob's comments have been on point, but I just felt that I didn't quite deserve it. Maybe I did, but I don't feel like it. :-)

2. I don't want to turn this into a "customer is always right, stop arguing with me" type of argumentation, because I don't believe in that, but I think this sort of feedback has its merit too.

3. I think this format has its merits. This wasn't a reaction to the idea of such series, but to this video in particular. Or not even this video per se, but compared to the previous one.

4. I still stand on my first impression: this particular video doesn't have the extra value I wanted. (Doesn't mean it's useless or pointless alltogether, just that I think I would have appreciated DD's, or anyone else experienced beating midstakes limit games for that matter, commentary more.)

5. I will admit that it was my mistake not to state the exact reasons for my disappointment more explicitly and lot of the confusion came from that. (Not that anyone wouldn't have right to be disappointed for whatever reasons they want. Just that I wasn't clear in my first post. I still don't feel it was that offensive, but things look always a bit different from a different point of view. :-)

6. No hard feelings from my part.

hug it out guys!

I want to show more love for this video. Personally I learn a lot from watching better players explain why they make certain plays in certain situations, but I probably learn even more by realizing by myself WHY other players are making the wrong plays in certain situations. I am somewhat dissapointed that noone has addressed the table/seat selection issue though as I feel this is one of the most important and at the same time overlooked concepts in LHE. Have you written me off Entity?

I am somewhat dissapointed that noone has addressed the table/seat selection issue though as I feel this is one of the most important and at the same time overlooked concepts in LHE.

Until our gurus create fresh table/seat selection masterpiece, have a look here.

Nothing there is new to me. I was specifically talking about getting FoxwoodsFiend to table select better and make it an integral part of his LHE learning experience as I think it's a very important part of the game.

Nothing there is new to me. I was specifically talking about getting FoxwoodsFiend to table select better and make it an integral part of his LHE learning experience as I think it's a very important part of the game.

Sorry, got it wrong.

FoxwoodsFiend: Until our LHE gurus create fresh table/seat selection masterpiece featuring you, have a look here.

:-P

LOL, no need to apologize to me, sorry if I sounded hostile in any way.

I want to show more love for this video. Personally I learn a lot from watching better players explain why they make certain plays in certain situations, but I probably learn even more by realizing by myself WHY other players are making the wrong plays in certain situations. I am somewhat dissapointed that noone has addressed the table/seat selection issue though as I feel this is one of the most important and at the same time overlooked concepts in LHE. Have you written me off Entity?

Haven't written anyone off but it's playoff weekend here (boo Seahawks just got creamed) so I won't be posting much substance until Monday.

Rob

GO PACKS GO!!!

Hi guys,

Sorry it's taken me so long to reply, I've just got back from a weekend away. I've read everyone's replies, thank you.

Joe, you're absolutely right that there would be no discussions of this nature if those involved didn't care so much about DC. The fact that the members seem as motivated as the admin to maintain the quality of th site is fantastic, and I honestly think it sets DC apart from similar instructional sites.

Rob, I do understand that your strong views are based upon a desire to ensure that DC is the best site of its kind. Like you, I'm also of the opinion that people should feel free to air their views, and that vigorous debate is often very beneficial and far preferable to saying nothing, provided it's carried out in a respectful manner.

Achieving your philosophical goals whilst simultaneously keeping your customers happy is a delicate balance, and I feel that honest and sometimes lively feedback is the best way of achieving this balance. But to do so it's important that all of the participants are willing to compromise at times, and your responses to Jav left me feeling that you felt you couldn't or wouldn't do that. We're all here for different reasons, and given that it's a subscription site I feel some weight should always be given to the member's views, even if this sometimes clashes with the views of the admin. For obvious reasons this is beneficial to all parties.

As I said before I'm very happy to be a member here and I have the utmost respect for everyone involved. I'm looking forward to the next instalment of the series.

Cheers