Забудьте про гто в онлайн покере, абсолютно бессмысленные цифры. + Или - 10% ничего не решают. Тут важно играть по каждой руке или раздаче индивидуально, а также стиля оппонента 😂 остальное ерунда
That was way more impressive to me than the 44 hand since that’s an easier spot to me to find bluffs in my case. But regulating bluffs in the 2nd spot requires next level understanding that i didn’t even had! Which makes it really awesome imo
Personally I don’t agree I think the 44 bluff was much more impressive than the 87 check back. With the 87 it’s fairly easy to identify that you have so many potential bluffing candidates, so you need to x back with some of them. Also Nacho is a station, so it’s not someone that you can get away with bluffing too easily. Don’t get me wrong both the 44 bluff and the 87 x back are great plays, but checking back with 8 high isn’t as uncommon as you’d think- especially when you are in similar situations with a plethora of potential bluffing candidates. I’ve looked over a bunch of Ax 3bet pot sims and you’ll often bluff twice with low lairs and then just mix bet/x back with hands that look like ‘obvious’ bluffs if you are to ever arrive with them otr. However, the solver always needs to control their bluffing frequencies so that it isn’t exploitable to over calls. So that means checking back hands like 8 high, at least sometimes.
@@Demondoink1 Sure, this thing is subjective and depends on how studied up you are. I have studied a lot the first spot so it’s easier for me to find bluffs there (although didn’t know AT was also bluffed!) The second spot Ik low pairs are bluffs as well as QT, but i didn’t know the minutia of why 97 is a bluff but 87 isn’t. It’s counterintuitive to me since bottom of range is usually an easy bluff in most spots, but in this spot specifically it’s not bc it prefers to unblock their folds in A7, and A8. You might have known 87 is a check back bc you simply looked at the spot before and memorized it or whatever. But I highly doubt anyone in the comment section knew the reasoning behind why, since that is some next level shit you had to be really really in tuned deeply with this specific spot to know.
bell curve meme: dumbass check because missed, normal bluff because missed draw + getting a fold, wise check because fold equity isn't high enough vs opponent's range
Love your channel man.I fell in love with poker because of the mental game it entails and not the money attached to it and you channel, in my opinion, is what pure poker is about
I shared a video from your channel to my poker friend yesterday and he was like "dude I was going to tell you about this channel too, its awesome". Great content as usual!!
Sick video I always enjoy railing the nosebleeds on GG. I know these guys are crushers that have put in an insane amount of work to get where they are but I am a bit skeptical though with how prevalent cheating/botting is online and how much money is at stake in these games I also wouldn’t be surprised if some had “dream machines” solving certain tougher or unintuitive spots in real time. Sites like GG and ACR have already shown to have dicey security at best
Yeah this is always a concern. That’s why I never put any of these guys on a pedestal bc they could just be cheating with RTA. When they replicate these plays live that’s when they will truly be elite imo. Linus is the only one I’ve seen actually implementing accurate solver strats live.
Definitely is a real problem in the online world. But still, we have to remember that these are 2 out of many hands that I picked and not every of them is played perfectly.
Always love how in depth your videos are. I can only assume your a crusher whereever it is you play. Curious how much of the strategies like these can you carry over into mtts. Also would love more mtt videos!!
Amazing video as always 🔥 by far the best GTO content on UA-cam. What do you think about applying this strategy against recreationals? I see those types of play a lot online, I try to avoid those playersz really tough lines
Appreciate the great compliment! 🔥 Against recreationals, you really just want to look for which type they are. You should be able to see pretty quickly whether they like to over call or over fold in general and then adjust accordingly. They usually don't care about whether a spot is hard to find bluffs in or not
Liked both spots since they are hard to find in practice, i think the key on the first one is the turn bet to be able to have some bluffs on the river in a tough spot for oop when flush completes
Top content, buddy. Thak you very much for your work and the effort you putting in making these videos! Like&sub P.S. I have never realized that 87s in the second spot is actually the bottom of our range. And, since you mentioned that, I thought "man, we're in trap here. And with betting on the river we will probably be called with any bluffcather (even JJ/QQ) since the board fits much better pre 3bet agressor. So check would be great I guess". And seeing Taisto x-behind there is such a class move 👍🔥😎 Cheep realisation equity on the flop, semi-bluff with generating fold-equity on the turn, and give up on the river. WP Taisto. I guess he would bluff tho on a club, any 2x or 7x
There is LITERALLY a world behind this. Some of the MEDIUM reg go for usually bluff on particular spot and check back when for them is impossible to bluff. But in reality is just like u mention: Find RIGHT bluff and not COMMON texture 😃 BEST POKER CHANNEL
Great video. I think what people sometimes fail to realise is that the person who is potentially bluffing can also realise they have a lot of potential bluffing combos, so they may either control their frequencies (either by RNG or by being more blocker/unblocker specific) or just under bluff (expecting their opponent to over call cos of all the perceived bluffs). I really don’t like the approach of ‘my opponent has a lot of potential bluffs here therefor I pure call every bluff catcher’. IMO it’s a kind of dumb approach unless you are playing against more basic/weak regs. Your opponent can also identify a potential over/under bluffed spot and adjust their strategy based on how they think you will react, or how population in general will react. It’s not as if we are so smart and intelligent that we are the only ones capable of identifying these situations when they arise. Exploitative adjustments are often just complete projections. We say to ourselves ‘our opponent will do this’ because of some inaccurate beliefs or reads we have on them. The reality is that we can never predict our opponents next move. They may be tilted and play differently, or they may be tilted and play the exact say. They may have just had coaching and are in the process of changing their strategy. They may have just been studying bluffing combos, or they may have decided for the next week they are never going to bluff a river. We don’t know. Imo our default should always be to make our opponents bluffs indifferent. Sure, sometimes we can over call or over fold, but if we just hit MDF then it doesn’t really matter what our opponents are up to as they are not making free money with their 0EV bluff candidates. That way if our opponents are deviating massively from equilibrium then they aren’t making any additional money from us- as we are merely playing an ‘optimal’ strategy in terms of calling down often enough to make their bluffs indifferent between bet and check.
Great to get your take on this, thanks for sharing! The way you describe this is how I think about poker in general - there are certain concepts for certain spots and we then try to estimate how well our specific opponent knows them in each spot. And how they would build their strategy as a result. So what you said here is 1-2 steps above the content in the video, which explains the concept. And then it's on us to work out a strategy based on that. The better our opponent the more it makes sense to approach equilibrium of course, which I assume is what you're thinking about considering the stakes you play. (btw. the over-bluffed / under-bluffed in this video didn't mean to say it's over- or under-bluffed on these stakes necessarily, but in general across all stakes)
when a player checks 87 in that spot , and is also GTO play, it makes all the alarms go off for me . i bet at least half of them are using RTS . u just cant trust online poker any more. anyone with 100 $ and 2 laptops can easily cheat. :(
Also remember that all the other stakes people can do randomly something like that for completely different reasons, emotional, other biased thinking, it does not mean they are crushers , but you might wanna check them out to find how and why they did it before you overreact.
Can someone spoon-feed me how to recognize situations that are over and underbluffed? I can't wrap my head around some of the nuance of this video even though ive been playing for 20 years.
Sure. It's hard to find normal bluffs in the first hand, but there are also not many fh hands that make sense here. There is only 1 A3s left, and there are 6 44, so where are the other fh hands that make up the difference? And if he's bluffing 44, he can be bluffing 55, 22....
44 without a club are only 3 combos (clubs wouldn't need to bluff) and for the solver 2 of those would raise the flop a lot. But in practice there could potentially be more that get to the river, agree. And you're right, it's also about the value hands possible. 33, 77, 56cc are a few more.
first hand seems a fairly easy call. he should never have 4c5c here so his range is way more weighted to bluffs as no flopped full house is ever taking this line. and he has a lot of qc/jc in his value range.
@@2CardConfidencehe's not drawing that conclusion based on this video. Rather just on the fact that RTA is simple and effective and why wouldn't you use it against the best players in the world (who are probably using it) when you are gambling millions of dollars against them over hundreds of thousands of hands
How long has it taken you to gain the in-depth knowledge of solvers you obviously showcase ? Is there anything in particular that helped you, or just practice?
I watched a lot of videos (Finding Equilibrium & Run It Once mostly) which gave me a base understanding. But then practice over time (reviewing my own hands every day) made me form my own thoughts which also helped. I think after a few weeks/months you can easily get to a very good level of solver knowledge
We don't bluff the 78s because we have too many bluffs to choose from? Therefore, choose bluffs that block our opponent from having hands that they would call with? Am I correct in that thinking process?
i wonder if the 44 guy, was thinking, hmm, i can get overpockets and AK without a club to fold always if i make this play? I wonder why he overbet, makes it polarized, when earlier he was repping he was strong, why polarize his range on the river? I dont know, i wish i knew!!
@@2CardConfidence ye but are they playing with a solver open? It's not hard to do surely? I play covered in crumbs stoned on my ipad so I have no idea?? Edit; I'm still a winning player which says alot about online poker pools
I dont know... i think this 78 was simply just a bad play. On river he could already raise to include more strong hand combos like (A5, A6, sets, etc), by calling you eliminate many strong hands... and then on the turn after a check a relative big bet.. not make sense at all as K is the pre flop raiser range. It was just a bad play, not pro at all. The first example... 3A3 flop, only calling 20% bet... I mean, with even a 3 poker I raise to target Ax type of hands, KK,QQ... type of pairs and flush draws. So why would i keep the pot small, even with the nuts. By the way I don't get this flop 20% type of raises. You have to go for max value, not min value. I raise 20% if I want to induce a re-raise. On A33 board, half pot raise is pretty much make sense as the only card favoring my range is the A, so why not keep involved smaller pairs, flush draws, A with worse kicker, etc. It is a bad concept to keep as much hands in the party as possible, the whole point is to go for max value. Also only thinking this way: a pro understands if a board texture contains many missed hands what would turn into a bluff AND board texture where bluffing is very likely not make sense, so cause of that a bluff would look even stronger. This is not pro level, cause the whole game has way more factors and if you not include these, just simply you rely on picked strategy elements, then you end up like the first and second "pro" in the example.
Haha the problem is that I can't grind when I make them :D Mod stakes have been my home, but this year I actually focus on the channel and everything around it
@@timo5563 I haven't been on a paid coaching site for a while, so hard for me to recommend one. I would just watch the free stuff from different people and go with the style that resonates with you the most.
Exploit and crush mid stakes preflop with my full preflop exploit guide:
► www.2cardconfidence.com/preflop-exploits
Забудьте про гто в онлайн покере, абсолютно бессмысленные цифры. + Или - 10% ничего не решают. Тут важно играть по каждой руке или раздаче индивидуально, а также стиля оппонента 😂 остальное ерунда
What a beast checking back 78s correctly
Yeah man
That was way more impressive to me than the 44 hand since that’s an easier spot to me to find bluffs in my case. But regulating bluffs in the 2nd spot requires next level understanding that i didn’t even had! Which makes it really awesome imo
Personally I don’t agree I think the 44 bluff was much more impressive than the 87 check back. With the 87 it’s fairly easy to identify that you have so many potential bluffing candidates, so you need to x back with some of them. Also Nacho is a station, so it’s not someone that you can get away with bluffing too easily.
Don’t get me wrong both the 44 bluff and the 87 x back are great plays, but checking back with 8 high isn’t as uncommon as you’d think- especially when you are in similar situations with a plethora of potential bluffing candidates. I’ve looked over a bunch of Ax 3bet pot sims and you’ll often bluff twice with low lairs and then just mix bet/x back with hands that look like ‘obvious’ bluffs if you are to ever arrive with them otr. However, the solver always needs to control their bluffing frequencies so that it isn’t exploitable to over calls.
So that means checking back hands like 8 high, at least sometimes.
@@Demondoink1 Sure, this thing is subjective and depends on how studied up you are. I have studied a lot the first spot so it’s easier for me to find bluffs there (although didn’t know AT was also bluffed!)
The second spot Ik low pairs are bluffs as well as QT, but i didn’t know the minutia of why 97 is a bluff but 87 isn’t. It’s counterintuitive to me since bottom of range is usually an easy bluff in most spots, but in this spot specifically it’s not bc it prefers to unblock their folds in A7, and A8. You might have known 87 is a check back bc you simply looked at the spot before and memorized it or whatever. But I highly doubt anyone in the comment section knew the reasoning behind why, since that is some next level shit you had to be really really in tuned deeply with this specific spot to know.
gigachad move unironically
Really love the new visual effects to highlight the explanation! top-notch explanations + really good editing skills = Epic
Shoutout to my new editor, he's amazing
Classic 2CC banger
i would also checkback 78s there, but for all the wrong reasons, im just a fish who thinks like a caveman "me miss draw, me check"
bell curve meme: dumbass check because missed, normal bluff because missed draw + getting a fold, wise check because fold equity isn't high enough vs opponent's range
Well the result is the same-understanding the reasoning behind it is more better for the future
Great video and explanation of why not to bluff 78s is very good. Thanks 2CC.
Happy to hear you got some value!
Love your channel man.I fell in love with poker because of the mental game it entails and not the money attached to it and you channel, in my opinion, is what pure poker is about
That's a great compliment, I'm happy to be able to deliver that! :)
I shared a video from your channel to my poker friend yesterday and he was like "dude I was going to tell you about this channel too, its awesome". Great content as usual!!
Haha that's awesome! Two legends 🔥
Love the way you edit and narrate 👍👍
Didn't edit this one myself, but very happy you like it!
bro, these two hands just literally shocked me on how these pros handling these spots in gto. Great content❤
Sick video I always enjoy railing the nosebleeds on GG. I know these guys are crushers that have put in an insane amount of work to get where they are but I am a bit skeptical though with how prevalent cheating/botting is online and how much money is at stake in these games I also wouldn’t be surprised if some had “dream machines” solving certain tougher or unintuitive spots in real time. Sites like GG and ACR have already shown to have dicey security at best
Yeah this is always a concern. That’s why I never put any of these guys on a pedestal bc they could just be cheating with RTA. When they replicate these plays live that’s when they will truly be elite imo. Linus is the only one I’ve seen actually implementing accurate solver strats live.
Definitely is a real problem in the online world. But still, we have to remember that these are 2 out of many hands that I picked and not every of them is played perfectly.
Nice Video, very well made, thank you!
You and poker giraffe should collab more on videos. Best 2 content creators
QY and 2CC is too good
He's the greatest! Happy to do so, just gotta fit both schedules, which can be difficult sometimes :)
Best poker videos BAR NONE!
Appreciate it a lot, Josh!
Always love how in depth your videos are. I can only assume your a crusher whereever it is you play. Curious how much of the strategies like these can you carry over into mtts. Also would love more mtt videos!!
Appreciate it! :) Will definitely mix in MTT videos from time to time
Amazing analysis and editing
Thank you man, glad you got something out of it :)
Amazing video as always 🔥 by far the best GTO content on UA-cam. What do you think about applying this strategy against recreationals? I see those types of play a lot online, I try to avoid those playersz really tough lines
Appreciate the great compliment! 🔥
Against recreationals, you really just want to look for which type they are. You should be able to see pretty quickly whether they like to over call or over fold in general and then adjust accordingly. They usually don't care about whether a spot is hard to find bluffs in or not
Liked both spots since they are hard to find in practice, i think the key on the first one is the turn bet to be able to have some bluffs on the river in a tough spot for oop when flush completes
Yes, agree
Top content, buddy. Thak you very much for your work and the effort you putting in making these videos! Like&sub
P.S. I have never realized that 87s in the second spot is actually the bottom of our range. And, since you mentioned that, I thought "man, we're in trap here. And with betting on the river we will probably be called with any bluffcather (even JJ/QQ) since the board fits much better pre 3bet agressor. So check would be great I guess". And seeing Taisto x-behind there is such a class move 👍🔥😎
Cheep realisation equity on the flop, semi-bluff with generating fold-equity on the turn, and give up on the river. WP Taisto. I guess he would bluff tho on a club, any 2x or 7x
There is LITERALLY a world behind this. Some of the MEDIUM reg go for usually bluff on particular spot and check back when for them is impossible to bluff.
But in reality is just like u mention:
Find RIGHT bluff and not COMMON texture 😃
BEST POKER CHANNEL
Your voice and timing while speaking makes this content epic. Keep it up. GG
Means a lot man, thank you!
Great video. I think what people sometimes fail to realise is that the person who is potentially bluffing can also realise they have a lot of potential bluffing combos, so they may either control their frequencies (either by RNG or by being more blocker/unblocker specific) or just under bluff (expecting their opponent to over call cos of all the perceived bluffs).
I really don’t like the approach of ‘my opponent has a lot of potential bluffs here therefor I pure call every bluff catcher’. IMO it’s a kind of dumb approach unless you are playing against more basic/weak regs.
Your opponent can also identify a potential over/under bluffed spot and adjust their strategy based on how they think you will react, or how population in general will react. It’s not as if we are so smart and intelligent that we are the only ones capable of identifying these situations when they arise.
Exploitative adjustments are often just complete projections. We say to ourselves ‘our opponent will do this’ because of some inaccurate beliefs or reads we have on them. The reality is that we can never predict our opponents next move. They may be tilted and play differently, or they may be tilted and play the exact say. They may have just had coaching and are in the process of changing their strategy. They may have just been studying bluffing combos, or they may have decided for the next week they are never going to bluff a river. We don’t know.
Imo our default should always be to make our opponents bluffs indifferent. Sure, sometimes we can over call or over fold, but if we just hit MDF then it doesn’t really matter what our opponents are up to as they are not making free money with their 0EV bluff candidates. That way if our opponents are deviating massively from equilibrium then they aren’t making any additional money from us- as we are merely playing an ‘optimal’ strategy in terms of calling down often enough to make their bluffs indifferent between bet and check.
Great to get your take on this, thanks for sharing!
The way you describe this is how I think about poker in general - there are certain concepts for certain spots and we then try to estimate how well our specific opponent knows them in each spot. And how they would build their strategy as a result.
So what you said here is 1-2 steps above the content in the video, which explains the concept. And then it's on us to work out a strategy based on that. The better our opponent the more it makes sense to approach equilibrium of course, which I assume is what you're thinking about considering the stakes you play.
(btw. the over-bluffed / under-bluffed in this video didn't mean to say it's over- or under-bluffed on these stakes necessarily, but in general across all stakes)
when a player checks 87 in that spot , and is also GTO play, it makes all the alarms go off for me . i bet at least half of them are using RTS . u just cant trust online poker any more. anyone with 100 $ and 2 laptops can easily cheat. :(
incredible video mates, quality is top
Thank you, happy to hear it!
Ty 2CC, very unique content
Love to hear it, thank you! :)
Really loved this video!
Another gem of a video
Also remember that all the other stakes people can do randomly something like that for completely different reasons, emotional, other biased thinking, it does not mean they are crushers , but you might wanna check them out to find how and why they did it before you overreact.
AMAZING, will watch again
Great compliment 🔥
love the video! great content
Awesome video!
insanely interesting and informative
Happy to hear that!
Thank u, great video
Great Video 🤗
brilliant video to be fair
Epic content❤
Can someone spoon-feed me how to recognize situations that are over and underbluffed? I can't wrap my head around some of the nuance of this video even though ive been playing for 20 years.
This is art
Sure. It's hard to find normal bluffs in the first hand, but there are also not many fh hands that make sense here. There is only 1 A3s left, and there are 6 44, so where are the other fh hands that make up the difference? And if he's bluffing 44, he can be bluffing 55, 22....
44 without a club are only 3 combos (clubs wouldn't need to bluff) and for the solver 2 of those would raise the flop a lot. But in practice there could potentially be more that get to the river, agree.
And you're right, it's also about the value hands possible. 33, 77, 56cc are a few more.
first hand seems a fairly easy call. he should never have 4c5c here so his range is way more weighted to bluffs as no flopped full house is ever taking this line. and he has a lot of qc/jc in his value range.
Awesome 🔥
i love you 2cc
Love you too man ❤️
I meet daily elite players that do the 44 stuff in literally all the hands they play against me , on 50 nl :))
Yeah nah at these stakes they have a solver by their side 100% and use it for tough spots
Can never rule anything out these days, but I wouldn't jump to too many conclusions from only 2 hands that are picked out of many
@@2CardConfidencehe's not drawing that conclusion based on this video. Rather just on the fact that RTA is simple and effective and why wouldn't you use it against the best players in the world (who are probably using it) when you are gambling millions of dollars against them over hundreds of thousands of hands
Playing online nowdays is just solverfest.
Another banger
How long has it taken you to gain the in-depth knowledge of solvers you obviously showcase ? Is there anything in particular that helped you, or just practice?
I watched a lot of videos (Finding Equilibrium & Run It Once mostly) which gave me a base understanding.
But then practice over time (reviewing my own hands every day) made me form my own thoughts which also helped. I think after a few weeks/months you can easily get to a very good level of solver knowledge
Insane !
Wait, are you playing while using a solver? Isn't that considered cheating?
I'm not playing, I'm reviewing a hand played in the past by others. And yes, using a solver while playing would be cheating
great video
Glad you like it!
Ty
damn son, great video
We don't bluff the 78s because we have too many bluffs to choose from? Therefore, choose bluffs that block our opponent from having hands that they would call with? Am I correct in that thinking process?
Yes, pretty much on point :)
i wonder if the 44 guy, was thinking, hmm, i can get overpockets and AK without a club to fold always if i make this play?
I wonder why he overbet, makes it polarized, when earlier he was repping he was strong, why polarize his range on the river? I dont know, i wish i knew!!
Polarizing means you are repping extremely strong hands. Bluffs are always included in a well balanced strategy, no matter the bet size.
Can you make a video (unless there already is one) on how to study solvers
Please and Thanks 🙏
There's too many things to just put everything in a few minute video. That's my I made a complete course on it, which is on my website
Great video. I have always wondered why 8 high doesn’t bluff sometimes.
If I called that hand, my opponent would have 4c5c
What's the sign?
big big big content bro!! hoping you're gonna get more visibilty (or maybe not becouse there is too much freecoaching for the fishes aha)
Always a dilemma! :D Thanks a lot my friend
Can we get more MTT content?
I'll definitely mix in MTT content from time to time
Wow are these players playing with a solver open or what?
If you only see this, you might think that. But to be fair, not every hand is played like this, these are only 2 out of many :)
@@2CardConfidence ye but are they playing with a solver open? It's not hard to do surely? I play covered in crumbs stoned on my ipad so I have no idea??
Edit; I'm still a winning player which says alot about online poker pools
BADS!! Shark.
The 44 would have me questioning RTA more than anything else
I think of the 2, that one is actually the play that more people would find
87, I go all in and make my opponent fold.
I dont know... i think this 78 was simply just a bad play. On river he could already raise to include more strong hand combos like (A5, A6, sets, etc), by calling you eliminate many strong hands... and then on the turn after a check a relative big bet.. not make sense at all as K is the pre flop raiser range. It was just a bad play, not pro at all.
The first example... 3A3 flop, only calling 20% bet... I mean, with even a 3 poker I raise to target Ax type of hands, KK,QQ... type of pairs and flush draws. So why would i keep the pot small, even with the nuts.
By the way I don't get this flop 20% type of raises. You have to go for max value, not min value. I raise 20% if I want to induce a re-raise.
On A33 board, half pot raise is pretty much make sense as the only card favoring my range is the A, so why not keep involved smaller pairs, flush draws, A with worse kicker, etc. It is a bad concept to keep as much hands in the party as possible, the whole point is to go for max value.
Also only thinking this way: a pro understands if a board texture contains many missed hands what would turn into a bluff AND board texture where bluffing is very likely not make sense, so cause of that a bluff would look even stronger.
This is not pro level, cause the whole game has way more factors and if you not include these, just simply you rely on picked strategy elements, then you end up like the first and second "pro" in the example.
If 78 bet 3/4 pot on the river, hero would've folded so why is it a good check?
if I have KK I 5bet and you have AA then did I make a bad shove?
Hero isn't folding to 3/4 pot bet in this universe or any other.
@@aless13260 in that instance yes
make some spins videos, thanks
I don't know anything about them, so that wouldn't help anybody :D
Not the you suck😭 great video!
The linus of YT fosho
Haha much appreciated my friend
elite my ass... a 42k$ bet on the river gets him to fold
bro says in the video he is an elite reg but then gives him the "you suck" emote😭💀
lol no that wasn't me. It's the players who make these emojis
@@2CardConfidence oh sorry bro. Thought u were playing
Only cash game ??why not tournament plays
Can't do everything at once my friend
44 had RTA for sure
44 not so much but the lack of bluff with 78 is the more difficult one.
Elite, maybe just aggressive(first hand). Fish (second hand).
If 44 on A33 are to barely bet (solver), why not 55?
🤡🤡🤡
Are you playing highstakes? After all this analyse vids, you must be a crusher or not?😅
Haha the problem is that I can't grind when I make them :D Mod stakes have been my home, but this year I actually focus on the channel and everything around it
More
man i suck at poker lmao
🤣
Focusing on the basics first will do a lot of magic already!
Which coach website can you recommend? @@2CardConfidence
@@timo5563 I haven't been on a paid coaching site for a while, so hard for me to recommend one. I would just watch the free stuff from different people and go with the style that resonates with you the most.
.
Hard to believe these dudes are using rta
RTA
pure gold
❤️
Can you stop posting that Solver si useless at those stakes
lol a hater ! usually a sign that your channel go up to more than 1M subs. Great video as always keep it up !
Maybe the second hand is just rng, but still quite impressive