ruclips.net/video/0bGb643Sry0/видео.htmlsi=te4ZVxSP6c-mFXmA This video will begin to help explain his check 100 strat against live recs OOP. Basically, they make way more mistakes vs checks than they do vs bets. He uses lots of node locked sims to gird the strategies in other videos, though not this particular one. I know Charlie fundamentally disagrees with this strat as "lazy", but taken in as an entire strategy of capping our opponents and punishing them for just playing so face up, Marc's stuff is willing itself out in my winrate, which has absolutely shot through the roof since I discovered him through Crush Live Poker back in 2021.
I range liked (👍)this comment from the subject of the video without reading what it said. I don't think it really matters to the algorithm if I read the pinned comments or not. As long as I seem like a bot it's definitely a plus EV like.
I have so much respect for both of you, Gentlemen. Mr. Carrel, thank you. Love your intellectual approach to poker.BTW Marc checks and bets his entire range until he doesn't. I have seen him deviate so you are 100%5 correct. I love the React videos; how about having Marc critique your play?
Marc chooses some slightly larger sizes than I think are necessary. However his logic is sound and he has revolutionised how I think about bluffing. Its working for me and really upped my winrate
He range checks in SRP pots OOP because a lot of low stakes live players overstab flops, telegraph their hand strength with their sizing and do not protect their check back range. I've seen him deviate from it when it makes sense in certain scenarios.
Love the review! As a denizen of the California $5 and $10 blind streets, I can confirm that in that hand where Marc flops trip 3's, the population is delighted to stack off with QQ+ on the flop. It's not so much player specific, as population tendencies. And that is where Marc shines. Love your reviews and analysis.
Long time hungry horse viewer, first time Charlie Carrel viewer. After watching this I’m now a newly minted Charlie Carrel Subscriber and potential Elite University member, thanks for the great analysis!
What Charlie doesn't seem to understand is that in the videos of Marc playing, he's at low stakes games and he's trying to exploit the weaknesses in the amateur games. He does NOT play that way in much higher stake games. He's altering his play for low stakes. So YES, Marc is really good at poker. To be successful in poker you must alter your game play depending on who you're playing against.
His stratagy he got straight from nodelocking millions recreational players.He range check becuase his opponent stabs too much andrange bet becuase recreational players raise their top of range making his opponent so caped on the turn..He made over a million dollars in cash games .
that's because you believe him when he says he made a million dollars playing cash games. I don't. He plays like most decent 2/5 regs, and that's not going to make you a million dollars in a few years lol. anyone selling courses or "bootcamps" is like very likely a liar
There is quite a lot of confidence in thinking that you can provide not just an opinion on his play but definitively say how good he is, and assume that every thing you would do differently is better. I want to see you go and play in similar games and do significantly better, and if you can't then how is what you say, "the truth"?. Your play should win more money, or it isn't better. I think you would be a lot less confident about that than you are about how much better you are. How do you explain this gap between confidence you are better and confidence you can win more, over a large sample.
No need to take it so seriously. A lot of RUclips titling is done for the algorithm or to be controversial. He's aware he isn't the greatest ever but he is at a high enough level to be critiquing these guys. 😊❤
Charlie I just wanted to say thank you for the great content, I can't play or gamble any more, but you are so inspiring in your approach short and long term and fun attitude and true wisdom.
Hungary horse has a school and the whole nine same as you Charlie. So as a colab why don't you both do this same analysis as this but back to back. to highlight different styles and thought processes.
19:53 im glad you said this about the 3-bet with 7’s, I often see creators who 3-bet with these middling pocket pairs and it never feels right to me. When I’m playing those hands I typically flat call and attempt to get to a flop and then play for stacks after we hit, rather than committing a ton to the pot pre.
😂😂😂 What happened during the live streams? He had access to one of the easiest high stakes games in the world at HCL and was not able to be a winner there
@@ptantonioalvesI’d be interested to know the backstory on this as well. He seemed to do reasonably well on the streams that I watched. But for a guy to drop all the way down to 5-5 just for a “challenge” seems odd. He clearly has a significant bankroll. Maybe there is some other reason he isn’t getting in the stream games. Or maybe he really is choosing to pursue coaching on a more full time basis.
@@nicholi2789 pursuing coaching i think. Perhaps trying to build a bigger audience to get onto juicy games. But coaching is the easiest passive income poker players have access to. His coaching has always been targeted to mid/low stakes, and hes just displaying it works, driving traffic to his coaching.
Cracking vid. watch all Hungry Horse video's as well as since I found him about 2 months ago. Been a longer fan of yours CC and I am OMC myself who's been stuck at the micros forever so joined your freeroll as well. 1 time !!!
Love to see you do Jaman Burton. He doesn't play high, but does play a exploitive strategy (as his lower limits dictate). Great production value in his videos, to boot .
IDK why but I have never really liked your content. I think it felt a bit gimmicky. This felt really genuine and showed off your high level knowledge. Really enjoyed it. Nice stuff. Way to impress a hater, respectfully.
Charlie, get a 5/10 table with Hungry Horse at one of Brad Owen's meetups, and see who can make the most money in one session. Then have the Poker Guys critique it.
What is cool is Charlie is critiquing live decisions from HH, who presumably could critique his own live decision making in the same way. The better the player the closer their thinking is between live play and off table theory, and my live play drags far behind the level I'm at in study, so... need to work on bringing that to the felt.
5:24 i put this into a pot odds calculator (im not going to claim to be good at poker since I needed to use one lol) but basically from the opponent’s pov they need to be right 39% of the time to call. which in turn doesnt that mean Marc only needs to get folds 61% of the time for this to work? Maybe this is just semantics. but to me you made it sound like this bluff needs to work like 80-90% of the time. And I do just think you’re getting folds at least 40% of the time here. Basically Jacks and below are folding like 95%+ of the time. And he bet small on flop and river so theres still a decent amount of junk in villains range. And then I think importantly all the hands better than jacks but worse than a flush are still folding _some_ amount. 60% fold seems like a given to me but im just a guy
You’re right the opponent only has to be right 39% of time but that doesn’t mean Marc needs to get it through 61% of the time That logic is wrong as according to that if Marc bet really small so that the opponent Only needed to be right 10% Marc would need that bet to work 90% of the time which obviously isn’t the case. The right maths here is Marc is risking $375 to win $200 + $375 back so it needs to get through 375/(375 + 200) which is 65%.
Charlie, during hands I have been focusing on consistently staring at a spot on the table, controlling breathing, blink rate, heart rate ect.... to limit my tells, however, I'm not watching my opponent or looking them in the eyes in doing so. What are your thoughts? Should I always be looking at my opponent? Thank you
@@JohnnyAppleseed-yl6fo yep, lemme just pull a book out and examine every one of my opponents tells. Also your comment doesn’t even relate to what OP asked, which is in regards to limiting his own tells
yes good video - I've been watching Marc's videos the past couple months - getting hands to call turn in order to bluff river is new to me, but I've been implementing it some as well. Also good to see a critique of Marc's style and approach.
There is a simple rule: people who don't play online in global pool - can't be good at poker. They might win good money in their local games or whatever.. but theory wise they won't be able to compete
11:29 disagree with checking here. Unlikely villains have a 3. U bet for control of the pot size. 99 will call but u also get value from flush draws n straight draws. If u check those hands will check back giving a free card. If villain has a 3 they might raise u n now u can act accordingly. If u check n they have a 3 n bet u still wont know where ur at if theyre betting a 3 or they have 99.
i loved your analysis the whole way and agreed with you on everything EXCEPT the 34hh hand where he flopped trips on the button. you said flat, i think raise now against this hand is the way to go. recs who overbet flop as pfr always have sticky overpairs, and theyre not folding to a percieved bluffy player when theres a flush draw on the flop. if its 998 or jj7, different story, but the 33x board is a dream come true against this player type
Decided to take the offer for elite university! Charlie's style is my favorite & Marc is a beast. I also disagree with his OOP 100% range checking, but I'm also a losing cash player. Winning tournament player but really want to get better at cash games! Looking forward to working with the Elite squad!
@@johannesgroe-scharmann2104What does the fact that tournaments are more complex have to do with anything? Mtt players are MUCH worse on average so you don't have to be that good to be a winner.
I'm enjoying the entire series. Yes, I agree. These guys are making TONS of money from RUclips so they're able to get into great games. As long as they're in this position they won't need to get any better. So, I hope they save for the future. Yes, I'm really curious to see what your thoughts are on Rampage because I stopped watching his videos. I don't think he's a good poker player. He's sitting in AMAZING games I would never have the opportunity to play in. So, he's taking advantage of this opportunity of playing in the best games and win bags and bags of money. But, I can't wait to hear your breakdown of him. Happy holidays!
If you are against a mostly folder, always say that you had what you think that they think that you had .. if they call to much, reinforce calling, if they fold too much, reinforce folding.
Are we never really worried about a 3 in the aces hand or river etc.? As usually the field would be raising a 3 always.. as the flush draws on the turn and king. Proving no villian has a 3?
I believe he's playing 5/5, not 2/5 - just a heads up. Cheers. Edit: Also, I think what he's doing on the flop is if he's out of position, he checks his entire range, and only when he is last to act does he _bet_ his entire range.
I don't like the 375 on the river in the first hand. If the reasoning behind the hand could be good the river is super bad. When the opponent has top range he is never folding (like a flush) and you are gonna loose a lot of money. So he should go way below like 225 if he wants to over bet
No one at 2/5 4bets anything but AA, KK, AK sometimes. Or at least not at a high enough frequency to matter. Also, Recs play poorly out of position in 3 bet pots so you bloat a pot with positional advantage against a rec. you could almost do it with any two cards from the button
If you want to understand why HH plays the way he does, you need to watch all or most of his videos. He has the theory videos and then videos like this show it in action. I went thru his entire channel recently. I can't say how good his strategy is, but it makes sense. I think it may work in deep stack games with bad players but will be more challenging in games with lower buy-in caps.
First, love the video well done. My two queries are... Second bomb pot with flush draw and set, I dont see the merit in betting on that flop, even on the turn. Reason, the amount of hearts that are already out on both boards and the extra heart in hand makes it highly unlikely it will come in and if it happens to come in pairing the board your in no mans land. And bottom board being trip 6s, trips are only good if you boat up. Get there cheaply. And the other minor analysis is the 3,4 hand, i thought that was the right play for a low stakes table. Great review Charlie, for the last 2 months ive been checking my entire range out of position. Guessing i have become exploitable.
Good NLHE player, typical NL blaster in PLO. Which can work alot in normal PLO, but DBPLO is a license to spew money. Over vallued both top and bottom board especially in bombpots for obvs reasons.
Hey Charlie. Tell us more about how PLO Double Board Bomb Pots are a Test of Intelligence and Are an Intuitive game? I am quite curious about your opinion here. I reckon there is some study that can go into Split Pot Theory? Also understanding value thresholds if you don't play PLO on the regular?
41:13 that 775 raise makes ZERO sense. Hes only doing that with ace high flush. Even then, he wants straights and smaller flushes to call. By betting so big, he almost doesnt want a call. Also, he did NOT raise preflop. Highly unlikely he has ace high flush
Play your hand against their range. ___ Key Exploitive Questions 1. What is my hand? 2. What is their range? 3. What is my perceived range? 4. What am I going to do about it?
I swear to God, the most effective speech play is just telling the truth in poker lmao. I used to do this not as any sort of strategy, but just because I was young and drunk, people would ask me what I had, I would tell them exactly what I had, and they would always be certain that I must be lying. The number of times I had this interaction is hilarious: Villain: What do you have? Me: The nuts, obviously. Villain: All-in. Me: calls and flips over the nuts.
As a general rule Hungry Horse never actually plays his own cards,,he just bets to find out what his opponent does and doesnt have,,and if he thinks he,s in front,hammer it.
that's interesting that you say "I have 8s" is an indication of not having 8s, from what I've seen people say their exact hand a lot more often than any other random possible hand
I agree. Most people will sometimes tell the truth because they think it give more credence to their lies. Even though no one is keeping track of all their exclamations simple because they don't play together enough to get the full picture if they did (So why bother? I don't know, but they do.). But because they sometimes tell the truth they're accidently increasing the likelihood they have exactly that hand than it would actually occur randomly. With an eight already on board when the claim was made, only three combos remain out of all the possible hands he could have. If it was 30:1 before the claim, it might be 5:1 or lower afterwards (or if their claim makes a set, they could have another set). Although in the video, the player was misunderstood as he was initially stating his stack size, not hand. But Goone's claim of having pocket tens is a great example of it, brilliantly hidden by the timing of stating it immediately after a ten hit the turn given the dialog previously. I've watched a lot of Marc's videos, and he announces his actual cards way more often than they would occur (I want to say at least 1/3 the time), at least in the hands he puts in the videos.
With respect to Charlie's claim, if the player had made the claim before the flop when his range is very wide, it's much more likely to be a lie. I think the insight that the player also wouldn't have another pair in the vicinity is good, as the player wouldn't want to define his range. After the flop such a claim is far more likely to be the truth than occurs randomly.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
thanks for the review charlie! many really good critiques. would love to come on and talk about range checking OOP :D
Well said! You are definitely someone to admire.
Dude you suck at poker, the only place where you can beat the 5/5 is at the hustler vs brain dead rich degenerates
ruclips.net/video/0bGb643Sry0/видео.htmlsi=te4ZVxSP6c-mFXmA
This video will begin to help explain his check 100 strat against live recs OOP.
Basically, they make way more mistakes vs checks than they do vs bets. He uses lots of node locked sims to gird the strategies in other videos, though not this particular one.
I know Charlie fundamentally disagrees with this strat as "lazy", but taken in as an entire strategy of capping our opponents and punishing them for just playing so face up, Marc's stuff is willing itself out in my winrate, which has absolutely shot through the roof since I discovered him through Crush Live Poker back in 2021.
I range liked (👍)this comment from the subject of the video without reading what it said. I don't think it really matters to the algorithm if I read the pinned comments or not. As long as I seem like a bot it's definitely a plus EV like.
Please do have a pod together we would all love this
I have so much respect for both of you, Gentlemen. Mr. Carrel, thank you. Love your intellectual approach to poker.BTW Marc checks and bets his entire range until he doesn't. I have seen him deviate so you are 100%5 correct. I love the React videos; how about having Marc critique your play?
Marc chooses some slightly larger sizes than I think are necessary.
However his logic is sound and he has revolutionised how I think about bluffing.
Its working for me and really upped my winrate
MOM AND DAD PLEASE STOP FIGHTING
mom and dad went to a show ,dropped me off at grandpa joes ,kicked and screamed said please nooo . grandma take me home...nirvana
Bahahaha
He range checks in SRP pots OOP because a lot of low stakes live players overstab flops, telegraph their hand strength with their sizing and do not protect their check back range. I've seen him deviate from it when it makes sense in certain scenarios.
100% agree
Based on tendency
Would love to see a collab between Hungry Horse and Charlie. They both think similarly and play creative exploitive poker !!
A wild idea, they play a game heads up, but they have to bet each other's hand's without seeing them.
Love the review! As a denizen of the California $5 and $10 blind streets, I can confirm that in that hand where Marc flops trip 3's, the population is delighted to stack off with QQ+ on the flop. It's not so much player specific, as population tendencies. And that is where Marc shines.
Love your reviews and analysis.
If there’s a flush draw they will stack off 100%
Long time hungry horse viewer, first time Charlie Carrel viewer. After watching this I’m now a newly minted Charlie Carrel Subscriber and potential Elite University member, thanks for the great analysis!
What Charlie doesn't seem to understand is that in the videos of Marc playing, he's at low stakes games and he's trying to exploit the weaknesses in the amateur games. He does NOT play that way in much higher stake games. He's altering his play for low stakes. So YES, Marc is really good at poker. To be successful in poker you must alter your game play depending on who you're playing against.
The AA and QJ hand , your critics of his play are absolutely on point 🎉🎉 Hey but make no mistakes he’s a good player
critiques
His stratagy he got straight from nodelocking millions recreational players.He range check becuase his opponent stabs too much andrange bet becuase recreational players raise their top of range making his opponent so caped on the turn..He made over a million dollars in cash games .
Charlie commends Marc for having humility, but doesn't have much of his in considering Marc's OOP SRP xrange..
i mean charlie is much worse then the dude he is watching, just pointless video
that's because you believe him when he says he made a million dollars playing cash games. I don't. He plays like most decent 2/5 regs, and that's not going to make you a million dollars in a few years lol. anyone selling courses or "bootcamps" is like very likely a liar
@@phrog6073 lmao i guess you don't know who charlie is. joke comment
@@barbrothers2 hes was a live mtt reg in the old days, means nothing about cash game play nowdays
He explained his node locking strategy in multiple videos using pio solver. His logic seemed pretty sound to me
Looking forward to you both collaborating. Loved your analysis of the table talk/hands. Both of your styles are extremely creative and fun to watch
I would love to see a collab between you two “Exploitative Live Poker Gurus”
I'd love to see you critique Pete Clarke at Carrot Corner. I think you guys would agree on a lot.
Pete Clarke is sharp man way sharper then my learning ability lol
Pete is the top of the top for any player puuuuhhhhllll
There is quite a lot of confidence in thinking that you can provide not just an opinion on his play but definitively say how good he is, and assume that every thing you would do differently is better.
I want to see you go and play in similar games and do significantly better, and if you can't then how is what you say, "the truth"?. Your play should win more money, or it isn't better. I think you would be a lot less confident about that than you are about how much better you are. How do you explain this gap between confidence you are better and confidence you can win more, over a large sample.
No need to take it so seriously. A lot of RUclips titling is done for the algorithm or to be controversial. He's aware he isn't the greatest ever but he is at a high enough level to be critiquing these guys. 😊❤
Charlie I just wanted to say thank you for the great content, I can't play or gamble any more, but you are so inspiring in your approach short and long term and fun attitude and true wisdom.
Hungary horse has a school and the whole nine same as you Charlie. So as a colab why don't you both do this same analysis as this but back to back. to highlight different styles and thought processes.
Great suggestion. I'm commenting to add traffic to your comment - hopefully drawing attention to the idea.
Yeah that would actually be pretty cool
Yeah tre way
Would love to see a collab of some kind. Even just a conversation about poker and stuff
Marc Goone is a well known and respected high stakes LA pro. I think he currently has the best content for beating lower stakes games
19:53 im glad you said this about the 3-bet with 7’s, I often see creators who 3-bet with these middling pocket pairs and it never feels right to me. When I’m playing those hands I typically flat call and attempt to get to a flop and then play for stacks after we hit, rather than committing a ton to the pot pre.
The response from marc should be hilarious cause marc shows up with receipts
Its kind of funny seeing Charlie talk about Marc as if he is just some small time Yter trying to "make it" Marc has made millions in high stakes game.
😂😂😂 What happened during the live streams? He had access to one of the easiest high stakes games in the world at HCL and was not able to be a winner there
@@ptantonioalvesdon’t be result oriented, bro.
We don’t know what happens off stream
@@ptantonioalvesI’d be interested to know the backstory on this as well.
He seemed to do reasonably well on the streams that I watched. But for a guy to drop all the way down to 5-5 just for a “challenge” seems odd.
He clearly has a significant bankroll. Maybe there is some other reason he isn’t getting in the stream games.
Or maybe he really is choosing to pursue coaching on a more full time basis.
@@nicholi2789 pursuing coaching i think. Perhaps trying to build a bigger audience to get onto juicy games. But coaching is the easiest passive income poker players have access to. His coaching has always been targeted to mid/low stakes, and hes just displaying it works, driving traffic to his coaching.
@@nicholi2789I don’t think he plays much other than this challenge. Sounds like he’s coaching and learning RUclips algorithms currently.
Wow I have been binging his series recently and its so cool that you are making a recap of it.
His channel is amazing
Cracking vid. watch all Hungry Horse video's as well as since I found him about 2 months ago. Been a longer fan of yours CC and I am OMC myself who's been stuck at the micros forever so joined your freeroll as well. 1 time !!!
Love to see you do Jaman Burton. He doesn't play high, but does play a exploitive strategy (as his lower limits dictate). Great production value in his videos, to boot .
IDK why but I have never really liked your content. I think it felt a bit gimmicky. This felt really genuine and showed off your high level knowledge. Really enjoyed it. Nice stuff. Way to impress a hater, respectfully.
Genuinely also was a hater until I saw the other video he’s done in this style and now I’m converted icl.
You two are my favorite poker content creators full stop. You two collaborating is like a dream coming true, looking forward to more content ❤
Thank you for the video Charlie!! A super intuitive review of my other favorite YT coach…a bonus Christmas gift!!
BSTI = bet small to induce?
Charlie, get a 5/10 table with Hungry Horse at one of Brad Owen's meetups, and see who can make the most money in one session. Then have the Poker Guys critique it.
45:35 $50 tip on that size pot is hella generous!
If you want to incorporate that style, you'd _best_ have the proper bankroll, because it seems to be a high variance style of poker.
What is cool is Charlie is critiquing live decisions from HH, who presumably could critique his own live decision making in the same way. The better the player the closer their thinking is between live play and off table theory, and my live play drags far behind the level I'm at in study, so... need to work on bringing that to the felt.
5:24 i put this into a pot odds calculator (im not going to claim to be good at poker since I needed to use one lol) but basically from the opponent’s pov they need to be right 39% of the time to call. which in turn doesnt that mean Marc only needs to get folds 61% of the time for this to work?
Maybe this is just semantics. but to me you made it sound like this bluff needs to work like 80-90% of the time. And I do just think you’re getting folds at least 40% of the time here. Basically Jacks and below are folding like 95%+ of the time. And he bet small on flop and river so theres still a decent amount of junk in villains range. And then I think importantly all the hands better than jacks but worse than a flush are still folding _some_ amount. 60% fold seems like a given to me but im just a guy
You’re right the opponent only has to be right 39% of time but that doesn’t mean Marc needs to get it through 61% of the time
That logic is wrong as according to that if Marc bet really small so that the opponent Only needed to be right 10% Marc would need that bet to work 90% of the time which obviously isn’t the case.
The right maths here is Marc is risking $375 to win $200 + $375 back so it needs to get through 375/(375 + 200) which is 65%.
Really enjoying these - would like to see a collab between yourself and Hungry Horse too!
Charlie, during hands I have been focusing on consistently staring at a spot on the table, controlling breathing, blink rate, heart rate ect.... to limit my tells, however, I'm not watching my opponent or looking them in the eyes in doing so. What are your thoughts? Should I always be looking at my opponent? Thank you
You should study tells and study your opponents tells.
@@JohnnyAppleseed-yl6fogreat answer, dude. Really specific. For some better advice how about “you should read your opponent lol”
@@johns5071 Tell me you didn't bother to read the entire comment without telling me...
@@JohnnyAppleseed-yl6fo yep, lemme just pull a book out and examine every one of my opponents tells. Also your comment doesn’t even relate to what OP asked, which is in regards to limiting his own tells
Smtms just wink to yr opp. It devastates ppl and will release yr pressure. Try it.
Love to see you do one for Mariano just because I find his content the easiest on the eye overall. Good for casuals (similar to Brad Owen).
16:48 would you still bet river after blasting turn?
31:19 he checks his range because he has said in previous videos that his opponents dont correctly play back against his range check correctly.
yes good video - I've been watching Marc's videos the past couple months - getting hands to call turn in order to bluff river is new to me, but I've been implementing it some as well. Also good to see a critique of Marc's style and approach.
There is a simple rule: people who don't play online in global pool - can't be good at poker. They might win good money in their local games or whatever.. but theory wise they won't be able to compete
11:29 disagree with checking here. Unlikely villains have a 3. U bet for control of the pot size. 99 will call but u also get value from flush draws n straight draws. If u check those hands will check back giving a free card.
If villain has a 3 they might raise u n now u can act accordingly. If u check n they have a 3 n bet u still wont know where ur at if theyre betting a 3 or they have 99.
i loved your analysis the whole way and agreed with you on everything EXCEPT the 34hh hand where he flopped trips on the button. you said flat, i think raise now against this hand is the way to go. recs who overbet flop as pfr always have sticky overpairs, and theyre not folding to a percieved bluffy player when theres a flush draw on the flop. if its 998 or jj7, different story, but the 33x board is a dream come true against this player type
Do carrot poker
Decided to take the offer for elite university! Charlie's style is my favorite & Marc is a beast. I also disagree with his OOP 100% range checking, but I'm also a losing cash player. Winning tournament player but really want to get better at cash games! Looking forward to working with the Elite squad!
Tournaments are way more complex. How many tourneys have you played to say you are a winning player?
@@johannesgroe-scharmann2104What does the fact that tournaments are more complex have to do with anything? Mtt players are MUCH worse on average so you don't have to be that good to be a winner.
@@pierrearrgood Point!
I'm enjoying the entire series. Yes, I agree. These guys are making TONS of money from RUclips so they're able to get into great games. As long as they're in this position they won't need to get any better. So, I hope they save for the future.
Yes, I'm really curious to see what your thoughts are on Rampage because I stopped watching his videos. I don't think he's a good poker player. He's sitting in AMAZING games I would never have the opportunity to play in. So, he's taking advantage of this opportunity of playing in the best games and win bags and bags of money. But, I can't wait to hear your breakdown of him.
Happy holidays!
If you are against a mostly folder, always say that you had what you think that they think that you had .. if they call to much, reinforce calling, if they fold too much, reinforce folding.
Lol what is this nonsense paragraph?
@@thartley16 its only nonsense to scrubs that cant play
Are we never really worried about a 3 in the aces hand or river etc.? As usually the field would be raising a 3 always.. as the flush draws on the turn and king. Proving no villian has a 3?
Please make a podcast with Marc ❤
I believe he's playing 5/5, not 2/5 - just a heads up.
Cheers. Edit: Also, I think what he's doing on the flop is if he's out of position, he checks his entire range, and only when he is last to act does he _bet_ his entire range.
I don't like the 375 on the river in the first hand. If the reasoning behind the hand could be good the river is super bad. When the opponent has top range he is never folding (like a flush) and you are gonna loose a lot of money. So he should go way below like 225 if he wants to over bet
No one at 2/5 4bets anything but AA, KK, AK sometimes. Or at least not at a high enough frequency to matter. Also, Recs play poorly out of position in 3 bet pots so you bloat a pot with positional advantage against a rec. you could almost do it with any two cards from the button
Really enjoying this series! Keep it up!
You should do 5 hour heads-up battle
Doesn’t need real money, but do it for HONOR!
If you want to understand why HH plays the way he does, you need to watch all or most of his videos. He has the theory videos and then videos like this show it in action. I went thru his entire channel recently. I can't say how good his strategy is, but it makes sense. I think it may work in deep stack games with bad players but will be more challenging in games with lower buy-in caps.
Would love to see Marc play some 200nl+ online
He would crush so hard.
He tried... Did not go well
@ please send link of him playing, I cannot find it
🎯 Charlie's Course on Tells: has anyone here bought it and if so, what do you think of the course?
First, love the video well done.
My two queries are...
Second bomb pot with flush draw and set,
I dont see the merit in betting on that flop, even on the turn. Reason, the amount of hearts that are already out on both boards and the extra heart in hand makes it highly unlikely it will come in and if it happens to come in pairing the board your in no mans land.
And bottom board being trip 6s, trips are only good if you boat up. Get there cheaply.
And the other minor analysis is the 3,4 hand, i thought that was the right play for a low stakes table.
Great review Charlie, for the last 2 months ive been checking my entire range out of position. Guessing i have become exploitable.
would love to see review of brantzen and lex o!
you should play a heads up live game vs him! its be so much fun to watch
I like the review but the reviwer seems to be a little to far removed from 2-5 or 5-5.
gr8 format can't wait to see who you review next
I love double board bomb pot PLO, never got the opportunity to play it though, because I don't know where to find games.
Love the video! One caveat when you claim to be a wise man that truly means that you don't know....
So idk poker or really anyone I'm just slowly getting into it but how good is this guy who's saying he good everyone else is (genuine question)
Charlie, can you send me the link on the lifetime MasterClass. I apologize I cannot seem to find it.
Good NLHE player, typical NL blaster in PLO. Which can work alot in normal PLO, but DBPLO is a license to spew money. Over vallued both top and bottom board especially in bombpots for obvs reasons.
This is great! Please more of these type of videos:)
27:35 river spot is close? What? Why? Back door diamonds not even mentioned?
Love this style of video!!❤
Hey Charlie. Tell us more about how PLO Double Board Bomb Pots are a Test of Intelligence and Are an Intuitive game? I am quite curious about your opinion here. I reckon there is some study that can go into Split Pot Theory? Also understanding value thresholds if you don't play PLO on the regular?
I would like to see Charlie and Hungry Horse collaborate on some nice videos! ❤
Good stuff. Many asked for this review amd you delivered like a mailman. Thank you.
41:13 that 775 raise makes ZERO sense. Hes only doing that with ace high flush. Even then, he wants straights and smaller flushes to call. By betting so big, he almost doesnt want a call. Also, he did NOT raise preflop. Highly unlikely he has ace high flush
Play your hand against their range.
___
Key Exploitive Questions
1. What is my hand?
2. What is their range?
3. What is my perceived range?
4. What am I going to do about it?
2 mins in, and you're already saying gto this when the player in question doesn't self-proclaimed non gto player.
Charlie, any thoughts on Bart Hanson's Crush Live Poker material? Thanks!
Charlie, would you rate Aero Plays Poker? I'd love to see that!
I swear to God, the most effective speech play is just telling the truth in poker lmao. I used to do this not as any sort of strategy, but just because I was young and drunk, people would ask me what I had, I would tell them exactly what I had, and they would always be certain that I must be lying.
The number of times I had this interaction is hilarious:
Villain: What do you have?
Me: The nuts, obviously.
Villain: All-in.
Me: calls and flips over the nuts.
Was it the same player playing 5-2 off those two hands?
lets see a Mark Goone vs Charlie Heads up battle :)
Would you analyse some of his 100/200 hands?
you should review kevin eyring, corey's older brother. He just recently started posting on RUclips.
As a general rule Hungry Horse never actually plays his own cards,,he just bets to find out what his opponent does and doesnt have,,and if he thinks he,s in front,hammer it.
Not a hater at all, but I would imagine you could afford a better camera and a microphone. Feels like I watch a stream back in 2008.
Fyi Hungry Horse's ORIGINAL goal was $200 / hr. He then switched it overnight to $100 / hr and thought no one would notice.
can you do mariano or is that too high profile
Nice review I like his play as well. I enjoy both of your pages and content
Hungry Horse is awesome!
Love to see your view on kakitee
that horse guy is weird enough to make Charlie look normal
Bet small to induce baybayyyyy!
I watched this video both ways the original and with your observational analysis do more please loved it❤ you gentlemen must do collaboration 🔗
I wanna see you go to hustler and beat the 1/2 table with a $400 bankroll
This was a great video. Thanks for doing it.
You earn a new sub for this vid. Keep it up
that's interesting that you say "I have 8s" is an indication of not having 8s, from what I've seen people say their exact hand a lot more often than any other random possible hand
I agree. Most people will sometimes tell the truth because they think it give more credence to their lies. Even though no one is keeping track of all their exclamations simple because they don't play together enough to get the full picture if they did (So why bother? I don't know, but they do.). But because they sometimes tell the truth they're accidently increasing the likelihood they have exactly that hand than it would actually occur randomly. With an eight already on board when the claim was made, only three combos remain out of all the possible hands he could have. If it was 30:1 before the claim, it might be 5:1 or lower afterwards (or if their claim makes a set, they could have another set). Although in the video, the player was misunderstood as he was initially stating his stack size, not hand. But Goone's claim of having pocket tens is a great example of it, brilliantly hidden by the timing of stating it immediately after a ten hit the turn given the dialog previously. I've watched a lot of Marc's videos, and he announces his actual cards way more often than they would occur (I want to say at least 1/3 the time), at least in the hands he puts in the videos.
With respect to Charlie's claim, if the player had made the claim before the flop when his range is very wide, it's much more likely to be a lie. I think the insight that the player also wouldn't have another pair in the vicinity is good, as the player wouldn't want to define his range. After the flop such a claim is far more likely to be the truth than occurs randomly.
I would have stuck it thru that PLO pot.