500NL, 1000NL and 2000NL Hands with a HIGH-STAKES PRO 

Every video is Clarke's best video

Yeah I was proud of how it did in its day but poker has moved on A LOT.

In what ways would you say poker has moved on/what sections of TGM are outdated? I read it within the last year and thought it was outstanding, so I'm curious if I could modernize in some areas :)

@@CarrotCornerPoker I got your book and asked you these questions and you never answered me.

@@CarrotCornerPoker If you can expand on why you wouldn't recommend it today? I'm going through the book right now and loving it, the way that you make the reader think all the time. Other than preflop what is not correct in the book?

I have a question about 17:00. We are talking about villain having maybe ace jack suited or kj or kq suited. But i fold literally all of those in 4 bet pots and instead call with like 56 78 and then ace king/ace queen. Isnt that what we are suposed to do because of reversed implied odds? Or is folding those hands bad? Its so confusing because it seems like good regs play these hands yet ur not suposed to? Whats the deal here

Solver's river play is an unstable equalibrium. Often if opponent is overbluffing, you should call with all bluff catchers (that beat their bluffs), and if they are under bluffing you should fold everything and only start thinking calling when you start matching/beating their value bets (as you both block their value, and of course can win at show)

Yeah this is a concept I’m already familiar with. I just love the step further where the villain might be a reg with perfect frequencies but we don’t give up any ev by playing a mix strategy as a pure strategy, and! If the villain happens to be making a mistake, the pure line begins to print.

@@kingjonc it's the same concept, just reworded. He is just saying villain is just bounding it. He is still saying X% overbluff or underbluff, which is still the same concept of saying villain has X tendency here. Technically in the real world it's often like 20% under bluff to 10% overbluff. So it crosses both thresholds, but the skew you land on, say 5% underbluff is what matters

@@PhonyBolognayeah I agree. All we are saying is we can rule out one direction of bias from the villain. Either over bluffing or under bluffing and then the consequence is that we can play a pure strategy even if the villain in actuality is playing perfectly gto as playing a pure strategy doesn’t give up ev if it was normally a mix. Edit: missed the second part. I guess we can think that way. But I personally wouldn’t use that logic in game. It’s either they might be over or under not some mix of both. I wouldn’t trust my random parameters in game and if I could see either an over or under bluff in a spot, I’m just gonna stick to Gto

I will make one point in response to this. When humans deviate from equilibrium and EVs swing as a result of the imbalance, they do so as a direct function of how much is in the middle. When we face a jam for 3x pot and make a call, 16bb is a much smaller amount in % pot than we’re used to it being. I’m not saying this is a winning call, I’m still on the fence about that, but I don’t think it takes as much overbluffing across turn and river collectively as the raw solver ev in bbs suggests at first sight. Small swings in a huge pot can lead to large changes in EV when it’s expressed in BBs.

@@CarrotCornerPoker Fair point but the point that I was trying to make, that may have been lost on you, is that not all bluff catchers are alike. Consequently, it's vital that we consider them relative to one another, as opposed to other variables (such as the size of the pot.) If you make a quantitative comparison, it will be clear that A6dd is one of the worst bluff catchers in terms of EV. To give a simple illustration of this point, if we increase villain's bluff combos by 100%, or 2x, we can widen our calling range (from 25% to ~37%) but we still don't have to consider A6dd as a viable option. Another point to consider is players who use 3x river sizings are far more likely to be cognizant of the fact that they can have a high % (43) of bluffs. It's tedious but if you mess around with villain's value/bluff ratio, you'll conclude that it would require not a significant but a momentous departure from GTO to get into the territory where we can't fold A6dd.

I think what we should take from it is the “street poker” concept. Being a player in the same pool as Alex, I feel this spot 100% (A6s hand) he trusted his read and gut and called with great reasoning behind why. The stakes he plays at; the players are very well versed in theory. Very. This could be apart of a lot of unseen actions. Not the first tango he’s had w this villain. The leveling wars on PSMiNj are real; reg battles get gritty

I see you Dublistic 👀 (JankyJimmy here)

The Carrot Poker school. Start with grade 1 and take it from there. You can have a browse through the syllabus and watch some previews at carrotcorner.com

I personally found GTO Poker Simplified by O'Kearney and Carter to be the best single poker book I've read, covering game theory reasoning for most of a chapter and then providing heuristic summaries at the end. It's a lot more digestible than Acevedo's Modern Poker Theory.

Question remains! Is he good in your opinion or not?

Pete is a 🐐 Great coach. Are you asking if I think the player in video is good?? Because I’m in Mi pool and very well know this dude “Alex” is the real deal. Arguably the “end boss” of our pool on PokerStarsMiNj

@jamesthornton8447 Absolutely, he's undeniably the greatest of all time! I inquired about Alex, and it seems you've provided the answer. Appreciate it! I was so impressed with his skills that I even searched for any RU-vid or other content featuring him. He surpassed my expectations of what a top-notch crusher is capable of.

@@cubanhack3r I’m think he’s wanting to remain anonymous; which is understandable. Personally I know his handle on PSMINJ but I’m not going to put it out there if he doesn’t it want it out. I will say the $200-$2,000 stakes on PokerStars Michigan/New Jersey is a very competitive competent group of grinders. VERY solid pool. I swim at the baby stakes compared to him

Very small “elite” pool up there at the nosebleeds too.

It’s a pretty big punt in theory but I don’t think it’s as bad as it seems when you consider how humans play this spot.

The Carrot Poker School courses are my most recent and comprehensive works ever. The Grinder’s Manual isn’t terrible but it’s pretty outdated and nowhere near as detailed or objectively solid as the video courses.

everything about this hand is so hard to watch, from the flop where homie says doesn't like to x/r Ax because they have too much showdown value (very telling statement about your flop x/r range construction across the board), to the poorly calibrated calling thresholds (you can absolutely fold on both flop and turn), to the insane river call with a hand that only blocks bluffs and never blocks value in a spot where we can be very selective with our catchers, to the part where Pete thinks this hand history demonstrates a high level of play (?????). I feel kind of bad roasting the guy but he did kind of ask for it by initiating the conversation to make this video. my main takeaway is that I need to move to Michigan

@@Ryan-ds5zc feel free to join us!! Beautiful place to live but don’t be mad when you get liquidated 😉

Very random stuff, btw his hand(A6ss) I think only can x/r flop some frequensy and never call vs Co range..

Nah a6s can never fold on flop vs quarter. You can raise you can call but you definately cannot fold with a6bdfd​@@6mikros9

@@purposefulpowerIf you think calling a 3x pot river shove with A6 high is only 2% worse than calling an actual bluffcatcher you’ve never studied with solvers. Probably listened to much to Pete constantly saying “high stakes pro” “really good regs” “my other high stakes students” and fell for his nonsense when he hasn’t got a clue

Shut up

We should relocate to America, this video is the proof...we are waste our times in European poker pools 😅

This HIGH STAKES PRO sounds like a microstakes player in non-US pools with all the same leaks and misunderstandings.

It’s outdated and limited in depth. We highly recommend the carrot poker school for a solid modern poker education.

If I could afford that I'd buy it as I've just started playing poker again, the grinder's manual is free and it has actually helped my game a lot. I will purchase CPS when I can@@CarrotCornerPoker

Maybe. Or maybe you’re a HUGE NIT??

No. I am also calling station😃

100 r n c is insanely soft. I think 2011 regs could mostly beat it.

And yet his statement is true

Excuse my ignorance - what is RnC?

Hahahaha. Its actually the worst call of all time. Just looked the hand Up. The call in the River looses 1800 bb per 100😂

It’s doesn’t lose 1800bb/100 hands. It loses 1800bb/100 every 100 times this spot comes up. This is a really misleading way to use the bb/100 metric because it usually tracks all of the hands you play not just one spot in which you play a giant pot multiplied by 100.

@@CarrotCornerPoker in gto wizard It says -18bb. To my understanding that means 1800 bb per 100. My teacher always says a -0.01ev hand means losing 1bb per 100 which is equivalent.

agree with Pete. just say the call loses 18bb. People, even some high stakes players, love just randomly multiplying by 100 and saying bb/100 and it makes absolutely no sense. if anything it probably makes more sense to divide than to multiply, eg let's say you face this line once every 1000 hands then you could say that you're torching 1.8bb/100 here. That's more insightful than just mindlessly multiplying one hand's EV by 100.

@@Ryan-ds5zc It makes total sense to mutiply by 100 to me. It's done because its easy to work with integers. There isn't much more to it.

Id try to stop thinking this way unless you’re sure there’s no exploit available. How many better hands you have to defend with doesn’t causally affect the ev of defending this hand. The call could be bad, I’m still not 100% but this isn’t because we have better defends. It’s bad if we have less equity than we need vs a good reg’s range and good if we have more. Of course if we played this way permanently over the long term vs a good player we would get wrecked but we are free to adjust from this showdown just as villain is.

I agree. I think people tend to get overly results oriented and might be quicker to defend the play because it ended up being "beautiful". But by all means, awesome hand.

Id rather have some folds, and this is the absolute bottom of my range. If villian has brain he's never bluffing me again with this line and i want him to have bluffs there..@@CarrotCornerPoker

Is this a poem?

No, while both plants and humans are carbon based lifeforms, Alex is a much more complex organism with many organs where as plants are simpler structures. It is thought that plants probably lack the ability to reason and therefore the capacity to play high stakes poker.

Ohh shut up

Exactly 16 regs.