---

Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by DOGISHEAD (Micro/Small Stakes)

Yes!!!!! Been a long week waitin for this.

Wow, this must be good. Posted 8 minutes ago and already it's got 5 stars O_o

ship

BOOOOMMM, just made a comment about bet sizing in the 1st vid and here it is already

niiice - gonna watch now !!

LOL at Porkchop expres's comment on beating 100NL at 7bb...I see him as 1.29bb overall at FTP, bit less than 100k hands, and only 2 sessions of 100NL HU and one 200NL HU, all 3 sessions being small negatives. Of course his big WR could be on some softer site.

just wanted to add that both dogishead's and alcohol4life's contributions were sick good

not often do you see vids where the sum of both commentators equals more than the single parts

great discussions and you guys explain your thought processes extremely well

love how you guys brought up checking back the K4 hand v the 63 hand in the vid

I only feel a little bad for porkchop here, I'd do anything I can to keep my DC name private after this as he got pwned like there is no tomorrow

I only feel a little bad for porkchop here, I'd do anything I can to keep my DC name private after this as he got pwned like there is no tomorrow

There is no shame what so ever getting pwned by anyone, let alone DOGISHEAD. But if he really was telling porkies about his win rate, that's another matter.

i really dont like the fold on the 99AJJ board with KQ the first couple of hands.

We should call it because most of the time we got a flip, and if not, we gain much information about how he plays because we see a showdown really cheap!

at least MSNL, common!

LOL at Porkchop expres's comment on beating 100NL at 7bb...I see him as 1.29bb overall at FTP, bit less than 100k hands, and only 2 sessions of 100NL HU and one 200NL HU, all 3 sessions being small negatives. Of course his big WR could be on some softer site.

Meh my FTP numbers have me as a fish I think. There are other sites imo.

Im Porkchop, and TBH first of all I suck HU. That is for sure.

As far as tableratings, it is far from correct. Since then I have fallen to maybe 5.5bb/100 at 100nl, but they are far from getting every hand. At the same time in the last month or so (since their "news release" that they improved coverage) they have gotten nearly all hands. But prior to a month ago they were awful. I once had a 32bi upswing in 15k hands and they had me as a loser that week by their stats.

I definitely defend 3b's too light as I saw in this video. At the same time I think I was thinking on a higher level than I was given credit for in a lot of spots. Still doesn't mean I was right... cause I got my tail kicked in that match.

I am not good at all at placing people on ranges HU and that showed in this video.

I did play him as a change of pace that night. I was about to sit out when he sat down, but a poker buddy and I were laughing over AIM when he sat, and I figured what the heck it's 50nl. I usually wont even play a regular HU.

Video is great by the way, though I think a little bit on the laggy side post flop, for teaching people HU. At the same time I am a multi table bot at 6max, so I really don't even know what laggy is HU.

Hey guys, great vid...

@ 35:45 Gman, you say you prefer to c/r str8 draws instead of fd's b/c they are more disguised if they hit. I've always thought you need to c/r (good) fd's b/c they are more apparent and less likely to get paid off when you are oop. What do you do w/ a fd oop? c/c, c/c, bet or c/r? I'm a little confused here. I do understand the reasons of c/r the KKJss brd w/ QT b/c of the high fold eq. %. I also understand when to c/r good combo draws as well... Maybe you can clarify and expand on you comment. Maybe give an example

ty

Great vid again. Among other things, I thought it was really really good by Gman to bring up the K4 check back and why it was different to the 63 check back, cause that was exactly what I was thinking about right away. That's really valuable stuff if you can spot those things and discuss that right in the video, instead of having to think about it myself later and drawing my own conclusions, so def kudos for that.

Hey guys, great vid...

@ 35:45 Gman, you say you prefer to c/r str8 draws instead of fd's b/c they are more disguised if they hit. I've always thought you need to c/r (good) fd's b/c they are more apparent and less likely to get paid off when you are oop. What do you do w/ a fd oop? c/c, c/c, bet or c/r? I'm a little confused here. I do understand the reasons of c/r the KKJss brd w/ QT b/c of the high fold eq. %. I also understand when to c/r good combo draws as well... Maybe you can clarify and expand on you comment. Maybe give an example

ty

Sure thing man. First of all, I don't think the difference between c/r OESD and FD is really that big, it's just a minor benefit imo. But w/ FDs specifically, it has become super super standard for people to be c/r them every single time. So on boards like Ad2d2x, people who would never c/r an A in this spot are ALWAYS c/r 9Tdd and it becomes pretty transparent to a good hand reader. Amongst most good players in fact, if you c/c w/ a FD and the turn completes your draw, most good opponents think that is actually a good card to double barrel because they assume you are c/r FDs soo much. On the contrary, when you c/r a FD and the turn makes your hand, a lot of good players use that as an excuse to fold a wide range of hands that peeled the flop (making it a good spot to often fire the turn after c/r the flop w/ air).

This doesn't mean you should always be c/c your FDs by any means. Obviously one of the main benefits of c/r and main problems w/ c/c is that your hand currently has no showdown value. But if you have the NFD, that is a spot where I will just c/c sometimes as I often have the best hand to go along w/ my huge draw. Another spot is if I have 2nd or 3rd pair w/ the FD since my hand already has some showdown value and I can peel against a turn barrel. Another spot is in a situation where I can't rep much of anything except a draw when I c/r, so I c/c. I also c/c in spots where it is very likely the turn will go check check and I can fire the river if I miss like on an A22 board, as most competent opponents aren't looking to fire twice on that board texture. And finally, someone who very rarely double barrels I will often c/c, and c/r mostly if they are prone to fire on the turn quite a lot.

Everything that I just mentioned above pretty much applies to straight draws too, I just think they can be a little bit more disguised on some board textures. Also, everything above only applies to opponents who can read hands fairly well. Against an idiot, no reason to try and outsmart them.

Great video, but I felt bad for pork chop you both were pretty hard on him. Either way the poker based content was exceptional keep up the good work.

Great video, but I felt bad for pork chop you both were pretty hard on him. Either way the poker based content was exceptional keep up the good work.

Ya I officially feel bad too. Porkchop, you really didn't play that badly at all. If I knew you were a DC member I would have been nicer, but I guess I should be nicer to everyone anyway

Very nice video.

Like an instructional video for holdem manager, repeating the same stuff for to long.

This stuff is great... loads of good discussion and thoughts and also comparing higher stakes and different types of players.

about 17mins in on the left with A7 on J273T, cant we shove the river? Obviously as a bluff

this is such a great combo

time to start the petition to just expand this to 2seasons

Im Porkchop, and TBH first of all I suck HU. That is for sure.

As far as tableratings, it is far from correct. Since then I have fallen to maybe 5.5bb/100 at 100nl, but they are far from getting every hand. At the same time in the last month or so (since their "news release" that they improved coverage) they have gotten nearly all hands. But prior to a month ago they were awful. I once had a 32bi upswing in 15k hands and they had me as a loser that week by their stats.

I definitely defend 3b's too light as I saw in this video. At the same time I think I was thinking on a higher level than I was given credit for in a lot of spots. Still doesn't mean I was right... cause I got my tail kicked in that match.

I am not good at all at placing people on ranges HU and that showed in this video.

I did play him as a change of pace that night. I was about to sit out when he sat down, but a poker buddy and I were laughing over AIM when he sat, and I figured what the heck it's 50nl. I usually wont even play a regular HU.

Video is great by the way, though I think a little bit on the laggy side post flop, for teaching people HU. At the same time I am a multi table bot at 6max, so I really don't even know what laggy is HU.

Thanks for the honesty phooey the fact that HU isnt your reg game puts things in a clearer perspective

100k hands is a month for me, there's plenty missing.

Ya I officially feel bad too. Porkchop, you really didn't play that badly at all. If I knew you were a DC member I would have been nicer, but I guess I should be nicer to everyone anyway

No worries, and accepted. Most often when I watch a video at any limit under 200nl the people who make the video are too far out of touch with the SSNL or even worse the micro limit levels. That hasn't been as much of an issue with most DC videos. Typically there are enough regulars at 200nl games that your level of thinking becomes a bigger utility for beating the game, which is what most high stakes players making videos are used too. I must say that DOGISHEADS reads were generally a bit more accurate overall.

I really would like to see a video of you guys playing small ball HU for people that don't play HU as a std game.

I think I out leveled myself by not having HU experience. I made some big folds (A9 bluff shove deep for instance) that maybe I shouldn't have.

I would say my biggest issue was that there were several spots where I tried to find ways to tone down his aggression level, but most that I tried worked against me in the end. I defiantly let him keep his aggressive lines a few times to see if I could work that against him but he never got out of line and raised my river leads.

great video, its good to see 2 guys who can explain stuff play the AVERAGE poker player.. porkchop imo does represent the average regular who watches CR/DC/leggo.. knows the basic, doesnt know why hes doing stuff etc etc.. it's good to put some thoughts on these oponement because usualy all the instrcutor focus on calling them 'ok' players instead of staking that they are completely retarded and adjusting to that accordingly..

this is how every video should be made.

Excellent, thank-you both.

I found that the passages I got most of where the ones where Gman was both supplementing and asking further questions of InternetPokers. What really helps is the depth of analysis that this creates.

On the OOP AQ hand where you guys were complaining about it being such a sick spot and that AK is a big part of his range, and you might even fold, I just seemed to disagree completely with this. It wasn't like this was his first 4bet and I dunno. To me I thought 'man if i was playing right now I'm fistpump getting it in if he bets turn'. That and once he checks back I was thinking I'd shovel the river. I know you guys explained your thinking but I was wondering if you could expand a lil more on this hand and possibly tell me if/how my thinking here is flawed.

Also - Sick vid for sure. Not boring by any means but 90min straight of any one poker video gets a lil brutal in the length department imo.

Hey guys, thanks again for all of the positive comments. Hopefully the attention paid to this series doesn't drop off, and once we start moving higher in stakes and the analysis starts to grow in depth (and hopefully in originality as well) that we'll continue to see positive feedback.

On the OOP AQ hand where you guys were complaining about it being such a sick spot and that AK is a big part of his range, and you might even fold, I just seemed to disagree completely with this. It wasn't like this was his first 4bet and I dunno. To me I thought 'man if i was playing right now I'm fistpump getting it in if he bets turn'. That and once he checks back I was thinking I'd shovel the river. I know you guys explained your thinking but I was wondering if you could expand a lil more on this hand and possibly tell me if/how my thinking here is flawed.

Also - Sick vid for sure. Not boring by any means but 90min straight of any one poker video gets a lil brutal in the length department imo.

It's been a while since I actually recorded the video, so I might be a bit redundant in this but allow me to put my thinking about this hand into words:

First off, game flow wise it doesn't seem like I'd naturally expect Porkchop to be bluffing with an excessive frequency here - the fact that he 4-bet and called it off with 88 seems to indicate not that he's crazy loose with 4-bets - it more indicates that he thinks I'm shoving very wide, which should mean that he would be bluffing infrequently - that is, if he thinks I'm shoving often enough to make 4-bet/calling 88 profitable, then he's probably not going to outright bluff that often. Second, his 4-bet his HUGE. Really big. Strangely large. Without any differentiating information, it seems to indicate that he's more likely to be making it for value, but I don't really know so I go ahead and call. Thirdly, you must realize that by the turn, I have a bluffcatcher. Board is AT85, I have AQ. For me to call a turn shove I have to assume he's bluffing. Why is that? Think about how he's playing his ENTIRE 4-bet value range - AK is shoving, AQ is shoving (split pot), AJ is not 4-betting pre, KK-JJ is checking, TT is shoving. So the range that he's shoving if he wasn't bluffing preflop is AK, AQ, TT. Against that range I only beat bluffs. You're right that on the absolute scale, our hand value is quite high given the size of the pot, but on a relative scale our hand value beats none of his value shoving range.

Now, that's not to say we were planning to fold to a turn shove - you would be right in fact in wanting to get this all in because his bluffing frequency doesn't have to be too high for our flush draw and top pair to be good enough, not to mention that he may well be 4-betting a lot of Ax's. So, given that, we weren't planning to fold the turn. Us saying that it was a sick turn spot is more indicative of the fact that we're beat very often when he shoves - not necessarily that we should fold. And I think this analysis verifies that.


As far as the video length comment, we were a little surprised by how long we went, as this was really our first attempt at making a video together, so future videos we were able to tidy up the length much easier.

about 17mins in on the left with A7 on J273T, cant we shove the river? Obviously as a bluff

Haha, remember what I said in episode 1? Don't try to make people fold good hands. Ever.

HKPhooey, I apologize for our harsh treatment of you in the video. I was trying to be fair but I may have gotten a little bit out of line, so I apologize. Hopefully if you do end up choosing to give heads up a try, you can benefit from some of the comments and suggestions we made. Good luck in your future endeavors man, thanks for doing this video with me.

Great series thus far. It's great that the video is this lenghty also.

man ,i wanna be coached by gman

On the OOP AQ hand where you guys were complaining about it being such a sick spot and that AK is a big part of his range, and you might even fold, I just seemed to disagree completely with this. It wasn't like this was his first 4bet and I dunno. To me I thought 'man if i was playing right now I'm fistpump getting it in if he bets turn'. That and once he checks back I was thinking I'd shovel the river. I know you guys explained your thinking but I was wondering if you could expand a lil more on this hand and possibly tell me if/how my thinking here is flawed.

Also - Sick vid for sure. Not boring by any means but 90min straight of any one poker video gets a lil brutal in the length department imo.

why would u ever complain about a longer vid, stop watching if u dont want

Complaining about lenght of vid is terrible, the longer the better dogishead thanks

I thought this was a great video and had a question about the hand with AQ. How would you feel about a smallish turn lead with the AQ followed by a now smaller river shove (in proportion to pot size)? I was thinking against a range of pure bluffs/JJ-KK/better it extracts more value since I didn't feel as though he straight shoves river as a bluff after being check called on that flop and also didn't think he'd be good enough to value shove JJ-KK but would definitely call small turn leads with JJ-KK as well as Ts... as well as get spazzy and shove over the top because your hand looks so marginal. Is this logic alright? We obviously are still losing to the same hands that we would have otherwise but I think it gets more value than c/c'ing a shove on the river as well as just outright shoving ourselves since I don't think he bluff shoves his stack on the river enough, nor calls a shove on the river enough after being flatted pf then c/c'd on an A high flop. Obviously a VERY transparent looking play against a good hand reader but it just felt like given reads and flow of this particular match that it would be appropriate and having a balanced line not as necessary.

Also the discussion about the decision whether to check back or bet bottom pair type hands on the turn was very good as well.

First of all I would like to say this is a great video and am very much looking forward to the sequels, however, there is something that bothers me when you talk about 4-bet sizing.

In the AQ vs J8 hand, he raises standard 3BB $1.5, you make it 12BB 6$ and he makes it 36BB $18 and you call it $3-4 over pot?? As far as I see it this is exactly potsized raise and in fact your 3-bet is the overbet... When he 4-bets to $16 you have $12 to call into a $24 pot. Giving you 2-1 odds.

Lets look at a easy to understand example. A $10 pot. Someone bets pot $10, so now the pot is $20 and you have to call $10 to see, making it 2-1 odds... Now look at your 3-bet size. You made it $5 before you got deep stacked. This is on top of a $1.5 raise. So he will have to call $3.5 into a $6.5 pot giving worse than 2-1 odds. not even talking about when you make it $6 instead of $5.

There might be more reasons why it's better to 4-bet smaller, but you don't touch too much on that, you just grate on the opponent for making such ridiculous overbets. Which in my eyes is faulty maths on your part.

I thought this was a great video and had a question about the hand with AQ. How would you feel about a smallish turn lead with the AQ followed by a now smaller river shove (in proportion to pot size)? I was thinking against a range of pure bluffs/JJ-KK/better it extracts more value since I didn't feel as though he straight shoves river as a bluff after being check called on that flop and also didn't think he'd be good enough to value shove JJ-KK but would definitely call small turn leads with JJ-KK as well as Ts... as well as get spazzy and shove over the top because your hand looks so marginal. Is this logic alright? We obviously are still losing to the same hands that we would have otherwise but I think it gets more value than c/c'ing a shove on the river as well as just outright shoving ourselves since I don't think he bluff shoves his stack on the river enough, nor calls a shove on the river enough after being flatted pf then c/c'd on an A high flop. Obviously a VERY transparent looking play against a good hand reader but it just felt like given reads and flow of this particular match that it would be appropriate and having a balanced line not as necessary.

Also the discussion about the decision whether to check back or bet bottom pair type hands on the turn was very good as well.

This never really occurred to me, partly because at higher stakes one tends to develop a phobia of turning one's hand face up when it is unnecessary to do so. But thinking about it, that may well be the optimal line, because I can imagine him calling a lot of KK, QJ, random single spade hands that he'd check back the turn with, and he may jam them anyway into us on the turn given our strange looking line. That may well be the optimal line although, like you said, against a higher stakes opponent it's a bad idea and looks pretty face-up. I think it's a good idea; nice thinking.

First of all I would like to say this is a great video and am very much looking forward to the sequels, however, there is something that bothers me when you talk about 4-bet sizing.

In the AQ vs J8 hand, he raises standard 3BB $1.5, you make it 12BB 6$ and he makes it 36BB $18 and you call it $3-4 over pot?? As far as I see it this is exactly potsized raise and in fact your 3-bet is the overbet... When he 4-bets to $16 you have $12 to call into a $24 pot. Giving you 2-1 odds.

Lets look at a easy to understand example. A $10 pot. Someone bets pot $10, so now the pot is $20 and you have to call $10 to see, making it 2-1 odds... Now look at your 3-bet size. You made it $5 before you got deep stacked. This is on top of a $1.5 raise. So he will have to call $3.5 into a $6.5 pot giving worse than 2-1 odds. not even talking about when you make it $6 instead of $5.

There might be more reasons why it's better to 4-bet smaller, but you don't touch too much on that, you just grate on the opponent for making such ridiculous overbets. Which in my eyes is faulty maths on your part.

Hahaha, I think we just got caught. Gman and I are both idiots who can't do math.

Yeah, you are absolutely right; our original reraise was an overbet and his 4-bet was pot size, and I was hopelessly wrong when I suggested that he had overbet the pot with his raise, he had just clicked the pot button. The way we should've framed the hand is not that he had overbet the pot, but that he had bet much larger than the standard 4-betting size, which would be closer to somewhere between $13-$16. It is very rare to see a 4-bet to pot with 100bb stacks, and still fairly uncommon with 200bb stacks. Once stacks get quite deep the pot 4-bets become the norm, but despite that, you're right, he did not 4-bet any more than pot, although his 4-bet size is still distinctive as being larger than the average 4-bet than thus indicative of strength. Of course, he did end up having J8 which made us further revise our read on his 4-bet sizing, but as an initial reaction, our thinking that he was doing that mostly for value is pretty fair.

Thanks for the comments Cannes, we'll try to be more careful not to make fools of ourselves in future episodes.

38 mins in, you have 68hh on T46hss and check it to him. you then say you want to call, but don't you hate every turn spot?

- if we bet and he raises, why can't we just ship it in? he'll raise air a decent amount, he might even raise/call like AJ because he was pretty tilted, we flop a lot, and aren't crushed a lot (with the backdoors we pbb have like 28% equity against a higher pair)
- if we check, and he bets, why don't we checkraise and let him shove overs a decent % of the time? given the way the match was going there seemed like their was a lot of value in inducing spazzes, instead of checkcalling and getting to SD hoping the boards comes good and he doesn't hit etc

i can't edit, but obv we don't hate every turn spot but we do hate 2/3rd of the deck

It is possible in HM to use a different HUD for your HU games, so using your 6max HUD, especially if it contains VPIP and PRF, is pretty useless.
Also postflop stats are lol bad to have in your HUD, because it is so so board texture dependent. And most stats are only useful over a sample that you'll most of the time not reach.
Also postflop stats makes you lazy, without those stats you are forced to make better reads, wich are more importants HU than those little numbers.

Against an idiot, no reason to try and outsmart them.

I am new to DC and I am starting out HU. I love your comments and hope, U will soon make another HU series.
However I don't understand why we poker players tend to disgrace ppl, who might be bad or hobby players with words like idiots (they might be smart persons and very successful in their living) or fishes. I hope we will soon find other terminologies to describe them.
At least we earn our income from this people. Chess players describe them as beginners or as players who have leaks in that part of their game.

Sorry for posting my comments so late after the publishing date, but my interest for HU just grow recently.

First of all let me say that the first two episodes I have watched were really great: the theory part was outstanding and I never watched an instructional video where the discussion of 2 coaches added so much. Furthermore, I was a little bit surprised how much information the video contained: I first argued whether to watch the video as I typically play NL1000-5000 FR and 6max and the video was "so lowstake", but it was really worth watching!

I have some questions that have not been answered yet, hoping that you will look at the thread...

Q1:
At 43:15, Villains opens to 1.50 and you 3-bet to 6.00. You don't elaborate on the 3-betting size in this spot, but you argue later that you are 3betting larger because of the deeper effective stacks, which makes absolutely sense to me. However, I wonder whether the opponent tendencies also affect your decision. It was pretty obvious that Villain called 3bets way too much and thus you adjusted by only value-3-betting. Another possible adjustment would be to raise larger with our value-3-betting hands in order to push our equity edge preflop even more. Hence, I wonder whether you would 3-bet *this opponent* 100BB deeps also a little bit larger than a regular opponent?

Q2:
There were two turn decisions where we decided to go with our hand, but in one spot we wanted to play c/c turn, c/c river, while in the other spot we decided to c/rai. It would be great if you could elaborate on your reasoning for these two spots.

Spot 1 (31:59 right): Villain raises 1.50, we 3bet to 5 with AJo, Villain calls. Flop: JJ3r. We bet, Villain calls. Turn: Ah bringing a flush draw. We decide to c/c turn, c/c river

Spot 2 (41:26 left): Villain raises 1.50, we 3bet to 5 with 86s, Villain calls. Flop comes T64ss with a backdoor FD for us. We check, Villain bets, we call. Turn is the 7h and brings us the backdoor flushdraw and a double gutter. We decide to c/shove the turn.

The reasoning for checking the turn is clear, I just wonder why you c/r in one spot, while you c/c in the other.

In Spot 1, if he has an Ace or a Jack, we get it in with either line. If he has a hand like a Pocket pair, he may call the c/r (we saw he likes to call), but he will not bet the river if we check again. If he turned a flush draw, he will call the turn, but not necessarily shove the river. Furthermore, we may get calls by KQ, KT, and QT. Hence, in order to be c/c > c/r, we need to assume that he will have a lot of air and will bet a decent amount of his bluffs on the river, even though the stack/pot-ratio is terrible to bluff. Do you really see him that often bluffing or did I miss sth. in the analysis?

In Spot 2, we are clearly commited given a ton of outs and if we call, the pot is 52.50 and we play with 23.50 effective remaining stacks. Is the difference here that he may have sth. like KQ and thus overcard outs and we want to get him to fold his remaining equity? I don't think that we get any better hand to fold, so I think the reason for betting should be getting worse hands to call. Do we expect he may call with 5x (having an OESD) or other flushdraws? Would c/c turn, c/c any river an alternative line here?

Thanks in advance ;=)

Time Link to 00:41:37

I don,t think that going all inn on the turn is the best option. i think that the best line is to call the turn to see the river; if You just call you have control on the river. if you hit your draws witch is very likely because all of your outs and push, he will be too committed to fold his $22.5, and if you don't hit and he pushes you can save $22.5. so just calling will give you the control on the river;thats why i think calling is the best option.

Time Link to 00:53:34

On this hand since this opponent is a passive loose opponent I would make my decision of calling or folding depending on what he does on the turn and river. If he checks the turn it could either be 2 things 1)he might be slow playing a hand like AK, two pair like AT or trips 2) he has a weak hand. So I would know on the river what it's the strength of his hand depending on his action . since this player is passive and loose he is very unlikely to make a big bet bluff on the river if he pushes it would mean that his check on the turn was a slow-play of a monster, but if he checks it down to the river you can be certain you are ahead with your AQ. In this situation I would have value bet the river because since he check the river i know am ahead and is very likely he will call with a weaker hand like j 8 since he is loose .

Time Link to 00:34:28

Hi enjoying the series, just a bit confused, a little earlier Gman said we shouldn't be 3bet bluffing with hands like 9T against this opponent as he'll be calling with hands that have a better 9t, kicker alot - however at this point you say you would be inclined to 3bet bluf 9t(s) - is this purely because it is suited, or is the comment about not 3betting 9t vs this opponent not 100% earlier, thanks very much!

Time Link to 00:49:53

This is actually a VERY standard line at these stakes in HU, 6m and FR. I see players (Including myself) making these plays all the time. I do agree it was a bad play but a lot of the time they let the PFR do all the work with the betting when there OOP and they don't want to risk a check behind so they donk the river. Just wanted to add that in there. Great series so far.

Did this guy seriously call you a donk lucky f*** in chat when you 3-bet AJo and he calls J9o? Yeah your a f****ing moron /sarcasm. I hate people that do that.