Reviewing Christian

  • NL BSS
  • NL BSS
  • $200
  • Shorthanded
(25 Votes) 11333


Free membership

Join now

Description Coach & No-Limit heads-up and shorthanded enthusiast "Raskolnikov", sits down with one of his students for the purposes of discussing a Short Handed match played at No-Limit $200. During the video the players will discuss each action with each other, picking up on common mindset leaks and spots for improvement throughout the video.


hand history review reraised pot postflop Session Review squeezeplay User Session Review

Comments (22)

newest first
  • EuanM


    Enjoy the latest from Raskolnikov!

    Your thoughts and comments are welcomed as always!
  • Raskolnikov


    Looking forward to answering your comments & questions!

    Btw, Euan this is not Heads Up ;)
  • BDog


    one of the best videos for these stakes
  • CoconutDealer


    good content, but his german accent gets really annoying so its pretty hard to actually concentrate.
  • Raskolnikov


    #3 thanks a lot!

    I would also like to you which type of video you prefer. This type:

    *where i can take up to half hour to analzye one hand


    * the "other" videos that i have done before where we go over more hands

    @ Eerybody: Please let me know so you can get more of what you like.
  • Raskolnikov



    Thx as well, i am glad you liked it.

    I will take your comment serious and will only make English videos with "more native sounding" people in the future.

    While it personally doesn't bother me since i'm part German as well, i can totally understand how accents could throw off people.

    Your will shall be granted!

    (Worst thing is when Americans try to speak French!!! Tilts me like crazy. Fwiw i'm part American as well, so i am allowed to say this ;)
  • francisco42k


    TY gordon you're the best!
  • SonMokuh


    i'd like to see a video where you go over more hands. of course it depends weather you make a video for silver/gold or platin/diamond, but in my opinion it's often a bit boring when you talk 30 mins about one hand.
    how about review a live session? that would be awesome :)
  • thcfugii


    heads up?
  • worldanizer


    please make more of this.
  • Raskolnikov



    Gracias. Y vos tenes lo mejor helado del mundo en tu pais ;) =Persicco
  • Raskolnikov



    I totally understand. I personally prefer the "many hand version" as well, but there have been some requests so i thought we should try and go from there.

    Like in every video, i read every comment very closely.
    The "bosses" at pokerstrategy look at your feedback as well.

    So if you are reading this and you have an opinion/wish, please comment.

    Only with the help of (all of) YOU we can produce the videos you love.
  • Raskolnikov


    #9 See comment #2 ;)

    #10 Will do.

    Btw, those people that you see in my videos are all pokerstrategy members who have asked me to be part in the next video.

    All you gotta do is ask me nicely, prepare hands and questions (its obviously free of charge).
  • muebarek


    Very good content, ty! I like your format of reviewing more hands like in the HU session you did even a little better though.

    Around 13 minutes into the video you state in the T9o equilab example that one's basically printing money by calling these small 3bets oop with 4% edge (in relation to the preflop odds). I'm rather sceptical if it is possible to realize 28%+ in this spot with weak hands like this given the SPR is still around 3.6 and your opponent can vbet/bluff quite a lot to make our life hard for our weak calling range.
    For example on this K97r board which came up, T9o has 51% vs the (admittetly too valueheavy) 3b-range but I think it'll be hard to come even close to reaching a postflopEV of $12.5 here.
    I know you're not a fan of the term "reverse implied odds", but it's hard to argue that the higher the SPR and the less playability of our hand, equity realization oop is a tough task.

    I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts about this (maybe in a later video?). Keep up the good work!
  • Raskolnikov



    As you point out in your example, even vs a very value-heavy range we have 51% equity.

    Against most "typical" betsizing we will even only need between 30-40% to call.

    If your opponent is barreling with a very high frequency, you just gotta go broke on the turn.

    All your opponents are either to aggro or to tight. If they were as "perfect" as so often assumed in theoretical discussions, then - no offense - they wouldn't play NL 100.

    Or in other words, if your Villain is Isildur, you will loose with a call preflop and a fold ;)

    Thanks a lot for a interesting questions. It shows me that you actively think while watching, and try to go one step ahead (aka "are we able to "realize" the equity with T9o), which is even more important than whether the 9To is a call, close call or easy fold!

    You're on the right way.

    P.s.: Realizing equity is a big topic in HU. For example there is the infamous 9To vs A2o discussion.
    Against some people you rather wanna call 9To, although technically it's weaker than A2o.

    IIrc, there was a big discussion in limit about this years ago as well
  • muebarek


    Thx for your detailed response!

    While I agree with your point that our opponents’ play will mostly be far from perfect, I fear their positional advantage, initiative and superior range (for the sake of simplicity, I’m staying within your example in the video) already cause us trouble realizing enough of our equity here if villain isn’t a passive fish who rarely cbets.

    My thought process behind this pessimistic assumption is the following: our preflop equity equals our flop equity averaged over all possible flops. So we have 32% preflop with our T9o but in this average number, there is factored in that we have around 15% on flops like A83, AQ6, K72, QQ4, and so on, which is in practice basically close to 0% bc we c/f about every single time (assuming we ( usually) don’t want to start suicidal purebluffs vs a strong range).

    Also, flops like J73 were we have ~30% or (assuming Tx9d) Kd5d3d with double-edged fds where we even have like 44% but with terribly playability leave us in very tough spots where exact play is needed to not butcher our EV.

    The mentioned K93 is about the average szenario IF we do hit and still it is not that easy, especially if one doesn’t have a huge sample on the opponent.

    The opponent, on the opposite, doesn’t have to do much to collect our equity but to cbet often enough. If he does, the average cost we have to consider is not only the call-amount pre but also the cbetting size on top of that which makes a call preflop less attractive.

    Ofc, the more polarized the 3b-range gets, the less validity these arguments will have.

    I’m quite curious to hear your arguments on this. Maybe you can point out if/where my thought process is flawed.
  • Raskolnikov


    #16: Short practical answer:

    Use Flopzilla to get an idea how often you will be able to continue. Its a nice tool.

    Long Answer:

    You got good points. The problem with a discussion like this is that it is hard to constitute "proof". Usually we can get pretty close to the truth by simply looking at Villains stats.
    Since we don't have reliable info, it becomes more of a speculation and general discussion.

    For example if he has a low cbet % (lower than 60 lets say), then its is an absolutely NO BRAINER call.

    If he is suuuuuper aggro (90% cbet), its a no brainer call as well.

    Nobody would disagree here.

    When it comes to the spots inbetween, it simply depends where you draw the line. There are other good players that agree/play the same. And to be fair, i am sure there are those who argue more on your side.

    In the end you gotta look what works for yourself. I see my main task as a coach to feed new ideas to you and others.

    If what you've been doing in the best has worked out well, continue it.
    If you're not satsified, try something else and see if it works.
  • matusko


    The range calculation is not correct imo. We might have 32% w for example T9o against that strong range, but that would be only if we were calling an AI with those potodds, we dont get to realize all of our equity in the hand w 100bb stacks(villain cbets, barrels turn etc).
  • Raskolnikov



    Discussed this in the last comments in detail, feel free to add new thoughts.

    You're basically right and then again not ;9
  • WhoWee


    general: good video, as usual! :)

    to that discussion about "realizing equity":
    as mentioned before, 32% is All-in equity and it would be a no-brainer call (if the guy pushed for that small amount).
    OOP, with a bad hand, no initiative there if think there is no question that we cannot even come close to realizing that equity...
    and, actually, i would even argue it doesnt matter if he cbets very ofter or seldom...we will just have a hard time realising that equity. "in practice", i would say i win maybe 1 out of 7-10 of those maybe the way to assess equity here is "all-in-equity" x penaltyfactor = realistic overall equity. i would guess this penaltyfactor due to OOP, initative etc to be about 0.5 :)
  • WhoWee


    ups...sorry for grammer! :(
  • luizsilveira


    His English is perfectly fine and actually quite easy to understand. And he's not the one doing all the talking anyway, so I didn't think there was even a slight problem there. Not everyone is a native speaker, and this is not a theoretical lecture that should be done by professional locution.

    Very good content and that's what matters most. Keep it up.