Quote:
Originally Posted by myNameIsInga
There is a three part podcast interview with Improva at DC. It's a good interview and Improva certainly gives the impression that he is super sharp and very knowledgable about poker. I think he is a mathematician originally.
Improva is a Danish Maths graduate. As such, he is plugged into the Scandi poker culture which first thinks about what the GTO line would be, and then analyses how to diverge from that line to exploit specific opponent habits. Considering the disproportionate number of successful scandi-players, they may have stumbled across a good idea.
The DC podcasts frame this trait very well. It shows him as being a very fluent speaker on poker, particularly since he's speaking in a second language. For a while, I didn't understand how he could be so fluent, but it makes sense if you think about the GTO/balanced approach, and list the ways a villain might diverge from this.
Improva uses the Poker Puzzle as an intro to coaching lessons. Google for it, and an old version shows up on Scribd.
Finally, anyone who says "Show your results" is demonstrating stupidity. Does anyone ask for Brunson's results? Sklansky's PTR graph? Malmuth's tax return? It just shows that the speaker is sufficiently confident in their own gullibility that they don't believe they'll have the ability to assess the quality of what they're reading or hearing. Were I going to scam people with a ****** book or ****** coaching, I'd arrange a fake PTR graph/account. And I'm not even basically dishonest. Grow up, assess the advice rather than worshiping an image on a website.
Considering that Improva is under (possibly unjust) accusation of fraudulent recommendation, anyone trusting a graph is just hilariously stupid.
