Prolly something along the lines of:

"..hmmm, I haz a purr, Laak prolly doesn't, I cawl..."

loooool this is amazing

did i cover it?

phill laak is a cagey player at best, his nerve is what he gains profit from. he moves quicly from wildly aggressive to ultra tight seamlessly, patrick antonious knows this well im sure, so making a call with any hand at all isnt all that difficult.

Glad u like it. But in all seriousness, thats also prolly pretty accurate...
Also, forgot to add originally, it's supposed to be said in Terminator's voice.

the same reason he called a raise with 10,4.
Besides, it is 80K on a 280K pot, laak raised the pot so he probably has one ace, The odds that he is bluffing are very good against him having AK.

Phil Laak (at the time, I'm sure this isn't the case anymore) has a pretty polarized river betting range and was happily snap checking back all kinds of strong one pair hands in similar spots. Antonius probably recognized this and also assumed Laak might be exploiting his image in a straddle pot (which has also proven to be a reasonable assumption), and figured he could defend wide and likely play back if he airballed the flop like he normally would. Since Laak thinks his perceived range his tight, Antonius' play-back-at-him range would be tighter still, but none of this mattered once he hit a pair.

NOW ALL THAT SAID, please do not assume Antonius as some Jesus of poker with advanced, complex thought processes racing through his gifted mind in every circumstance. Sometimes he just does **** for the hell of it (see: him stacking off KKxx on an A high board in Omaha on PAD). It looks great when it works (or this), but really the guy is just a calling station and these aren't profitable plays.

People make spewy, erratic and weird plays in live poker (when boredom is more likely to set in) and televised poker especially because there's meta-value in putting on a good show to build your poker celebrity, which in turn makes other spazzy counter-plays potentially profitable (because it weights your opponent's range to more bluffs/fancy plays). This is a concept that someone like, say, Andrew Feldman, hasn't grasped. Listen yourself to the remark Esfandiari makes at the 4 second mark in the very clip you provided.