Apples and oranges?
Poker is a competition, you can’t beat competition with knowledge alone, you need experience. Idk anything about trading but I assume you only need to beat the market, professors understand the market.

If he was for instance some maths professor who’d gone deep on the theory of poker you could have a point he could teach something valuable even without having played himself

But he’s not. He’s merely someone who’s looked at pio sims like everyone else and makes surface level comments about them.

You need to have competed in poker to understand what playing well really means. Can’t believe people would disagree with this on a poker forum. And over a big sample because if you only play 50k hands you will learn things that are bad but seem good because of variance.

Chill, it's 2p2 bro. And thats why poker is still beatable.

The issue with accepting coaching from someone without proven results is trust. Carroters prices are not exactly cheap, so maybe some people here feel uncomfortable paying, or knowing that clueless guys and girls are paying, to get advice from someone they don't trust. Also, other than maybe testimonials (which can also be very misleading) you don't have a lot of tools for judging someone other than what their achievements look like. So, I fully understand why some people here criticize Peter.

Taking the approach of the funny youtuber entertainer doesn't help that much either, when he always seemed to like portraying himself as a professor treating poker as an academic subject.

What I don't like about the haters is that they seem to ignore that you can have a taste of what the guy look like, cheaply, from sources like RIO, FTGU, maybe even his books although I think they are outdated etc, and judge how knowledgeable he is by reading, or listening, and then thinking, without any prejudices. I don't think he gave any wrong advice, nor seemed ignorant of obvious concepts. His courses were actually quite good for beginners IMO, and helped me a lot. And in the end, what truly matters is where your winrate goes after taking the course, not what his winrate looks like.

If you can filter out all the youtuber nonsense stuff, you can have a taste of the guy for free. I randomly watch stuff there from time to time and don't remember seeing anything wrong, other than that I completely disagree with ditching trainers as a good advice (can't remember the video nor timestamp but he said that) if you have any sort of ambition of moving up and play tougher games eventually. You can definitely train exploits and to not misplay common spots while you're still a relatively novice playing lowstakes.

Depends on the type of tradings. Market makers for example are constantly betting enormous sums of money against other industry players so it is very much like a competition. The market is a big game made up of millions of players!

Is it true he's never competed? I genuinely have no idea. I thought he was a small stakes reg who moved on to coaching but I've consumed maybe one video from the guy so I don't really know.

In his latest twitch stream 22/8 he addresses the issue with R&C at the start of the stream, like how the preflop chart that most fish use affects how much they can lose in a short space of time and he also said he has a much better grasp how to play in the pool now compared to when he started and is better at explaining it on stream nowadays.

That being said, he said that playing reg tables is probably better as R&C is so nitty and it's like getting blood from a stone most of the times. No real confirmation about this challenge but he's not made his mind up where it would be best to put volume in as of yet. Also mentioned he would like to play 500nl or 1knl on stream at some point.

Later on the stream he said he played probably about 1M to 1.5M hands (300-400k a year) before he started focusing more on building up his business which then absorbed most of his time.

I wonder how he will explain to his viewers why the table insta-fills when he sits at 1k

would this not be true for any account that isn't a known winner at the stakes?

ie if linus created a new account nobody knew about and sat down at 1k it'd instant fill as well



my point is that's only valid if he'd been around at those stakes for a bit and the tables still insta filled once he joins