The guys you mentioned are probably charging much less than they could though.

But I agree this Carrot guy seems hella overpriced

Really? Can you give some examples?

Charging £250 an hour for coaching then claiming he doesn't even have a graph to show has to be a pisstake

There is plenty of his free videos on YT.

I agree that price is too high. It's ok to price coaching highly if you don't have a graph, but in that case you should have testimonials from ex students who became successful pros. Coach should be judged based on his ability to make others profitable players.

Anyway, his good at explaining things that he understood about poker. Imho he doesn't udnerends the game fully and there are some unnecessary complications in his explanations. I wouldn't pay that much for his coaching.

So who does? Who in your opinion has made the best course on NLH cash?

I've been watching a good amount of Carrot Corner content on Youtube and have been extremely impressed. It's head and shoulders above every other educational resource I've seen on Youtube. In fact, I think it's better than any paid content I've seen, although most of my coaching site consumption happened a decade ago in the era of CardRunners and DeucesCracked. That said, I don't have exhaustive experience with currently available for-pay training resources, so I can't really make a fair comparison there. I dabbled for one month each with what's available with a CrushLivePoker and PokerCoaching subscription, and came away away from those not feeling fulfilled. So I do have a gut feeling the Carrot content is and will be above average, but I'm not yet willing to fork out $1k for any professional development to validate that suspicion.

I used to watch Pete's videos on Grinder School back in the day and watch his YouTube content now. Pete is an excellent teacher for the new and improving player.

If you're unsure if Pete's style works for you, there's plenty of free YouTube content to make that judgement.

With that said, I hadn't realised the personal coaching is so expensive. There's absolutely no reason why your hourly at the tables should match your coaching rate, but £250 per hour for the improving player is too much. I'm sure this used to be closer to £50, but that's probably many years ago. Maybe it makes sense though - why work five hours at £50 if you can find the odd player willing to pay £250?

Historically I think the coaching market have been quite similair for as long as I can remember (the last 10 years or so). There are exceptions though, people either overestimate their skilledge, or some sell themselfes too cheap or they just dont know how to price it but. Would say that the pricing have been like this pretty much

$50 /h = probably some kind of nl50-nl100 regular.
$100-200/h = some kind of really high winrate nl100 reg or nl200 regular.
$200-350/h = pretty much every nl400-nl600 regular goes here, the midstakes guys.
$350-500 = some kind of nl1k regular or 2k regular.
$500-900 = strong highstakes regulars, obviously the lower rate the lower they play / lower winrate.
$1k + = endbosses typically like top 30 players in the world or so

Obviously you will sometimes get like a low winrate nl1k regular selling for 250-300 or something. And just in general the lower end of the descriptions tend to be the lower numbers listed in that bracket and vice versa. There are also other factors depending on how much the coach wants to coach. The less you want to coach the higher you should put your hourly, and vice versa. It's just quite generalised overall, it's not my personal opinion but I still think the numbers listed above represents a very accurate description of the last 10 years or so.

Bought the course and I think its pretty good. 30+hrs for 1k is not so expensive compared to private coachings. Now I have premium theory course from Pete Clarke and premium exploit course from Uri Peleg. Need to buy some mental aid and hope to become a crusher soon ��

Hi, do you have any update how is it going after you bought the course from carrot? Was it worth it? I am concidering purchase this course as well

Unfortunately in the last Twitch stream he stated that his not able to beat rake on NL200 ZOOM (

almost imposible beat the rake zoom 200 without a fish on the table.

I went through the whole course. It definitely shored up some theory gaps I had in certain spots, and solidified some concepts in my mind. Up to you if it’s worth 1k, but upswing has released worse courses for 1k.

Can recommend the course as well. It is not some "top notch high stakes endlevel secret content", but it is also not snakeoil at all. It is a very good, theoretical course, that will teach you how poker works. You will also not get spoon fed anything, PC shows how it is done and then it is on you to implement the concepts into your everday games. Overall, it is 30 hrs of content; every video at ~1hr length on some specific topic like how to play Flop, how to follow up on certain run outs, how blockers work yada yada. No topic gets into detail too much, it's more like a solid framework that will help you to analyze and understand spots better. Basically PC gives you the tools and tells you how to use it and you will have to do the work. There is also an exam at every end of each grade where you can test if you understood what he told you.

Now, is it worth 1k? It depends. It is defo not some random video course you watch on the side with half an eye and expect to get any better. You will have to listen carefully, you will have to make notes, you might even have to re-watch some lectures. If you do that, you will be able to do a lot of things better and that will pay off in the end. So I would say yes, it is worth the investment for everyone, who wants to understand poker theory better and who takes poker srsly. Else, you might be better off watching some random YT content.

Edit: I assume the Upswing Uri Peleg course will be the perfect addition,because from what I saw, Uri goes over real, in game stuff, that exploits very common leaks that almost every pool in online poker has. So on the one hand, you're getting good theoratically and on the other hand you will understand when to deviate from theory and exploit. I might get the upswing course later that year.

Muay Thai , I have a detailed review of it on my discord channel .You can add me on discord - Pokerguy#4011

Can anyone suggest what stakes someone could get to from learning this course? Could it take someone to 100nl reg tables on Stars? Assuming the student takes notes and applies it correctly etc of course.

There’s no magic bullet to get you to X stake. If you’re playing 50nl, it probably isn’t worth 20bi.

I've always been a bit skeptical of Peter Clarke. His stream is rather insufferable as he shamelessly advertises his coaching and courses every 5 minutes, yet goes off on an unhinged rant any time someone asks him for his results. Not to mention, all of his students who make guest appearances on his stream are either stuck at 50z or have actually moved down since getting coaching.

Pete himself admits he can't beat 200z, and personally I doubt he'd be better than breakeven at 100z either. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he's really good at NLHE theory, but for a similar price one can hire actual math geniuses who understand GTO poker theory far better than Pete. Better yet, for £250/hr one can get coaching from proven crushers who have actually beaten up to high stakes online and know not only theory, but how to exploit populations and make maximum profit. After all, there's no inherent reward for having a high GTOWizard Accuracy% score. All that matters in the end is how much money one is able to make.

IMO, hiring some guy who doesn't beat the games, isn't a math prodigy, and simply claims to be kind of good at theory just isn't worth it, especially given the exorbitant prices Pete demands. Anyone can invest a few bucks into GTOWiz or Pio and become equally or more proficient at theory as Pete, provided they have a relatively high IQ and are able to recognize patterns. If one doesn't have IQ and isn't able to recognize patterns, then chances are they aren't going to make it as a poker player in 2023 anyway, and no amount of coaching or courses will change that.

Ultimately, my gripe with Pete is his whole personality and business model are built on making himself sound clever to dumb people who don't know any better. He'll waffle on for hours about an extremely basic spot, spouting nonsense terms and theorems he made up himself in an attempt to obfuscate that he can't beat contemporary online poker and doesn't really have anything of substance to offer. Those who can see through it would never consider hiring him as a coach to begin with. Those who cannot are his target audience. What Pete is really doing is selling false hope to frustrated, desperate people who never had a chance of becoming successful poker players to begin with.

Pretty much agree with ddn above and I say that as a guy who purchased Peter's "From The Ground Up" course and did enjoy and do feel a gained from it as I was just coming back to cash after years and years of mainly playing MTT's. And well for the price(BF sale) it was worth it. Probably even still worth it at $50usd regular price.

With that said there's very few courses/guys I'm paying 1k too for a course and he better be a high stakes crusher with plenty of receipts to back it up. I think if I wanted to go higher then 50nl and 100nl I'd just look for a good well known high stakes coach and pay hourly over simply paying for a 1 time course. Too each their own that's just the way I'd go about it if I was to go that route. Wish I was younger and without years and years of built in bad habits lol. Not sure a 50 year dog can learn new tricks or break old habits.


Cheers!!!

Been watching a lot of his free content on youtube recently after getting back into playing the past few months. His teaching style seems pretty good and he obviously understands the game reasonably well from a GTO perspective.

From watching him play though I can hazard a guess at why he's maybe not a big winner in the games he plays.

1) He makes mistakes by running out of time despite not playing that many tables. I can relate to this a little as it's certainly an issue of my game and where I play as well (no time bank even worse) - Part of this for him I think is because he doesn't seem a very intuitive player but at the same time that could just be down to the fact he's streaming and talking at the same time - maybe without the streaming this running out of time would happen less.

2) Most importantly maybe is the high focus on game theory/randomizing decisions as opposed to exploitative play. He's aware of exploitative play and knows that's the way you beat games and there are many examples where he uses exploits - but when it comes to some of his sessions I find it happens less frequently. Maybe that's just because he plays low volume and doesn't really have many notes/reads on opponents but a lot of his decisions come down to randomization of frequencies as opposed to trying to figure out what might work best against a specific opponent/population tendency absent no reads.

Does the fact he can't beat the games mean the course is bad? Not necessarily. Is it better than any of the other hundreds of courses out there though for similar/cheaper prices? Probably not. But also, there are probably many courses out there that are equally worse. I think most courses are ultimately a scam in the sense that lots of people who purchase them are never going to make it as winning players. If you're talented enough it doesn't really matter which course you get as long as you find some way to learn as you'll be able to extrapolate the ideas and execute them better than others.

meh I think calling most courses a scam is a bad take.

The course could be the best ever but if student doesn't learn/apply what they learn they won't be a winning player, but that really has little to do with the course itself.

If people are buying courses in the view they're some magic pill that will make them a winning player then it's them that need to manage their expectations.

However I do agree that winning in the games is not necessarily a prerequisite for being a good poker coach, there are many factors at play.

Have seen a fair amount of his free content and agree with ddn’s post.

Maybe Pete can teach absolute beginners to go from nothing to a small winrate in 25 or 50NL but not any further beyond that

He has tried various twitch and youtube series of coaching students and none of them have successfully moved up in stakes despite usually starting already very low at 25NL. His own results at 200 zoom are clearly losing too based on how he won’t show the graph but goes on a defensive tirade of deflections if you ask about it. And he makes huge punts every stream but always claims to be “running bad today”.


Despite this Pete and his streamers talk with such arrogance as though they have already got the game figured out and are always punching down at how other people’s approach to poker is wrong.

TLDR coaching from someone who can beat the game or has coached proven winners is a better investment of time and money

Can't stand his accent, think he wrote a few books about poker too. Hope you get your value!

Coaches should know theory, and they should know why, how and when to deviate and maximize their winnings. After all, that's what we need to know to become a decent winner and move up right? Results are not enough to be a good coach, but not having the results is a big no no imo. Btw I remember that a few years ago he still had a graph on carrot corner showing a 100nl graph of 3 bb/100 or so.

Grinders Manual was a good book though. Holes in theory and outdated stuff, but he kept a focus on well reasoned thought processes adjusting vs player types. And books >>>>>>>> videos imho, especially when someone is so annoying as Peter is when talking.