Am emotive topic, I agree, but let's keep it cool please. It's certainly not trolling, even if we disagree with the points made.
Can this discussion be limited to one thread then please? I started a thread on downswings last week that seemed to do quite well until it was derailed by this same topic (which has nothing to do with the thread I started) being brought up by the same poster
Lol at the Negreanu comment. Have you followed nothing in poker in the last few years?
He's essentially paid a lot of money to make outrageous claims on behalf of Stars. 'More rake is better' springs to mind.
Pretty much respect his opinion on poker related manners
His opinion is not respected in the poker community any more.
Also, live earnings don't equate to live profit. Sorry can't remember the year, but some time in the past few years he tweeted that he had cashed that year for x million dollars but still had a losing year.
If you actually took the time to read the article then he says categorically that he has never advocated " more rake " . The article has got nothing to do with stars , and neither does he mention them. As far as his opinion not being respected in the poker community anymore , outlandishly ridiculous comment to make with zero foundation. People can make up their own minds if his opinions are valid , I know who I'm with .
Have had the good fortune to share a table with Mr Negreanu a few years ago.
He is personable, good for the game generally, and is obviously one of the very best players of all time.
However, his comments were pretty outrageous, and misleading at best.
He forgets to mention that he is paid considerable sums by Stars. He conveniently uses just the 2 types of live player. Not the myriad of different levels that are on Stars. He forgets to mention that, as well as reducing rakeback for the top pros, they were simultaneously reducing rakeback for every single player. At every single level. The "treasure" chest thing must be the nut worst scheme in the industry. And the rake itself remains high.
Do I respect his opinions generally? Of course. Just not the ones where he pretends to be the referee while he has a dog in the fight.
1 thing that needs saying in relation to poker generally, and DYMs in particular, is that higher stakes players have always subsidised lower stakes. And so they should. It costs Sky exactly the same amount of money to run a 28p DYM as a £55. One runs at a loss, subsidised by the 1 that runs at a profit. And so it should. It is the size of the profit that seems wrong.
Finally, Sky have SNGs that run at half the rake of DYMs. I cannot understand why no-one plays the SNGs.
Hey Phil...am I missing something? Seriously not teasing, but I though the rake on regular SNG's and DYM's was the same? Just checked and they are OR am I missing it??
Am emotive topic, I agree, but let's keep it cool please. It's certainly not trolling, even if we disagree with the points made.
Can this discussion be limited to one thread then please? I started a thread on downswings last week that seemed to do quite well until it was derailed by this same topic (which has nothing to do with the thread I started) being brought up by the same poster
Lol at the Negreanu comment. Have you followed nothing in poker in the last few years?
He's essentially paid a lot of money to make outrageous claims on behalf of Stars. 'More rake is better' springs to mind.
Pretty much respect his opinion on poker related manners
His opinion is not respected in the poker community any more.
Also, live earnings don't equate to live profit. Sorry can't remember the year, but some time in the past few years he tweeted that he had cashed that year for x million dollars but still had a losing year.
If you actually took the time to read the article then he says categorically that he has never advocated " more rake " . The article has got nothing to do with stars , and neither does he mention them. As far as his opinion not being respected in the poker community anymore , outlandishly ridiculous comment to make with zero foundation. People can make up their own minds if his opinions are valid , I know who I'm with .
Have had the good fortune to share a table with Mr Negreanu a few years ago.
He is personable, good for the game generally, and is obviously one of the very best players of all time.
However, his comments were pretty outrageous, and misleading at best.
He forgets to mention that he is paid considerable sums by Stars. He conveniently uses just the 2 types of live player. Not the myriad of different levels that are on Stars. He forgets to mention that, as well as reducing rakeback for the top pros, they were simultaneously reducing rakeback for every single player. At every single level. The "treasure" chest thing must be the nut worst scheme in the industry. And the rake itself remains high.
Do I respect his opinions generally? Of course. Just not the ones where he pretends to be the referee while he has a dog in the fight.
1 thing that needs saying in relation to poker generally, and DYMs in particular, is that higher stakes players have always subsidised lower stakes. And so they should. It costs Sky exactly the same amount of money to run a 28p DYM as a £55. One runs at a loss, subsidised by the 1 that runs at a profit. And so it should. It is the size of the profit that seems wrong.
Finally, Sky have SNGs that run at half the rake of DYMs. I cannot understand why no-one plays the SNGs.
Hey Phil...am I missing something? Seriously not teasing, but I though the rake on regular SNG's and DYM's was the same? Just checked and they are OR am I missing it??
Maybe hu is 5% and dym is 10%
Agreed so how are sitngo's less rake?
Also, I'm impressed, you spelt maybe correctly...good boy, gold star!! ;-)
Am emotive topic, I agree, but let's keep it cool please. It's certainly not trolling, even if we disagree with the points made.
Can this discussion be limited to one thread then please? I started a thread on downswings last week that seemed to do quite well until it was derailed by this same topic (which has nothing to do with the thread I started) being brought up by the same poster
Lol at the Negreanu comment. Have you followed nothing in poker in the last few years?
He's essentially paid a lot of money to make outrageous claims on behalf of Stars. 'More rake is better' springs to mind.
Pretty much respect his opinion on poker related manners
His opinion is not respected in the poker community any more.
Also, live earnings don't equate to live profit. Sorry can't remember the year, but some time in the past few years he tweeted that he had cashed that year for x million dollars but still had a losing year.
If you actually took the time to read the article then he says categorically that he has never advocated " more rake " . The article has got nothing to do with stars , and neither does he mention them. As far as his opinion not being respected in the poker community anymore , outlandishly ridiculous comment to make with zero foundation. People can make up their own minds if his opinions are valid , I know who I'm with .
Have had the good fortune to share a table with Mr Negreanu a few years ago.
He is personable, good for the game generally, and is obviously one of the very best players of all time.
However, his comments were pretty outrageous, and misleading at best.
He forgets to mention that he is paid considerable sums by Stars. He conveniently uses just the 2 types of live player. Not the myriad of different levels that are on Stars. He forgets to mention that, as well as reducing rakeback for the top pros, they were simultaneously reducing rakeback for every single player. At every single level. The "treasure" chest thing must be the nut worst scheme in the industry. And the rake itself remains high.
Do I respect his opinions generally? Of course. Just not the ones where he pretends to be the referee while he has a dog in the fight.
1 thing that needs saying in relation to poker generally, and DYMs in particular, is that higher stakes players have always subsidised lower stakes. And so they should. It costs Sky exactly the same amount of money to run a 28p DYM as a £55. One runs at a loss, subsidised by the 1 that runs at a profit. And so it should. It is the size of the profit that seems wrong.
Finally, Sky have SNGs that run at half the rake of DYMs. I cannot understand why no-one plays the SNGs.
Hey Phil...am I missing something? Seriously not teasing, but I though the rake on regular SNG's and DYM's was the same? Just checked and they are OR am I missing it??
The regular SNGs and DYMs have the same rake.
The "turbo" DYMs with 2 minute blinds are also raked at 10%. Whereas the "Hyper" SNGs (also 2 minute blinds) have only a 5% rake. Which should prove Melty's point.
Lol at the Negreanu comment. Have you followed nothing in poker in the last few years?
He's essentially paid a lot of money to make outrageous claims on behalf of Stars. 'More rake is better' springs to mind.
Pretty much respect his opinion on poker related manners
His opinion is not respected in the poker community any more.
Also, live earnings don't equate to live profit. Sorry can't remember the year, but some time in the past few years he tweeted that he had cashed that year for x million dollars but still had a losing year.
If you actually took the time to read the article then he says categorically that he has never advocated " more rake " . The article has got nothing to do with stars , and neither does he mention them. As far as his opinion not being respected in the poker community anymore , outlandishly ridiculous comment to make with zero foundation. People can make up their own minds if his opinions are valid , I know who I'm with .
Have had the good fortune to share a table with Mr Negreanu a few years ago.
He is personable, good for the game generally, and is obviously one of the very best players of all time.
However, his comments were pretty outrageous, and misleading at best.
He forgets to mention that he is paid considerable sums by Stars. He conveniently uses just the 2 types of live player. Not the myriad of different levels that are on Stars. He forgets to mention that, as well as reducing rakeback for the top pros, they were simultaneously reducing rakeback for every single player. At every single level. The "treasure" chest thing must be the nut worst scheme in the industry. And the rake itself remains high.
Do I respect his opinions generally? Of course. Just not the ones where he pretends to be the referee while he has a dog in the fight.
1 thing that needs saying in relation to poker generally, and DYMs in particular, is that higher stakes players have always subsidised lower stakes. And so they should. It costs Sky exactly the same amount of money to run a 28p DYM as a £55. One runs at a loss, subsidised by the 1 that runs at a profit. And so it should. It is the size of the profit that seems wrong.
Finally, Sky have SNGs that run at half the rake of DYMs. I cannot understand why no-one plays the SNGs.
Lol at the Negreanu comment. Have you followed nothing in poker in the last few years?
He's essentially paid a lot of money to make outrageous claims on behalf of Stars. 'More rake is better' springs to mind.
Pretty much respect his opinion on poker related manners
His opinion is not respected in the poker community any more.
Also, live earnings don't equate to live profit. Sorry can't remember the year, but some time in the past few years he tweeted that he had cashed that year for x million dollars but still had a losing year.
If you actually took the time to read the article then he says categorically that he has never advocated " more rake " . The article has got nothing to do with stars , and neither does he mention them. As far as his opinion not being respected in the poker community anymore , outlandishly ridiculous comment to make with zero foundation. People can make up their own minds if his opinions are valid , I know who I'm with .
Have had the good fortune to share a table with Mr Negreanu a few years ago.
He is personable, good for the game generally, and is obviously one of the very best players of all time.
However, his comments were pretty outrageous, and misleading at best.
He forgets to mention that he is paid considerable sums by Stars. He conveniently uses just the 2 types of live player. Not the myriad of different levels that are on Stars. He forgets to mention that, as well as reducing rakeback for the top pros, they were simultaneously reducing rakeback for every single player. At every single level. The "treasure" chest thing must be the nut worst scheme in the industry. And the rake itself remains high.
Do I respect his opinions generally? Of course. Just not the ones where he pretends to be the referee while he has a dog in the fight.
1 thing that needs saying in relation to poker generally, and DYMs in particular, is that higher stakes players have always subsidised lower stakes. And so they should. It costs Sky exactly the same amount of money to run a 28p DYM as a £55. One runs at a loss, subsidised by the 1 that runs at a profit. And so it should. It is the size of the profit that seems wrong.
Finally, Sky have SNGs that run at half the rake of DYMs. I cannot understand why no-one plays the SNGs.
All very well and fair , but what if anything , do you disagree with on the article of his I posted several posts up ?
Winning players suck the life out of poker.
Says the man who wins the most. And gets paid extra to tell it to the little people. Effectively, with their money. Twice.
While the recs get less and less.
A great player. But not so great that he can bluff us all when his cards are face up.
Genuine question .....So if anyone else had said it , you might agree ?
Take the fact that Negreanu is paid a lot of money from stars out of the equation , I'm genuinely baffled how people don't agree with the logic in the article I posted .
Take the fact that Negreanu is paid a lot of money from stars out of the equation , I'm genuinely baffled how people don't agree with the logic in the article I posted .
Take the fact that Negreanu is paid a lot of money from stars out of the equation , I'm genuinely baffled how people don't agree with the logic in the article I posted .
I’m genuinely baffled that you agree with it
You would be ! Thanks for your weekly contribution .
Lol at the Negreanu comment. Have you followed nothing in poker in the last few years?
He's essentially paid a lot of money to make outrageous claims on behalf of Stars. 'More rake is better' springs to mind.
Pretty much respect his opinion on poker related manners
His opinion is not respected in the poker community any more.
Also, live earnings don't equate to live profit. Sorry can't remember the year, but some time in the past few years he tweeted that he had cashed that year for x million dollars but still had a losing year.
If you actually took the time to read the article then he says categorically that he has never advocated " more rake " . The article has got nothing to do with stars , and neither does he mention them. As far as his opinion not being respected in the poker community anymore , outlandishly ridiculous comment to make with zero foundation. People can make up their own minds if his opinions are valid , I know who I'm with .
Agree with everything Angmar says above.
Zero foundation ?
Check out any poker forum for the last 5 years and you will know how much his opinion on poker is respected. Actually just have a quick glance at the biggest one 2 plus 2 as he has his own thread there.
Lol at the Negreanu comment. Have you followed nothing in poker in the last few years?
He's essentially paid a lot of money to make outrageous claims on behalf of Stars. 'More rake is better' springs to mind.
Pretty much respect his opinion on poker related manners
His opinion is not respected in the poker community any more.
Also, live earnings don't equate to live profit. Sorry can't remember the year, but some time in the past few years he tweeted that he had cashed that year for x million dollars but still had a losing year.
If you actually took the time to read the article then he says categorically that he has never advocated " more rake " . The article has got nothing to do with stars , and neither does he mention them. As far as his opinion not being respected in the poker community anymore , outlandishly ridiculous comment to make with zero foundation. People can make up their own minds if his opinions are valid , I know who I'm with .
Agree with everything Angmar says above.
Zero foundation ?
Check out any poker forum for the last 5 years and you will know how much his opinion on poker is respected. Actually just have a quick glance at the biggest one 2 plus 2 as he has his own thread there.
No great surprise there either ....double teaming eh ?
Check out any poker forum for the last 5 years and you will know how much his opinion on poker is respected. Actually just have a quick glance at the biggest one 2 plus 2 as he has his own thread there.
No great surprise there either ....double teaming eh ?
2+2 ..very level headed informative poker views and no one trolling at all.
Lol at the Negreanu comment. Have you followed nothing in poker in the last few years?
He's essentially paid a lot of money to make outrageous claims on behalf of Stars. 'More rake is better' springs to mind.
Pretty much respect his opinion on poker related manners
His opinion is not respected in the poker community any more.
Also, live earnings don't equate to live profit. Sorry can't remember the year, but some time in the past few years he tweeted that he had cashed that year for x million dollars but still had a losing year.
If you actually took the time to read the article then he says categorically that he has never advocated " more rake " . The article has got nothing to do with stars , and neither does he mention them. As far as his opinion not being respected in the poker community anymore , outlandishly ridiculous comment to make with zero foundation. People can make up their own minds if his opinions are valid , I know who I'm with .
Agree with everything Angmar says above.
Zero foundation ?
Check out any poker forum for the last 5 years and you will know how much his opinion on poker is respected. Actually just have a quick glance at the biggest one 2 plus 2 as he has his own thread there.
No great surprise there either ....double teaming eh ?
No the surprise is in 2019 someone tried to use Daniel Negreanu on a thread about rake.
Lol at the Negreanu comment. Have you followed nothing in poker in the last few years?
He's essentially paid a lot of money to make outrageous claims on behalf of Stars. 'More rake is better' springs to mind.
Pretty much respect his opinion on poker related manners
His opinion is not respected in the poker community any more.
Also, live earnings don't equate to live profit. Sorry can't remember the year, but some time in the past few years he tweeted that he had cashed that year for x million dollars but still had a losing year.
If you actually took the time to read the article then he says categorically that he has never advocated " more rake " . The article has got nothing to do with stars , and neither does he mention them. As far as his opinion not being respected in the poker community anymore , outlandishly ridiculous comment to make with zero foundation. People can make up their own minds if his opinions are valid , I know who I'm with .
Agree with everything Angmar says above.
Zero foundation ?
Check out any poker forum for the last 5 years and you will know how much his opinion on poker is respected. Actually just have a quick glance at the biggest one 2 plus 2 as he has his own thread there.
No great surprise there either ....double teaming eh ?
No the surprise is in 2019 someone tried to use Daniel Negreanu on a thread about rake.
Take the fact that Negreanu is paid a lot of money from stars out of the equation , I'm genuinely baffled how people don't agree with the logic in the article I posted .
Again i'm amazed that someone can believe this story, Why would a guy who is a rec a.) play in a $10/20 game b.) keep track of his hourly
There is no way all or at least part of this story can be true. They are have put together a very convincing sales pitch that will work with RECS - The reason it works with recs is because they play the game for fun.... will it keep them playing longer no? will the crapshoot slot games keep them playing.... no.
Honestly I like Daniel, but what he is doing is selling a corporations idea even when he does not believe in it.
it is close to insane that you are buying into that story.
Hope you can manage to read this with my shoddy spelling
Take the fact that Negreanu is paid a lot of money from stars out of the equation , I'm genuinely baffled how people don't agree with the logic in the article I posted .
Again im amazed that someone can believe this story, Why would a guy who is a rec a.) play in a $10/20 game b.) keep track of his hourly
There is no way all or at least part of this story can be true. They are have put together a very convincing sales pitch that will work with RECS - The reason it works with recs is because they play the game for fun.... will it keep them playing longer no? will the crapshoot slot games keep them playing.... no.
Honestly I like Daniel, but what he is doing is selling a coporations idea even when he does not believe in it.
it is close to insane that you are buying into that story
Well have you any evidence to prove the story isn't true ? Plus , story aside , I agree with what he's saying generally . It's all very well good coming out with these outlandish statements about peoples integrity , but put some proof to it . As far as the last line is concerned that you edited ...just!
Take the fact that Negreanu is paid a lot of money from stars out of the equation , I'm genuinely baffled how people don't agree with the logic in the article I posted .
Again i'm amazed that someone can believe this story, Why would a guy who is a rec a.) play in a $10/20 game b.) keep track of his hourly
There is no way all or at least part of this story can be true. They are have put together a very convincing sales pitch that will work with RECS - The reason it works with recs is because they play the game for fun.... will it keep them playing longer no? will the crapshoot slot games keep them playing.... no.
Honestly I like Daniel, but what he is doing is selling a corporations idea even when he does not believe in it.
it is close to insane that you are buying into that story.
Hope you can manage to read this with my shoddy spelling
Hey! See me after class- detention for you my lad....I'll be speaking to your parents as well....
Take the fact that Negreanu is paid a lot of money from stars out of the equation , I'm genuinely baffled how people don't agree with the logic in the article I posted .
Again im amazed that someone can believe this story, Why would a guy who is a rec a.) play in a $10/20 game b.) keep track of his hourly
There is no way all or at least part of this story can be true. They are have put together a very convincing sales pitch that will work with RECS - The reason it works with recs is because they play the game for fun.... will it keep them playing longer no? will the crapshoot slot games keep them playing.... no.
Honestly I like Daniel, but what he is doing is selling a coporations idea even when he does not believe in it.
it is close to insane that you are buying into that story
Well have you any evidence to prove the story isn't true ? Plus , story aside , I agree with what he's saying generally . It's all very well good coming out with these outlandish statements about peoples integrity , but put some proof to it . As far as the last line is concerned that you edited ...just!
Do you have any evidence to prove it is true? Looking from a purely neutral logical standpoint, is this man paid million dollars to likely lie for the large corporation to increase their profit or to genuinely be telling the truth whilst at the same time condescending everything he has stood for in the past? Would he be paid as much as he is if he did not offer value much greater than what he is paid? Is it because his word used to be so highly valued he can be used as a human propaganda machine?
Do you believe in the morals of a man that stood side by side with pokerstars as they abolished the super nova elite rewards worth hundreds of thousands of pounds per playing equating to the millions of pounds gained for pokerstars and literally taking away a promised commitment? Bear in mind many of the supernova elite players play at a loss (losing players) and made money by grinding out profit by playing such high volume they make profit from the big pay out. why did they let them grind for 9 months before cancelling?
Whilst we are talking FACTS and RESPECTED pros, why did people like Victoria Coren and Isaac Haxton resign because of the changes being made, whilst Daniel Negreanu continued to collect his pay check? Is Ike not smart enough to understand the Ecology after meeting with the heads of stars? I mean Ike is widely regarded as a top 5 poker player across all formats and is a member of Mensa.
Whilst we continue to talk FACTS, please answer why you believe this statement you made is true? "Pretty much respect his opinion on poker related manners ." after posting his results? what do his results have anything to do with respect? Chino Rheem has some cracking results but I sure as **** would love to see karma bite him in the ****.
(also should it not be matter rather than manner? - Please correct me if i'm wrong)
Where would all these changes leave all the people in the middle of the poker spectrum? Those marginal winners, breakeven and slight losers would now become break even or losing, definitely losing and big losing players - Would those players who had the odd success and were now losing players stay in the game? I doubt it.
Im speaking he as a winning rec, I don't make vast amounts of money and I play on evenings as and when I can but I do make enough to treat myself to nice things whilst not effecting my regular income. Would I continue to play the game if the formats I could beat became unbeatable for me - no.
I want to make this clear I am fairly positive I could not beat the turbo sngs on here over a large sample.
This entire debate is based on the two extremes - winning grinders and losing recs... With no consideration for every single person in the middle of this that is actually the vast majority of players that study the odd article and watch the odd strat video.
Take the fact that Negreanu is paid a lot of money from stars out of the equation , I'm genuinely baffled how people don't agree with the logic in the article I posted .
Again i'm amazed that someone can believe this story, Why would a guy who is a rec a.) play in a $10/20 game b.) keep track of his hourly
There is no way all or at least part of this story can be true. They are have put together a very convincing sales pitch that will work with RECS - The reason it works with recs is because they play the game for fun.... will it keep them playing longer no? will the crapshoot slot games keep them playing.... no.
Honestly I like Daniel, but what he is doing is selling a corporations idea even when he does not believe in it.
it is close to insane that you are buying into that story.
Hope you can manage to read this with my shoddy spelling
Hey! See me after class- detention for you my lad....I'll be speaking to your parents as well....
Fabulous contribution to the issue , many thanks .
Comments
Yes, all HU SNG's (except Russian Roulette) are 5%.
Also, I'm impressed, you spelt maybe correctly...good boy, gold star!! ;-)
The "turbo" DYMs with 2 minute blinds are also raked at 10%. Whereas the "Hyper" SNGs (also 2 minute blinds) have only a 5% rake. Which should prove Melty's point.
Ahh yes, I forgot the Hyper jobbies.
Zero foundation ?
Check out any poker forum for the last 5 years and you will know how much his opinion on poker is respected.
Actually just have a quick glance at the biggest one 2 plus 2 as he has his own thread there.
I'm going to close the thread temporarily unless we stop the personal digs.
Agree with everything Angmar says above.
Zero foundation ?
Check out any poker forum for the last 5 years and you will know how much his opinion on poker is respected.
Actually just have a quick glance at the biggest one 2 plus 2 as he has his own thread there.
No great surprise there either ....double teaming eh ?
2+2 ..very level headed informative poker views and no one trolling at all.
No the surprise is in 2019 someone tried to use Daniel Negreanu on a thread about rake.
There is no way all or at least part of this story can be true. They are have put together a very convincing sales pitch that will work with RECS - The reason it works with recs is because they play the game for fun.... will it keep them playing longer no? will the crapshoot slot games keep them playing.... no.
Honestly I like Daniel, but what he is doing is selling a corporations idea even when he does not believe in it.
it is close to insane that you are buying into that story.
Hope you can manage to read this with my shoddy spelling
Plus , story aside , I agree with what he's saying generally .
It's all very well good coming out with these outlandish statements about peoples integrity , but put some proof to it .
As far as the last line is concerned that you edited ...just!
Do you believe in the morals of a man that stood side by side with pokerstars as they abolished the super nova elite rewards worth hundreds of thousands of pounds per playing equating to the millions of pounds gained for pokerstars and literally taking away a promised commitment?
Bear in mind many of the supernova elite players play at a loss (losing players) and made money by grinding out profit by playing such high volume they make profit from the big pay out. why did they let them grind for 9 months before cancelling?
Whilst we are talking FACTS and RESPECTED pros, why did people like Victoria Coren and Isaac Haxton resign because of the changes being made, whilst Daniel Negreanu continued to collect his pay check? Is Ike not smart enough to understand the Ecology after meeting with the heads of stars? I mean Ike is widely regarded as a top 5 poker player across all formats and is a member of Mensa.
Whilst we continue to talk FACTS, please answer why you believe this statement you made is true? "Pretty much respect his opinion on poker related manners ." after posting his results?
what do his results have anything to do with respect?
Chino Rheem has some cracking results but I sure as **** would love to see karma bite him in the ****.
(also should it not be matter rather than manner? - Please correct me if i'm wrong)
Where would all these changes leave all the people in the middle of the poker spectrum? Those marginal winners, breakeven and slight losers would now become break even or losing, definitely losing and big losing players - Would those players who had the odd success and were now losing players stay in the game? I doubt it.
Im speaking he as a winning rec, I don't make vast amounts of money and I play on evenings as and when I can but I do make enough to treat myself to nice things whilst not effecting my regular income. Would I continue to play the game if the formats I could beat became unbeatable for me - no.
I want to make this clear I am fairly positive I could not beat the turbo sngs on here over a large sample.
This entire debate is based on the two extremes - winning grinders and losing recs... With no consideration for every single person in the middle of this that is actually the vast majority of players that study the odd article and watch the odd strat video.