Poker Blog Roll, part VI

The last time we spoke about it he was asking me to use my credit card (again) to restash, and I said no. He got angry, I stood my ground, and he never asked me for money to play again. That was a long time ago.

Yes, this is the genuine voice of the poker significant other at and an important read for those dedicated to understanding where poker fits into society. This “wivesofpoker” is another blog of primary importance (poor FlushDraw unsubscribed to OOP after reading about his blog here; such is humanity); this one, however, while unfortunately now silent, still breathes. It is, then, the real deal. (Another good test of that, among other things, is we quickly forget about its Blogger hobby-horse design.)

“Andrea” (if that is her name) begins thus:

Hello there, my name is Andrea and I’m a 30 year old copywriter working for a marketing agency. Me and my boyfriend have been together for almost 6 years and we moved in together like 2 and a half years ago. The reason why I decided to start this blog is he became a “professional” poker player 4 years ago and… it hasn’t been easy. We’ve had our good times, but mostly it’s been pretty bad.


We are now going through another rough period and I decided to search online, to see if I could find anyone who’s going through similar experiences. No luck. The only blogs I found were from 2009… so here I am. I will tell you my whole story – trust me, no picnic here – and am hoping to know more women out there who, although are successful and independent, are getting their lives shaken (or destroyed) by their boyfriend’s or husband’s dream of poker success.


I am also hoping to find success stories. Someone who can give hope to the rest of us, who do not wish to leave our companions, but simply cannot live like this anymore.

So from the start we know we are going to have a sympathetic yet unreliable narrator. She despises something in this process which is causing her suffering, but she can’t put her finger on what it is. Is her husband a professional? No, she puts the word in quotation marks: we know where this is going. Are marriages and relationships picnics? No, but somehow poker or her husband are at fault. Is she successful and independent, as she claims? Again, no, because if she was, she would not be having her life destroyed by a game or even by her boyfriend’s hobby. Independence, by definition, includes the ability to confront externalities which threaten the subject.

As the philosopher said, identity is a hall of mirrors, yet our Andrea is going to be holding her hands over her eyes for years: this first post promises profound unhappiness, and will ironically turn her into an unwitting gambler. She bargain with and bet on Josh in spite of herself, unable to tear herself away from the the action. The blog, we can see from the the first posts, is going to be the story of the delusions of two people who have a compelling reason not leave each other, and how they manage their fantasies. Buckle up. The real nature of relationships is going to be exposed – even if we learn nothing about the silly game of poker.

Our relationship was very difficult in the beginning, he showed no respect for me whatsoever, he was selfish, violent and always angry at the world. We broke up 3 times in 6 years (I did, anyway). But somehow I always took him back and blamed his past, his complicated childhood with addicted parents, or his overprotective grandmother… and I always hoped he would change He did change, in many ways, thank god, but… moving on with the story.

Andrea suffers, as all of us do, from her logical deficiency. The beginning of a relationship is not six years, and implying paradoxically that she broke up with him while he did not break up with her, is the first delusion we come across. What her conscience is trying to say is that she is incapable of accepting the consequences of either of their natures. She stretches time to suit her dreams. Which, as it happens, is fine: most relationships are about accepting and forgiveness, not the power of creative destruction that is allied with accountability.

My relationship with Josh had many problems and money wasn’t, by then, the biggest of them. Although I supported him, respected him and even pampered him with gifts from time to time (like buying him an expensive watch for his birthday and not getting a single birthday gift in return when I turned 25), I felt like he didn’t love me back. After a few years I realised he did love me, but his poor behaviour as a boyfriend was the best he could do for anyone.

Only a few paragraphs into a blog of many years length, a basic problem is laid bare. Couples must respect each other in order to survive the often painful intimacy of cohabitation. Josh’s problem is that he isn’t particularly worthy of respect; Andrea’s is that she can’t be honest about not respecting him; it is not even necessary to read between the lines to realize this, her blog is so full of demeaning and belittling remarks about her partner the poker player. Yet like many of them, she too is addicted to fantasy.

A few days after my birthday, he cheated on me. I couldn’t bring myself to break it off by then, because I was finishing my Master’s Degree and breaking up would ruin it for me, I just wasn’t enough emotionally stable to do it. So a few months went by, I finished my thesis and we broke up because of how he reacted to it: pure indifference. He didn’t congratulate me, didn’t care for how good my grades were (and they were good) and he basically ressented me for being successful.

Interesting stuff. Josh is not her father, Andrea is not eleven years old, but what she wants is the approval of a man who holds her in contempt and she has contempt for. She claims to love him, but he does not support her or take care of her or even pathetically worship her. Andrea is in another world where Josh is not her partner: he is her codependent, yet she imagines she is his.

Second of all, Josh’s house was a mess – his constant rampages caused him to break things around the house whenever he lost, and he also wasn’t exactly a tidy person. I’m talking about kicked in doors, several desks broken in half, and tons of dishes laying around in the sink every week waiting for the cleaning lady (payed by his grandmother) to arrive.

And finally, because his house always creeped me out. His parents died under tragic circumstances and I never felt comfortable around the house. I’m not saying it’s haunted, but… I’m not saying it isn’t. I don’t know, I guess I’m a little paranoid, but the idea of living there just didn’t feel right.

The choice between living in a nice new house or Josh’s old one was not a choice at all, but was indicative of where Josh and Andrea were at: one in the past, one in her head. The mystery of Josh’s charisma is the key variable now, and likely until the end: he is the wounded child the wholesome mother figure thinks she can heal and bring into the light.

This, along with the fact that he didn’t help around the house and didn’t treat me right, became unacceptable for me and it all went down in flames when I found out he had been cheating… again.

Of course he cheated, probably not as often as he wished: what people want is someone on exactly their level, because only then are they truly seen as existing. There is no rescuing anyone in this world: there is only meeting them at the level they are on.

I totally lost it. He had gone out for a run, so I went after him and had a huge fight on the street, I insulted him, spat on him and tried to beat him (I had already done that when I was suspicious of these “friends”). It was a very low moment for me… and for him.

For those who suffer, it is not the heights which are likely to enlighten them, but the lows. Here, at last, Andrea is seeing things clearly: both are at bottom, both share responsibility for this nightmare and seem to know it. The question is, can they help each other?

Thank you for reading, I understand this part of the story is a bit “soap-opera-like”, but it all comes down to the same problem: if he wasn’t playing poker, if he had a regular job and money coming in every month (even if it wasn’t much), we wouldn’t have lived this nightmare.

The answer, tragically, and so emphatic that it comes in the same post, is a thundering NO. The delusion that Josh’s severe trauma would disappear, that he would stop seeking the love of new relationships (because all new loves are untainted by the past and thus seen as a rebirth) or new activities by replacing poker is the fallacy. Andrea has looked into the mirror and somehow found someone else in her field of vision to blame. From here on out, I predict this becomes very uncomfortable.

And no surprises so far. Andrea loses weight and worries. Josh is outcast by his family. Neither of them get want they need, but like all of us, exactly what we deserve. They come back together because they never addressed what attracted them in the first place. Relationships are filled with furniture rearrangements while life whizzes by.

Poker, of course, is just one of many things that might occupy your time on God’s green earth; you might as well blame Him, if that is what you are into. Plus, maybe He’ll help you… and we get there pretty fast.

I will not lend him another dime in my life, so help me God.

No one sane would.

Yeah, after the whole soccer thing went to hell (because of the “female friend” and also because one of the guys from the group slept with another one’s girl – a really nice croud as you can see), he started pumping iron at the gym. His body looks great, that’s for sure, and maybe that’s why I still love him after all of this, because all my exs were fat and ugly as shit. But he spends lots of money on supplements like whey protein and whatnot… fortunatelly no steroids – he has considered it, but it’s just too dangerous.. and too expensive.

Remember what I said about charisma? Every woman loves what some call the “Jerkboy,” no matter how much she denies it in the effort to conform socially and to her conscience. Josh is a parasite but Andrea can’t ever get enough of him and his selfish drama, because drama creates gravity and we, less committed to our own needs because we love our own imagination, are its orbiting objects. She’s in thrall and looking for sympathy, calling out for Poker Wives when she isn’t even married, a mother, or tied down to her object of passion. Yet sympathy, as I wrote before, is inferior to empathy and as with all true things, is rarely advertised for, as it is not a transaction.

Andrea writes in a comment section:

Hahaha yeah he is good in the sack, I’ll give you that.

The pride of and interior need for being sexually satisfied exceeds or matches an overwhelming number of socially acceptable laments. We, like Andrea, often want everything, and this hubris is what often explains our attachments to what is hurting us.

But I kept my ground, I had to… or else we would live this lie forever

The resort to cliche often reveals the depths of our inertia, as our inaction debases even our thinking. What ground was she keeping? She was surrendering her life to garage weight lifting, Pokerstars microgrinding, amateur soccer league love affairs, and whey protein. What was the lie? Josh was making his need to remain in childhood exasperatingly clear… the only lie was that a game she didn’t play was destroying her life. Would she be strong enough to expel the parasite or would she continue to excuse him on account of an outside force?

Meanwhile, a concern troll among her growing comment section is developing a relationship with Andrea, repeating himself in variations on this theme:

i dont think yr crazy. u just fell in love with the wrong dude is all. now dump the zero and find yr hero,girl. also, in the future, just bcuz some1 spends alot of time playing poker doesnt make that person a PRO. poker is a game

All advice is biased. Without knowing it, this poster looks like he will become the Poker Wife she is hoping to establish solidarity with. This fellow has a strong if two dimensional point, simplifying Josh into the problem while presenting a solution which is valid. He displaces her responsibility in order to present possibility to her, even if it is merely out of social habit. His white knighting for the deluded and distressed damsel, however, will never end the way he imagines it, because she has free will, as well. She is an exhibitionist, a performer, and he is the audience: she is gaining something here that is hard to quantify. What is it?

Andrea’s quandary soon spills across the pokerwebs, bringing her problems to new blogs– as well as her followers. The tragic clown TBC, sniffing blood like a toothless pathos shark, arrives to promote his problems:

i wonder if shes ever seen my blog although im sure im a lot better at poker than the man u are referring to. remember poker isnt where i lost my money, it was on other things. thats why everyone is so confused, they are thinking just because im broke i must not be good and yet me being so broke now has nothing to do with poker at all.

After looking at the possibilities and finding every way to evade a sane resolution, we finally hear from Andrea the plaintive voice of a more honest suffering:

I feel so alone in this situation.

Now we are getting somewhere. Her partner is not a partner at all. He has abandoned her while also weighing upon her; how he does it was never important, and the “poker wives” she seeks to share in obfuscation cannot help her. Take away the poker and Josh will fill naturally the void of his pain with something else; indeed, he has already shown a proclivity for all kinds of actual betrayals, nevermind a quantifiable one which keeps him at home and under her eye.

Poker is a strange thing, and as Abe Limon correctly explained, “there is no there there.” Just as it is a vehicle of success for some, for Andrea, it is the monster in the Rorschach and for Josh, the return to a better time where his responsibilities were easily quantifiable. Check, bet, call in place of suffer, adapt, grow.

This is often a great blog. Andrea’s belittling of Josh is often hard to accept and keeps her from true vulnerability and emotional clarity, at least as far as I have read. Nevertheless, from Andrea’s description of the conflict we get to see her life as a girlfriend, writer, woman… human. If we can read between the lines, there is much to be gained here from her endeavor to project her frustrations. I intend to finish all of it.


Posting Frequency: Finished

Design: Solid

Writing quality: Confessional

Overall rating: AQs

Leave a Reply

The OOP Lexicon is a user-developed poker glossary.

Absolute Position
Being last to act (e.g. closest to the button) postflop.

Advancing Leverage
Aggressive actions intended to shift the leverage point closer to the current street.

A bluff or value hand which is a natural candidate for balancing another hand because of their shared qualities, such as AA and AK; usually helps planning range splitting and line construction.

Auto profit threshold (APT)
A bluff made with positive expectation resulting from the opponent under defending vis-a-vis bet sizing. The inverse of MDF.

Choosing to support either value bets or bluffs with their converse.

A bet is a proposition.  It’s the first offer on the pot with regard to the outcome of the game. Each player, in turn, has the opportunity to lay or change the price on the pot to the rest of the players. “The language of poker.” The bet, as opposed to the raise, is most often and most easily allied to the merged pricing construction.

To remove combinations of hands from a range based on cards in your hand or on the board.

Cards which influence our combinatorial assumptions. Ex: We face resistance on T76ss while we hold As7d. Both our cards act as blockers. Our ace of spades blocks (limits) a number of flush draws our opponent could hold, while our seven blocks a number of two pair and sets our opponent could hold. *See also Block and Unblock

Blocker Bet
A small bet made by an out-of-position player.

Board Texture
The available community cards and the set of conditions which inform its relationship to a logical range.

The worst hands in a betting range.  Depending on context this could be the worst hand in a value bet range or the bluffing section of polarized range.

A range descriptor indicating a range shape with a specific high or low boundary.  A range bounded high won't contain some number of the best linear hands ranked from the top down.  This is equivalent to a "capped" range.  A range bounded low won't contain some number of the worst linear hands ranked from the bottom up.  This is often useful to describe a range that doesn't include any air or very weak hands.

A strategic mode in which a player is attempting to deny their opponent(s) equity share of the pot through aggression. Often referred to as “denying equity” or “buying up equity”.

A range is capped when it represents little to no nutted combinations as confirmed by prior action.

A continuation bet. A bet made by the player with initiative as a continuation of their initiative on a prior street.

The ability to accurately range an opponent based on all available information at a decision point.  An understanding of your hands exact equity.

Closing Action
Acting last where no subsequent action is possible behind you.  For example calling a UTG raise in the BB or calling in position postflop with no players behind.

Cold Call/Cold Bet
An action is considered “cold” when it comes from a player entering into the pot has not previously put chips voluntarily in the pot. Ex: the UTG opens, the BTN 3bets. If the SB were to call or raise, it would be a cold-call or a cold-4bet.

The branch of mathematics the deals with finite number sets. Used in poker in determining the amount of combinations of certain hands in a range.

When a blind that is not the biggest blind calls the amount of the biggest blind. Ex: At $2/$5, action folds around to the SB and the SB completes. Meaning they just call. The BB can complete when there is a straddle.

A capped range that contains only middling value hands. A range without the polarized portion.

Logical advancement of combinations across streets.

Dark Side of the Deck
The large swath of hands, often off-suit, that fall outside of conventional playable recommendations. Counter-equity hands.

Dead Money
Money in the pot that is not being fought for.  A passive player creates dead money when they call a bet preflop and looking to play fit-or-fold postflop. Dead Money is often confused with the money in the pot.

Delayed Cbet
A cbet made on the turn by the preflop raiser when the flop checked through.

Delaying Leverage
Passive actions intended to maintain a likely late street leverage point, or possibly to avoid a leverage point entirely.

A strategic break from one’s standard construction as an exploit of a particular player’s profile or construction.

Diminishing Medium Value Category
A Seidman concept in which when one’s middling value hand range is too small and transparent to our opponent and thus either that range should be shifted into the top of a polarized range or the nutted portion should be shifted into the medium value range. Ex: AQo or TT being 3bet preflop.

A cbet that is less than the preflop raise. Ex: BTN opens to $25, we 3bet to $90 from the SB, BTN calls. On the flop we cbet $70.

Dry Board
A board texture that yields relatively few logical hands value. Often containing one medium or high card and disconnected low cards. Ex: Q53r, T622r.

Dual Mentalities
A Seidman concept in which when we decide to go postflop with a weak hand against a nutted range, we should either be looking to out flop it or steal the pot away. We base our decision against the player type we are up against and never go post with both mentalities at once.

Dynamic Board
A flop texture in which the runout is very likely to change the order of top ranking hands. Ex: 954tt, 742r.

Effective Stack
The smallest stack to VPIP in a given hand. Their stack decides the amount of money that can be played for or threatened before an all-in.

Effective nuts
A value hand that can be played for stacks as if it were the actual nuts.  This is a relative hand ranking based on range assumptions and opponent type.

A measure of how well the equity of a hand is deployed. Efficiency can also be used as a measure of what is risked vs what is gained for a given bet size.

Either/Or Philosophy
A Seidman concept in which a particular street can be a very good spot for value, meaning our opponent is never folding, or a very good spot to bluff, meaning our opponent is never calling, but that those spots cannot be concurrent.

Borrowed from economics, a measure of the sensitivity of a range or hand relative to the price offered.  Ranges (or hands) described as elastic will narrow, sometimes quickly, in response to increases in price.  Those described as inelastic will not.

The percent pot share of a holding or range on any given street if the hand were to go to showdown with no further betting action.

Equity Pusher
A analytic approach to the game in which a player views the correct actions only through the lens of their hands equity vs. their opponent’s range. Often this player type has a lack of understanding of overall strategy and plays their range face up with few bluffs.

Expected Value
The mathematical formula for how much a player’s action is expected to make with their hand vs. their opponent’s range. EV = ($towin * %ofwin) - ($tolose * %ofloss)

Face Up
A player is playing their range “face up” when their actions directly correspond with their desired outcome. Ex: A player bets half-pot three streets with a range that has no bluffs. A player 3bets to 7x with JJ.

False Polarization
Otherwise known as Faux-Po; a polarizing action taken with a merged range.

The result of losing your entire table stakes. All the way down to the felt.

A call of a cbet with a weak holding with the likely intention of taking the pot away when the opponent shuts down. Often done by an in position preflop caller.

The convergence of positions, stack depths, and preceding actions at a given decision point.

A mathematical formula developed by Phil Galfond for calculating the expected value of one’s range construction vs. an opponent’s holding.

A computer programming term that means "garbage in, garbage out" which also applies to poker forums when a poster seeks an in-depth conversation about a hand, but fail to provide pertinent information such as stack sizes, bets sizes, table dynamics and player tendencies.

Game Theory
The applied science of combining mathematical models with logic to craft winning poker strategies.

Game Theory Optimal
A set of strategies is GTO if no player can unilaterally deviate and increase his average profit. ~ Will Tipton.  GTO does not mean best possible response, highest EV, or maximally exploitative play.

Implied Odds
Additional value likely to be accrued if you make your hand on a later street.

Sometimes referred to as the betting lead, a common situation in which the passive player yields to the aggressive player postflop, or the last aggressor continues betting on subsequent streets.

A bet or raise intended to force out the rest of the field in order to play heads up against a weaker opponent who has entered the pot through limping, raising, or posting the blinds.

Loose aggressive player type. Generally overused and inaccurate.

A bet made from out of position after a passive action. Often referred to as a donk bet on the flop.

He knows that I know that he knows I know.

A bet or raise that signals the hand will be played for stacks.  Within reason, it is accomplished by betting with a sizing that will create RSP equal to 1 on the following street.

Limp First In

A consecutive range of hands decreasing in strength from top to bottom; generally meaning value hands. Equivalent to "merged."

Lockdown Board
A board on which the nuts have often already been made.  More prevalent in PLO but sometimes useful in no-limit, for example on monotone flops and boards with available common straights e.g. JT9, T98, 987, etc.

1) A range of hands that includes both strong and medium value; 2) in reference to medium value; 3) the merged construction describes the natural representation of a wide range through a bet.

Mini Stop-N-Go
A Seidman concept, a line taken by a OOP PFR where flop is check/called and turn is lead.

Minimum Defense Frequency (MDF)
The necessary defending (calling/raising) frequency to prevent an opponent from auto-profiting.  The inverse of APT.

Natural Action
A check, bet, or raise which is exactly suited to a player's range and situation (e.g. a pfr's continuation bet on AK2r).

A player who will not put chips into the pot without a very strong and sometimes only nutted hand.

The best possible hand.

Nuts-To-Air Ratio (NAR)
In a polarized betting line, the ratio of value to bluff.  As used by Seidman, not limited to polarization but sometimes used to label general opponent tendency of value to bluff.

Old Man Coffee. Typically an older, retired player that likes to play bingo with ATC, but will only continue with the nuts.

The first voluntary action. The first action or bet to voluntarily enter the pot.

A bet that is more than the size of the pot.

Perceived Range
Refers to the range of hands that your opponent thinks you could have in a certain playing situation. This can be interpreted and thus misinterpreted from your playing style and position at the table.

A range consisting of very strong and very weak hands.

Post Oak Bluff
A small bluff on a late street that has little chance of winning the pot.  Generally interpreted as “gutless” in the past but now fulfilling certain functions as betting efficiencies are understood.

Positional Protection
When the strength of a range is perceived to be capped or uncapped based on which position an action is taken from.

When an action or player is perceived to have strong hands in its range.

Protection Bet
A wager which denies equity to hands which will only give action if they significantly improve; "a value bet which does not want a call."

The rejection of the offered price and the laying of a new higher price.  Raises represent a more narrow range of hands and trend towards polarization.

Range Advantage
Implementation or study tool that refers to 1) most basically, equity measurement of one range against another; 2) or also including a combination of further factors including availability of nutted hands, the nuances of the runout, and positional protection.

Range Manipulation
Deliberate line work/bet sizing made to narrow a range or keep a range wide.

Range Switch
A deliberate change in range composition made to thwart a player who is reading our range too accurately in any spot.  Reduces transparency, fights assumptions, and wins the leveling war if implemented correctly.

Ratio of Stack To Pot
RSP. The stack to pot ratio at any point in a hand, generally used post-flop as opposed to Stack to Pot Ratio.

Taking a hand to showdown and realizing its full equity.  Generally used with regard to passive actions.

The mutual exchange of chips resulting from similar play and ideas.  Reciprocity is a common bi-product of group-think.  A true edge by definition cannot be reciprocal.

Relative Position
A player’s position measured against the aggressor's position.  Generally this is used going to the flop.  For example, if UTG raises and several players call behind, calling in the big blind would give you the best relative position.  You will act after seeing how the field responds to a likely continuation from the preflop aggressor.  In the same scenario calling immediately after the preflop aggressor results in the worst relative position.  You will have to act immediately after a continuation without seeing how the remaining players will respond.  Strong relative position confers an information edge.

The ability of hand to maintain equity across streets against a betting range or as part of a betting range.

Reverse Implied Odds (RIO)
Hands that often win small pots or lose large pots suffer from reverse implied odds.

Popularized by Mathew Janda, a descriptor for how well a hand retains equity over streets of play.  Hands described as robust have equity that does not suffer as an opponent's range becomes stronger.  Often these hands are currently both strong and invulnerable, or have the ability to become very strong by the river, relative to the opponent's range.

Fourth and Fifth Street cards following a given flop texture.

Scale of Protection
Poker theorem which states that the more protected or strong an opponent's range is, the higher the degree of denial or retention a counter will require.

Sklansky Bucks
Dollars won (or lost) in expected value regardless of actual hand result.

Any one of many possible poker archetypes found at low stakes games.

A reraise made after a player has raised and one or more players has called in-between.

Static Board
A flop texture in which the runout is unlikely to change the order of top ranking hands. Ex: AK7r, KK4r.

A passive action followed by an aggressive action, out of position.  For example, a call followed by a lead on the next street.

Streets of Value
A crude shorthand measurement for how much betting a hand can tolerate and still be best at showdown more often than not.

Tight aggressive opponent type. Generally overused and misapplied.

TAG's Dilemma
The paradox created by having a top-heavy range played so aggressively that it misuses equity vis-à-vis position and holding.

The Great Range Fantasy
The common idea that we know our opponent’s range and frequencies precisely; most commonly seen in post-hoc analysis to justify microedge decisions.

Thin Value
A bet that is only slightly more likely to be called by worse than by better. Associated with the merged pricing construction and bet-fold lines.

Three Fundamentals
The most fundamental variables for decision making: position, stack size, and community cards.

The best hands in a given range.

Two-Way Bet
A bet that expects calls from worse hands and incorrect folds at the same time, a simultaneous value bet and bluff line.

The psychological effect of feeling like you’re losing because your stack size isn’t as large as it once was during a session, even though it’s more than what you’re in the game for.

(e.g. You bought in for $100, ran it up $450, but now only have $175 in front of you.)

A hand that has no negative card removal effects on the target range.  Bottom set, for example, unblocks top pair top kicker.

A range that is perceived to contain the nuts in any given line.  Capped ranges may become uncapped during transitions for example from preflop to flop, or flop to turn.

A turned nut straight after raising flop with a gutter.

Value Owning
Making value bets with a hand that has less than 50% equity when called.

Voluntarily Put Money In Pot (VPIP)
The frequency at which a player limps, calls, or raises preflop.

Volatile Board
A flop texture where equities will often shift on the turn and river.  See “dynamic”.

An illusory cooler where one player makes a massive mistake equity mistake and loses his stack with a strong but second best hand; also known as a Jam Basket.

Wet Board
A board texture that allows for a lot of logical hands to continue. Often made up of medium rank connected cards. Ex: KT9tt, Tc8c6s-7c-Ac.

“Walk In, Fuck Shit Up, Walk Out” a hashtag used by instagram poker players.

Winning Player
A forum poster who offers reciprocal advice under the guise of questionable positive low stakes results. A weak player or fish, in general.

Young Man Coffee. Is very much an OMC, but younger.  They usually only continue with the nuts, often under the illusion of playing a GTO style.