Heads Up Tourney Play
Posted by Nick Rampone
Video Player is loading.
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Resume Video
Start from Beginning
Watch Video
10
Loading 24 Comments...
Just too good. Easily in the top 1% of poker geniuses.
You're far too kind my friend, but thanks a lot of watching. I'm really happy you're getting something out of my videos. Cheers.
Good idea for a video, do you use this limping strategy vs pros aswell? When I am heads up (~$15 180s, mtts) I usually do a standard min raising strategy, because I am not as elite post flop, when should I change this? Also, given that you limp folded a 12bb stack with 72, could limp calling the A3o hand be more optimal than a shove?
Hey junzhong. Thanks for watching my video and for leaving a comment. You asked a couple of great questions here. Yes, I use this strategy vs. pros as well. This strategy, or any strategy, isn't too be used specifically vs. pros or specifically vs. amateurs. I try to keep an open mind at the tables, and think about what all of my options are in every situation, and pick what I think is the best one to use in that moment, under those conditions. Let me give you a couple of examples with limping heads up. I would limp vs a prop or an amateur if I thought they were going to be playing too fast or in a hurry, in an effort to slow the match down and give myself more chances and more flops to play pots with them. Generally speaking I am more likely to limp vs amateurs, because generally speaking they will be more prone to rushing things in a heads up match and making mistakes. Those are just a couple of the many examples I could come up with and the many situations that we could find ourselves in.
I usually do a standard min raising strategy heads up too. And I think this is the proper strategy to use vs many tough opponents. Vs a tough a opponent, there isn't going to be much of an edge either way. In those situations I'll usually raise my button 80-95% of the time, depending on how often they 3b and call raises. The question of when to change this strategy is way too broad to answer in any specific way! I will say that you should change it when you find a reason to. I mean min raising 100% of your buttons should be your default strategy. The trouble is almost every player these days will be able to recognize that, and make some adjustment to fight back vs that. If you're playing a total rookie, then raise 100%. If you're playing most players who have some idea of what they're doing, raise less often. If you're playing against someone who has some specific aspect of their game that you think you can take advantage of, think about ways you can take advantage of that and make the appropriate adjustments in your own strategy.
Great thought here about limping with A3o, and hoping to call a shove. I definitely will do that at times with that hand, A3o. In this case, and often times, I am more comfortable shoving with that hand though. I know it can make clear, definite money by shoving preflop, whereas if I get to postflop play, it doesn't play as well because I often don't get a ton of value when I flop an ace, and my other card is a nearly useless 3. You might ask well isn't that exploitable then? Yes it is, I'm just betting on the fact that he won't notice or know that in time to be able to take advantage of me for it :D
I follow this strategy when HU a lot, too, so it's reassuring to see someone at the top level doing the same things.
Cheers Nick.
Good to hear you're thinking outside the box and coming up with unique strategies on your own. That's what poker is all about. It's flexible, it's dynamic, it's constant adjustment.
Nice to point out to pay attention when we get to last 3 or 2, true is ppl are in a hurry and impatient, and is very good point to make, is good to be reminded to get full focus in such spots , thanks
Yeah! It's just crazy to me how this happens to people. And how often it happens. For whatever reason people just lose track of how many big blinds they have heads up. They rush, they hurry, and they get money in way too light. It's amazing how often people try to win every pot or at least too many pots. They forget balance, pace, and discipline. Of course I'm speaking very generally here, but I'm also speaking from the experience of a great deal of observation and play of heads up matches in tournaments, and I just see these things far too much of the time. I've been guilty of it myself many many times!
Great concept video! Love the limping as well, I have included it in my HU tournament game in the previous year as well, especially when we are under the 20bb level, I think limping does wonders (as long as you balance your range).
As far as the Q5o call vs the flush draw, I love the read, but I believe it is too much of a marginal spot that is too high variance... I would call that shove in a cash game if I had the same read, but not in a HU tournament structure.
According to pokerstove, he is a 55.2% favourite in the hand. And while the pot odds make this play a profitable one (we are getting 1.4 to 1 on our call, so we need to win 41.6% of the time for the call to be right, and we are a 44.8% vs a flush draw), I still do not like it. I think that he has an A a decent amount of the time, because a weak player will himself be scared of the flush draw. But mainly, it is a marginal spot, roughly a 3% edge if we are always right about him having a draw (which is not the case), and even though it is a hyper turbo structure, limping does in fact reduce the variance, making this call doesn't.
Thx for the video, looking forward to the next ones!
No way this guy jams an ace hu even the biggest of fish know that tp hu is the eff. nuts on this board given dynamic. but you are right its not that profitable but in game when you have a read sometimes you just gotta go with it even when youre barely ahead.
Hey JS BB, thanks for watching and for leaving a couple of comments. Thank you also for introducing a math check so to speak for the Q5 bet/call. I think it's very useful to have the math side in mind, in addition to the hand reading/game play side of things. Hand reading and some simple deductions on how he would play different portions of his range tell us that he's got a flush draw here almost always. Yet, as you pointed out by running the numbers, this isn't the whole story. It's interesting, during the hand and even the subsequent review, never once did I consider my actual equity. I was convinced I had the "best hand", and that that was good enough for me. I was right in a sense, my hand was ahead, but this doesn't do me much good if his hand that's "behind" has more equity than my hand. In this case, as in many situations, pot odds equalized it more toward my favor, and even gave me a slight edge.
However, that assumes he always has a flush draw. As you noted, he occasionally could have an ace or other random pairs. In light of this basically being a break-even spot, how do you think I should proceed here? I could check back the flop and "trap", but it seems like I should be c-betting and just winning the pot almost always. If/when I do c-bet, and he shoves, I think I have to call. One minor note is that I dominate him slightly more often than he dominates me (he has less Qx FD combos). I mean the math is clear, but it just doesn't seem right to bet/fold. Maybe checking back does have a place here... Very interesting! Thanks for the thoughts.
Nice video topic. One hand complaint is:
The Q5o call goes against your whole game plan. You wanted to not rush things, i.e. wait for high equity spots and to maximize number of decisions. Even vs a range of only flush draws you are a dog.
hh!(a,qj,qt,q9) 35.92%
Q5o 64.08%
And I think its overly ambitious to not include an occasional pair hand that you didnt anticipate him checking pf. If you just include A2o your call becomes worse considerably.
hh!(a,qj,qt,q9) 42.71%
Q5o 57.29%
Zachary, if we are getting 64.08%, then it is an instant call, but I do not know where you are getting your numbers from... I do not think that you are including his 6 outs to a pair, which are crucial in our decision. Pokerstove gives us 44.8% vs flush draw and 2 unders.
dantonius, I believe that is a mistake to assume that villain never has an A here. And since our edge is only 3.2% vs a flush draw not Q high, we need to include the possible pairs in the equation, and yes the random A.
Hey Zach and JJ BB, thanks for doing some math homework here! I appreciate you guys bringing a math approach to the discussion, especially since I didn't talk about the math behind this hand at all during the video. Zach I think JS BB is right here with his numbers, and I'm not sure how you came to yours. A simple way to do the math on this hand that should still be very accurate is to use a simple equity calculator to run everything from the flop. Use our exact hands too, because the hand that he did have is exactly the average hand I expect him to have there, and is therefore the average hand in his range. Zach although your numbers are off, your concept is spot on. This is something that JS BB brought up in a post above, and I like where your guys' heads are at on this one. Here is the entire HH if you want to run some numbers or be reminded of the exact hole cards:
PokerStars Hand #92872822188: Tournament #675453354, $80.40+$1.60 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level XXIV (10000/20000) - 2013/01/23 19:45:50 PT [2013/01/23 22:45:50 ET]Table '675453354 1' 6-max Seat #4 is the buttonSeat 3: daysleft7 (277076 in chips) Seat 4: PureCash25 (526924 in chips) daysleft7: posts the ante 4000PureCash25: posts the ante 4000PureCash25: posts small blind 10000daysleft7: posts big blind 20000*** HOLE CARDS ***Dealt to PureCash25 [Qs 5d]PureCash25: calls 10000daysleft7: checks *** FLOP *** [Ac Kh 4h]daysleft7: checks PureCash25: bets 21500daysleft7: raises 231576 to 253076 and is all-inPureCash25: calls 231576*** TURN *** [Ac Kh 4h] [8d]*** RIVER *** [Ac Kh 4h 8d] [3h]*** SHOW DOWN ***daysleft7: shows [6h Th] (a flush, King high)PureCash25: shows [Qs 5d] (high card Ace)daysleft7 collected 554152 from pot*** SUMMARY ***Total pot 554152 | Rake 0 Board [Ac Kh 4h 8d 3h]Seat 3: daysleft7 (big blind) showed [6h Th] and won (554152) with a flush, King highSeat 4: PureCash25 (button) (small blind) showed [Qs 5d] and lost with high card Ace
Just re-read my post, I swapped the equities of your hand with his.*Reminder to self, dont post when tired. What I meant to post was the sims below. I like your reasoning but thinks its too thin particularly in relation to your game plan of low variance.
Hold'em Simulation
(Exhaustive)board: ackh4h
(a,qj,qt,q9) 57.29%
qd5s 42.71%
--------------------------
board: ackh4h
(a,qj,qt,q9),a2$o 64.08%
qd5s 35.92%
First off idd like to say that i enjoyed the vid verry much.I like how u explained the hands and the complexe thinking behind them.I also paused during the vid at the Q5 hand before i red the top comments and put it in pokerstove to see how ur doing in that spot.Because at first sight it seems marginal but if u do the math corectly and take the odds and the equity jj bb is right. ur ahead.I honestly think ur read is 99.9% accurate in that exact sit.i dont think he ever has a random ace there or king.only thing i might see him have is a random 4 and the only reason he shoves there is that he doesnt wanna see any more cards and he knows u wouldf shoved any Kx pre and while u might trap and limp an ace from time to time the chances u traping vs the chances u shoving that ace pre go in favor of shoving.so from my point of view the real worries with that call is him having a 4 or a higher Q flushdraw which would have u in pretty bad shape(but that obviously almost never happens).with all this taken in consideration i still think u have a 2 3% edge and while i might not make that call in a 10 15 min blind structure tournament i would definetly take that edge in a hyperturbo.Again very nice vid and looking forward for more!!glglgl
Hey Joian, thanks! I'm glad you enjoyed the video, and thank you for taking the time to leave a comment. I want to leave a detailed comment since you left such a detailed one yourself, but everything you said I totally agree with. I think he has Ax or Kx a lot less than other people are thinking, and I think a silly 4x is possible though. I admit I didn't realize the math was as close as it was, but now that I know that, I totally agree with your thoughts on if we should take that 2-3% equity. Yes for hyper turbo structure, no for normal 10-15 minute structure. Cheers man, I'll catch you on my next video! Gl.
Hey Nick, great video as always. I think you're one of the best coaches on the internet atm, keep it up sir!
Few things though - I really don't like your check back with Q6 on that Q64r flop. I think it's a flop you'd bet with air 100% of the time and when you check it looks really suspicious. It's a really dry flop and aggro players like to check/raise and barel those. Also if you check the flop I'd say you should check the 3 on the turn too, as he'd probably bet any hand with the equity to beat you himself (like any pair, or 5/7/2x for straight draws), so he can catch up with his K-hi or whatever.
The Q5 on AK4hhx - I'm not a huge fan of this call at all, you said yourself that this play is mostly a draw and sometimes a 4x (tbh I see people do this with a K even because you should never have an ace or good kings; I know it's not a good reason to shove but I see it). You're flipping against fd's (few of which you're not even technically ahead of), you have 20ish % vs. 4x and are almost dead againt Kx.
I'm not sure if your tripple barel with 97o on A53-3-Qr is gonna work super often against a 5x with that sizing. Since you're mostly repping an Ax that most people believe you can never have when you limp the button in a HU game and you're betting 3 streets so small, I think 5x is calling like 90% of the time. Also you give him great odds to do that. I'd like it a lot more if you bet like 95k on the river.
Last thing - Shoving J7o for 12,5bb is not gonna be profitable. Take a look here: http://www.holdemresources.net/hr/sngs/hucalculator.html?action=calculate&r=12. J7o is a shove with 8bbs or less.
Overall it was a great video though and I can't wait for the next one!
Ondra, hey thanks for leaving such a thoughtful comment. This is some really fun stuff to talk about so let's get into it a bit!
Checking back Q6. One thing I keep in mind a lot, maybe too much but I'll address the solution to that in a moment, is my balance heads up. This is a very general concept, one that we're all familiar with. Opinions vary greatly on how important it is in tournaments. I've stated that I don't feel it's of the utmost importance in MTTs given the vast player pool in general, and the big individual field sizes. However, it's important to always keep in mind, and it's crucial to get good at balancing in order to progress to being a great player. In terms of the HU portion of MTTs, I think balance is a bit more important. The reason is you're playing so many more hands with this one specific villain so he'll be able to build up a small, yet progressively more meaningful sample on you and your tendencies as the match progresses. Granted, this is a hyper turbo, so the match figures to be pretty damn short anyways, thus reducing the importance of balance. The whole purpose of these comments on balance is for me to note that if I adopt a strategy to limp most or ATC OTB, I'm going to be left with air most of the time on the flop (as is he of course). It's not believable for me to just cbet every time. This sometimes leads me to checking back a lot of flops, especially when my aim is to control and slow the pace of the match. Since I'd like to check back a bunch of air, I need to check back strong, not very vulnerable hands like this to protect and balance my range. You might say well why not just cbet 100% or near it since he will fold most of the time? Yes, that's correct, and that's my default But here I wanted to control the pace of the match, and also my assumption on his approach led me to believe that he would bet the turn often if I checked back the flop. Now a few blunt notes on this spot. Yes my check looks suspicious, but it doesn't have to in the eyes of this opponent. He may not be thinking that deeply into it. As previously stated, it protects my range for delayed c-betting going forward. While I say I expect a player in this spot to be loose and aggro, I don't often find them using that aggression in semi-sophisticated ways like check raising. More often it's blunt barreling, or lots of opening, or wide/big shoves or reshoves. Fair point about the turn play, I just felt that he could check some stuff with a bit of showdown value, and I wanted to try and get value from that. I also thought this because I expected him to bet the turn with air at a higher frequency than average. Good discussion on this hand.
I agree that there will be some times when the player shows up with a completely logically baffling holding like Kx here. But I've played a lot of these heads up matches, vs a lot of different player types, and in my experience it just happens a lot less than people seem to think it does. I suppose I should tack a number to it. I think that this player will have a FD as much as 95% of the time. Granted the other 5% (maybe more) of the time that he doesn't, certainly must be taken into account. I stand by play because of how often I feel I'll see a FD, but I have to admit that I was thinking the combo of my equity and pot odds would make this spot much more profitable for me than it actually was. Someone did the math above and it was very helpful for me to see the actual math.
Ooo man, this one I'm sold on. Not to be a smartass, but even with your words "it's not going to work super often", I'm good! It doesn't have to, because the price my bet lays me is so favorable for me. But even with that aside, this play works wayyy more often than it should. Way more often. I'm constantly amazed by it too. I mean I was questioning it for years. I'd make a bluff of this size in a similar situation and just be sitting there kind of chuckling to myself saying man, is this really going to work again. Time and time again, the player folds this spot. After a while I stopped questioning it and just realized that it was a pretty consistent play. That has stood the test of time. Of course some players are wise to it now, and will never folds getting such a good price vs such a wide range. Other players are not thinking about the game hard enough for it to work. They say "small bet, I have a pair, easy call". Just like many things in poker, you gotta know the players. I would encourage you to experiment with bet sizes like this and in contexts like this. When the opponent has his range capped, and you can credibly rep so much more of the board than he can, it's a recipe for putting pressure on people and getting folds. Let me know how it works out for you a couple months down the road! Now having said all that, I certainly wouldn't mind a bit of a bigger size on the river, but in order to represent really thin value bets, I think this size is the most credible.
Hey thanks for running the math on that J7o hand. That's very interesting, I'm surprised it's that close. I thought it was clearly a shove in my mind. Your comment and a few others recently makes me realize I really need to hit the books and improve on my math... It's consistently off and too general. Looking at your link, we can shove J8o profitably. To me that says that J7o is like 49.8% or something there, you know? It's not giving away much. I tend to shove slightly wider in HT than in normal speed, because the levels are going up much faster, and that creates extra incentive to keep your opponent at like 10bb, because when the level-up hits, he all of a sudden is reduced to a much more precarious ~8bb level. Also, HT have bigger ante, making for wider push/calling of course, and I'm not sure if that calculation accounted for that. Either way, thanks for running it for me and bringing it to my attention.
Hey cheers man, I appreciate you leaving such a thoughtful comment. I'm glad you enjoyed the video. I've got another one very similar to this about HU play coming out soon. Gl
Wow, thanks for such an extensive reply. You're the man ;)
@Q6 - I understand it now, if you check back this often then it obv makes a lot of sense to check back this too.
@Q-hi vs. fd - I also think you're mostly looking at fd's like 95% of the time, but I just think this is far too high variance of a spot and not really congruent with your slow-the-game-down approach. Not to be a smartass (you're obv much better at poker than me), but I really think it's not that good of a spot if you're flipping 95% of the time and the 5% you're 20% or smashed.
@the bluff - Man, I just feel like everytime I'm tripple barelling in this sort of spot I'm getting called, lol. I mostly play lower stakes (like $5-$40 range) and it doesn't seem to work too often. Believe me, I try a lot! On a more serious note, I've actually lately been experimenting with making larger bets (seing Scott Seiver do it in the $100k PCA high roller and Steve O'dwyer in EPT London) than is the standart in certain spots and it seems to work really well for me. I think it's a lot better esp in limp pots, where people usually don't want to lose much (since it's a limp pot and they have very few chips invested), so if I bet 2/3 pot on the turn they have harder time calling. What do you think?
@J7o - According to the nash thing, J7o is a shove from 8bbs without antes, which I'd say is still more of a shallow stack than 12bbs with antes. Obv you're not giving much at all away (as J8o is a shove for 12bbs), just saying :)
Hey man. That's what I'm here for! Haha. I hope you come back to read this after I took so long to respond. I really enjoyed this post of yours as well. I appreciate your open-mindedness both in considering how hands can be played, and in incorporating my ideas into your current view of poker and these individual hands we're discussing in detail. What I love though, absolutely love, is that you're studying the greats. I don't mean my videos! Haha. I mean watching these super high rollers and guys like O'dwyer and Seiver. Those guys have poker mastered at such a complete level; they're great role models to study and learn from. If you're a student of the game, and put in the time, you will find a great deal of success :D That's the beauty of the poker world.
Now the hands. @Q6: Cool, yeah I feel pretty good about my play and explanation on this one. One note to emphasis is that it's the first pot of the heads up match, so what I do here dictates the strategy I can use going forward to some extent. I check back here because it's the best way to make money in this pot in a vacuum. A few things can happen. I can make a lot of money picking off his bluff. I can make a little money picking off his bluff, with the added benefit of him seeing me check back strong on the flop, thus strengthening my flop check back range and letting me get away with a lot of delayed cbetting (good for pace control and perhaps variance reduction, a bit). I can delayed cbet and win without showdown, and my flop cbetting frequencies are more inline and balanced with what I'd like them to be in the overall context of this match (though not shown down, he still knows I'm not c-betting 100%, he just doesn't know with what hands I'm taking what action).
@ Qhi vs FD: Your statement on this hand makes a ton of sense. It's also quite convincing! I'm still having some trouble converting to that camp though. I think my problem is that once I c-bet and he takes this action, I feel compelled to call given how nearly certain I am of his holding and of my own investment into the pot. Perhaps I'm foolishly clinging to an outdated thought though, as the math clearly shows that I'm only a slight favorite, in the most favorable of circumstances. This was very counter to my thought at the time, where I assumed that the math worked out much more favorably for me. I think you're teaching this old dog new tricks, hah.
@ bluff: Really good stuff here man. I'm loving the way you're approaching this spot (and poker in general). I love that you are experimenting, and trying out new things that you see from other players in your own games. "Believe me, I try a lot" Hahah, that was funny. This will be very general advice, but since you're getting called most of the time in these spots, I would encourage you to place more emphasis on identifying your villains You gotta know your players. Some guys simply won't fold, no matter what your bet size, your timing, your image. There are guys that think of poker in this way " I have JT, AJ8 flop. I have made my pair! Pair of jacks is pretty good. I will call him whenever he bets because I have a pair of jacks" There could be literally no thought to what your hand is, or that you even have a hand! I realize that at the 5-40 buyin level the player pool is so huge. But I would encourage you to try to find something on each player at the table, some tiny note, that you can use to deduce what kind of a player each of your opponents actually is. Knowing something like this ahead of time will improve your success rate a ton when you make these bluffs, particularly with a small bet size. Another note is to take into account the situation. I find that players fold more in higher pressure situations. Whether that's a final table, or a big pot in the middle of the tournament, or against a known player that they're afraid to make a mistake against and afraid to do something that will make them look "silly". Pressure can take many different forms , and if some of it is present, you will get more folds on your bluffs. Generally, but again, you must know your players! Some people are afraid to fold in pressure spots and be perceived as scared or weak. Us Italians especially, too much pride! I think when you're considering what bet size to use, the math behind it all is a big foundation. If you think using a 2/3 size will result in enough more folds than a 1/2 size, enough to compensate for the additonal money you're investing to bet, then it's worth it. I would pick a few hands out and work through the numbers yourself. You'll get some familiarity with the numbers and how they work with one anonther. That will translate to a pretty good ability to estimate on the fly during the game. Soon you'll be able to quickly identify opponents that will respond the way you want them too if you use a certain bet size. You'll also have the confidence that the math you're basing all of this on is right (or damn close) because you've put in the work away from the table.
Keep up the good work man, I look forward to seeing how some of your experiments go!
really nice vid Nick. Congrats
what is your limp range against:
1) ultra agroo opponent (30bb eff stacks)
2) passive player (20 bb eff stacks)
3) top tricky poker player (30bb)
Hey man, thanks! I'm glad you liked the video. Thanks for leaving such a specific question. It's always tough to answer when someone says something general like "How do you play heads up?" Or "When do you limp?". I always answer well it depends on X, Y, and Z. You took the guess work out of that, so I can answer these pretty well. Disclaimer though. These guidelines are for what I'd generally do, or usually do. There certainly could be, and are, game conditions or some other factor that causes me to change my plan. As a player in-game, you always need to be aware that these things are out there, and how to adjust accordingly.
1. This player and this stack depth have a lot of options. In general I think it's best to tighten up ranges to enter the pot a little bit from the button, be it limping or raising, and then widen up ranges for continuing. Call 3 bets wider, 4 bet/call wider, etc. Another viable option is to limp basically your whole range. He figures to be raising your limps from the BB wide (possibly too wide) and you can then call those raises IP, and have plenty of stack depth (~30bb) to maneuver postflop. That maneuverability is key as compared to is you had 15-20 bb, when you limp/call a 3x, the stack to pot ratio doesn't allow you much wiggle room. This also has the benefit of taking away his ability to 3b you. Since he's ultra aggro, that's likely to be one of his most used weapons HU. You can even take it one step further and mix in some limp RR yourself. This leverages his stack extremely well, and it's credible. Since you're limping your whole range, he knows you can have AA AQ and 77 to here so you rep extremely well.
2. Here you can take your pick! On the one hand he's passive so ATC MR OTB sounds pretty appealing because of the sub-optimal resistance you'll encounter. On the other, limping sounds good because he won't punish it or put up much of a fight postflop. You're sort of catering to his comfort zone by doing that, and with 20bb every preflop win is pretty important, so I would advice an ATC OTB MR with tiny c-bets postflop. You could get tricky and limp your good hands and try to make dominating or higher pairs post and stack him, while MRing your shit hands since he'll be folding too much both pre and post.
3. Here you have two options. You can either try and bullshit a bullshitter, or you can you just play straight up aggressive. The difference from scenario one is that this guy will likely be wise to all your tricks and ranges. Limping for range disguise and to slow him down won't work as it did vs player one, because he'll have a proper adjustment for it. Still, you can attempt to out-maneuver him and play a super fun psychology game with him, but honestly if he's a top player that might be a losing battle. In this case I would try my best to level the playing field. I would raise ATC OTB, limping never. Now he knows what my open range is, which is good for us, because now we know how he will respond. Once he sees up open ATC, he will respond fairly predictably Even if that predictably involves some tricky big pair slowplays, or lots of flop CR as bluffs, we'll have an understanding that he'll combat our wide ranges aggressively. In turn that allows us to readjust, and open up our ranges. A final note. This is counter-intuitive but against top players like this, you actually want to increase the variance. This is for the same reason why normally we don't want variance, it causes our edge to be realized in unpredictable fashion, and potentially over a much longer term than we'd like. That's what we want to do to the player who has an edge over us.
I hope this helped! Let me know if I can clarify anything or if you have any follow up questions. I'll check back here soon. Gl.
VN NICK! Thanks a million!
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.