Poker God or Cheating Scum?

Just for a start without getting into the fact that he helped set up the stream and has significant knowledge in this area and some other evidence.

We have this guy that's been playing poker for a long time. During most of that time he seems to be a good poker player, but certainly not a brilliant poker player. We even have some evidence of his play before the time period he was suspected of cheating. They have even pinpointed the moment he started cheating. He goes from just a good player to a God instantaneously. Not only that, everything about his mannerisms, body positions, personality and style of play suddenly changes. He begins to play as perfectly as humanly possible as if he can see the other person's cards. His checks, bet's end table talk is tailored perfectly to induced calls, bets, razors bluffs, folds all in his favor. The guy is able to call preflop with any two cards and still find a way to extract the most value or lose the absolute least possible when he has no chance to win.

He claims to have soul reads on people and all this other BS when half the time he's not even looking at the people since is looking at this phone under the table in his lap. Whenever there is a glitch with the Stream or he's not using his phone in his lap or doing strange things with his hat he suddenly loses his superpowers.

As we can see, anyone with knowledge more than watching poker on TV and reading things here and there, see him guilty and everyone else predominantly says probably. Put him in your death pools next year I'd say, suicide risk has to be high for something like this.

Stone Gambling Hall has announced they have assembled a computer forensics team, with nationally known computer forensics experts, to examine the server. If they go into backup files and find the IP address of Postle's phone in the list of platforms to stream to, then that would be hard evidence.

Atty. Michael Lipman in @sacbee_news: “We believe that the definitive evidence will be found by forensically examining the computer systems used to broadcast the stream.” We have retained forensic specialists @strozfriedberg to perform this analysis.

One could speculate whether the forensics team might cover up any damning evidence - but I cannot imagine they will do so, because that would clearly constitute criminal fraud on the part of the experts and the owners of the Stones hall..

Quote: gordonm888

Stone Gambling Hall has announced they have assembled a computer forensics team, with nationally known computer forensics experts, to examine the server. If they go into backup files and find the IP address of Postle's phone in the list of platforms to stream to, then that would be hard evidence.

I don't think there is collusion here because if i were the one who helped set up the stream, i would just set my phones IP address as the IP address of the first device within the streaming list of IPs, and the server would just simultaneously stream to my phone as well. Depending on how sophisticated the program is written, as well as the network equipment being used, they most likely dont check for multiple MAC addresses coming from the same IP address. I would look for MAC address logs after I would look for the IP logs because IP address can be spoofed almost as easily as MAC addresses. Its just most people dont know how networks function so they have NO clue that they actually have a physical address associated with their device as well. Regaurdless there is some kind of trail, if mike wasn't good enough to make sure he covered his trail which it looks like this guy has no clue what hes doing when it comes to cheating.

Instead of trial, just have him go play Live at the Bike or one of the other streams. If he can pull off winning similar to what he's been doing at Stones, then he is a poker god and he walks. But chances are (100%), that he plays like a damn fish, gets rekt, and he gets sent off to the gulag, which is fair.

Quote: gordonm888

Stone Gambling Hall has announced they have assembled a computer forensics team, with nationally known computer forensics experts, to examine the server. If they go into backup files and find the IP address of Postle's phone in the list of platforms to stream to, then that would be hard evidence.

Atty. Michael Lipman in @sacbee_news: “We believe that the definitive evidence will be found by forensically examining the computer systems used to broadcast the stream.” We have retained forensic specialists @strozfriedberg to perform this analysis.

One could speculate whether the forensics team might cover up any damning evidence - but I cannot imagine they will do so, because that would clearly constitute criminal fraud on the part of the experts and the owners of the Stones hall..

This is a good move.

Hard evidence will be found or it will not (I have a feeling even if nothing is found some people will still be convinced of his guilt).

But, either way it should settle the minds of most people.

Long post coming... hope not TLDR.

At a trial the prosecution will show a SPECIFIC hand. It will be some sort of 'hero call' where it is clear to US that he knew the other player's cards. But then the defense will be able to show an equally improbable hero call that occurred in real play with two other players.
The prosecution will be able to show a fold that none of us would ever find. But the defense will find a similar 'clairvoyant' fold by someone else.

If you had to say any ONE hand there was definitely cheating you would fail. There are bizarre decisions and lucky guesses all the time in poker. It would be whether the prosecutor would be able to convince the jurors that if you add up all the improbable events that is enough evidence. WE all know it is. But a jury.....

Years ago I was the defendant in a malpractice case. I cannot describe how horrific an experience it was. First of all, there is a patient with a bad outcome that you feel bad about. Second, I knew I did nothing wrong. Third, I had to meet with my defense lawyer every Saturday and Sunday for a few MONTHS before the trial. Sometimes for all day. So work all week and trial prep all weekend. There were occasional depositions during the week that I had to use "vacation" time to attend. As is usually the case in these very complicated cases, there are multiple defendants blamed. So there are multiple lawyers involved from multiple parties.

If I tried to explain the issues to a group of VERY SMART people, like the mathletes here on the WoV forum, it would not be easy.
(Making up next part as an example....)
"Jurors, whatever you hear from the defense, Mr. Smith entered the hospital with two legs but he now only has one. Clearly Dr. SOOPOO messed up." I may have five experts who would say... "Research shows that the majority of the time Dr. SOOPOO's plan would have worked, and there was no better plan available before Mr. Smith's operation...." And they get one paid "expert" who would say, "I would have done it differently".

So juror #1 was a morbidly obese man, wearing a white T shirt with last night's pizza sauce still on it. He was supposed to be made to understand the choices of drugs, ventilator settings, fluid choices, etc...?
Juror #2 was a kindly older lady who had tears welling up in her eyes as the plaintiff was wheelchaired in missing a leg.

You think they give a HOOT if the big bad insurance company has to pay the limping guy a few million dollars?

I am precluded from giving the final result of this exact trial. I am told all I can say is "The matter has been resolved".

So I would bet that there is a strong possibility of a settlement, which in a criminal trial is known as a plea bargain. Neither side wants a trial. My guess is they will go to Postle's lawyer and say something like this.... We know you had accomplices. Give us their names and testimony against them and we agree to a low level felony and you spend just a year in jail. If we find one of them first, and that hoodlem takes the deal first your offer is off the table.
If the prosecution is able to find actual evidence of the computers being hacked or streamed to Postle, then that would just give the prosecution more leverage in the negotiations.

I suspect that expert witnesses, like Polk, will be happy to testify that Postle is either cheating, or the best player ever by far, only when staring at his lap.

They can probably dig up some broke SOBs who had poker notoriety at one time to say anything for a few k. Cross examination might be tough for them though.


Something like 90% of criminal cases result in pleas, which is kind of messed up.

One lawyer argues that if postle is charged with fraud or larceny, every session or even every hand could be considered a count. This might mean he is facing major time and will feel compelled to accept a short sentence.

While this is the best case scenario for bringing him to justice, it seems somewhat unfair. He deserves his day in court and I don't think many people believe he should be sentenced like a murderer.

That is absolutely the wrong thing to do. Think trump and his own team investigating his campaigns.
Sorry, Stone will cover it up. Why would they 'assemble' their own team, when the first investigation was bullshit and by their own people?
I'm surprised there are any digital files left to investigate. They have been destroying evidence since the first video. Was the first whistleblower ripped off by Mike?

If this is to get truly cleared up and investigated, it would have to be by a totally independent team not related to the gambling industry whatsoever. And certainly not anyone associated with Stone, or their hand picked team.

And you think they're worried about criminal fraud? You must be under 30 years old.

And the other point is none of this story is even in the national news, or general public. It's in the shady world of internet gambling. You know, mostly illegal in the states anyhow. What, 90% done off shore and some in Canada. Who even knows or gives a shit. Only the online gambling gambling community.

This will be a 30 second blurb to the general public maybe, but it's huge to online players.

To each their own.

There's no doubt in my mind that the whole organization is in on it, and now Mike may be the fall guy. Did he know this going in on the scam? Probably not.
And as usual, the lamb will be slaughtered and the real guilty will walk and do it again.

Quote: Gandler

This is a good move.

Hard evidence will be found or it will not (I have a feeling even if nothing is found some people will still be convinced of his guilt).

But, either way it should settle the minds of most people.

Nobody who knows poker would be satisfied without an explanation.

Actually, I know nothing about chess. Or bridge. If someone was the best the world has ever seen in those games sometimes, and mediocre other times, with huge changes in body language, dress, timing and disposition, I would hold the same view, as I think most would.

Plus the numerous other factors already discussed. A guy who can play computer perfect chess in one particular venue, but nowhere else. Never enters a big competition.

Postle is actually way better than a computer though. More like an alien.

Quote: SOOPOO

Long post coming... hope not TLDR.

At a trial the prosecution will show a SPECIFIC hand. It will be some sort of 'hero call' where it is clear to US that he knew the other player's cards. But then the defense will be able to show an equally improbable hero call that occurred in real play with two other players.
The prosecution will be able to show a fold that none of us would ever find. But the defense will find a similar 'clairvoyant' fold by someone else.

If you had to say any ONE hand there was definitely cheating you would fail. There are bizarre decisions and lucky guesses all the time in poker. It would be whether the prosecutor would be able to convince the jurors that if you add up all the improbable events that is enough evidence. WE all know it is. But a jury.....

Years ago I was the defendant in a malpractice case. I cannot describe how horrific an experience it was. First of all, there is a patient with a bad outcome that you feel bad about. Second, I knew I did nothing wrong. Third, I had to meet with my defense lawyer every Saturday and Sunday for a few MONTHS before the trial. Sometimes for all day. So work all week and trial prep all weekend. There were occasional depositions during the week that I had to use "vacation" time to attend. As is usually the case in these very complicated cases, there are multiple defendants blamed. So there are multiple lawyers involved from multiple parties.

If I tried to explain the issues to a group of VERY SMART people, like the mathletes here on the WoV forum, it would not be easy.
(Making up next part as an example....)
"Jurors, whatever you hear from the defense, Mr. Smith entered the hospital with two legs but he now only has one. Clearly Dr. SOOPOO messed up." I may have five experts who would say... "Research shows that the majority of the time Dr. SOOPOO's plan would have worked, and there was no better plan available before Mr. Smith's operation...." And they get one paid "expert" who would say, "I would have done it differently".

So juror #1 was a morbidly obese man, wearing a white T shirt with last night's pizza sauce still on it. He was supposed to be made to understand the choices of drugs, ventilator settings, fluid choices, etc...?
Juror #2 was a kindly older lady who had tears welling up in her eyes as the plaintiff was wheelchaired in missing a leg.

You think they give a HOOT if the big bad insurance company has to pay the limping guy a few million dollars?

I am precluded from giving the final result of this exact trial. I am told all I can say is "The matter has been resolved".

So I would bet that there is a strong possibility of a settlement, which in a criminal trial is known as a plea bargain. Neither side wants a trial. My guess is they will go to Postle's lawyer and say something like this.... We know you had accomplices. Give us their names and testimony against them and we agree to a low level felony and you spend just a year in jail. If we find one of them first, and that hoodlem takes the deal first your offer is off the table.
If the prosecution is able to find actual evidence of the computers being hacked or streamed to Postle, then that would just give the prosecution more leverage in the negotiations.

Very long post indeed.

Question: Did you kill someone or not?

Quote: AxelWolf

Very long post indeed.

Question: Did you kill someone or not?

This case was not a death.

I have been involved with dozens of patients who died. May even make it to a hundred. It's what happens when you work in a trauma hospital. Gunshots, bad car accidents. Severe burns. These people sometimes die despite our best efforts.

Quote: Rigondeaux

Nobody who knows poker would be satisfied without an explanation.

Actually, I know nothing about chess. Or bridge. If someone was the best the world has ever seen in those games sometimes, and mediocre other times, with huge changes in body language, dress, timing and disposition, I would hold the same view, as I think most would.

Plus the numerous other factors already discussed. A guy who can play computer perfect chess in one particular venue, but nowhere else. Never enters a big competition.

Postle is actually way better than a computer though. More like an alien.

There's a recent chess scandal (you will have to look it up) basically, an aging grand master (I think) suddenly starts to gets significantly better and start winning. Most people don't get better like that with age. People begin to suspect he's cheating. They follow him into the bathroom and get a video of him using a chess program on breaks in the bathroom stall.

Quote: AxelWolf

There's a recent chess scandal (you will have to look it up) basically, an aging grand master (I think) suddenly starts to gets significantly better and start winning. Most people don't get better like that with age. People begin to suspect he's cheating. They follow him into the bathroom and get a video of him using a chess program on breaks in the bathroom stall.

I bet you were surprised to find that story when you googled "hidden camera men's room."

Quote: AxelWolf

There's a recent chess scandal (you will have to look it up) basically, an aging grand master (I think) suddenly starts to gets significantly better and start winning. Most people don't get better like that with age. People begin to suspect he's cheating. They follow him into the bathroom and get a video of him using a chess program on breaks in the bathroom stall.

so, they were taking a video of him while he was on the crapper?

thru the door slits?

why do I feel there is a better chance of invasion of privacy lawsuits being filed here by the grandmaster?

JUST WHAT ANGLE DID THEY ACHIEVE THRU THE DOOR SLITS OF THE BATHROOM STALL THAT THEY COULD DETERMINE WHAT HE WAS PERUSING????

EDIT: ok, looked it up. He is not allowed any phone access at all during a game. so based on that...

There is a new phrase in the poker world: "crotch theory optimal" poker play. It is when you do not look at the table or your opponents, but instead stare at your crotch until suddenly your head pops up and you make some astonishing fold or bet that always turns out be perfectly correct as if you knew the opponent's hole cards.

Again, all of us make judgments, decisions and form opinions on all sorts of matters in our lives without smoking-gun evidence. We would all be paralyzed if we insisted on 100% certainty before forming an opinion or acting.

There is a concept in law called "reasonable doubt" - you may not be imprisoned if a jury believes there is reasonable doubt about guilt. But civic litigation juries and all of society are indeed permitted to punish people (in legal ways) if they have a reasonable doubt about an individual's innocence. You may indeed be banned from entering a private area, you may be shunned by a society, you may be denied a promotion or not hired by an employer because they have a reasonable doubt about your innocence.

I trust that everyone posting on this thread -and virtually everyone in the poker world - has a reasonable doubt about Postle's innocence. At the least, society will punish him for his crotch-theory optimal play. He will be shunned and banned and despised. We need no smoking gun for that.

Quote: Rigondeaux

Nobody who knows poker would be satisfied without an explanation.

Actually, I know nothing about chess. Or bridge. If someone was the best the world has ever seen in those games sometimes, and mediocre other times, with huge changes in body language, dress, timing and disposition, I would hold the same view, as I think most would.

Plus the numerous other factors already discussed. A guy who can play computer perfect chess in one particular venue, but nowhere else. Never enters a big competition.

Postle is actually way better than a computer though. More like an alien.

I don't watch or play at Stones (and never have) nor have I met or even heard of this guy before about 2-3 weeks ago. So I have no personal knowledge of connection to any of this.

But, I have seen interviews with pretty large names who vouched for his skill.

What I do know is his statements that he plays aggressive.

I have no reason to condemn somebody who I have never experienced.

I will wait for the Stones new investigation that includes data review before coming to judgement.

If the Civil case is not successful and the investigation finds no wrongdoing, I have no reason to override the opinions of the jury and investigators.

I will wait for hard evidence before rushing to judgment. I have seen a lot of sour losers pile on to accuse others of cheating (not just in Poker, but all over), so this is possible. It's possible he is cheating. It's also possible he is a good player/reader who plays mostly against not very good players (which also seems to be a trend in many videos).....

Stones already suspended their streaming program, so even if that was his way of cheating, it will not be possible any more.

Quote: Gandler

I don't watch or play at Stones (and never have) nor have I met or even heard of this guy before about 2-3 weeks ago. So I have no personal knowledge of connection to any of this.

But, I have seen interviews with pretty large names who vouched for his skill.

What I do know is his statements that he plays aggressive.

I have no reason to condemn somebody who I have never experienced.

I will wait for the Stones new investigation that includes data review before coming to judgement.

If the Civil case is not successful and the investigation finds no wrongdoing, I have no reason to override the opinions of the jury and investigators.

I will wait for hard evidence before rushing to judgment. I have seen a lot of sour losers pile on to accuse others of cheating (not just in Poker, but all over), so this is possible. It's possible he is cheating. It's also possible he is a good player/reader who plays mostly against not very good players (which also seems to be a trend in many videos).....

Stones already suspended their streaming program, so even if that was his way of cheating, it will not be possible any more.

Are you the same person that thought the security guards were innocent (or whatever) when they attacked that family in an AC casino ?

What names vouch for him at that level of skill? Do they claim he is the best in the universe to have ever lived, and plays like a GOD all while staring at his crotch?

Quote: gordonm888

There is a new phrase in the poker world: "crotch theory optimal" poker play. It is when you do not look at the table or your opponents, but instead stare at your crotch until suddenly your head pops up and you make some astonishing fold or bet that always turns out be perfectly correct as if you knew the opponent's hole cards.

Again, all of us make judgments, decisions and form opinions on all sorts of matters in our lives without smoking-gun evidence. We would all be paralyzed if we insisted on 100% certainty before forming an opinion or acting.

There is a concept in law called "reasonable doubt" - you may not be imprisoned if a jury believes there is reasonable doubt about guilt. But civic litigation juries and all of society are indeed permitted to punish people (in legal ways) if they have a reasonable doubt about an individual's innocence. You may indeed be banned from entering a private area, you may be shunned by a society, you may be denied a promotion or not hired by an employer because they have a reasonable doubt about your innocence.

I trust that everyone posting on this thread -and virtually everyone in the poker world - has a reasonable doubt about Postle's innocence. At the least, society will punish him for his crotch-theory optimal play. He will be shunned and banned and despised. We need no smoking gun for that.

There's no REASONABLE doubt. I'm sure someone could conjure up some Unreasonable doubt or they just don't have any clue.

Quote: AxelWolf

There's no REASONABLE doubt. I'm sure someone could conjure up some Unreasonable doubt or they just don't have any clue.

There is also no proof.

The Sacramento Bee instead received a comment from Postle's attorney William Portanova who implied Postle's winning streak was within the realm of possibility.

“I guess he wins a lot of hands of poker. I don’t gamble, because that’s how many hands I lose. But we don’t know what the facts are. I can just say this: When I play poker I lose almost every hand, so I know such streaks are possible.”

This lawyer probably does not realize how stupid he sounds.

Quote: AxelWolf

Are you the same person that thought the security guards were innocent (or whatever) when they attacked that family in an AC casino ?

What names vouch for him at that level of skill? Do they claim he is the best in the universe to have ever lived, and plays like a GOD all while staring at his crotch?

Yes I was (justified not innocent). And, if security and the floor were actively and aggressively enforcing rules and dress code here, none of this would be an ongoing issue.


But, to answer the more relevant question, Mike Matusow for a well-known one.

Quote: gordonm888

The Sacramento Bee instead received a comment from Postle's attorney William Portanova who implied Postle's winning streak was within the realm of possibility.

“I guess he wins a lot of hands of poker. I don’t gamble, because that’s how many hands I lose. But we don’t know what the facts are. I can just say this: When I play poker I lose almost every hand, so I know such streaks are possible.”

This lawyer probably does not realize how stupid he sounds.

And a jury could easily have several like minded people.

Quote: DRich

There is also no proof.

What do you mean by proof? Given that DNA matches can be false 1 in 4: billion times, are they proof?

We can't really prove that we aren't in the matrix.

Quote: Rigondeaux

What do you mean by proof? Given that DNA matches can be false 1 in 4: billion times, are they proof?

We can't really prove that we aren't in the matrix.

I may get suspended, but I am embarrassed that there is anyone who has any even minimal knowledge about poker does not believe he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. He cheated. There is NO doubt. They may not be able to explain it to a bunch of low IQ jurors who do not play poker, but I would hope if the WoV forum was the jury the evidence is already there for an easy CONVICTION.

Edit. My incompetent formatting..... the "I may get... sentence is mine.

Mod edit: fixed.

Need help from an administrator
(Mod edit: fixed above)
Please see the post above me, from Soopoo it quotes me as saying:
**********************************************
Quote: gordonm888



What do you mean by proof? Given that DNA matches can be false 1 in 4: billion times, are they proof?

We can't really prove that we aren't in the matrix.
**********************************************************************

I never said any of that! (Edit: I realize that Rigondeaux said it) I am not requesting that Soopoo be suspended, because I don't believe he meant to cause me harm or misquote me - but I request that the post be edited in some way -please, perhaps you can take my name off of it or something. This is just weird.

Quote: Gandler

Yes I was (justified not innocent). And, if security and the floor were actively and aggressively enforcing rules and dress code here, none of this would be an ongoing issue.


But, to answer the more relevant question, Mike Matusow for a well-known one.

If that's your example and Mike P's hope then he's FKed.

Artie Lange is well known as well I bet he would make for a good character/expert witness in some areas as well.

Quote: AxelWolf

If that's your example and Mike P's hope then he's FKed.

Artie Lange is well known as well I bet he would make for a good character/expert witness in some areas as well.

I don't know anything about Lange's poker play or opinions about Postle.

But, Matusow is a pretty well known player. Several WSOP bracelets, and countless events. He also is the only pro to actually interview him since the allegations (that I can find)....

But, Postle's only defense has to be deny everything, and hope no evidence is found (if he was guilty). There are many other players who seem to vouch for him (this is not super relevant)....



'STONES INVESTIGATOR: "MOST OF WHAT THEY’VE SAID IS CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AS TO WHAT MAY HAVE HAPPENED. HOWEVER, WE BELIEVE THAT THE DEFINITIVE EVIDENCE WILL BE FOUND BY FORENSICALLY EXAMINING THE COMPUTER SYSTEMS USED TO BROADCAST THE STREAM." '



If they investigate their operation and find wrongdoing I am happy to concede such, if they find no wrongdoing I am happy that I did not rush to judgement. As of now even their own investigators when investigating their operation are admitting that everything is circumstantial and hypothetical...

Quote: Gandler

I don't know anything about Lange's poker play or opinions about Postle.

But, Matusow is a pretty well known player. Several WSOP bracelets, and countless events. He also is the only pro to actually interview him since the allegations (that I can find)....

Matusow is a convicted felon who has served prison time for selling drugs and who has since admitted that he was high when he did his interview with Mike Postle.

I am concluding that Gandler's posts are not based upon deep funds of wisdom and experience with poker. He supports a casino's right to ban BJ counters without "smoking gun proof" but when a casino cheats the players he requires "smoking gun proof" -as if videos of Postle checking the phone in his lap before making his decisions is not proof. I think I will stop reading his posts.

The only pro vouching for him is Matusow who is viewed as a joke in the poker community. His “interview” was a load of shit that he conducted while stoned. Matusow is a former (possibly using again I guess) drug addict who went to jail for selling drugs. He says he was coerced into selling them by a federal agent but I’m not going to believe the drug addict was coerced into selling drugs. Just my opinion and imo his opinion is worthless.

I don't really know anything about poker. AFAICT, he's guilty beyond a shadow of a reasonable dugout.

He isn't playing computer perfectly -- he's playing computer perfectly with HC information. If he were playing blackjack, he wouldn't be standing on the 16v6 when he knows the dealer has an ace in the hole. If he's got 3,3 vs T, he's splitting and double-after-splitting with 7 because he knows the dealer has a 5 in the hole. Computer perfect isn't terrible hard as it's just basic strategy, although in poker it's not as easy as BJ. But playing the way he was playing -- the only explanation is knowing the hole cards. Without knowing the hole cards in BJ, you simple can't make money by hitting 16 vs 6 or splitting 3,3 vs T with any frequency.

People aren't saying he's guilty because of this one hand or whatever. It's over hundreds and hundreds of decisions. Not only are the hands damn near certainty of cheating, but everything else. His mannerisms at the table, the constant looking at cell phone / keys on table / hat bulge. There was a PLO hand where the cards did't register all 4 (or only 2) and he was viciously trying to re-scan the RFIDs -- and oh look, after that didn't work, he's playing with both hands on table instead of his left one on his lap.

From what it looks like, his only losing days fall in line with when that producer or whoever (Justin?) was out of town. Surely that's a coincidence, right? RIGHT???

Some of the hands get pretty ridiculous. He's got 4,5 vs two opponents that each have A,K and he plays it as if he has some premium hand. Wtf? What do you do when you flop the second strongest hand? You fold, just like Postle, right? And weak starting hands you play aggressively -- yup, that's a winner's strategy right there.

What happens when he makes a totally out of this world ridiculous play and there's zero logic for why he did it? Ah, it was the RFID that got messed up...just change his cards on screen to the only logical hand to make that play. Because RFID can certainly mess up like that, right?

Stones calls the allegations completely fabricated - then they do their own 0.0 second investigation to find no cheating. Obviously they receive a bunch of pushback so they hire an independent team to do an investigation -- seems legit until you learn the lead investigator is one of their lawyers.

Postle also had (apparently) access to the streaming equipment set up or something like that before it all started. Idk exactly what went on there, though.

Edit: Oh, and it seems like no one can find a hand that he didn't play perfectly as if he had HC info. Hmm...


Any of these things by themselves you could say it's a coincidence. But add everything together -- he's definitely cheating.

Quote: RS

Edit: Oh, and it seems like no one can find a hand that he didn't play perfectly as if he had HC info. Hmm...

Oh, they found lots of those hands. They just happened to be pre god mode, or when he wasn't looking at his phone, or his hat was on backwards missing a lump, or the stream was broken.

Quote: gordonm888

I think I will stop reading his posts.

You must remember, this is coming from a guy who thought it was Justified for security guards too beat down an innocent family(one was non-threatening teenage girl) as they were trying to leave the Casino. If I recall correctly, there was a problem all because the casino made some kind of mistake and was kicking them out of their room or not letting them check in.

I wonder what those people ended up getting? Anyone know?

So holecarding is acceptable at BJ, but not in poker? Is everyone here saying that were they to find themselves in this position, they don't use it to their advantage?

Quote: AxelWolf

You must remember, this is coming from a guy who thought it was Justified for security guards too beat down an innocent family(one was non-threatening teenage girl) as they were trying to leave the Casino. If I recall correctly, there was a problem all because the casino made some kind of mistake and was kicking them out of their room or not letting them check in.

I wonder what those people ended up getting? Anyone know?

Nothing, I tuned out being right as usual.


The mayor did bow to political pressure , and prohibit AC Police from working security for Casinos after the public outrage of these incidents at Harrahs.

But please keep that discussion in the proper thread.

Quote: gordonm888

Matusow is a convicted felon who has served prison time for selling drugs and who has since admitted that he was high when he did his interview with Mike Postle.

I am concluding that Gandler's posts are not based upon deep funds of wisdom and experience with poker. He supports a casino's right to ban BJ counters without "smoking gun proof" but when a casino cheats the players he requires "smoking gun proof" -as if videos of Postle checking the phone in his lap before making his decisions is not proof. I think I will stop reading his posts.

Gordonm888,

Since you're following this thread closely, I will give you 24 hours to delete the insult to this forum in your signature. If it's still there at that point, then I will ban you until you find a (more difficult, admittedly) way to get it deleted. Your call.

Quote: gordonm888

Need help from an administrator
(Mod edit: fixed above)
Please see the post above me, from Soopoo it quotes me as saying:
**********************************************
Quote: gordonm888



What do you mean by proof? Given that DNA matches can be false 1 in 4: billion times, are they proof?

We can't really prove that we aren't in the matrix.
**********************************************************************

I never said any of that! (Edit: I realize that Rigondeaux said it) I am not requesting that Soopoo be suspended, because I don't believe he meant to cause me harm or misquote me - but I request that the post be edited in some way -please, perhaps you can take my name off of it or something. This is just weird.

I am not sure how that happened. But moments after I added an edit to say it was my quote, not yours. I'm happy an administrator fixed it.

Quote: gordonm888

Matusow is a convicted felon who has served prison time for selling drugs and who has since admitted that he was high when he did his interview with Mike Postle.

I am concluding that Gandler's posts are not based upon deep funds of wisdom and experience with poker. He supports a casino's right to ban BJ counters without "smoking gun proof" but when a casino cheats the players he requires "smoking gun proof" -as if videos of Postle checking the phone in his lap before making his decisions is not proof. I think I will stop reading his posts.

Do you have evidence of me saying any such thing?

The incidents at Harrahs had nothing to do with BJ....

For the record I have actually defended the NJ code that protects the rights of BJ play (you cannot be banned simply for playing well as long as you do not use any physical cheating methods). I have also said I wish for more States to adopt such Codes/Laws.

Counting at BJ is not even similar at all to cheating at Poker with the help of a device (if that turns out to be the case here).... One is all in the mind (unless you use a communication device which is illegal pretty much everywhere and should be) and one is using a device to steal data to gain an unfair advantage.

- I honestly don't care about the insult, but I do care about people inventing views which are completely wrong.... -



There is an old quote, (which I am probably badly paraphrasing), When everyone in a group is aggressively agreeing and condemning somebody, perhaps that should be a red flag. There was an article I read this morning about how the Postle scandal is great because it is bringing all of the Poker Community together on a common view (or common enemy), I don't think this should be regarded as a good thing, especially while it is still being investigated.

If people want to hate me for waiting for evidence, that is fine. As I said, if cheating is found I am happy to admit such. If no cheating is found, I am not forced to backpeddle. I do not feel this is an abnormal view to hold, on most issues it is generally the most rational view to hold.

The fact that so many people are piling on does not change my view (if anything it reinforces it). If you are going to push for legal action and criminal prosecution before the evidence comes out or the investigation results are released, that is wrong (in my mind). If you simply do not want to play with him, that is your right regardless of your reasoning.

As for Matusow doing drugs in the past? Who cares.... He has said that he was not on drugs on the interview podcast ( though it's ironic that, if he was drinking beers during a poker podcast nobody would care....) I have no reason to think that he was... There is a lot of crime in poker and gambling communities, personal drug use years ago hardly reaches the top of the charts in anything....

Quote: billryan

So holecarding is acceptable at BJ, but not in poker? Is everyone here saying that were they to find themselves in this position, they don't use it to their advantage?

Read up on what's going on if you're making that post seriously.

Quote: RS

Read up on what's going on if you're making that post seriously.

I can't help but notice you didn't answer the question.

q=Gandler]I

But, I have seen interviews with pretty large names who vouched for his skill.

You said names. You gave one.

Mike m did not vouch for his skill, to my knowledge. He said we should keep an open mind. He actually said he'd only seen a couple hands going into the pod, suggesting he didn't know postles skill level.

Doing so allowed him to get postle on his podcast. The hottest interview in poker.

In this tweet, he acknowledged that he was motivated by getting postle on his show.

https://mobile.twitter.com/themouthmatusow/status/1180235727956660224

In fairness, he later said things like, the evidence looks damning, but we should wait for everything to come out before mobbing the guy. Basically, he is pretty sure the guy is guilty but maybe there is some crazy explaination.

Even matasau wants some kind of explanation for what occurred. He's not saying that if postle didn't hack the computer, he should be considered innocent. (someone could have been relaying him the info)

So basically, you've got a has been who got a ton of attention... Here I am linking his twitter, by remaining neutral for a while then back peddling, and who admitted he had ulterior motives. And who now says the case against postle looks "damning"

Do you have any other examples, or are you willing to admit you were in error here?

Quote: billryan

I can't help but notice you didn't answer the question.

The allegation is the use of an electronic device to get everyone’s hole cards. Not that the player next to him flashed him his hole cards every so often.

Another non-answer.

Bill, people have different views on if you should hole card in poker. Meaning, if someone does not protect their hand, is it ethical to look at their cards.

At lower stakes vs recreational players many people will warn the opponent once, then freely take advantage. But that's kind of being nice.

At higher stakes, I think most say it's on you to protect your hand. Particularly as a pro.

An exception imo is if someone has a physical limitation.

Casinos and dealers are pros playing seriously. It's on them to protect.

No, I would note super use in poker. Of course, especially on line where you could make millions, it would be tempting. But I would consider it stealing and I think I would refrain from becoming a thief.

Quote: billryan

Another non-answer.

If you want to reask your question without the embedded false premises of “What Postle did is equivalent to holecarding in BJ” and “Everyone is saying [by transitive property they wouldn’t holecard BJ],” then I would be happy to answer it. ;-)

Quote: billryan

So holecarding is acceptable at BJ, but not in poker? Is everyone here saying that were they to find themselves in this position, they don't use it to their advantage?

I’ll answer your ridiculous question.

Holecarding is acceptable in BJ and if a player is flashing his cards to me (at a poker table) than that is ok too. I personally will warn a player that they are flashing their hole cards once and after that it is their issue. Here’s where I have major issue with your question. You are trying to compare what Postle did to holecarding which he didn’t do. He used electronics to know others people’s cards and I would have a problem with someone using electronics to cheat at BJ too. Finally I will proudly say that I would NEVER do what Postle did if given the opportunity. What Postle did was theft, no way around that. He stole from people and laughed at them as he did it.

Quote: billryan

I can't help but notice you didn't answer the question.

Again, if you're asking that question sincerely, then it's clear you haven't looked into what's going on. And tbh, I don't think you're even looking to have a serious discussion.

Cherry on top.

A leak of mine is I sometimes flash my cards because I'm lazy/bored and on the phone and stuff.

I'm certain this has cost me money at some point. I have no beef with anyone who took advantage. It was my fault.

Quote: Gandler

Quote: gordonm888

Matusow is a convicted felon who has served prison time for selling drugs and who has since admitted that he was high when he did his interview with Mike Postle.

I am concluding that Gandler's posts are not based upon deep funds of wisdom and experience with poker. He supports a casino's right to ban BJ counters without "smoking gun proof" but when a casino cheats the players he requires "smoking gun proof" -as if videos of Postle checking the phone in his lap before making his decisions is not proof. I think I will stop reading his posts.

Do you have evidence of me saying any such thing?

The incidents at Harrahs had nothing to do with BJ....

For the record I have actually defended the NJ code that protects the rights of BJ play (you cannot be banned simply for playing well as long as you do not use any physical cheating methods). I have also said I wish for more States to adopt such Codes/Laws.

Counting at BJ is not even similar at all to cheating at Poker with the help of a device (if that turns out to be the case here).... One is all in the mind (unless you use a communication device which is illegal pretty much everywhere and should be) and one is using a device to steal data to gain an unfair advantage.

- I honestly don't care about the insult, but I do care about people inventing views which are completely wrong.... -



There is an old quote, (which I am probably badly paraphrasing), When everyone in a group is aggressively agreeing and condemning somebody, perhaps that should be a red flag. There was an article I read this morning about how the Postle scandal is great because it is bringing all of the Poker Community together on a common view (or common enemy), I don't think this should be regarded as a good thing, especially while it is still being investigated.

If people want to hate me for waiting for evidence, that is fine. As I said, if cheating is found I am happy to admit such. If no cheating is found, I am not forced to backpeddle. I do not feel this is an abnormal view to hold, on most issues it is generally the most rational view to hold.

The fact that so many people are piling on does not change my view (if anything it reinforces it). If you are going to push for legal action and criminal prosecution before the evidence comes out or the investigation results are released, that is wrong (in my mind). If you simply do not want to play with him, that is your right regardless of your reasoning.

As for Matusow doing drugs in the past? Who cares.... He has said that he was not on drugs on the interview podcast ( though it's ironic that, if he was drinking beers during a poker podcast nobody would care....) I have no reason to think that he was... There is a lot of crime in poker and gambling communities, personal drug use years ago hardly reaches the top of the charts in anything....

But if you had to make book today on whether he cheated, how would you set the odds?

I've read every thing in this thread and it seems to me he exploited a flaw in the game. Did he instigate the flaw or did he simply exploit it. Was the flaw allowing only him to profit or was he the only one to figure it out. He was playing with an obvious advantage, I'm just not sure it was criminal.
Was this a case of a rogue casino conspiring with one player to rip off the other players or is it a case of an individual exploiting a casino error in handling players cards? I haven't seen evidence that convinces me either way. Just because something stinks, and is unethical doesn't make it illegal, although it may be.

Quote: unJon

Quote: Gandler

Quote: gordonm888

Matusow is a convicted felon who has served prison time for selling drugs and who has since admitted that he was high when he did his interview with Mike Postle.

I am concluding that Gandler's posts are not based upon deep funds of wisdom and experience with poker. He supports a casino's right to ban BJ counters without "smoking gun proof" but when a casino cheats the players he requires "smoking gun proof" -as if videos of Postle checking the phone in his lap before making his decisions is not proof. I think I will stop reading his posts.

Do you have evidence of me saying any such thing?

The incidents at Harrahs had nothing to do with BJ....

For the record I have actually defended the NJ code that protects the rights of BJ play (you cannot be banned simply for playing well as long as you do not use any physical cheating methods). I have also said I wish for more States to adopt such Codes/Laws.

Counting at BJ is not even similar at all to cheating at Poker with the help of a device (if that turns out to be the case here).... One is all in the mind (unless you use a communication device which is illegal pretty much everywhere and should be) and one is using a device to steal data to gain an unfair advantage.

- I honestly don't care about the insult, but I do care about people inventing views which are completely wrong.... -



There is an old quote, (which I am probably badly paraphrasing), When everyone in a group is aggressively agreeing and condemning somebody, perhaps that should be a red flag. There was an article I read this morning about how the Postle scandal is great because it is bringing all of the Poker Community together on a common view (or common enemy), I don't think this should be regarded as a good thing, especially while it is still being investigated.

If people want to hate me for waiting for evidence, that is fine. As I said, if cheating is found I am happy to admit such. If no cheating is found, I am not forced to backpeddle. I do not feel this is an abnormal view to hold, on most issues it is generally the most rational view to hold.

The fact that so many people are piling on does not change my view (if anything it reinforces it). If you are going to push for legal action and criminal prosecution before the evidence comes out or the investigation results are released, that is wrong (in my mind). If you simply do not want to play with him, that is your right regardless of your reasoning.

As for Matusow doing drugs in the past? Who cares.... He has said that he was not on drugs on the interview podcast ( though it's ironic that, if he was drinking beers during a poker podcast nobody would care....) I have no reason to think that he was... There is a lot of crime in poker and gambling communities, personal drug use years ago hardly reaches the top of the charts in anything....

But if you had to make book today on whether he cheated, how would you set the odds?

I am honestly not sure.

Will he be convicted of a criminal charge relating to this incident? I would say probably not.

Will the Civil Case be be successful? I would say its probably 50/50.

Did he actually cheat or break the rules (other than using his phone when prohibited)? Going off the vast number of people who seem convinced that he did, and the endless YouTube analysis channels going over his hands and records, I would say it seems likley that he did something fishy and quite possibly was. I am not sure what the numbers would be, but I will grant its probably more likley than not.

But, this is all vague speculation based off of interviews and videos, I would prefer to wait for hard evidence from the data investigation.

Like I said, I am not some fanboy or defender of his, I have never even heard of him before a couple weeks ago.... I just like to allow all sides to play out... And, I am always suspicious of consensus involving outrage...