Poker God or Cheating Scum?
Poll
 | 6 votes (12.5%) | ||
| | 39 votes (81.25%) | ||
| | 6 votes (12.5%) |
48 members have voted
Quote: billryanI'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.
It’s only October 14th but I think we can declare this the dumbest post of the year. He took advantage of a flaw???? Seriously lol???? He had the hole cards sent to his f*cking phone or possibly by the device in his hat. If you don’t understand that this is cheating then I can’t help you. The guy is scum, he’s a cheater whether he had an accomplice or not.
Quote: PokerGrinderIt’s only October 14th but I think we can declare this the dumbest post of the year. He took advantage of a flaw???? Seriously lol???? He had the hole cards sent to his f*cking phone or possibly by the device in his hat. If you don’t understand that this is cheating then I can’t help you. The guy is scum, he’s a cheater whether he had an accomplice or not.
I’ve discovered a flaw in roulette wheels. We can take advantage of it with this laser speedometer and distance sensor stuffed in my hat.
Yeah so said the safe cracker, I figured out the flaw and took your stuff, just had to go 29, left 29, right 29, left 23, right 60. I don't think I did it for the lulz will be his defense.Quote: billryanI'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.
Hopefully people see a difference between that VS cheating individuals (some who were actually dieing of cancer in their last poker game ) out of their money... people who believe they were playing a fair skill game?Quote: unJonI’ve discovered a flaw in roulette wheels. We can take advantage of it with this laser speedometer and distance sensor stuffed in my hat.
Another flaw (I haven’t taken advantage of it and I won’t do it) is that if you go to a bank with a gun, they’ll just hand you several thousand dollars of cash!
Another is it you’re at the grocery store, use the self check out line. Buy ham and turkey. When you go to scan the ham, leave the turkey underneath is, so you don’t get charged for the turkey. Based on expert calculations, that’s about a 4% savings for the typical consumer.
Hey those poker players just didn’t protect their hole cards.Quote: AxelWolfHopefully people see a difference between that VS cheating individuals (some who were actually dieing of cancer in their last poker game ) out of their money... people who believe they were playing a fair skill game?
(This is a joke.)
We need to ask Bill if it would be cheating if someone picked picked up their neighbors cards and looked at them without them knowing (perhaps they were distracted while tipping the cocktail waitresses.)Quote: unJonHey those poker players just didn’t protect their hole cards.
(This is a joke.)
I have never actually seen a rule against this.
Believe it or not , I have picked up a guys card's at the table and looked at them, however, he knew I did this and the game was wild and we messed with each other. It was someone I played with regularly and we were heads up.
RS, Romes and perhaps some others claim I made my opponents bets for him in a pot for all his chips when I had the nuts or something like that. Who knows what they are claiming happened. I think they are over exaggerating. Whatever the case, I won the pot and no on seemed to care including him.
He said I could make change, he didn't say it had to be correct.Quote: PokerGrinderOr just take some of their chips while they are in the bathroom. Clearly this is just a flaw in the system.
Again, as far as anyone knows, nobody has ever been successfully prosecuted for cheating at poker in the history of the US. I see that as a pretty big deal.
Proving that an actual crime has occurred will be a significant hurdle. All kinds of sleazy crap winds up not being criminal.
From an ethical/rules standpoint, it is absolutely cheating.
Quote: billryanSo 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'm not sure how I would "find myself" in the position of seeing the entire table's hole cards. I will say that it is common to be seated at the poker table next to an inexperienced player who does not do a good job of keeping their hold cards hidden. When in this situation, many poker players, including me, will give the person a warning. Something like "you should be more careful when you check your hole cards because sometimes I can see them." If they keep doing it, then fair game IMO. There are also plenty of poker players who would not give the warning.
In the BJ example, sitting to take advantage of a bad dealer who flashes hole cards = taking advantage of good fortune. Bribing the dealer to flash hole cards seems to be stepping over a line. Colluding with someone who has access to a video stream seems more like the latter case.
Quote: Rigondeauxq=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?
Bumping myself because I screwed up the op and it got burried.
So we are at zero impartial poker experts who don't think he was cheating, and one prejudiced "expert" who still thinks the evidence looks "damning" correct?
Quote: beachbumbabsGordonm888,
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.
I honestly did not mean to post an insult (I believe Gandler had previously said that he is not a poker expert) but I accept Bab's ruling that this was an insult.. I have tried to delete the sentence that has the insult, or the entire message, but I am no longer able to edit that post.
I sincerely apologize to Gandler for the insult (and my inadvertent misstatement of what his previous position had been when defending a casino's behavior). Babs, you have my permission to delete any part of the post or the entire post. Again, I apologize to Gandler and everyone.
Babs means your signature referring to a **** little forum.Quote: gordonm888I honestly did not mean to post an insult (I believe Gandler had previously said that he is not a poker expert) but I accept Bab's ruling that this was an insult.. I have tried to delete the sentence that has the insult, or the entire message, but I am no longer able to edit that post.
I sincerely apologize to Gandler for the insult (and my inadvertent misstatement of what his previous position had been when defending a casino's behavior). Babs, you have my permission to delete any part of the post or the entire post. Again, I apologize to Gandler and everyone.
Quote: Gordonm888Sometimes, people are just a bottomless mystery. And, after all, this is just a sh*tty little forum in the sun-less backwaters of the online world.
Quote: unJonBabs means your signature referring to a **** little forum.
How, in that context, is that an insult?
Damn shame when truths continue to be misinterpreted and censored.
It’s just a flaw in the system.Quote: MaxPenQuote: unJonBabs means your signature referring to a **** little forum.Quote: gordonm888I honestly did not mean to post an insult (I believe Gandler had previously said that he is not a poker expert) but I accept Bab's ruling that this was an insult.. I have tried to delete the sentence that has the insult, or the entire message, but I am no longer able to edit that post.
I sincerely apologize to Gandler for the insult (and my inadvertent misstatement of what his previous position had been when defending a casino's behavior). Babs, you have my permission to delete any part of the post or the entire post. Again, I apologize to Gandler and everyone.
How, in that context, is that an insult?
Damn shame when truths continue to be misinterpreted and censored.
Quote: unJonIt’s just a flaw in the system.
I think you've found your new signature.
Quote: MaxPenHow, in that context, is that an insult?
Damn shame when truths continue to be misinterpreted and censored.
What do you believe the context is of gordon's signature?
Quote: RigondeauxYou 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?
Moneymaker and Matusow are two pretty big ones. Yes, they both backpadlded recently as you point out. But, neither are declaring his guilt.
I admit the error of using argument of authority as it does not matter how many multiple WSOP pros you get on one side or the other, that is not a guarantee of one side being right. I should not have gone this route because it just leads to pointless arguments over drug use and how relevant they are now.... (But those two alone are two pretty big names, I think that more than qualified my statement, which I admit was not a valid statement to begin with).
But, yes, I don't follow many people (and don't even have a Twitter account) , but based on what I read, it appears most pros who are active on social media are in the probably a cheater camp. I am happy to concede that.
When people find an expert that agrees with them they laud them, when they find one that disagrees, they dif for dirt, and find personal indiscretions in their past to discredit them over.... This is not unique to poker, this happens everywhere.... ( The classic "Oh this guy made solid points but look he was arrested for pot use and prostitution 14 years ago"....) Which is why I regret using this argument to begin with.
Even if they are both now saying nothing other than wait for evidence, that is my exact point... And, I think this is the most rational view.
Quote: gordonm888I honestly did not mean to post an insult (I believe Gandler had previously said that he is not a poker expert) but I accept Bab's ruling that this was an insult.. I have tried to delete the sentence that has the insult, or the entire message, but I am no longer able to edit that post.
I sincerely apologize to Gandler for the insult (and my inadvertent misstatement of what his previous position had been when defending a casino's behavior). Babs, you have my permission to delete any part of the post or the entire post. Again, I apologize to Gandler and everyone.
I appreciate it.
You are right, I did say that, and it is true (especially compared to many on here). I never view anyone negative for using statements I said in a debate against me. But, it is still a solid gesture, thank-you.
It is not true that I support casinos aggressively banning card counters (I am not sure where that even came from, I never said anything like that here or ever....)
I'd be interested to see videos of the opposite side. Like if he's shoving when he's clearly dominated. I'm not saying where he's behind and shoving so the other guy folds because he gets bad equity, I mean legitimate boat over boat type stuff. Unfortunately, I've only seen stuff where he folds or checks stuff where he's dominated in boat > boat or SF > flush type hands.
Perhaps our resident expert, Rigindux, can do a live stream and show us all the hands and whatnot that (although not proof or w/e) but give some evidence in favor of clean play and against the cheating allegations.
One problem is that no one has uncovered those hands where he makes mistakes once the phone is in his crotch. There are a few examples of him getting owned when the phone is on the table.Quote: RSSo I've seen some of Doug Polk and Joey Ingram videos, basically tearing Mike Postle a new poop-hole by analyzing a bunch of hands/decisions as well as other stuff like hat / phone / body language / reactions / etc.
I'd be interested to see videos of the opposite side. Like if he's shoving when he's clearly dominated. I'm not saying where he's behind and shoving so the other guy folds because he gets bad equity, I mean legitimate boat over boat type stuff. Unfortunately, I've only seen stuff where he folds or checks stuff where he's dominated in boat > boat or SF > flush type hands.
Perhaps our resident expert, Rigindux, can do a live stream and show us all the hands and whatnot that (although not proof or w/e) but give some evidence in favor of clean play and against the cheating allegations.
Quote: GandlerMoneymaker and Matusow are two pretty
Even if they are both now saying nothing other than wait for evidence, that is my exact point... And, I think this is the most rational view.
Not really. Moneymaker, who has a personal relationship with postle said it looks very bad but he is "praying" that he is somehow innocent.
Mike m said the evidence is damning, but Postle deserves a chance to present an alternative explaination.
I don't think this has been mentioned but in one video, postles brother tells a story of him cheating at gambling as a kid. These are the people who like him!
Drug use and knowledge aside, zero public figures see much chance he is innocent.
Sounds to me like money and Mike would require an alternative explaination. Not just be satisfied if a particular computer turns up clean.
Quote: RigondeauxNot really. Moneymaker, who has a personal relationship with postle said it looks very bad but he is "praying" that he is somehow innocent.
Mike m said the evidence is damning, but Postle deserves a chance to present an alternative explaination.
I don't think this has been mentioned but in one video, postles brother tells a story of him cheating at gambling as a kid. These are the people who like him!
Drug use and knowledge aside, zero public figures see much chance he is innocent.
Sounds to me like money and Mike would require an alternative explaination. Not just be satisfied if a particular computer turns up clean.
Is that the interview where his brother says something like "If there is an angle Mike will play it"? (probably not an exact quote).
But, that is not what either of then originally said:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cardschat.com/news/mike-matusow-mike-postle-cheating-84720/amp
But, I really do not want to debate how many pros agree or disagree. I concede that was a bad point to make originally, arguments from authority are always flawed. I would rather see what kind of evidence turns up and I would rather see what kind of testimony from employees and players who experienced the incidents first hand.
Quote: RSSo I've seen some of Doug Polk and Joey Ingram videos, basically tearing Mike Postle a new poop-hole by analyzing a bunch of hands/decisions as well as other stuff like hat / phone / body language / reactions / etc.
I'd be interested to see videos of the opposite side. Like if he's shoving when he's clearly dominated. I'm not saying where he's behind and shoving so the other guy folds because he gets bad equity, I mean legitimate boat over boat type stuff. Unfortunately, I've only seen stuff where he folds or checks stuff where he's dominated in boat > boat or SF > flush type hands.
Perhaps our resident expert, Rigindux, can do a live stream and show us all the hands and whatnot that (although not proof or w/e) but give some evidence in favor of clean play and against the cheating allegations.
What am I chopped liver? 🤣
If 20 mechanics agree your car needs a new alternator it probably does, it just isn't a logical certainty.
Every mechanic in the world is pretty much on the same page here.
Quote: RigondeauxAppeal to authority is a logical fallacy because the authority can be wrong. But it's often still a good argument if the authority is credible.
If 20 mechanics agree your car needs a new alternator it probably does, it just isn't a logical certainty.
Every mechanic in the world is pretty much on the same page here.
If 20 mechanics say that your car needs serious work, hopefully they can show you exactly what the problem is and what needs to be repaired or replaced.
Arguments from authority are fallacious regardless of the credibility of the individuals (in fact that is the primary fallacy...) If somebody only talks about their credentials and never about substance that is always a red flag in any debate.
Unfortunately, this is a unique scenerio because right now all we have to go on is speculation based on hand videos and overviews of recorded play outcomes. We have no hard evidence or data to view at this time.
The statistical analysis of how unlikely it would be for someone to sustain the win rate Postle has is rather compelling. It can’t be 100% by nature of statistics (and data collection to refine the inputs continues), but it’s on the order of a DNA test. And it’s much more than say 20 doctors would need to order surgery on a patient. It’s more than it would take physicists to declare the discovery of a new exotic particle from experimental data. Whether it leaves a “reasonable doubt” in a criminal sense, I think is something people could have differing views are. But in a civil liability point of view I don’t think it’s a close call to say cheating, especially when combined with the crotch stare and the stark difference in play styles when he has phone on table.Quote: GandlerIf 20 mechanics say that your car needs serious work, hopefully they can show you exactly what the problem is and what needs to be repaired or replaced.
Arguments from authority are fallacious regardless of the credibility of the individuals (in fact that is the primary fallacy...) If somebody only talks about their credentials and never about substance that is always a red flag in any debate.
Unfortunately, this is a unique scenerio because right now all we have to go on is speculation based on hand videos and overviews of recorded play outcomes. We have no hard evidence or data to view at this time.
If whenever you drive in the rain your car suddenly and consistently runs like crap and it becomes predictable. Then whenever there's no rain your car runs perfectly. So then 20 mechanics run a diognotics on your car and it comes back clean, but all those mechanics tell you there's definitely something wrong but we just can't find the reasons. Then one mechanic says don't worry about it there's there's no hard evidence there's anything wrong and I can vouch for the diognotics tool and the makers of your car.Quote: GandlerIf 20 mechanics say that your car needs serious work, hopefully they can show you exactly what the problem is and what needs to be repaired or replaced.
Arguments from authority are fallacious regardless of the credibility of the individuals (in fact that is the primary fallacy...) If somebody only talks about their credentials and never about substance that is always a red flag in any debate.
Unfortunately, this is a unique scenerio because right now all we have to go on is speculation based on hand videos and overviews of recorded play outcomes. We have no hard evidence or data to view at this time.
Quote: PokerGrinderIt’s only October 14th but I think we can declare this the dumbest post of the year. He took advantage of a flaw???? Seriously lol???? He had the hole cards sent to his f*cking phone or possibly by the device in his hat. If you don’t understand that this is cheating then I can’t help you. The guy is scum, he’s a cheater whether he had an accomplice or not.
So you know he cheated, but don't know if it was by phone, or by a device in his hat, or xray contact lenses. Good luck convincing a jury with that.
Quote: unJonThe statistical analysis of how unlikely it would be for someone to sustain the win rate Postle has is rather compelling. It can’t be 100% by nature of statistics (and data collection to refine the inputs continues), but it’s on the order of a DNA test. And it’s much more than say 20 doctors would need to order surgery on a patient. It’s more than it would take physicists to declare the discovery of a new exotic particle from experimental data. Whether it leaves a “reasonable doubt” in a criminal sense, I think is something people could have differing views are. But in a civil liability point of view I don’t think it’s a close call to say cheating, especially when combined with the crotch stare and the stark difference in play styles when he has phone on table.
I agree, which is why a civil remedy is probably far more likley than any potential criminal one.
I also have no clue about gaming laws in CA as to what exactly would be illegal. I am sure it is some variation on using a device for an unfair advantage (if that does turn out to be what happened).
Are there any good videos of sessions of him playing anywhere outside of Stones (such as a place where there is 0 chance of his alleged cheating method of intercepting their data to work) to compare playstyles?
The stats seem pretty bad (or really good if he turns out to be not cheating), but that seems to be the most compelling evidence. But, my problem is, that he/ his defense team has said that they don't factor in lots of games that were not recorded, and if you look at all of the data it is more realistic. And, this may be true, presumably he plays far more off camera (especially going back in history) than on camera.
Quote: RigondeauxCherry 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.
I think a huge part of this gambling problem would be taken away if the organizations sponsoring these games would totally outlaw all media devices by players.
To hell with the player ego and money machine of running a live stream of their playing and sickening closeups of their ugly faces while paying and playing for money against other people. The establishment should supply a clear secure box for all players to throw their devices into the box at the start, and they should submit to a airport type body scan for qualification finals.
All these people are making money with their private streaming sites and it's all nonsense to put up with. Obviously the house makes money with streaming too. Who even needs rft interceptors if they could watch the live stones feed on their phone on their crotch. Mike was just watching the live feed I was watching, only delayed a few seconds. Why not, as good a theory as the next guy.
Haven't finished the whole thread yet, so maybe it's all over by now.
One of the biggest things to stick in my mind, gambling or not, is if it is true Mike actually was one of the main people setting up the system, then he would have access to all the network addresses and protocols and everything else on the network where he could insert himself into the stream as an observer probably on the fly to view anything he wanted. Be it live feed, internal or anything. Mike could even have set up automatic imports to his phone only at any timings. So much is possible as a administrator user of the network. Everything works off of addresses and packets. Hundreds of packet sniffing programs and network tracing could also have been used to build his own forensic type of live surveillance of the feed. If it's indeed a fact that Mike was in that position, that could be a heavy negative factor against him.
Quote: billryanSo you know he cheated, but don't know if it was by phone, or by a device in his hat, or xray contact lenses. Good luck convincing a jury with that.
Who said anything about convincing a jury? You said he was taking advantage of a flaw instead of calling it like it is, he’s a cheater.
He’s just taking advantage of a flaw in the jury system.Quote: PokerGrinderWho said anything about convincing a jury? You said he was taking advantage of a flaw instead of calling it like it is, he’s a cheater.
Quote: Gandler
Are there any good videos of sessions of him playing anywhere outside of Stones (such as a place where there is 0 chance of his alleged cheating method of intercepting their data to work) to compare playstyles?
There is a lot of video of him playing at Stones when people think there was no cheating. Current hypothesis is cheating started July 18, 2018 2 hours and 1 minute into the stream. I have not seen anyone gather and run tests on the streams before that date (there are a bunch) to show the difference in win rate and play style, etc.
First, since what has alleged to have happened, this would most likely fall under a civil manner and labeled as fraud. Thus the civil courts if it even gets that far.
Are there federal statutes against cheating in private venues like casinos? I don't think so. Possibly State where the venues reside.
Discussions about his criminality are speculations for now because what Mike did may not be criminally culpable in Federal laws. The civil courts will force disclosure and if the feds are called in because the civil process has shown a larger scale fraud, then we may see doj enter the picture.
Unless otherwise explained as it may have been somewhere whether this is all done under a private umbrella, this would logically dictate to me that there may be civil litigations against some or all the parties alleged to have committed fraud. And they can easily just get slapped with fines and walk away.
IMO.
It’s a California regulated card room.Quote: sammydvSeems to me, since no one has been able to clearly identify who or what authority the stones games are performed under, is it a private venue, agreeing to the space for a fee and advertising on the clients stream feed? Is stones sanctioned by any regulatory agency of gambling associations. If this whole event is done in a private venue, then do Federal laws even apply?
First, since what has alleged to have happened, this would most likely fall under a civil manner and labeled as fraud. Thus the civil courts if it even gets that far.
Are there federal statutes against cheating in private venues like casinos? I don't think so. Possibly State where the venues reside.
Discussions about his criminality are speculations for now because what Mike did may not be criminally culpable in Federal laws. The civil courts will force disclosure and if the feds are called in because the civil process has shown a larger scale fraud, then we may see doj enter the picture.
Unless otherwise explained as it may have been somewhere whether this is all done under a private umbrella, this would logically dictate to me that there may be civil litigations against some or all the parties alleged to have committed fraud. And they can easily just get slapped with fines and walk away.
IMO.
He 100% used his phone, but may have also been in conjunction with another device in his hat. At one point it was probably in conjunction with his key fob that he suspiciously had on the table. He probably felt the keys on the table with the little suspicious since almost no one keeps their keys on the table, unless of course they need a fast getaway. He probably Advanced his cheating set up as he went along.Quote: billryanSo you know he cheated, but don't know if it was by phone, or by a half device in his hat, or xray contact lenses. Good luck convincing a jury with that.
The only other explanation is that his crotch has super powers because whenever he gets done staring at it for a while he suddenly becomes all gleeful, happy and talkative with a totally different personality and gains Godlike playing abilities beyond what any human can possibly do.
I don't know if they went through all the streams he played on but there seem to be plenty of examples of non god-like play that have been posted.Quote: unJonThere is a lot of video of him playing at Stones when people think there was no cheating. Current hypothesis is cheating started July 18, 2018 2 hours and 1 minute into the stream. I have not seen anyone gather and run tests on the streams before that date (there are a bunch) to show the difference in win rate and play style, etc.
His entire body positions, mannerism, personality and play style are significantly different up until he gained supercrotch powers.
Joe recreational player sits in a game that is on a live stream.
On his next bathroom break, Fred the prow receives a little dossier. It provides all the stats and tendencies from this and any other stream. Maybe personal info, like a guess as to how rich the guy is.
Ethical?
If it is ethical, shouldn't every pro playing for decent stakes do this?
If every decent pro is adding to his already significant advantage, wouldn't it be foolish for any rec to play unless he really doesn't care about the $?
Isn't this exactly what was being done online with a program in many situations?Quote: RigondeauxUnrelated to this case, sort of.
Joe recreational player sits in a game that is on a live stream.
On his next bathroom break, Fred the prow receives a little dossier. It provides all the stats and tendencies from this and any other stream. Maybe personal info, like a guess as to how rich the guy is.
Ethical?
If it is ethical, shouldn't every pro playing for decent stakes do this?
If every decent pro is adding to his already significant advantage, wouldn't it be foolish for any rec to play unless he really doesn't care about the $?
Is it unethical to run a poker bot online at an unregulated online casino? For some reason I don't have an issue with it. I just assumed if I'm playing online(and I haven't play poker online in years) people are doing it.
Quote: GandlerIs that the interview where his brother says something like "If there is an angle Mike will play it"? (probably not an exact quote).
Yes. It is chopped up in most vids, because the comment you referred to occured during one of the crazy hands. However, the full story doesn't get out before the hand is over and it is added to later.
The full story is that the family owned a roller rink. Mike set up a wheel where you could pay to spin for a prize. The payouts seemed fair but he rigged the wheel so that he had a big advantage.
In other words, he cheated at gambling.
In itself not damning. But it's another relavent part of the equation. Guy has 1 in 4 billion poker run. X guy just happened to help set up the stream. X guy has history of cheating at gambling. X guy makes all his genius plays while staring at his crotch for no reason....
Quote: RigondeauxYes. It is chopped up in most vids, because the comment you referred to occured during one of the crazy hands. However, the full story doesn't get out before the hand is over and it is added to later.
The full story is that the family owned a roller rink. Mike set up a wheel where you could pay to spin for a prize. The payouts seemed fair but he rigged the wheel so that he had a big advantage.
In other words, he cheated at gambling.
In itself not damning. But it's another relavent part of the equation. Guy has 1 in 4 billion poker run. X guy just happened to help set up the stream. X guy has history of cheating at gambling. X guy makes all his genius plays while staring at his crotch for no reason....
You forgot @billryan wants to treat him to a $1 ribeye dinner after he's found innocent.🥩
Quote: GandlerI agree, which is why a civil remedy is probably far more likley than any potential criminal one.
I also have no clue about gaming laws in CA as to what exactly would be illegal. I am sure it is some variation on using a device for an unfair advantage (if that does turn out to be what happened).
Are there any good videos of sessions of him playing anywhere outside of Stones (such as a place where there is 0 chance of his alleged cheating method of intercepting their data to work) to compare playstyles?
The stats seem pretty bad (or really good if he turns out to be not cheating), but that seems to be the most compelling evidence. But, my problem is, that he/ his defense team has said that they don't factor in lots of games that were not recorded, and if you look at all of the data it is more realistic. And, this may be true, presumably he plays far more off camera (especially going back in history) than on camera.
Taking this last paragraph in isolation, isn't this exactly the point? He's as mortal as the next pro at an ordinary poker table (or without his phone or his hat is backwards and close to his skull), but when the stream (from Stones, a single source) that was programmed (by him? his brother? some other insider?) is running, and he has his (able to intercept an uploading stream?) phone in his lap where he can consult it, or his hat has a lump and is on frontways, he's a Poker God ma king crazy, low-percentage plays work.
If there are lots of other normal-results games outside this for a data comparison, that just makes it more obvious that in THIS configuration, he's exceeding his own skills and probabilities by a huge amount. If those non-Stones-streaming games show some miracle bluffs and premium folds and pure baller moves in general, THEN your argument holds some water. But mortal is further damning, not exculpatory, in this situation.
Quote: GandlerIf 20 mechanics say that your car needs serious work, hopefully they can show you exactly what the problem is and what needs to be repaired or replaced.
.
I don't think this is true. It's not with doctors. They will often look at your symptoms sand make a probabilistic judgement about what is wrong with you because the actual object is hidden from view.
E.g. they don't directly observe a virus very often.
Quote: beachbumbabsTaking this last paragraph in isolation, isn't this exactly the point? He's as mortal as the next pro at an ordinary poker table (or without his phone or his hat is backwards and close to his skull), but when the stream (from Stones, a single source) that was programmed (by him? his brother? some other insider?) is running, and he has his (able to intercept an uploading stream?) phone in his lap where he can consult it, or his hat has a lump and is on frontways, he's a Poker God ma king crazy, low-percentage plays work.
If there are lots of other normal-results games outside this for a data comparison, that just makes it more obvious that in THIS configuration, he's exceeding his own skills and probabilities by a huge amount. If those non-Stones-streaming games show some miracle bluffs and premium folds and pure baller moves in general, THEN your argument holds some water. But mortal is further damning, not exculpatory, in this situation.
But, people have said (I have seen no evidence to confirm or deny) that he plays very similar in controlled environments (and plenty of people have said differently to be fair).
Which brings me back to my question, does anyone have any streams or videos of him playing elsewhere where cheating is not possible (at least not in the way he is doing it here)? If I can see a video at a non Stones table, and he is an amazing reader who makes crazy calls and folds, that would be good evidence in his favor, if he plays like crud consistently (everyone has has bad sessions, just like even bad players have good ones), night after night, that would be great evidence against him (if it was recent, if it's from 15 years ago, you can make the argument that he was still learning).
But people seem reluctant to post other videos other than selections of hands that make good YouTube videos, but probably are not showing the whole picture.
Even Polk (who I love, he makes many great videos on many great topics), seems very selective in his videos. Such as the RFID error video where Postle was rescsnning his hands (but cut out the part where everyone else who was still in was doing the same thing)....
If there were videos of him playing at tables where RFID was not used, and only the players know their cards (no hole card camera), and he was playing aggressively and successfully, would that be evidence in his favor? Or would be be presuming to cheat in some other way?
Because at that point it would just be turning into a witch hunt (especially if no unauthorized users were found on the data)...
If I were him, and I were innocent I would turn over my phone to an investigator from Stones to examine if anything abnormal happened during playing hours. Of course this is a massive invasion of privacy for something that may not even be criminal, so I don't blame him for not doing it. But, it would be a good way to instantly shut all of this down.
Quote: RigondeauxI don't think this is true. It's not with doctors. They will often look at your symptoms sand make a probabilistic judgement about what is wrong with you because the actual object is hidden from view.
E.g. they don't directly observe a virus very often.
Well they can generally do lab work to see exactly what is wrong. I don't think I have ever been to a Physcisn for a serious illness and not had lab work, cultures, and samples taken to see what was off. But, I generally only go if I am seriously ill or injured.
But, it's also different. They are not determining somebody's fate for life, when you want criminal charges against somebody and there is already active civil disputes, it is important to wait for evidence. These are things that can ruin somebody financially and socially for life. Stones already closed down their streaming operations, so nobody is in any immediate danger of losing money.
Quote: GandlerBut, people have said (I have seen no evidence to confirm or deny) that he plays very similar in controlled environments (and plenty of people have said differently to be fair).
Which brings me back to my question, does anyone have any streams or videos of him playing elsewhere where cheating is not possible (at least not in the way he is doing it here)? If I can see a video at a non Stones table, and he is an amazing reader who makes crazy calls and folds, that would be good evidence in his favor, if he plays like crud consistently (everyone has has bad sessions, just like even bad players have good ones), night after night, that would be great evidence against him (if it was recent, if it's from 15 years ago, you can make the argument that he was still learning).
But people seem reluctant to post other videos other than selections of hands that make good YouTube videos, but probably are not showing the whole picture.
Even Polk (who I love, he makes many great videos on many great topics), seems very selective in his videos. Such as the RFID error video where Postle was rescsnning his hands (but cut out the part where everyone else who was still in was doing the same thing)....
If there were videos of him playing at tables where RFID was not used, and only the players know their cards (no hole card camera), and he was playing aggressively and successfully, would that be evidence in his favor? Or would be be presuming to cheat in some other way?
Because at that point it would just be turning into a witch hunt (especially if no unauthorized users were found on the data)...
If I were him, and I were innocent I would turn over my phone to an investigator from Stones to examine if anything abnormal happened during playing hours. Of course this is a massive invasion of privacy for something that may not even be criminal, so I don't blame him for not doing it. But, it would be a good way to instantly shut all of this down.
There are a bunch of Stones streams you can watch when he wasn’t (we think) cheating. Check out any he plays pre-July 18, 2018. There are some hands in the massive 2+2 thread from there, some funny spots where he makes a bad river decision or gets owned. But I’m not wading through 200 pages to find. No one has done a rigorous analysis yet comparing play styles, VPIP, win rate, etc.
Nobody has posted videos exonerating postle because they couldn't find them. They looked. Many people were initially reluctant to declare him a cheater. Note, in the OP I was not yet convinced.
Nor have they found any other documentation of such ability in other venues, like tournament results, which are well recorded. A man with this ability to soul read amateurs could destroy tournies, which are full of bad amateurs.
If cheaters are only cooked upon every step of the process being closely documented, cheating is effectively legal. But then, it has been up till now.
Quote: RigondeauxYes. It is chopped up in most vids, because the comment you referred to occured during one of the crazy hands. However, the full story doesn't get out before the hand is over and it is added to later.
The full story is that the family owned a roller rink. Mike set up a wheel where you could pay to spin for a prize. The payouts seemed fair but he rigged the wheel so that he had a big advantage.
In other words, he cheated at gambling.
In itself not damning. But it's another relavent part of the equation. Guy has 1 in 4 billion poker run. X guy just happened to help set up the stream. X guy has history of cheating at gambling. X guy makes all his genius plays while staring at his crotch for no reason....
Actually, Mike was in conference with the little brain in his crotch which has all the brains and was the mastermind of the caper.
Why in the world do you keep insisting/accepting or implying that Stones own hand picked investigators would be beyond reproach and absolutely honest and above board, when many of them are insiders to the program?
This scenario of insiders themselves expected to investigate their own fraud and conduct an unbiased investigation is beyond naive.
This setup is wrought with deception and possible criminal conduct. But must go through civil first for the most part. There is a case now being published.
And why wouldn't mike give his phone to a insider investigator who isn't going to reveal anything anyways. Just give the fox another hen in the hen house.
At some point, numerous people will be comparing mikes historical play as well. Perhaps why so many have felt mike is cheating because they have observed mikes play years back and know they signs, but have no interests in quantifying to any general public on social sites. Not everyone cares about twit and faceboob or have egos that need to be publicly stoked.
Any fool making a youboob video where their face is more than 2/3 the screen 90% of the time does not truly care what the subject they are babbling about is.
Quote: sammydv@Gandler.
Why in the world do you keep insisting/accepting or implying that Stones own hand picked investigators would be beyond reproach and absolutely honest and above board, when many of them are insiders to the program?
This scenario of insiders themselves expected to investigate their own fraud and conduct an unbiased investigation is beyond naive.
This setup is wrought with deception and possible criminal conduct. But must go through civil first for the most part. There is a case now being published.
And why wouldn't mike give his phone to a insider investigator who isn't going to reveal anything anyways. Just give the fox another hen in the hen house.
At some point, numerous people will be comparing mikes historical play as well. Perhaps why so many have felt mike is cheating because they have observed mikes play years back and know they signs, but have no interests in quantifying to any general public on social sites. Not everyone cares about twit and faceboob or have egos that need to be publicly stoked.
Any fool making a youboob video where their face is more than 2/3 the screen 90% of the time does not truly care what the subject they are babbling about is.
I could be wrong, but I thought it had been established that they contracted out the data investigation to a pretty well-known and established company?
It is generally illegal for those kind of companies to lie or not report things because of pressure. Now, they can hand the report to Stones, and Stones can completely ignore it, but that would be foolish with so many eyes on them.
