Poker God or Cheating Scum?
Poll
 | 6 votes (12.5%) | ||
| | 39 votes (81.25%) | ||
| | 6 votes (12.5%) |
48 members have voted
Quote: unJonComing back just to this point. I disagree with it. In science you make a hypothesis and you test it. And maybe you find enough evidence to accept it. Or maybe you find enough evidence to disprove it. But most of the time, you don’t find enough evidence to either accept or reject it. You are missing this third category in your analysis.
My default is not that Postle is not a cheater unless proven otherwise.
My default is “I have no idea if Postle is a cheater or not, so let’s look at the evidence.”
For me, I saw enough to conclude that Postle cheated.
For you, you did not see enough to conclude he cheated. Fine. But I would argue that you also did not see enough to conclude he didn’t cheat. So instead of going around thinking he’s not a cheater, I think you should keep an open mind that maybe he did.
Unless, you are on a jury. In which case, if you didn’t think there is enough evidence, you should vote “not guilty.”
But “not guilty” doesn’t mean you believe he’s “innocent.”
I think you are disagreeing with me for the sake of disagreeing (because I have an unpopular view). That is almost exactly what I have been saying (for I guess the last two years now).
(Also, the scientific theory is that assertions need to be tested in environments that can be repeated, so I am not sure that is fair....)
I have never claimed Postle never cheated. I have just said that to me I have not seen evidence to convivence me (certainly not to the extent of the mob-like fervor of many here).
If this was a criminal trial jury, and the only evidence was that presented in this thread I would probably vote not guilty. If it was for a civil action (much lower burden), I don't know I am on the fence (it would probably depend on how it was presented to be honest).
But, my point is, I am still not calling him a cheater. And, I feel those that are should have some evidence beyond numbers (winning more than he should and making non-correct plays that turn out to be right). I am talking a security video of him having the stream on his phone while at the table, or a recording of his organizing it with the manager.
Whenever there is a mob that is out to get somebody without tangible evidence, I am skeptical. And, I feel that I have a right to be (world history should confirm this if nothing else). So yes, in cases like this that do not involve security risks to the country to physical harm to individuals I will wait for the evidence.
This is not a ticking timebomb ethical scenario where if Postle is not stopped this instant the country or government is in genuine danger.... Its a card game....
Quote: GandlerI think you are disagreeing with me for the sake of disagreeing (because I have an unpopular view). That is almost exactly what I have been saying (for I guess the last two years now).
(Also, the scientific theory is that assertions need to be tested in environments that can be repeated, so I am not sure that is fair....)
I have never claimed Postle never cheated. I have just said that to me I have not seen evidence to convivence me (certainly not to the extent of the mob-like fervor of many here).
If this was a criminal trial jury, and the only evidence was that presented in this thread I would probably vote not guilty. If it was for a civil action (much lower burden), I don't know I am on the fence (it would probably depend on how it was presented to be honest).
But, my point is, I am still not calling him a cheater. And, I feel those that are should have some evidence beyond numbers (winning more than he should and making non-correct plays that turn out to be right). I am talking a security video of him having the stream on his phone while at the table, or a recording of his organizing it with the manager.
Whenever there is a mob that is out to get somebody without tangible evidence, I am skeptical. And, I feel that I have a right to be (world history should confirm this if nothing else). So yes, in cases like this that do not involve security risks to the country to physical harm to individuals I will wait for the evidence.
This is not a ticking timebomb ethical scenario where if Postle is not stopped this instant the country or government is in genuine danger.... Its a card game....
I really wasn’t arguing to argue. Thank you for this post. I get where you are coming from. For me the probabilistic evidence against Postle is something more than 6 standard deviations. Enough for me.
If you read my post I did not say he cheated or what he did was criminal(Not that I haven't in the past). I said, he could see other peoples hole cards and he used that information to win money from them.Quote: GandlerI have not. And, this is California where they are eager to charge just about anyone with just about anything, so I am guessing the state has not either....
I am simply not comfortable labeling somebody a cheater based on some awkward plays, and people saying he won more than he should over a period of time.
Postle denies cheating, Stones's investigator denies that he cheated, and there have been no criminal charges or as of yet even successful civil actions (against Postle, I know there was a settlement with Stones, where they payed each of the players 600ish, though as part of the settlement it was stated that no cheating occurred on the part of the Stones), sorry the evidence is simply not there as far as being able to him a cheater (also the settlement had nothing to do with Mike Postle).
https://www.pokernews.com/news/2020/09/details-regarding-stones-kuraitis-postle-poker-settlement-37983.htm
https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article245724175.html
My question is, if you are going to cheat at poker why would you cheat at a recorded and streamed game where many people watch and will forever be online?
Let's grant for a moment all of the allegations, that Stones is in on it, the management was in on it etc... Why not play one of the many other games for the same stakes that are not streamed? It would be like a shoplifter choosing an aisle at a store where a news crew is filming to grab a candy bar and walk out.... It just makes no sense that the management would assist him in cheating in a streamed game when if this same thing happened at any other table nobody would care or be talking about it for the last two years....
This is a pretty bold and egregious statement. I guess people who believe in "innocent until proven guilty" have what is coming to them?
Especially as we are talking about a game.... Where somebody allegedly cheated in a game.... We are not talking about something that caused physical harm...
If you are talking about a serial killer who admitted to it and boasted about it to the news before a formal conviction that would be one thing. But, we are talking about a game, where some hands were played in odd ways that may or may not have been cheating.... This is not the Colorado Shooter we are talking about... This is a dude who maybe cheated some people in a card game (maybe). This post is pretty out of line.....
If you haven't seen enough evidence then I can only assume a few things. You dont know how poker works enough to see the obvious. You haven't watched him play enough hands. You haven't gathered enough information. You have not actually seen some of the math and statistics.
He made over $900 an hour with very little variance for like 300 hours of play in games like $5 $10 no limit. We are talking truly astronomical numbers, like 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. If that added to all the other things like... Always playing the worst possible hands into multiple people with far superior hands, Playing hands perfectly that only someone who could see the hole cards could do, always looking at his phone, access on the inside, can't play anywhere near as good when there is no stream, seems to be confused when the graphics are not added correctly.
Do you know who potripper is? I believe it's one of the Hamilton accounts where it's basically been proven he was using a superuser account. Take a look at this chart, look how much better Mike postel is than a known superuser. https://external-preview.redd.it/PyGaZkWEuviWMxhRPfgA8ikcAHq8E7yrW5fN56wrj7I.jpg?auto=webp&s=02a4f284a412e4d17259ab20ba6a9fb837fd0e28
We don't know to what degree management was involved. Why would they cheat poker over other games? There may not have been any good opportunities available on the other games. The risk of getting caught may have been much higher, the casino would certainly be more inclined to press charges since the casino would be the one losing money, not the players.
Reaction #1. I don't know much about poker, but >1,000 professional poker players have spent time reviewing the videos and virtually everyone has concluded Postle had knowledge of the hole cards beyond any reasonable doubt. That seems like "trial by your poker peers" and he has been found guilty. So, I assume he is guilty. Move on.
Reaction #2. I don't know much about poker and so I can't personally form a conclusion about what happened. I acknowledge that I don't know what happened, and I recognize that my opinion is not worth much.
Reaction #3. I don't know much about poker, but this is like a messy divorce where both parties claim the other one is mentally ill. It is interesting theater, but I don't know the people who are involved and I have no stake in this dispute. Therefore I'm not going to spend much time forming an opinion or taking a public position on this.
Reaction #4. I don't know much about poker, but I will use the interesting Postle thread to ask questions about why genuine experts think he is guilty. I will pay attention to their responses and hope to learn more about poker.
Reaction #5. I don't know much about poker, and I don't understand the evidence against Postle. However, despite this lack of knowledge and understanding, I will post dozens of posts (over two years) on a WOV thread explaining to people that I think it is very possible and/or likely that Postle is innocent. With my posts, I will repeatedly provoke the poker experts many of whom are genuinely alarmed about what has happened. I will do this because I think I have something important to say and they should pay attention to my opinions over and over again.
*****************
So, Gandler, why in bloody hell have you chosen Reaction #5? I don't understand you.
Quote: gordonm888Gandler, I am closely reading what you are saying, but I don't understand it. You say you don't know much about poker, yet here is a list of the reactions to the Postle situation that you might take:
Reaction #1. I don't know much about poker, but >1,000 professional poker players have spent time reviewing the videos and virtually everyone has concluded Postle had knowledge of the hole cards beyond any reasonable doubt. That seems like "trial by your poker peers" and he has been found guilty. So, I assume he is guilty. Move on.
Reaction #2. I don't know much about poker and so I can't personally form a conclusion about what happened. I acknowledge that I don't know what happened, and I recognize that my opinion is not worth much.
Reaction #3. I don't know much about poker, but this is like a messy divorce where both parties claim the other one is mentally ill. It is interesting theater, but I don't know the people who are involved and I have no stake in this dispute. Therefore I'm not going to spend much time forming an opinion or taking a public position on this.
Reaction #4. I don't know much about poker, but I will use the interesting Postle thread to ask questions about why genuine experts think he is guilty. I will pay attention to their responses and hope to learn more about poker.
Reaction #5. I don't know much about poker, and I don't understand the evidence against Postle. However, despite this lack of knowledge and understanding, I will post dozens of posts (over two years) on a WOV thread explaining to people that I think it is very possible and/or likely that Postle is innocent. With my posts, I will repeatedly provoke the poker experts many of whom are genuinely alarmed about what has happened. I will do this because I think I have something important to say and they should pay attention to my opinions over and over again.
*****************
So, Gandler, why in bloody hell have you chosen Reaction #5? I don't understand you.
I really don't think that is fair. I have been routinely saying I don't know while reporting the results from third parties (legal result, investigation reports etc....) Because I think these results are the most important.
I have just clarified again that if this was a civil jury I would be on the fence and for a criminal jury I would say not guilty (with what we know). I have never said it is very likely that he is innocent.
I am just not willing to jump into mob-justice where certain people on here are advocating violence ( "Take him out back with a baseball bat" , other comments I don't want to repeat over the years....) So yes, I will remain skeptical. And, you seem to be very hostile in this thread (not just now to me), but over the past two years to anyone who is skeptical. Which is fine, but its not going to change my view.
That being said, there are some posters on here that have made convincing arguments.
You can go back to 2019 to my first posts in this thread, and see that I have been pretty consistent.... I have been saying I have no clue if he cheated, he is clearly guilty of using his phone at the table (as are many in the streams, clearly was not properly enforced, that is a cut and dry violation that you can see in the videos), but I am not on board with the universal calls against him (some quite out of hand).
I feel like security jumps all over you if you pull your phone out for like 10 seconds at a BJ table without stepping away (which is fine if that is the rule its the rule), but in Poker (where there are endless ways to cheat with a phone that are far less complicated than the theories being pushed here, you can simply be playing with friends and text them your cards each hand), it is still cool in many rooms to have your phone out constantly. I honestly have always been bamboozled as to why no phones are enforced so strictly (at many casinos) at BJ (and even other games where a phone can offer no benefit at all), but not at poker (where you can actually use it to cheat pretty easily especially when you are able to have it sitting on the table on in your hand nonstop....) It just never made sense to me, and it seems like this issue is just highlighting this simple double standard that has always bothered me (well before this incident).
My only guess is casinos care more about games where however unlikely, the phone can be used for some kind of advantage over them versus an advantage over other players (there does not seem to be any other explanation that makes sense as to the way phone use in casinos is enforced). Hopefully, this will change things on this front if nothing else, and that would be one positive result from this incident.
Not being able to use your phone at the poker tables would not be a positive result. The reason they allow it is because there are far more people who want it that way than people who don't. You might lose a significant amount of players, or have people constantly getting up and down so frequently it would become annoying.Quote: GandlerI have just clarified again that if this was a civil jury I would be on the fence and for a criminal jury I would say not guilty (with what we know).
You still have not addressed the statistics. If agreed that he somehow had access to the hole cards and used that information to gain a significant advantage but you don't think what he did is/was/ illegal then that's a different subject as far as I'm concerned. . I think there is ZERO CHANCE that he didn't have access to the hole cards and use that information to his great advantage.
Do you mean what WE know, or what YOU know? Perhaps you can break that down for us.
I really believe that if most people heard ALL of the evidence and testimony from experts etc, it's almost certain he would be found guilty.
It only took me watching about 10 key hands to be 100% convinced that he had knowledge of hole cards(i watched many more and kept up for a while on the other details as well. As I said before, he played his hands in such a perfect way(not to be confused as a crazy way of playing or someone using occasional guts and intuition ) in order to get the perfect desired results. There were a few hands where he makes the perfect bluff and actually gets hero called by someone so frustrated they just say F-it. And that makes sense because they probably just seen him make a bluff with absolutely nothing, however, they had no clue all those bets were perfectly calculated since he had knowledge of the hole cards his opponents held.
Can you explain how he knew the graphics display were not correct during play? Can you explain how when there was a glitch in the graphics it was noticeable that he was suddenly caught like a deer in headlights?
Quote: AxelWolfNot being able to use your phone at the poker tables would not be a positive result. The reason they allow it is because there are far more people who want it that way than people who don't. You might lose a significant amount of players, or have people constantly getting up and down so frequently it would become annoying.
You still have not addressed the statistics. If agreed that he somehow had access to the hole cards and used that information to gain a significant advantage but you don't think what he did is/was/ illegal then that's a different subject as far as I'm concerned. . I think there is ZERO CHANCE that he didn't have access to the hole cards and use that information to his great advantage.
Do you mean what WE know, or what YOU know? Perhaps you can break that down for us.
I really believe that if most people heard ALL of the evidence and testimony from experts etc, it's almost certain he would be found guilty.
It only took me watching about 10 key hands to be 100% convinced that he had knowledge of hole cards(i watched many more and kept up for a while on the other details as well. As I said before, he played his hands in such a perfect way(not to be confused as a crazy way of playing or someone using occasional guts and intuition ) in order to get the perfect desired results. There were a few hands where he makes the perfect bluff and actually gets hero called by someone so frustrated they just say F-it. And that makes sense because they probably just seen him make a bluff with absolutely nothing, however, they had no clue all those bets were perfectly calculated since he had knowledge of the hole cards his opponents held.
Can you explain how he knew the graphics display were not correct during play? Can you explain how when there was a glitch in the graphics it was noticeable that he was suddenly caught like a deer in headlights?
I don't agree, you can't have it both ways. You can't say phones are banned at all tables and then not enforce it specifically for poker tables (where technically they are generally banned, but for all purposes they may as well not be). And, then get upset when people use their phone to cheat (which I am sure happens constantly in less dramatic scenarios such as people texting their friends their hands). You either need to ban all phones or accept that some people will be texting information to other players.
You make an interesting point about what if he acquired information in a non illegal way. For example if the stream was not delayed, and he was just watching the live stream on his phone (not doing anything illegal to access the non-delayed stream), I don't know if this would be wrong. He is just using his phone to watch something that is publicly available while playing that anyone else can also do. (This goes back to why banning phones is not a non-issue). If you are allowed to be on your phone, and you are just using your phone to see information that is available to anyone, I don't know if this is inherently wrong, especially because this would not even be collusion (you are not getting help or texts from other players, you are independently getting information). Of course if you illegally access information or even if not illegal are granted access that others do not have this would be wrong. I think phones should be banned at the table (its absurd that you can't text at a roulette table, lets even set aside BJ, where there is not any advantage to be gained by a phone, but Poker where literally every advantage can be gained, its acceptable for people to sit there staring at the screen for the whole session), I think a reasonable compromise would be to not allow phones when in a hand, this would not be perfect, but its an improvement.
The bottom line is if you are going to encourage phone use, some people will use it to cheat. This (Postle) may be an egregious example. But, I am sure this happens every minute to lesser extents (friends texting hands back and forth while in a hand, people texting for advice from people not involved at the table).
For example I am terrible at poker (by the standards here), I could play perfect if I have a solver where I input the information as the hand plays out and follow its instructions. I could play perfect poker if I did this. If it is fine for people to use their phones for any legal purpose while playing, would it be wrong to install an app solver on my phone and input each move and follow the advice? There are many that think this is not right even for online poker, would doing it on your phone in a live game be any different?
And, if so is it wrong to use phone apps on Video Poker where you input the rules and payouts and what cards are displayed for optimal play? (Generally phone bans do not seem to apply to machines, only to tables, but you can gain more by using your phone at video poker than roulette for example).
I am not sure the video you reference where he claims to know the graphics were wrong while playing. That would be pretty solid evidence.
As for the glitch in the graphics, I think I saw that one some time back (was that the one where they were paying PLO, but the graphics were still for Hold Em? ) That one was compelling because if we are talking about the same thing he kept scanning his cards over the RFID scanner almost like he knew they were not registering. But, its been a while so I may be getting them mixed up.
Its plain old Smith, cant get more common then that
He knew the fake id name would get him on TV
His real name
Christopher Bryan Smith
Quote: terapinedMoneymaker lied
Its plain old Smith, cant get more common then that
He knew the fake id name would get him on TV
His real name
Christopher Bryan Smith
I am assuming this is an April Fool's joke?
I find it hard to believe if he was using a pseudonym that it wouldn't have come out years ago....
Quote: SOOPOOI am assuming this is an April Fool's joke?
I find it hard to believe if he was using a pseudonym that it wouldn't have come out years ago....
LOL
Did I just fall for a prank article
I forgot today is April fools.
To me its opening day
https://www.pokernews.com/news/2021/04/shocking-reveal-chris-moneymaker-lied-for-18-years-38902.htm
Postle's lawsuits have been dismissed:Quote: sabreNo, defendants filed Anti-SLAPP motions and the cases will likely be dismissed with Postle responsible for the defendant's fees.
https://twitter.com/JonathanLittle/status/1378136638379941888
Postle dismissed his own lawsuit "without prejudice", just 19 days before our anti-SLAPP motion.
We are proceeding to ask the court to rule that I am dismissed from the case WITH prejudice, and that Postle needs to pay my attorney's fees.
The result of this likely will not be known until April 19-20 or so.
If you'd like to hear my radio show segment about this, where I had my attorney come on and explain it, go to the 3:12:57 mark of the show. Just google "Poker Fraud Alert Radio" and look for the 4/4/21 episode.
And he wins vs Postle:Quote: DanDruffI'm one of the defendants -- Todd Witteles.
Postle dismissed his own lawsuit "without prejudice", just 19 days before our anti-SLAPP motion.
We are proceeding to ask the court to rule that I am dismissed from the case WITH prejudice, and that Postle needs to pay my attorney's fees.
The result of this likely will not be known until April 19-20 or so.
If you'd like to hear my radio show segment about this, where I had my attorney come on and explain it, go to the 3:12:57 mark of the show. Just google "Poker Fraud Alert Radio" and look for the 4/4/21 episode.
https://www.cardschat.com/news/todd-witteles-to-receive-27k-judgment-from-mike-postle-in-anti-slapp-ruling-100382/
Congrats Dan.. er.. Todd
(but geez.. your lawyer costs $700/hr?!)
and now comes the fun part.. collecting on that judgement
Quote: 100xOddsAnd he wins vs Postle:
https://www.cardschat.com/news/todd-witteles-to-receive-27k-judgment-from-mike-postle-in-anti-slapp-ruling-100382/
Congrats Dan.. er.. Todd
(but geez.. your lawyer costs $700/hr?!)
and now comes the fun part.. collecting on that judgement
$700 an hour is not outrageous for an attorney.
Quote: DRich$700 an hour is not outrageous for an attorney.
I think $45,000 for a case that seems like it didn't progress very far is a tad high, but I'm not familiar with the cases.
. Say who?Quote: DRich$700 an hour is not outrageous for an attorney.
Quote: SOOPOO. Say who?
I know that I have paid more than that for good attorneys many years ago. Then again, those attornies were all members at Augusta National so maybe I was paying for their membership.
https://www.lawyersmutualnc.com/blog/lawyer-rates-top-1000-per-hour#:~:text=Topping%20the%20list%20of%20the,counsel%20bills%20%241%2C250%20per%20hour.
Rudy Guiliani charges $20,000 a day to Trump.
And Veronica Brill's Anti-SLAPP lawsuit against Postle is slated to be heard May 19. Expect more pain and more public repudiation for the so-called Poker God and more money draining out of his accounts. This is akin to finally convicting Al Capone, but for income tax evasion. (Although I wonder if a certain participant in this thread will claim that he personally can't be certain that Al Capone was guilty of murder and/or of running a violent criminal enterprise.)
Phil Ivy style garnishment is coming his way then.Quote: billryanI doubt his " victims" will be able to collect those judgments. It doesn't take much to be pretty judgment-free, especially if you aren't a salaried worker.
https://wizardofvegas.com/articles/retro-game-review-world-poker-tour/
I know this is a bit of a stretch for a tack on, but I try not to create too many new threads.
Only a moron would bring daub (the substance commonly used to mark cards) to the table, and it's not as if he e has access to them away from the table ?
It's a near certainty that he somehow hacked the feed (and thus was able to view his opponents cards in real time, as opposed to after the fact).
Now here's the rub . . .
It's three years later and though I didn't follow the story, my feed contains a ton of poker articles, none of which referred to a resolution.
My guess . . .
What he did may have been beneath contempt, but I'm thinking it wasn't illegal.
Either that or they just couldn't pin it on him since there's almost no way to prove his guilt.
To wit, if a third party was viewing the cards and relaying the to him via text (presumably using some sort of code in the event his phone was hacked) no D.A. would go near it since there's arguably no crime, and certainly no provable one.
so if he cheated (and i think he did), he got away with it?Quote: unJonI believe the civil suit against him by the class of people that lost money was dismissed for failing to state a cognizable claim.
link to original post
but at a hit to his reputation since many pros think he cheated as well?
Quote: 100xOddsso if he cheated (and i think he did), he got away with it?Quote: unJonI believe the civil suit against him by the class of people that lost money was dismissed for failing to state a cognizable claim.
link to original post
but at a hit to his reputation since many pros think he cheated as well?
link to original post
Correct.
Here’s the last I see on it.
https://www.cardplayer.com/poker-news/25799-alleged-poker-cheat-mike-postle-drops-330-million-defamation-suit
https://twitter.com/i/status/1575709741199683584
What are her chances of winning with 1 card to come?
Quote: 100xOddsthis doesnt involve mike postle but did she know his hand?
https://twitter.com/i/status/1575709741199683584
What are her chances of winning with 1 card to come?
link to original post
According to the chyron she had a 47% chance of winning on the river.
I'm not exactly a pro poker player but I don't see why everyone is making such a big deal about this hand. He bluffed, she called, and won.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: 100xOddsthis doesnt involve mike postle but did she know his hand?
https://twitter.com/i/status/1575709741199683584
What are her chances of winning with 1 card to come?
link to original post
According to the chyron she had a 47% chance of winning on the river.
I'm not exactly a pro poker player but I don't see why everyone is making such a big deal about this hand. He bluffed, she called, and won.
link to original post
47% chance on turn not River.
It’s an absurd hand that makes absolutely no sense. My guess is she misread her hand as J3 and thought she had bottom pair and a bluff catcher.
The allegations she cheated make no sense. If she understood she had a 47% chance she would have folded.
The super strange part is what happened afterword where the loser confronted her off camera, and she gave him back his money under what she claims is duress.
Quote: unJon
47% chance on turn not River.
I stand corrected.
Quote:
It’s an absurd hand that makes absolutely no sense. My guess is she misread her hand as J3 and thought she had bottom pair and a bluff catcher.
Maybe she misread her hand, or maybe she had a really strong suspicion he was bluffing and had even worse cards than she did. Worst case scenario, she just made a dumb play and got lucky. The cheating claims are ludicrous, and it sounds like that guy has issues.
link to original post
apparently mike postle is playing poker again :o
https://www.pokernewsdaily.com/wsop-opens-investigation-into-card-marking-allegations-against-martin-kabrhel-39259/?amp=1
Lots of info out there on 2+2 and other places (including a Polk video) for those interested.
His physical actions in handling the cards do look unnatural/suspicious to me but there are strategic decisions in playing hands that don’t make sense if he knew one of the cards.
Might be an elaborate troll/way to annoy everyone.
Quote: TinManI found the Polk video informative.
His physical actions in handling the cards do look unnatural/suspicious to me but there are strategic decisions in playing hands that don’t make sense if he knew one of the cards.
Might be an elaborate troll/way to annoy everyone.
link to original post
I agree. Let’s see what comes out of the official investigation.
