Robbi J4 v Garrett 87

Original Hand:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR_PWVGUMVQ#t=2h07m30s

Info below from a Reddit comment
覧覧-

She actually gave the money BACK to him, basically a 135k gift, after he threw a bit of a tantrum. This caused some men at the table to become upset, because she deserved the money and shouldn't have given it back (even if it was a dumb call)

She later claimed that she misread her hand and thought she had J3 (but didn't want to come clean and admit it because she was embarassed), which would mean she had a small pair and could beat most bluffs/draws

She gave an interview afterwards - for those on mobile where it doesn't work timestamp is 3h 37m 55s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR_PWVGUMVQ#t=3h37m55s

Garrett's Response on twitter, claims she in fact did NOT misread her hand, goes into hand detail, and highlights other behavior as suspicious

https://twitter.com/GmanPoker/status/1575727417284382721

https://twitter.com/GmanPoker/status/1575727289932709888

Phil Ivey Interview (he was at the table) 4h 25m 26s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR_PWVGUMVQ#t=4h26m26s

Guy who got upset interview 4h19m21s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR_PWVGUMVQ#t=4h19m21s

_______________

She has thrown down the gauntlet and officially challenged him to a heads up match

https://twitter.com/RobbiJadeLew/status/1575913730738511872

i saw this live this is a case of the internet over reacting imho this is a nothingburger\

edit

# ban baby garrett - until he gives the money back

Quote: gamerfreak

Garrett's Response on twitter, claims she in fact did NOT misread her hand, goes into hand detail, and highlights other behavior as suspicious

https://twitter.com/GmanPoker/status/1575727417284382721

https://twitter.com/GmanPoker/status/1575727289932709888
link to original post

This guy is what happens when you take a game, become an expert at it, overanalyze it into the ground, and then assume that everyone else is the same way and going to play the exact, mathematically perfect way and never make any mistakes or deviate from perfect strategy. (This is why also why Chess grandmasters can lose to someone way below their skill level.)

You lost, dude...worst case scenario is she accidentally made a dumb play and you were on the receiving end of it. Best case scenario is she outsmarted you.

and what people dont understand about this is that she made the call because she knew garrett didnt want her in the pot any more

she felt the shove was too aggro for his range against her range - she played it passively and he played the entire hand aggro which was my understanding of why it didnt make any sense to shove he should have checked and let her bluff into him if he was nutted as much as he was repping

one streamer i watch i think its spraggy said that when they triple barrel they usually dont have it which most likely is untrue but in this situation it was

The call was bizarre but the reaction by Garrett was even more bizarre. He rashly accused someone of cheating without having any evidence of a cheating method.

Cheating could potentially be inferred if a player showed a pattern of making ridiculous calls against hands that all turned out to be as weak as Garrett's. But not from a single hand - especially one where the player was sitting with only 50% equity.

The river runouts could have easily given Garrett the win. Would he then have just assumed she was a bad player?

The fact that the player seemed unable to offer a clear and consistent explanation for her play is irrelevant. Poker players aren't obligated to provide accurate information about their strategy to other players. She could have misread her hand, but it seems more likely that in the moment she didn't want to admit she was a "bad" enough player to call with just a jack.

There are videos out there of poker pros calling with even worse hands who were never accused of cheating. In her mind, she had a chance to improve on the river. Tom Dwan once called with just a 9 on the river. (He lost.)

I guess the first thing I would say is, if you don't want to be cheated, then you probably shouldn't play poker in the first place. I'd tend to hold that as even more true for cash games with the kind of technology that is available.

That said, every intuition that I have says that it's cheating, except for two problems:

1.) Why would she call the shove on a coin flip with slight odds against her?

2.) Why would she want to run the river twice?

I could see it if you somehow know what the river card is going to be, but is there anything that would enable her to know she would win on both river cards, and, if so, doesn't running it twice look even more suspicious than once?

Looking at the hand, the table folds around to Garrett on the small blind and has reasonable equity to try to steal blinds, raises to 3k.

The first weird decision is to defend the BB by calling for $2,200 with J-4 off. What raise are you actually ahead of, at that point?

The post-flop call really doesn't surprise me too much because $2500 is a really weak bet post-flop and there are no over cards (to her jack) on the board. Garrett got more money in pre-flop than his post-flop bet even was and it was definitely a drawing board, so with the benefit of knowing what his cards actually were (and probably ONLY for that reason--I am not a good poker player) it makes sense that he would bet that on some sort of draw.

Or, maybe I am a good poker player, because an opponent can just have my BB if I am holding J4o. lol

Turn comes out three and helps nobody; there's also not really any great reason to believe it would help anyone, especially not Garrett who, I would think, Robbi is putting on a draw anyway. Garrett bets 10k, which is more aggressive than his post-flop bet, but still less than pot by a little bit. Robbi raises to 20k, min raise.

I think Garrett is at least calling any raise in that situation with the equity he has in that draw. He knows there's no way she has a set, or he wouldn't have shoved. He shoves and she eventually calls.

Using the WoO calculator, she would actually slightly have the best of the coin flip, but for what was folded. In a heads-up game, she actually has a slight advantage based on what they both have going into the river.

The only problem that I run into is why doesn't Garrett have QcXc, KcXc or something like J-8 (suited or not) or QJ off? It's true that she has one Jack blocked, but she's still losing to a better jack. I guess he can't have J9, at least.

I think maybe she just guessed right and it was kind of a fluke. I still don't know how you call a shove there without being more confident than she had any right to be. I also think it's possible that she cheated somehow, but why run the river twice? My opinion, which is worthless on something like this, is that it is more likely than not that she did not cheat.

Third different thread this has been posted in. I値l say what I said in the others. I think she thought she made a pair of 3s on the turn and made a hero call with a bluff catcher.

The part after where she gave the money back under alleged duress is crazy.

Quote: unJon

Third different thread this has been posted in. I値l say what I said in the others. I think she thought she made a pair of 3s on the turn and made a hero call with a bluff catcher.

The part after where she gave the money back under alleged duress is crazy.
link to original post

I tend to agree with this as long as she thought she made the 3's. If she did think that, then there's really no reason to think she's not ahead of Garrett.

Quote: Mission146

Quote: unJon

Third different thread this has been posted in. I値l say what I said in the others. I think she thought she made a pair of 3s on the turn and made a hero call with a bluff catcher.

The part after where she gave the money back under alleged duress is crazy.
link to original post

I tend to agree with this as long as she thought she made the 3's. If she did think that, then there's really no reason to think she's not ahead of Garrett.
link to original post

during the hand she said "3s no good" and immediately after the announcer said "well she doesnt have a 3" and she looked at her hand right before she said what she said

Quote: unJon

Third different thread this has been posted in. I値l say what I said in the others. I think she thought she made a pair of 3s on the turn and made a hero call with a bluff catcher.

The part after where she gave the money back under alleged duress is crazy.
link to original post

yeah, i posted it here hrs before this thread because i didnt think it deserved a new thread:
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/poker/33725-poker-god-or-cheating-scum/38/#post864829

i guess i was wrong.

And yeah, her giving back the $ was stupid.

and she said it was under duress?
that was crazy.

did he have her by the throat threatening her?
did she go into detail about this?