Robbi J4 v Garrett 87
Quote: AxelWolfHowever, we have evidence that people cheating like this don't seem to have that mindset of making sure they won't be detected.
Quote:
unJon "But cheating + moron is a possibility we can’t eliminate"♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
Quote: GenoDRPh
I'm glad you understand. You are apparently a rather intelligent person, who has been amiable to my questions in the recent past. Question is,would you play Ms.Hero-Call-Jack-Four or even Mr. Sore-Loser-Who-Threatens-The-Winner-Whenever-I'm-Ahead-In-The-Hand heads-up? I've already said I don't play poker, so playing me heads-up isn't much of a fight. Playing one of them, on the other hand.....
I already said I don't play poker. Nor do I bet on sports. The hand in question only affirms my decision.
Gene
link to original post
If they're even at that table, they'd both destroy me, but I'd have a much better chance against Robbi than Garrett. One thing that would help me against Robbi is the fact that I almost never bluff.
Is it likely? No.
Quote: unJonQuote: MDawgQuote: MDawgProbably what Phil Ivey said made the most sense, that he heard Robbi mention that "all I have is a 3" during the hand, that she misread her hand, then later was embarrassed and didn't want to seem dumb in front of the other pros, so was equivocal about her mistake.
link to original post
According to Ivey: "If you notice in the middle of the hand she asked, Can you beat a 3?...She misread her hand, and she didn't want to say [later] that she misread her hand, because she's at a poker table."
Phil Ivey shares what he thinks happened during the Robbi vs GMAN infamous poker hand
The fact that you seem to keep arguing that she must have cheated, makes me even more confident that I could beat you at heads up poker! I continue to believe that you have poor reads on people, including on me.
link to original post
This has been my impression after watching twice.
link to original post
Quote: AxelWolfShe did have the best hand at that point. And she should've called. Even if she was behind a little and knew that, she was supposed to call. I thought you said you were good at poker.Quote: MDawg
If she were cheating her signal would have been red light, fold! because she did not have the best hand outcome at the turn.
link to original post
Yeah, but she wasn't supposed to protect her BB with J4 off in the first place.
Why not? If you are cheating in a way that has information about your opponent's hand, you should probably call just about any hand that isn't all in or a significant bet pre-flop. Obviously, there's more to it, but in general, you would be involved with as many hands as possible.Quote: Mission146Quote: AxelWolfShe did have the best hand at that point. And she should've called. Even if she was behind a little and knew that, she was supposed to call. I thought you said you were good at poker.Quote: MDawg
If she were cheating her signal would have been red light, fold! because she did not have the best hand outcome at the turn.
link to original post
Yeah, but she wasn't supposed to protect her BB with J4 off in the first place.
link to original post
Quote: Mission146Quote: AxelWolfShe did have the best hand at that point. And she should've called. Even if she was behind a little and knew that, she was supposed to call. I thought you said you were good at poker.Quote: MDawg
If she were cheating her signal would have been red light, fold! because she did not have the best hand outcome at the turn.
link to original post
Yeah, but she wasn't supposed to protect her BB with J4 off in the first place.
link to original post
You would hate me with the hands I play then i would constantly be accused of cheating but it’s not that I’m cheating it’s just that I did my research and know more than most of the people who play poker online (I know this was live )
Source:
https://twitter.com/HCLPokerShow/status/1578169889788862464
An employee admitted to taking $15k off Robbi's stack after the production was over.
What other things from left field can happen?
Calling an all-in bet on the river with a J-4 with that board means you can only win if your opponent has two cards that are 8 or lower (and has not made a pair with the 3.) That is highly unlikely. She put how much? - $40,000+ in when she called the all-in river bet even though she had less than a 10% possibility of winning that bet. That is a lot of money. She was simply flushing away tens of thousands of dollars unless she knew he held an 8-7 hand.
So, two explanations:
She was cheating - ( BTW she only had to know Garret's cards, not the run-out -to explain the way she played the hand.)
Or she was on drugs or otherwise temporarily dysfunctional from a mental point of view. I can indeed believe that she was confused and in mental disarray, based on her weird behavior and contradictory statements
For people who don't understand poker, let me point to the fact that the poker production company is indeed doing an investigation. They would not be doing this investigation unless they agree that this was prima-facie bizarre behavior by Robbie and justifies the expense of contacting lawyers and doing such an investigation.
When streaming a game there are RF transmitters in the table that broadcast the facedown cards over a very short range and there is usually at least one technical support person associated with the broadcast that could have had access to Garretts hole card information. The Mike Postle swindle has made everyone in poker very aware of this possibility.
So did she cheat? Or was she high, or temporally mentally deficient? (I have had that happen once when my blood sugar got very low at a WSOP Circuit event.)
I'd say it is about 50/50 in my mind. I kind of lean towards the "high or mentally confused for some reason" explanation, but I am glad that the Streaming service is investigating. She must have given back the $139K pot to Garrett because she is a confrontation-avoider personality and did not want to be ostracized from poker like Mike Postle was, and she realizes that she made an inexplicable call on the river and then botched her verbal explanation of that. She was already about $200K ahead over 3 days even when she gives the money back, so in the aftermath of this hand, I can see that she might have thought that the $139K was no big deal.
It is an interesting situation.
Quote: gordonm888I play a lot of poker and i've waited to express my opinion. I have watched the Doug Polk blog video.
Calling an all-in bet on the river with a J-4 with that board means you can only win if your opponent has two cards that are 8 or lower (and has not made a pair with the 3.) That is highly unlikely. She put how much? - $40,000+ in when she called the all-in river bet even though she had less than a 10% possibility of winning that bet. That is a lot of money. She was simply flushing away tens of thousands of dollars unless she knew he held an 8-7 hand.
So, two explanations:
She was cheating - ( BTW she only had to know Garret's cards, not the run-out -to explain the way she played the hand.)
Or she was on drugs or otherwise temporarily dysfunctional from a mental point of view. I can indeed believe that she was confused and in mental disarray, based on her weird behavior and contradictory statements
For people who don't understand poker, let me point to the fact that the poker production company is indeed doing an investigation. They would not be doing this investigation unless they agree that this was prima-facie bizarre behavior by Robbie and justifies the expense of contacting lawyers and doing such an investigation.
When streaming a game there are RF transmitters in the table that broadcast the facedown cards over a very short range and there is usually at least one technical support person associated with the broadcast that could have had access to Garretts hole card information. The Mike Postle swindle has made everyone in poker very aware of this possibility.
So did she cheat? Or was she high, or temporally mentally deficient? (I have had that happen once when my blood sugar got very low at a WSOP Circuit event.)
I'd say it is about 50/50 in my mind. I kind of lean towards the "high or mentally confused for some reason" explanation, but I am glad that the Streaming service is investigating. She must have given back the $139K pot to Garrett because she is a confrontation-avoider personality and did not want to be ostracized from poker like Mike Postle was, and she realizes that she made an inexplicable call on the river and then botched her verbal explanation of that. She was already about $200K ahead over 3 days even when she gives the money back, so in the aftermath of this hand, I can see that she might have thought that the $139K was no big deal.
It is an interesting situation.
link to original post
I stopped reading after you said she called with J-4 on the River. Watch the hand again. It was all in on the turn.
An employee of the high steaks production no less. Let me guess...someone with access to the stream or something key to possible cheating ? Does anyone know?Quote: 100xOdds
Source:
https://twitter.com/HCLPokerShow/status/1578169889788862464
An employee admitted to taking $15k off Robbi's stack after the production was over.
What other things from left field can happen?
link to original post
Why isn't she pressing charges?
Crazy $H!T
Quote: AxelWolfWhy not? If you are cheating in a way that has information about your opponent's hand, you should probably call just about any hand that isn't all in or a significant bet pre-flop. Obviously, there's more to it, but in general, you would be involved with as many hands as possible.Quote: Mission146Quote: AxelWolfShe did have the best hand at that point. And she should've called. Even if she was behind a little and knew that, she was supposed to call. I thought you said you were good at poker.Quote: MDawg
If she were cheating her signal would have been red light, fold! because she did not have the best hand outcome at the turn.
link to original post
Yeah, but she wasn't supposed to protect her BB with J4 off in the first place.
link to original post
link to original post
True; my statement was on the assumption that she didn’t cheat.
Quote: heatmapQuote: Mission146Quote: AxelWolfShe did have the best hand at that point. And she should've called. Even if she was behind a little and knew that, she was supposed to call. I thought you said you were good at poker.Quote: MDawg
If she were cheating her signal would have been red light, fold! because she did not have the best hand outcome at the turn.
link to original post
Yeah, but she wasn't supposed to protect her BB with J4 off in the first place.
link to original post
You would hate me with the hands I play then i would constantly be accused of cheating but it’s not that I’m cheating it’s just that I did my research and know more than most of the people who play poker online (I know this was live )
link to original post
It wouldn’t bother me. I’d also not jump to the conclusion that someone is cheating just because they are loose with BB calls preflop, much less assume they are cheating based entirely on one hand.
I agree with Axel that her post flop call becomes correct as would have been a call on the turn, but not her weird min raise…certainly not the call to the shove, obviously.
from the poker community comment on it. I'm a where there's smoke there's fire guy and
was on the fence on this until this latest development.
Very strange hand occurs.
Seems strange to run this one 2x ("On the fence here")
Super strange Robbi gives the money back.
Its all strange enough the company takes action to protect its brand.
And then gents the strangest of all, an employee is caught on cam
removing (stealing} chips from Robbi's stack and she declines to
press charges?
Where there is smoke there is fire and I can no longer breath.
The hand was not straight. There is no way you call $130k all in on the turn when you've invested ~$20k in the pot, no pair, no draw, J high. Hell he could be bluffing with Q-2 and still have her beat.
You can tell from the beginning she was going to call him too. Putting the time chip out. Trying to say "oh I've got a 3" like she could say she misread her hand (but she checked her HC several times so that excuse wouldn't fly). She stuttered and stumbled HARD in trying to explain it too. IF you're calling there as a hero call, then the ONLY, literal ONE reason you're calling is "I thought you were bluffing and had nothing." Anything else is just a joke. Everything else is just smoke. That's the only way in any universe you make that call (which no real player ever would). Then she starts to attack him saying "You let me do this to you!" lol he MADE her call of $130k on J high? After the hand is even more telling, because she knows she can't really explain it.
Just absolutely zero chance that hand was fair, in my opinion.
I think it’s highly unlikely that she cheated. Everyone is seeing Monsters under the bed after Postle.
(1) I haven’t heard a plausible theory for how she cheated. The only concept vaguely possible is she she saw GAs hand or someone else did and signaled her. Talk of electronics and devices is silly without much more to go on.
(2) This looks like someone flustered who made a bad call. It happens thousands of times per day. This is exactly what everyone else at the table wants and now they’ve killed her action by accusing her of cheating. People get flustered and make bad decisions.
When I was 21 or 22, I was playing stud at Ballys AC. On 7th street, there were 3 of us. One guy was all in. There was literally nothing in the side pot. I peeled my card and missed a flush draw. Both other players had me beat on their boards. I bet. Why? There was no logic to it. I literally had no equity in that bet. If the other player calls, I lose to his board. If he folds, I get nothing from the side pot and lose the main pot to the all in player. It was just a stupid move. I know it’s not the same as playing high stakes or being older, but people do non sensical things all the time.
(3) it makes no sense to run it twice or give the money back if you’re cheating.
(4) there are no other unusual hands I’ve seen. Again with Postle there were dozens of suspicious hands. This is one unusual hand. It’s possible this is the one time she saw his cards or someone signaled her, but I think that’s the only possible cheating scenario (and if she saw the cards herself, I think one could call that more angle shooting than outright cheating. It is cheating if someone else saw his hand and signaled her).
Quote: RomesEveryone throwing their 2 cents in, so here's mine... after playing too many millions of hands of poker as it was my job during college.
The hand was not straight. There is no way you call $130k all in on the turn when you've invested ~$20k in the pot, no pair, no draw, J high. Hell he could be bluffing with Q-2 and still have her beat.
You can tell from the beginning she was going to call him too. Putting the time chip out. Trying to say "oh I've got a 3" like she could say she misread her hand (but she checked her HC several times so that excuse wouldn't fly). She stuttered and stumbled HARD in trying to explain it too. IF you're calling there as a hero call, then the ONLY, literal ONE reason you're calling is "I thought you were bluffing and had nothing." Anything else is just a joke. Everything else is just smoke. That's the only way in any universe you make that call (which no real player ever would). Then she starts to attack him saying "You let me do this to you!" lol he MADE her call of $130k on J high? After the hand is even more telling, because she knows she can't really explain it.
Just absolutely zero chance that hand was fair, in my opinion.
link to original post
Between this post and Union’s right above, Romes’ mirrors my thoughts. This wasn’t a $2 home game. Tens of thousands of $$ were in play. It is impossible any real poker player makes that call with J-4.
About her returning the money…. That only makes sense if she felt physically threatened. If she WAS cheating you don’t return the money as it is a quasi admission of guilt! And if she WASN’T cheating no way you give that money back for a hand you won fair and square!
I wonder if we will ever know for sure what happened?
As for her not pressing charges, if she got her money back could be she didn't want the stress and complications that come with pressing charges after she was made whole. All's well that ends well, so to speak.
Gene
I'm skeptical of everything she says.
Quote: GenoDRPhYou loose 100% of the hands you fold, she was there to gamble and she got lucky because she made her own luck by staying in the hand. Her unorthodox plays that hand were exactly that-unorthodox. Those who say she cheated have the burden to prove she did so. Otherwise, it's just irrational rantings of sore losers.
As for her not pressing charges, if she got her money back could be she didn't want the stress and complications that come with pressing charges after she was made whole. All's well that ends well, so to speak.
Gene
link to original post
Have you ever played poker? Even once? Her play in the bluffing before the all in was just bad poker, but not unusual. People try bluffing with nothing all the time. But calling an all in with nothing is totally different.
Agree on the pressing charges. The little she has to do with law enforcement, the better for her.
Gene
Quote: AxelWolfI thought it was unlikely she cheated but as more things come to light and the more she talks, I'm getting close to 50/50.
I'm skeptical of everything she says.
link to original post
What more has come to light?
Gene
The main reason I don't think there was cheating involved here is the fact that it is such an awful hand to be cheating on. If you have some kind of knowledge about other hands, why on earth would you use that on this hand of all?
In my opinion, apply Occam's razor and conclude
* This was a bad play
* She got lucky
* Afterwards she was shaken and had a hard time explaining herself. No-one like to admit they played stupid and got lucky, so what do you say?
All three points above happens every day in poker rooms big and small. Nothing to see here.
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: RomesEveryone throwing their 2 cents in, so here's mine... after playing too many millions of hands of poker as it was my job during college.
The hand was not straight. There is no way you call $130k all in on the turn when you've invested ~$20k in the pot, no pair, no draw, J high. Hell he could be bluffing with Q-2 and still have her beat.
You can tell from the beginning she was going to call him too. Putting the time chip out. Trying to say "oh I've got a 3" like she could say she misread her hand (but she checked her HC several times so that excuse wouldn't fly). She stuttered and stumbled HARD in trying to explain it too. IF you're calling there as a hero call, then the ONLY, literal ONE reason you're calling is "I thought you were bluffing and had nothing." Anything else is just a joke. Everything else is just smoke. That's the only way in any universe you make that call (which no real player ever would). Then she starts to attack him saying "You let me do this to you!" lol he MADE her call of $130k on J high? After the hand is even more telling, because she knows she can't really explain it.
Just absolutely zero chance that hand was fair, in my opinion.
link to original post
Between this post and Union’s right above, Romes’ mirrors my thoughts. This wasn’t a $2 home game. Tens of thousands of $$ were in play. It is impossible any real poker player makes that call with J-4.
About her returning the money…. That only makes sense if she felt physically threatened. If she WAS cheating you don’t return the money as it is a quasi admission of guilt! And if she WASN’T cheating no way you give that money back for a hand you won fair and square!
I wonder if we will ever know for sure what happened?
link to original post
Is she really a seasoned professional poker player though?
I might be wrong, but my understanding is that she is a somewhat novice player who got staked to play with the pros for whatever reason.
If that’s the case, I really don’t find it that hard to believe she made a dumb play, and awkwardly fumbled/lied through justifying it out of wanting to be accepted by / fit in with / liked by the pro poker community. Google “imposter syndrome”.
Quote: AxelWolfI'm skeptical of everything she says.
Quote: GenoDRPhQuote: AxelWolfI thought it was unlikely she cheated but as more things come to light and the more she talks, I'm getting close to 50/50.
I'm skeptical of everything she says.
link to original post
What more has come to light?
Gene
link to original post
Some guy who worked for the livestream got caught "stealing" chips from her stack and she declined to press charges.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: GenoDRPhQuote: AxelWolfI thought it was unlikely she cheated but as more things come to light and the more she talks, I'm getting close to 50/50.
I'm skeptical of everything she says.
link to original post
What more has come to light?
Gene
link to original post
Some guy who worked for the livestream got caught "stealing" chips from her stack and she declined to press charges.
link to original post
Which is apropos of....nothing. If she got her money back, she's made whole and that's the end of it.
Gene
Quote: GenoDRPhQuote: TigerWuQuote: GenoDRPhQuote: AxelWolfI thought it was unlikely she cheated but as more things come to light and the more she talks, I'm getting close to 50/50.
I'm skeptical of everything she says.
link to original post
What more has come to light?
Gene
link to original post
Some guy who worked for the livestream got caught "stealing" chips from her stack and she declined to press charges.
link to original post
Which is apropos of....nothing. If she got her money back, she's made whole and that's the end of it.
Gene
link to original post
She didn't get the money back. The thief claimed to have already spent it.
And she was "friends" with him online, but after the theft, she "unfriended" him and then claimed she never knew him in the first place.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: GenoDRPhQuote: TigerWuQuote: GenoDRPhQuote: AxelWolfI thought it was unlikely she cheated but as more things come to light and the more she talks, I'm getting close to 50/50.
I'm skeptical of everything she says.
link to original post
What more has come to light?
Gene
link to original post
Some guy who worked for the livestream got caught "stealing" chips from her stack and she declined to press charges.
link to original post
Which is apropos of....nothing. If she got her money back, she's made whole and that's the end of it.
Gene
link to original post
She didn't get the money back. The thief claimed to have already spent it.
And she was "friends" with him online, but after the theft, she "unfriended" him and then claimed she never knew him in the first place.
link to original post
HSP offered to reimburse Robbi.
Gene
This would explaine her reaction/response or lack theroff.
.
Quote: GenoDRPhQuote: TigerWuQuote: GenoDRPhQuote: TigerWuQuote: GenoDRPhQuote: AxelWolfI thought it was unlikely she cheated but as more things come to light and the more she talks, I'm getting close to 50/50.
I'm skeptical of everything she says.
link to original post
What more has come to light?
Gene
link to original post
Some guy who worked for the livestream got caught "stealing" chips from her stack and she declined to press charges.
link to original post
Which is apropos of....nothing. If she got her money back, she's made whole and that's the end of it.
Gene
link to original post
She didn't get the money back. The thief claimed to have already spent it.
And she was "friends" with him online, but after the theft, she "unfriended" him and then claimed she never knew him in the first place.
link to original post
HSP offered to reimburse Robbi.
Gene
link to original post
You have a link for that? Or just confirmation bias much?
I’m keeping an open mind. I was pretty firmly in the not cheating camp but will process new data to adjust.
Quote: unJonQuote: GenoDRPhQuote: TigerWuQuote: GenoDRPhQuote: TigerWuQuote: GenoDRPhQuote: AxelWolfI thought it was unlikely she cheated but as more things come to light and the more she talks, I'm getting close to 50/50.
I'm skeptical of everything she says.
link to original post
What more has come to light?
Gene
link to original post
Some guy who worked for the livestream got caught "stealing" chips from her stack and she declined to press charges.
link to original post
Which is apropos of....nothing. If she got her money back, she's made whole and that's the end of it.
Gene
link to original post
She didn't get the money back. The thief claimed to have already spent it.
And she was "friends" with him online, but after the theft, she "unfriended" him and then claimed she never knew him in the first place.
link to original post
HSP offered to reimburse Robbi.
Gene
link to original post
You have a link for that? Or just confirmation bias much?
I’m keeping an open mind. I was pretty firmly in the not cheating camp but will process new data to adjust.
link to original post
HCL said so on their Twitter feed, Find it at @HCLPokerShow. Confirmation bias from me much? No. Confirmation from me always? Yes. Anything else?
Gene
Quote: rainmanPerhaps the thief was a Co Conspirator and got spooked by Robbi giving the money back fearing Rabbi's conscious winning the war with her greed he took it upon himself to ensure his due.
This would explaine her reaction/response or lack theroff.
.
link to original post
Pure speculation. Could be she got lucky, was threatened to give the money back, and the thief was just a thief. News reports confirmed he is an convicted felon.
Gene
Quote: GenoDRPh
HCL said so on their Twitter feed, Find it at @HCLPokerShow. Confirmation bias from me much? No. Confirmation from me always? Yes. Anything else?
Gene
link to original post
Thank you. Confirmation bias allegation withdrawn.
And a worker (who is a facebook friend of hers?) steals $15,000 in chips during the break, can't reimburse her because he spent it (on what, I wonder?), and she declines to file a report with the police (which would have documented the loss for tax or insurance purposes.) And this decision is made a couple of days later, when she is not being pressured in a hallway and when she has time to think.
Clearly, she wants no publicity and is willing to spew money, $139,000 and $15,000, just to shut down this entire matter.
I've seen movies with less plot than this.
i have been slightly swayed by this video guys
“This is a bit of conjecture here.”
Does the Deckmate shuffler have wifi or wired connectivity?
If this dude had actual information or evidence, he should tell the investigators. But he doesn’t.
Gene
Quote: gordonm888She gave all the money in the hand back to Garrett. Not a couple of thousand, but $139,000. (BTW, why not offer to chop the pot and give Garrett back all the money he put into the hand and lost? Say, about $70,000? And keep the money that she had put into the hand. That would have been a more equitable resolution. I imagine that Garrett would have accepted that.)
And a worker (who is a facebook friend of hers?) steals $15,000 in chips during the break, can't reimburse her because he spent it (on what, I wonder?), and she declines to file a report with the police (which would have documented the loss for tax or insurance purposes.) And this decision is made a couple of days later, when she is not being pressured in a hallway and when she has time to think.
Clearly, she wants no publicity and is willing to spew money, $139,000 and $15,000, just to shut down this entire matter.
I've seen movies with less plot than this.
link to original post
It’s been a few days since I watched the hand, but I thought the effective stacks at start were about $139k so that would be a chop.
Quote: GenoDRPhSo a so called social media influencer follows strangers to boost her numbers, and strangers follow her because she’s an influencer. And that’s suspicious?
“This is a bit of conjecture here.”
Does the Deckmate shuffler have wifi or wired connectivity?
If this dude had actual information or evidence, he should tell the investigators. But he doesn’t.
Gene
link to original post
Do you understand what streaming a poker game is? They have RFID systems that identify the hole cards in every player's hand and sends that info to a back room so that the hole cards can be displayed on the video image of the game. In real-time during the game, the hole cards were visible on the TV monitor that this guy Bryan was watching in the back room because that is the TV signal that will be broadcast to the public (with a time delay, usually 30 minutes.)
Brian reconfigured the back room so that his desk and chair would be positioned so that he could see the real-time video image of the game (complete with this hole card information.) There cannot be any uncertainty that this guy Brian knew the hole cards. The only thing still to be discovered is how he signaled Robbi.
Gene, have you ever watched poker on TV? Are you even aware that the hole card information is displayed so the audience can understand what the players are doing?
And yet, one of the reasons she claimed to have let him off the hook was something about him not having any prior history. It seemed as if she meant he didn't have a criminal history, but perhaps she was talking about a previous history of stealing chips. if so, how would she even know that?Quote: GenoDRPhQuote: rainmanPerhaps the thief was a Co Conspirator and got spooked by Robbi giving the money back fearing Rabbi's conscious winning the war with her greed he took it upon himself to ensure his due.
This would explaine her reaction/response or lack theroff.
.
link to original post
Pure speculation. Could be she got lucky, was threatened to give the money back, and the thief was just a thief. News reports confirmed he is an convicted felon.
Gene
link to original post
This chick just keeps telling different stories.
All kinds of strange stuff is coming out, I can't even keep up.
What dude, the dude who took the money from her stack?Quote: GenoDRPhSo a so called social media influencer follows strangers to boost her numbers, and strangers follow her because she’s an influencer. And that’s suspicious?
“This is a bit of conjecture here.”
Does the Deckmate shuffler have wifi or wired connectivity?
If this dude had actual information or evidence, he should tell the investigators. But he doesn’t.
Gene
link to original post
Do you really think a felon (assuming that's true) is going to admit to a felony after having just been given a free pass? Of course, she didn't press charges, the last thing she wants is for him to sing like a bird.
If everyone involved just keeps their mouth shut, I'm almost certain there's never going to be any hard evidence found. They know Mike Postel got away with obvious cheating so they are almost certain to get away with it, and they know that.
But then I learned that she had previously only played at the small stakes level and began borrowing money to move up in stakes. If she's risking money she can't afford to lose, then her behavior doesn't make any sense unless we assume cheating. If she had a cheating method she was confident she could execute successfully in future games, and she had convinced herself she was going to win millions using it, then kissing $135k goodbye wouldn't be a big deal -- or so she thought in the moment.
I suggest watching it from the start, but you can skip to -2:52:10 for Garrett's official statement/evidence/investigation. If after this you still think she's innocent, I say good luck in the gambling world and life in general.
On every previous hand where she put a time chip in, she only waited an additional 5-10 seconds then made the correct decision to call or fold. Why use a time chip and then immediately make a decision? On the 'J4 vs 87' hand, she throws a time chip in and after about 5 seconds her demeanor changes; she doesn't instantly make the decision but she does start babbling her cover story.
They are also speculating that Brian in the back room may have been signaling her boyfriend Rip in the audience, who Robbi could see. Reportedly, the pattern is that she looks at Rip right after she throws in a time chip. In this scenario, she would have no electronic device on her body.
Poker experts are speculating that Brian was told he would get 10% of any hand that he assisted with that resulted in a win, that is, any winning hand after a time chip signal. This J4vs87 was his big money-maker. After Robbi agreed to hand over the $139,000 in chips to Garrett, Brian was observed to react by yelling "No." And then later took his 10% by palming 15k in chips from Robbi's stack.
Quote: gordonm888Quote: GenoDRPhSo a so called social media influencer follows strangers to boost her numbers, and strangers follow her because she’s an influencer. And that’s suspicious?
“This is a bit of conjecture here.”
Does the Deckmate shuffler have wifi or wired connectivity?
If this dude had actual information or evidence, he should tell the investigators. But he doesn’t.
Gene
link to original post
Do you understand what streaming a poker game is? They have RFID systems that identify the hole cards in every player's hand and sends that info to a back room so that the hole cards can be displayed on the video image of the game. In real-time during the game, the hole cards were visible on the TV monitor that this guy Bryan was watching in the back room because that is the TV signal that will be broadcast to the public (with a time delay, usually 30 minutes.)
Brian reconfigured the back room so that his desk and chair would be positioned so that he could see the real-time video image of the game (complete with this hole card information.) There cannot be any uncertainty that this guy Brian knew the hole cards. The only thing still to be discovered is how he signaled Robbi.
Gene, have you ever watched poker on TV? Are you even aware that the hole card information is displayed so the audience can understand what the players are doing?
link to original post
Let's try and keep the condescension to a minimum, shall we?
Yes, I have watched poker on TV lots and lots of time over the years. I've seen with little cameras in the table to peek at the hole cards. I've seen with little glass windows on the table to peek at the hole cards. And now we have RFID chips in the cards to ID the hole cards. But, again, I ask the question that nobody has answered, which is: So what?
Robbi is under pressure here because she isn't a card shark. She didn't play the hand like an "expert. She din't play the hand the "right" way. So now all the other so-called experts and sharks say she must have cheated, because there is no way someone like "her" could have won the hand. Mr. Sore-Loser-Who-Likes-To Intimidate-Women should've just taken his lumps and moved on to the next hand. Hope he becomes a pariah in poker circles.
Gene
So Brian was in the control room, and had real time access to the stream and the hole card info. You know who else had that? Every other person in that control room as well. How many of them had criminal records? And do we have any credible evidence he was signalling Robbi, other than speculation?
Quote: AxelWolfWhat dude, the dude who took the money from her stack?Quote: GenoDRPhSo a so called social media influencer follows strangers to boost her numbers, and strangers follow her because she’s an influencer. And that’s suspicious?
“This is a bit of conjecture here.”
Does the Deckmate shuffler have wifi or wired connectivity?
If this dude had actual information or evidence, he should tell the investigators. But he doesn’t.
Gene
link to original post
Do you really think a felon (assuming that's true) is going to admit to a felony after having just been given a free pass? Of course, she didn't press charges, the last thing she wants is for him to sing like a bird.
If everyone involved just keeps their mouth shut, I'm almost certain there's never going to be any hard evidence found. They know Mike Postel got away with obvious cheating so they are almost certain to get away with it, and they know that.
link to original post
The dude in the video posted above.
No "assumption" he has a record from me. We have the receipts. https://www.pokernews.com/news/2022/10/robbi-jade-lew-poker-chips-stolen-42240.htm
Anything else?
Gene
If the police choose to prosecute, they can arrest Brian for grand larceny (a felony) and threaten to put him in jail for a long time. They have video evidence of him palming chips and records that he immediately cashed them in. They can then propose a plea bargain arrangement in exchange for a signed statement of his role in the cheating activity. With that signed statement, they could move to charge Robbi and her boyfriend.
The critical difference between the Mike Postle case and this case is here the police have video evidence of Brian stealing $15,000 in chips.
