Robbi J4 v Garrett 87

Quote: AxelWolf

Obviously, it's not what the title suggests, but this entire movement is a little odd.
link to original post

You aren't accusing her of have a vibrating device here?

Quote: GenoDRPh

link to original post

Thanks for that.

I agree, there was no evidence regarding his theory and most people thought he was nuts. Turns out he was correct in using his knowledge of the subject.

Had he said gravity was bluff-called everyone, I would have been skeptical.

Quote: AxelWolf

To add more fuel to the fire. This might add at least a little bit of suspicion.

link to original post

Or here?

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AxelWolf

Obviously, it's not what the title suggests, but this entire movement is a little odd.
link to original post

You aren't accusing her of have a vibrating device here?
link to original post

I certainly did not suggest, say, or believe there was a vibrating device inside her. I clearly said, "it's not what the title suggests." I actually said somewhere I wasn't buying a vibrating device BS. I did/do think her movement is odd, but that's NOT because I think something is vibrating in/on her.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AxelWolf

To add more fuel to the fire. This might add at least a little bit of suspicion.

link to original post

Or here?
link to original post

This is great, thank you, I don't think I saw this breakdown. I suggest everyone watch the entire thing(nevermind the vibrating BS, that's not happening) look at a small fraction of highly suspicious activity.

Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: GenoDRPh

link to original post

Thanks for that.

I agree, there was no evidence regarding his theory and most people thought he was nuts. Turns out he was correct in using his knowledge of the subject.

Had he said gravity was bluff-called everyone, I would have been skeptical.
link to original post

Would you be as skeptical if he said gravity paid off an accomplice to keep quiet and disappear?

Robbi Jade Lew Return to Hustler Casino Live in the Works?

The spectacle continues.

I'm coming out of retirement for one post because this is driving me nuts.

Axel and PG know more about poker than others. This creates the illusion that they are not drooling idiots (who I love).

The idea that poker players generally think she is guilty at this point is false. As in many areas, it is more a division between conspiracy theorists and evidence-based thinkers. Andy and Phil Ivey were there, and said she is probably innocent. Jonathan Little, Daniel N, Bart Hanson, David Williams and others have either always leaned to innocence or shifted that way as the evidence came in.

The people who think she is guilty are Doug Polk, who believed she was signaled by a visibly vibrating chair and promoted a crypto scam, Charlie Carol who believes the US Government did 9/11 and Tom Dwan who has made false cheating allegations in the past and apologized. Also Sean Deeb and a couple of others, but by and large, they have cooled off. Lots of people were initially very suspicious but again, time and evidence have changed their minds.

It's actually kind of amazing how much exculpatory evidence there is at this point, given that it is just a poker hand.

She passed a poly. Could she have taken 30 and passed only 1? Could she have bribed the guy? Sure she could have. You can always cook up explanations. That's how conspiracy theories work. The problem is, as you fabricate more and more explanations, you create a larger and larger parlay that is less and less likely to be true. I do not put a huge amount of stock in polygraphs or this one, but it does suggest innocence.

You also have to consider stuff conspiracy theorists never do. Like, if she or her people went around asking polygraph testers if they would produce false results for a bribe, there is a good chance that one would say no and speak out. If this company produces false results for anyone who pays, they'd likely be found out at some point.

Axel moronically claims that they investigated themselves like Stones did in the Postle case and suggests the report is unreliable. Untrue. The investigator was Bulletproof. A very large company for whom this was a small case. It is very unlikely they would falsify a report here. In fact, HCL comes off quite badly. They essentially say HCL is a slapdick org with lots of security vulnerabilities, but that there is no evidence of cheating in this case.

Moreover, it's not even clear that HCL would benefit from falsifying the report. Would it be so terrible if they said "someone cheated, but we caught them?" In any case, there is no legitimate reason to doubt the report.

Some cheating methods would go undetected in the report. That's true. But many would be detected. For example, if the random hand gestures that people claimed were signals were in fact signals, this would have been detected. If thinking rationally, as your theories are shot down, you question the premise. You don't just keep inventing new theories. That's how people in Qanon think.

The report would also have detected unusual patterns in play. There were none. Of course, the internet at large has poured over every hand that the alleged cheating ring played and found zero other irregular hands. There are several exculpatory hands. For example, Robbi puts in a lot of money with a flush draw when Garrett has a full house. Meaning she has 0.0% chance of winning.

Idiots: They were doing that to cover up the cheating.

Oh right. So the plan was to put in thousands of dollars drawing dead to cover their tracks. Then they go for the kill. And going for the kill is putting their entire stack in on a coin flip in the most conspicuous way possible. (BTW the deep conspiracy theorists explain this by suggesting the whole thing was a plan to gain fame for Robbi, not win money. You have to be THAT stupid to believe this stuff).

This brings us to maybe the best exculpatory evidence. A 3 person cheating ring plays thousands of hands KNOWING THEIR OPPONENTS' CARDS, some or all of the time, and they are not beating the game.

Let me restate that. The people cheating with hole card access are not winning in the game. They are break even-ish, except for the j-4 hand, which they got lucky with as it was a 50/50 situation and then she returned the money.

"But no innocent person would return the money." Maybe you wouldn't. Others would. This is an objectively stupid argument as research has shown that people frequently confess to first-degree murder, knowing they are innocent. They do it because of social pressure and a desire to end prolonged confrontation and submission to authority. Again, this is something objectively proven in the real world. So, of course, someone might return some money in a poker dispute when they are a novice and the big famous pro and the show's producer have them off in isolation and are leaning on them, threatening them with public humiliation. It is not unlikely at all.

I'm sure a lot of people who THINK they wouldn't cave to the pressure in a situation like this actual would. It happens all the time. It is not unusual or suspicious.

BTW, when was the last time an actual cheat returned all their money upon being asked to?

Here is a similar situation for less money, but still enough to buy a decent car. Keven Hart misreads his hand, feels guilty and returns the money.

https://www.cardplayer.com/poker-news/22393-kevin-hart-wins-pot-after-calling-all-in-bet-with-king-high-returns-15k-to-opponent-out-of-pity

Bryan stealing the money was initially a pretty striking coincidence. We have since learned he was a chronic thief and stole from Hustler Casino itself as well. It makes far more sense that a regular thief saw an unattended stack and a chaotic situation and seized the opportunity. As opposed to, he was in a cheating ring and was "taking his cut" or some dumb ass theory like that, on camera, knowing that everything would later be reviewed as the cheating was exposed.
In fact, Ryan said that he stole the money after the game, thinking the stream was over, which makes perfect sense if he is just a thief and no sense at all if he is in a cheating ring.

There was a 250k bounty for any insider who came forward. Nobody did. Again, you can explain this away with a bunch of contrivances. Maybe it would be hard to actually collect the money. But there is a very good chance a broke-ass Bryan would at least get a lawyer to inquire about setting it up. Why wouldn't this guy want a quarter million dollars? Absolutely life changing money for him.

The hand itself is crazy, but not as crazy as it seems. There are 2 innocent explanations. 1) Misread hand. She had J-3 the previous hand. She asked if a 3 was good.

Idiot: I'd never misread my hand in such a big pot.

Here is none other than Phil Ivey misreading his hand and mucking the winner at the WSOP main event.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6bIx76LJo8&ab_channel=PokerGO

2) She actually thought she was good! Nobody thinks this was a good call. But it would not be as crazy as it seems. Without getting into too much strategy, it is possible that Garrett is bluffing here 100% of the time, or almost. Also, he should not be using his ace high draws as bluff, as he would fold out worse draws: a disaster.

Here is a similar hand that nobody considers cheating. Also for huge money. A 3 bet pot. Check raise on the flop. Big bet on the turn. Rui is calling all the way with... 8 high and no draw.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1s1AlEiKUpc&ab_channel=TritonPoker

He did this because he put Dwan on 7-2 exactly. They were playing the 7-2 game. Maybe Robbi, an amateur, had a similar thought process and thought Garret had a lower draw exactly. Yes there are more combos of 7-2 and blah blah blah. But she is an amateur!

Both of these things would be unusual. But perfectly plausible. Whereas no plausible cheating scenario has been presented and many have been totally debunked.

She didn't press charges initially. Again, not really suspicious at all. It was a small theft to her and she felt bad for the guy. Tons of people do not like the police or the CJ system and will only use them as a last resort. Maybe that's not how YOU are but, incredibly enough, some people are different from you. Heck, maybe she just didn't feel like dealing with the hassle.

The droolers claimed that Robbie could never press charges because Bryan would flip on her. Of course, this was directly contradicted when she did press charges and Bryan fled rather than cut a deal. Any rational person would quickly see that they were wrong here. Because they were directly and objectively proven wrong. Nutjobs just invent some new story about how Robbie would have him killed if he flipped or some nonsense like that.

Here is one last set of videos. This guy makes some of the best poker vids on youtube, breaking down elite players and game theory optimal strategies. Much of what he is saying is already posted above. But if you'd like to hear a guy who is smarter than PG, Axel or me explain what was very likely going on, he does a great job.

Really funny too. Maybe I should have just posted these.







Of course, it is within the realm of possibility she cheated in the most conspicuous and unprofitable way imaginable. But there is very little evidence or reason to think so.

Hope all is well. i've no dog in the fight but it'd interesting watching people take sides.

Quote: billryan

Hope all is well. i've no dog in the fight but it'd interesting watching people take sides.
link to original post

OK, 2 posts. Thanks Bill. Sounds like you are doing great and I'm happy to hear it. Come up and see us some time!

Rig…. Welcome back. Why don’t you do just what you did? Post your well thought out opinion on a controversial topic? Just avoid getting entangled in the generally useless back and forth!

OK.... 3 posts. PG and Axel are both good friends of mine and we always kind of kid each other. I'm sure they'll take it in the spirit intended. All that stuff was tongue in cheek.

Great to see you back even if it just a cameo Dux. Always happy to debate and you’ve made some very good points. I however still heavily lean to cheating and I highly doubt at this point I will be swayed which I’m willing to admit. After countless hours consuming (wasting time) info about this I still think something was going on with her and Rip on the stream.

Anyways until next time we play pickle ball be good Dux.


P.S we can both agree that Axel is a moron obviously but that’s a different subject 😝

Quote: PokerGrinder

P.S we can both agree that Axel is a moron obviously but that’s a different subject 😝
link to original post

Obviously, since I like you two ladyboy lovers.

Quote: Rigondeaux

I'm coming out of retirement for one post because this is driving me nuts.

Axel and PG know more about poker than others. This creates the illusion that they are not drooling idiots (who I love).

The idea that poker players generally think she is guilty at this point is false. As in many areas, it is more a division between conspiracy theorists and evidence-based thinkers. Andy and Phil Ivey were there, and said she is probably innocent. Jonathan Little, Daniel N, Bart Hanson, David Williams and others have either always leaned to innocence or shifted that way as the evidence came in.

The people who think she is guilty are Doug Polk, who believed she was signaled by a visibly vibrating chair and promoted a crypto scam, Charlie Carol who believes the US Government did 9/11 and Tom Dwan who has made false cheating allegations in the past and apologized. Also Sean Deeb and a couple of others, but by and large, they have cooled off. Lots of people were initially very suspicious but again, time and evidence have changed their minds.

It's actually kind of amazing how much exculpatory evidence there is at this point, given that it is just a poker hand.

She passed a poly. Could she have taken 30 and passed only 1? Could she have bribed the guy? Sure she could have. You can always cook up explanations. That's how conspiracy theories work. The problem is, as you fabricate more and more explanations, you create a larger and larger parlay that is less and less likely to be true. I do not put a huge amount of stock in polygraphs or this one, but it does suggest innocence.

You also have to consider stuff conspiracy theorists never do. Like, if she or her people went around asking polygraph testers if they would produce false results for a bribe, there is a good chance that one would say no and speak out. If this company produces false results for anyone who pays, they'd likely be found out at some point.

Axel moronically claims that they investigated themselves like Stones did in the Postle case and suggests the report is unreliable. Untrue. The investigator was Bulletproof. A very large company for whom this was a small case. It is very unlikely they would falsify a report here. In fact, HCL comes off quite badly. They essentially say HCL is a slapdick org with lots of security vulnerabilities, but that there is no evidence of cheating in this case.

Moreover, it's not even clear that HCL would benefit from falsifying the report. Would it be so terrible if they said "someone cheated, but we caught them?" In any case, there is no legitimate reason to doubt the report.

Some cheating methods would go undetected in the report. That's true. But many would be detected. For example, if the random hand gestures that people claimed were signals were in fact signals, this would have been detected. If thinking rationally, as your theories are shot down, you question the premise. You don't just keep inventing new theories. That's how people in Qanon think.

The report would also have detected unusual patterns in play. There were none. Of course, the internet at large has poured over every hand that the alleged cheating ring played and found zero other irregular hands. There are several exculpatory hands. For example, Robbi puts in a lot of money with a flush draw when Garrett has a full house. Meaning she has 0.0% chance of winning.

Idiots: They were doing that to cover up the cheating.

Oh right. So the plan was to put in thousands of dollars drawing dead to cover their tracks. Then they go for the kill. And going for the kill is putting their entire stack in on a coin flip in the most conspicuous way possible. (BTW the deep conspiracy theorists explain this by suggesting the whole thing was a plan to gain fame for Robbi, not win money. You have to be THAT stupid to believe this stuff).

This brings us to maybe the best exculpatory evidence. A 3 person cheating ring plays thousands of hands KNOWING THEIR OPPONENTS' CARDS, some or all of the time, and they are not beating the game.

Let me restate that. The people cheating with hole card access are not winning in the game. They are break even-ish, except for the j-4 hand, which they got lucky with as it was a 50/50 situation and then she returned the money.

"But no innocent person would return the money." Maybe you wouldn't. Others would. This is an objectively stupid argument as research has shown that people frequently confess to first-degree murder, knowing they are innocent. They do it because of social pressure and a desire to end prolonged confrontation and submission to authority. Again, this is something objectively proven in the real world. So, of course, someone might return some money in a poker dispute when they are a novice and the big famous pro and the show's producer have them off in isolation and are leaning on them, threatening them with public humiliation. It is not unlikely at all.

I'm sure a lot of people who THINK they wouldn't cave to the pressure in a situation like this actual would. It happens all the time. It is not unusual or suspicious.

BTW, when was the last time an actual cheat returned all their money upon being asked to?

Here is a similar situation for less money, but still enough to buy a decent car. Keven Hart misreads his hand, feels guilty and returns the money.

https://www.cardplayer.com/poker-news/22393-kevin-hart-wins-pot-after-calling-all-in-bet-with-king-high-returns-15k-to-opponent-out-of-pity

Bryan stealing the money was initially a pretty striking coincidence. We have since learned he was a chronic thief and stole from Hustler Casino itself as well. It makes far more sense that a regular thief saw an unattended stack and a chaotic situation and seized the opportunity. As opposed to, he was in a cheating ring and was "taking his cut" or some dumb ass theory like that, on camera, knowing that everything would later be reviewed as the cheating was exposed.
In fact, Ryan said that he stole the money after the game, thinking the stream was over, which makes perfect sense if he is just a thief and no sense at all if he is in a cheating ring.

There was a 250k bounty for any insider who came forward. Nobody did. Again, you can explain this away with a bunch of contrivances. Maybe it would be hard to actually collect the money. But there is a very good chance a broke-ass Bryan would at least get a lawyer to inquire about setting it up. Why wouldn't this guy want a quarter million dollars? Absolutely life changing money for him.

The hand itself is crazy, but not as crazy as it seems. There are 2 innocent explanations. 1) Misread hand. She had J-3 the previous hand. She asked if a 3 was good.

Idiot: I'd never misread my hand in such a big pot.

Here is none other than Phil Ivey misreading his hand and mucking the winner at the WSOP main event.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6bIx76LJo8&ab_channel=PokerGO

2) She actually thought she was good! Nobody thinks this was a good call. But it would not be as crazy as it seems. Without getting into too much strategy, it is possible that Garrett is bluffing here 100% of the time, or almost. Also, he should not be using his ace high draws as bluff, as he would fold out worse draws: a disaster.

Here is a similar hand that nobody considers cheating. Also for huge money. A 3 bet pot. Check raise on the flop. Big bet on the turn. Rui is calling all the way with... 8 high and no draw.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1s1AlEiKUpc&ab_channel=TritonPoker

He did this because he put Dwan on 7-2 exactly. They were playing the 7-2 game. Maybe Robbi, an amateur, had a similar thought process and thought Garret had a lower draw exactly. Yes there are more combos of 7-2 and blah blah blah. But she is an amateur!

Both of these things would be unusual. But perfectly plausible. Whereas no plausible cheating scenario has been presented and many have been totally debunked.

She didn't press charges initially. Again, not really suspicious at all. It was a small theft to her and she felt bad for the guy. Tons of people do not like the police or the CJ system and will only use them as a last resort. Maybe that's not how YOU are but, incredibly enough, some people are different from you. Heck, maybe she just didn't feel like dealing with the hassle.

The droolers claimed that Robbie could never press charges because Bryan would flip on her. Of course, this was directly contradicted when she did press charges and Bryan fled rather than cut a deal. Any rational person would quickly see that they were wrong here. Because they were directly and objectively proven wrong. Nutjobs just invent some new story about how Robbie would have him killed if he flipped or some nonsense like that.

Here is one last set of videos. This guy makes some of the best poker vids on youtube, breaking down elite players and game theory optimal strategies. Much of what he is saying is already posted above. But if you'd like to hear a guy who is smarter than PG, Axel or me explain what was very likely going on, he does a great job.

Really funny too. Maybe I should have just posted these.

Of course, it is within the realm of possibility she cheated in the most conspicuous and unprofitable way imaginable. But there is very little evidence or reason to think so.
link to original post

This post was so long I just assumed it was Mission and didn't read it. 😄

I said multiple times, I'm not convinced 100% either way.

If they did cheat, I'm sure they paid Bryan more than 250k.

Great post by Rigondeaux, which I read from Axel's quote.

Here's the article:

https://wizardofvegas.com/articles/lew-vs-adelstein-was-there-cheating/

I don't know if there have been any responses to my posts from yesterday, but I'll respond either tomorrow or later this evening; I have a pretty busy day today.

Quote: Rigondeaux

Quote: billryan

Hope all is well. i've no dog in the fight but it'd interesting watching people take sides.
link to original post

OK, 2 posts. Thanks Bill. Sounds like you are doing great and I'm happy to hear it. Come up and see us some time!
link to original post

Awesome return post. Thank you.

I had breakfast with a former WSOP champion and still active poker player. I asked him about the Robbi Jade cheating scandal. He was absolutely of the opinion Jade was cheating in that hand. Nothing else could explain it. He went onto say he discussed it with other poker and security professionals and the opinion was unanimous against Jade.

I asked how she did it. To that, he said he wasn't sure, but either a hack mentioned in the Wired article Hackers Rig Casino Card-Shuffling Machines for ‘Full Control’ Cheating or had help from someone on the crew of the televised show, which did know the hole cards for purposes of expert commentary. It should be noted that someone with the show "stole" $15,000 in chips from Jade, who declined to press charges. Hmmm.

It should be noted there is also discussion about the shuffler in the thread PARTICIPATION IN DENIAL IS JUST NONSENSE ANY MORE.

I know I've defended Jade in the past. It is possible I was wrong.

LA Times link for more information: An afternoon with Robbi Jade Lew, the woman at the center of the poker cheating scandal.

What annoyed me about that whole scandal is that people were accusing her of cheating solely based on the fact she played that hand poorly yet still won. They had zero evidence or suspicion that there was any kind of hack or collusion or anything; it was just, "Oh, she played that weird, she's obviously cheating."

Quote: Wizard

I had breakfast with a former WSOP champion and still active poker player. I asked him about the Robbi Jade cheating scandal. He was absolutely of the opinion Jade was cheating in that hand. Nothing else could explain it. He went onto say he discussed it with other poker and security professionals and the opinion was unanimous against Jade.

I asked how she did it. To that, he said he wasn't sure, but either a hack mentioned in the Wired article Hackers Rig Casino Card-Shuffling Machines for ‘Full Control’ Cheating or had help from someone on the crew of the televised show, which did know the hole cards for purposes of expert commentary. It should be noted that someone with the show "stole" $15,000 in chips from Jade, who declined to press charges. Hmmm.

It should be noted there is also discussion about the shuffler in the thread PARTICIPATION IN DENIAL IS JUST NONSENSE ANY MORE.

I know I've defended Jade in the past. It is possible I was wrong.

LA Times link for more information: An afternoon with Robbi Jade Lew, the woman at the center of the poker cheating scandal.


link to original post

Your breakfast companion is of the "opinion" she cheated, but isn't sure how? Does he know more than Phil Ivey, who was actually at the table that day, who thinks Robbi just misread her hand? ‘Tiger Woods of poker’ explains what he thinks happened in alleged poker cheating moment

It should be correctly noted that Robbi did indeed press charges against the person accused of stealing from her, and that dude has been on the run since October last, currently escaped to parts unknown. He himself however has said that while he had "God mode" access to card information, there was no nefariousness to cheat that day.Hustler Casino Chip Thief Speaks Out from Hiding

Could be that Garrett is nothing more than an impetuous sore loser of a poker bro. The people who think she cheated currently have no evidence to support their accusations, and keep getting facts wrong.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: Wizard

I had breakfast with a former WSOP champion and still active poker player. I asked him about the Robbi Jade cheating scandal. He was absolutely of the opinion Jade was cheating in that hand. Nothing else could explain it. He went onto say he discussed it with other poker and security professionals and the opinion was unanimous against Jade.

I asked how she did it. To that, he said he wasn't sure, but either a hack mentioned in the Wired article Hackers Rig Casino Card-Shuffling Machines for ‘Full Control’ Cheating or had help from someone on the crew of the televised show, which did know the hole cards for purposes of expert commentary. It should be noted that someone with the show "stole" $15,000 in chips from Jade, who declined to press charges. Hmmm.

It should be noted there is also discussion about the shuffler in the thread PARTICIPATION IN DENIAL IS JUST NONSENSE ANY MORE.

I know I've defended Jade in the past. It is possible I was wrong.

LA Times link for more information: An afternoon with Robbi Jade Lew, the woman at the center of the poker cheating scandal.


link to original post

Your breakfast companion is of the "opinion" she cheated, but isn't sure how? Does he know more than Phil Ivey, who was actually at the table that day, who thinks Robbi just misread her hand? ‘Tiger Woods of poker’ explains what he thinks happened in alleged poker cheating moment

It should be correctly noted that Robbi did indeed press charges against the person accused of stealing from her, and that dude has been on the run since October last, currently escaped to parts unknown. He himself however has said that while he had "God mode" access to card information, there was no nefariousness to cheat that day.Hustler Casino Chip Thief Speaks Out from Hiding

Could be that Garrett is nothing more than an impetuous sore loser of a poker bro. The people who think she cheated currently have no evidence to support their accusations, and keep getting facts wrong.
link to original post

You probably think OJ was not guilty as well.

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: Wizard

I had breakfast with a former WSOP champion and still active poker player. I asked him about the Robbi Jade cheating scandal. He was absolutely of the opinion Jade was cheating in that hand. Nothing else could explain it. He went onto say he discussed it with other poker and security professionals and the opinion was unanimous against Jade.

I asked how she did it. To that, he said he wasn't sure, but either a hack mentioned in the Wired article Hackers Rig Casino Card-Shuffling Machines for ‘Full Control’ Cheating or had help from someone on the crew of the televised show, which did know the hole cards for purposes of expert commentary. It should be noted that someone with the show "stole" $15,000 in chips from Jade, who declined to press charges. Hmmm.

It should be noted there is also discussion about the shuffler in the thread PARTICIPATION IN DENIAL IS JUST NONSENSE ANY MORE.

I know I've defended Jade in the past. It is possible I was wrong.

LA Times link for more information: An afternoon with Robbi Jade Lew, the woman at the center of the poker cheating scandal.


link to original post

Your breakfast companion is of the "opinion" she cheated, but isn't sure how? Does he know more than Phil Ivey, who was actually at the table that day, who thinks Robbi just misread her hand? ‘Tiger Woods of poker’ explains what he thinks happened in alleged poker cheating moment

It should be correctly noted that Robbi did indeed press charges against the person accused of stealing from her, and that dude has been on the run since October last, currently escaped to parts unknown. He himself however has said that while he had "God mode" access to card information, there was no nefariousness to cheat that day.Hustler Casino Chip Thief Speaks Out from Hiding

Could be that Garrett is nothing more than an impetuous sore loser of a poker bro. The people who think she cheated currently have no evidence to support their accusations, and keep getting facts wrong.
link to original post

You probably think OJ was not guilty as well.
link to original post

There was actual evidence against OJ...which is missing here.

Quote: GenoDRPh

There was actual evidence against OJ...which is missing here.
link to original post

It's easy to say there is no proof of cheating here. A case could be made either way. If you put a gun to my head, I'd say the probability of cheating is somewhere between 50% and 99%.

Quote: Wizard

Quote: GenoDRPh

There was actual evidence against OJ...which is missing here.
link to original post

It's easy to say there is no proof of cheating here. A case could be made either way. If you put a gun to my head, I'd say the probability of cheating is somewhere between 50% and 99%.
link to original post

It's easy to say because it's true. Investigations, analysis of physical evidence, interviews with witnesses as well as at least one polygraph hasn't uncovered any publicly released incriminating evidence that we are aware of. Even Garrett has said he has no evidence.

Quote: Wizard

Quote: GenoDRPh

There was actual evidence against OJ...which is missing here.
link to original post

It's easy to say there is no proof of cheating here. A case could be made either way. If you put a gun to my head, I'd say the probability of cheating is somewhere between 50% and 99%.
link to original post

If you followed the entire saga you will find a bunch of Hmmm moments that add up to a bunch of deceptive wtf shenanigans that make it more likely than not that she and perhaps others were cheating.

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: Wizard

I had breakfast with a former WSOP champion and still active poker player. I asked him about the Robbi Jade cheating scandal. He was absolutely of the opinion Jade was cheating in that hand. Nothing else could explain it. He went onto say he discussed it with other poker and security professionals and the opinion was unanimous against Jade.

I asked how she did it. To that, he said he wasn't sure, but either a hack mentioned in the Wired article Hackers Rig Casino Card-Shuffling Machines for ‘Full Control’ Cheating or had help from someone on the crew of the televised show, which did know the hole cards for purposes of expert commentary. It should be noted that someone with the show "stole" $15,000 in chips from Jade, who declined to press charges. Hmmm.

It should be noted there is also discussion about the shuffler in the thread PARTICIPATION IN DENIAL IS JUST NONSENSE ANY MORE.

I know I've defended Jade in the past. It is possible I was wrong.

LA Times link for more information: An afternoon with Robbi Jade Lew, the woman at the center of the poker cheating scandal.


link to original post

Your breakfast companion is of the "opinion" she cheated, but isn't sure how? Does he know more than Phil Ivey, who was actually at the table that day, who thinks Robbi just misread her hand? ‘Tiger Woods of poker’ explains what he thinks happened in alleged poker cheating moment

It should be correctly noted that Robbi did indeed press charges against the person accused of stealing from her, and that dude has been on the run since October last, currently escaped to parts unknown. He himself however has said that while he had "God mode" access to card information, there was no nefariousness to cheat that day.Hustler Casino Chip Thief Speaks Out from Hiding

Could be that Garrett is nothing more than an impetuous sore loser of a poker bro. The people who think she cheated currently have no evidence to support their accusations, and keep getting facts wrong.
link to original post

You probably think OJ was not guilty as well.
link to original post

No, he probably thinks Mike Postel didn't cheat. ROTFLMAO.

Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: Wizard

I had breakfast with a former WSOP champion and still active poker player. I asked him about the Robbi Jade cheating scandal. He was absolutely of the opinion Jade was cheating in that hand. Nothing else could explain it. He went onto say he discussed it with other poker and security professionals and the opinion was unanimous against Jade.

I asked how she did it. To that, he said he wasn't sure, but either a hack mentioned in the Wired article Hackers Rig Casino Card-Shuffling Machines for ‘Full Control’ Cheating or had help from someone on the crew of the televised show, which did know the hole cards for purposes of expert commentary. It should be noted that someone with the show "stole" $15,000 in chips from Jade, who declined to press charges. Hmmm.

It should be noted there is also discussion about the shuffler in the thread PARTICIPATION IN DENIAL IS JUST NONSENSE ANY MORE.

I know I've defended Jade in the past. It is possible I was wrong.

LA Times link for more information: An afternoon with Robbi Jade Lew, the woman at the center of the poker cheating scandal.


link to original post

Your breakfast companion is of the "opinion" she cheated, but isn't sure how? Does he know more than Phil Ivey, who was actually at the table that day, who thinks Robbi just misread her hand? ‘Tiger Woods of poker’ explains what he thinks happened in alleged poker cheating moment

It should be correctly noted that Robbi did indeed press charges against the person accused of stealing from her, and that dude has been on the run since October last, currently escaped to parts unknown. He himself however has said that while he had "God mode" access to card information, there was no nefariousness to cheat that day.Hustler Casino Chip Thief Speaks Out from Hiding

Could be that Garrett is nothing more than an impetuous sore loser of a poker bro. The people who think she cheated currently have no evidence to support their accusations, and keep getting facts wrong.
link to original post

You probably think OJ was not guilty as well.
link to original post

No, he probably thinks Mike Postel didn't cheat. ROTFLMAO.
link to original post

There was evidence against Postel, who also lost a lawsuit. Where's your evidence against Robbi, other than your accusation that she shoved a signaling vibrator up her backside? Talk is cheap.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: Wizard

Quote: GenoDRPh

There was actual evidence against OJ...which is missing here.
link to original post

It's easy to say there is no proof of cheating here. A case could be made either way. If you put a gun to my head, I'd say the probability of cheating is somewhere between 50% and 99%.
link to original post

It's easy to say because it's true. Investigations, analysis of physical evidence, interviews with witnesses as well as at least one polygraph hasn't uncovered any publicly released incriminating evidence that we are aware of. Even Garrett has said he has no evidence.
link to original post

Very suspicious polygraph circumstances, it was nothing more than a smoke screen. It's been discussed and you can find out why with some research. I'm not going to go over it again now.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: Wizard

I had breakfast with a former WSOP champion and still active poker player. I asked him about the Robbi Jade cheating scandal. He was absolutely of the opinion Jade was cheating in that hand. Nothing else could explain it. He went onto say he discussed it with other poker and security professionals and the opinion was unanimous against Jade.

I asked how she did it. To that, he said he wasn't sure, but either a hack mentioned in the Wired article Hackers Rig Casino Card-Shuffling Machines for ‘Full Control’ Cheating or had help from someone on the crew of the televised show, which did know the hole cards for purposes of expert commentary. It should be noted that someone with the show "stole" $15,000 in chips from Jade, who declined to press charges. Hmmm.

It should be noted there is also discussion about the shuffler in the thread PARTICIPATION IN DENIAL IS JUST NONSENSE ANY MORE.

I know I've defended Jade in the past. It is possible I was wrong.

LA Times link for more information: An afternoon with Robbi Jade Lew, the woman at the center of the poker cheating scandal.


link to original post

Your breakfast companion is of the "opinion" she cheated, but isn't sure how? Does he know more than Phil Ivey, who was actually at the table that day, who thinks Robbi just misread her hand? ‘Tiger Woods of poker’ explains what he thinks happened in alleged poker cheating moment

It should be correctly noted that Robbi did indeed press charges against the person accused of stealing from her, and that dude has been on the run since October last, currently escaped to parts unknown. He himself however has said that while he had "God mode" access to card information, there was no nefariousness to cheat that day.Hustler Casino Chip Thief Speaks Out from Hiding

Could be that Garrett is nothing more than an impetuous sore loser of a poker bro. The people who think she cheated currently have no evidence to support their accusations, and keep getting facts wrong.
link to original post

You probably think OJ was not guilty as well.
link to original post

No, he probably thinks Mike Postel didn't cheat. ROTFLMAO.
link to original post

There was evidence against Postel, who also lost a lawsuit. Where's your evidence against Robbi, other than your accusation that she shoved a signaling vibrator up her backside? Talk is cheap.
link to original post

Geno, you are aware criminals/cheaters do their darndest to NOT leave a trail of evidence pointing back at them? If I can’t explain it simply enough to you that all the circumstantial evidence discussed leads to the obvious conclusion that she cheated, that’s on you, not me. Is it possible that the ridiculous excuses for her play and other incredible coincidences surrounding that poker game were something other than cheating? Sure. When humans are involved there are often bizarre occurrences. But I’m confident beyond any reasonable doubt she cheated.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: Wizard

I had breakfast with a former WSOP champion and still active poker player. I asked him about the Robbi Jade cheating scandal. He was absolutely of the opinion Jade was cheating in that hand. Nothing else could explain it. He went onto say he discussed it with other poker and security professionals and the opinion was unanimous against Jade.

I asked how she did it. To that, he said he wasn't sure, but either a hack mentioned in the Wired article Hackers Rig Casino Card-Shuffling Machines for ‘Full Control’ Cheating or had help from someone on the crew of the televised show, which did know the hole cards for purposes of expert commentary. It should be noted that someone with the show "stole" $15,000 in chips from Jade, who declined to press charges. Hmmm.

It should be noted there is also discussion about the shuffler in the thread PARTICIPATION IN DENIAL IS JUST NONSENSE ANY MORE.

I know I've defended Jade in the past. It is possible I was wrong.

LA Times link for more information: An afternoon with Robbi Jade Lew, the woman at the center of the poker cheating scandal.


link to original post

Your breakfast companion is of the "opinion" she cheated, but isn't sure how? Does he know more than Phil Ivey, who was actually at the table that day, who thinks Robbi just misread her hand? ‘Tiger Woods of poker’ explains what he thinks happened in alleged poker cheating moment

It should be correctly noted that Robbi did indeed press charges against the person accused of stealing from her, and that dude has been on the run since October last, currently escaped to parts unknown. He himself however has said that while he had "God mode" access to card information, there was no nefariousness to cheat that day.Hustler Casino Chip Thief Speaks Out from Hiding

Could be that Garrett is nothing more than an impetuous sore loser of a poker bro. The people who think she cheated currently have no evidence to support their accusations, and keep getting facts wrong.
link to original post

You probably think OJ was not guilty as well.
link to original post

No, he probably thinks Mike Postel didn't cheat. ROTFLMAO.
link to original post

There was evidence against Postel, who also lost a lawsuit. Where's your evidence against Robbi, other than your accusation that she shoved a signaling vibrator up her backside? Talk is cheap.
link to original post

What evidence are you referring to? I didn't believe there was any hard evidence. It was all circumstantial or why wasn't he arrested or prosecuted for cheating at gambling? Did he lose his Lawsuit? Hmmm. What one did he lose and why? From my understanding, a
federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed against him by the affected players. I understand that he also dropped a lawsuit. Perhaps there were multiple lawsuits going I can't remember now.

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: Wizard

I had breakfast with a former WSOP champion and still active poker player. I asked him about the Robbi Jade cheating scandal. He was absolutely of the opinion Jade was cheating in that hand. Nothing else could explain it. He went onto say he discussed it with other poker and security professionals and the opinion was unanimous against Jade.

I asked how she did it. To that, he said he wasn't sure, but either a hack mentioned in the Wired article Hackers Rig Casino Card-Shuffling Machines for ‘Full Control’ Cheating or had help from someone on the crew of the televised show, which did know the hole cards for purposes of expert commentary. It should be noted that someone with the show "stole" $15,000 in chips from Jade, who declined to press charges. Hmmm.

It should be noted there is also discussion about the shuffler in the thread PARTICIPATION IN DENIAL IS JUST NONSENSE ANY MORE.

I know I've defended Jade in the past. It is possible I was wrong.

LA Times link for more information: An afternoon with Robbi Jade Lew, the woman at the center of the poker cheating scandal.


link to original post

Your breakfast companion is of the "opinion" she cheated, but isn't sure how? Does he know more than Phil Ivey, who was actually at the table that day, who thinks Robbi just misread her hand? ‘Tiger Woods of poker’ explains what he thinks happened in alleged poker cheating moment

It should be correctly noted that Robbi did indeed press charges against the person accused of stealing from her, and that dude has been on the run since October last, currently escaped to parts unknown. He himself however has said that while he had "God mode" access to card information, there was no nefariousness to cheat that day.Hustler Casino Chip Thief Speaks Out from Hiding

Could be that Garrett is nothing more than an impetuous sore loser of a poker bro. The people who think she cheated currently have no evidence to support their accusations, and keep getting facts wrong.
link to original post

You probably think OJ was not guilty as well.
link to original post

No, he probably thinks Mike Postel didn't cheat. ROTFLMAO.
link to original post

There was evidence against Postel, who also lost a lawsuit. Where's your evidence against Robbi, other than your accusation that she shoved a signaling vibrator up her backside? Talk is cheap.
link to original post

Geno, you are aware criminals/cheaters do their darndest to NOT leave a trail of evidence pointing back at them? If I can’t explain it simply enough to you that all the circumstantial evidence discussed leads to the obvious conclusion that she cheated, that’s on you, not me. Is it possible that the ridiculous excuses for her play and other incredible coincidences surrounding that poker game were something other than cheating? Sure. When humans are involved there are often bizarre occurrences. But I’m confident beyond any reasonable doubt she cheated.
link to original post

So the absence of evidence of her cheating is actually MORE evidence of her cheating?

Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: Wizard

I had breakfast with a former WSOP champion and still active poker player. I asked him about the Robbi Jade cheating scandal. He was absolutely of the opinion Jade was cheating in that hand. Nothing else could explain it. He went onto say he discussed it with other poker and security professionals and the opinion was unanimous against Jade.

I asked how she did it. To that, he said he wasn't sure, but either a hack mentioned in the Wired article Hackers Rig Casino Card-Shuffling Machines for ‘Full Control’ Cheating or had help from someone on the crew of the televised show, which did know the hole cards for purposes of expert commentary. It should be noted that someone with the show "stole" $15,000 in chips from Jade, who declined to press charges. Hmmm.

It should be noted there is also discussion about the shuffler in the thread PARTICIPATION IN DENIAL IS JUST NONSENSE ANY MORE.

I know I've defended Jade in the past. It is possible I was wrong.

LA Times link for more information: An afternoon with Robbi Jade Lew, the woman at the center of the poker cheating scandal.


link to original post

Your breakfast companion is of the "opinion" she cheated, but isn't sure how? Does he know more than Phil Ivey, who was actually at the table that day, who thinks Robbi just misread her hand? ‘Tiger Woods of poker’ explains what he thinks happened in alleged poker cheating moment

It should be correctly noted that Robbi did indeed press charges against the person accused of stealing from her, and that dude has been on the run since October last, currently escaped to parts unknown. He himself however has said that while he had "God mode" access to card information, there was no nefariousness to cheat that day.Hustler Casino Chip Thief Speaks Out from Hiding

Could be that Garrett is nothing more than an impetuous sore loser of a poker bro. The people who think she cheated currently have no evidence to support their accusations, and keep getting facts wrong.
link to original post

You probably think OJ was not guilty as well.
link to original post

No, he probably thinks Mike Postel didn't cheat. ROTFLMAO.
link to original post

There was evidence against Postel, who also lost a lawsuit. Where's your evidence against Robbi, other than your accusation that she shoved a signaling vibrator up her backside? Talk is cheap.
link to original post

What evidence are you referring to? I didn't believe there was any hard evidence. It was all circumstantial or why wasn't he arrested or prosecuted for cheating at gambling? Did he lose his Lawsuit? Hmmm. What one did he lose and why? From my understanding, a
federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed against him by the affected players. I understand that he also dropped a lawsuit. Perhaps there were multiple lawsuits going I can't remember now.
link to original post

Cheating at cards is not a crime in California. That's why he wasn't arrested. Prove me wrong.

Quote: GenoDRPh

Talk is cheap.

I owe you a penny then.

Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: Wizard

Quote: GenoDRPh

There was actual evidence against OJ...which is missing here.
link to original post

It's easy to say there is no proof of cheating here. A case could be made either way. If you put a gun to my head, I'd say the probability of cheating is somewhere between 50% and 99%.
link to original post

It's easy to say because it's true. Investigations, analysis of physical evidence, interviews with witnesses as well as at least one polygraph hasn't uncovered any publicly released incriminating evidence that we are aware of. Even Garrett has said he has no evidence.
link to original post

Very suspicious polygraph circumstances, it was nothing more than a smoke screen. It's been discussed and you can find out why with some research. I'm not going to go over it again now.
link to original post

You're welcome to revisit why your interpretation of her polygraph was incorrect,

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: GenoDRPh

Quote: Wizard

I had breakfast with a former WSOP champion and still active poker player. I asked him about the Robbi Jade cheating scandal. He was absolutely of the opinion Jade was cheating in that hand. Nothing else could explain it. He went onto say he discussed it with other poker and security professionals and the opinion was unanimous against Jade.

I asked how she did it. To that, he said he wasn't sure, but either a hack mentioned in the Wired article Hackers Rig Casino Card-Shuffling Machines for ‘Full Control’ Cheating or had help from someone on the crew of the televised show, which did know the hole cards for purposes of expert commentary. It should be noted that someone with the show "stole" $15,000 in chips from Jade, who declined to press charges. Hmmm.

It should be noted there is also discussion about the shuffler in the thread PARTICIPATION IN DENIAL IS JUST NONSENSE ANY MORE.

I know I've defended Jade in the past. It is possible I was wrong.

LA Times link for more information: An afternoon with Robbi Jade Lew, the woman at the center of the poker cheating scandal.


link to original post

Your breakfast companion is of the "opinion" she cheated, but isn't sure how? Does he know more than Phil Ivey, who was actually at the table that day, who thinks Robbi just misread her hand? ‘Tiger Woods of poker’ explains what he thinks happened in alleged poker cheating moment

It should be correctly noted that Robbi did indeed press charges against the person accused of stealing from her, and that dude has been on the run since October last, currently escaped to parts unknown. He himself however has said that while he had "God mode" access to card information, there was no nefariousness to cheat that day.Hustler Casino Chip Thief Speaks Out from Hiding

Could be that Garrett is nothing more than an impetuous sore loser of a poker bro. The people who think she cheated currently have no evidence to support their accusations, and keep getting facts wrong.
link to original post

You probably think OJ was not guilty as well.
link to original post

No, he probably thinks Mike Postel didn't cheat. ROTFLMAO.
link to original post

There was evidence against Postel, who also lost a lawsuit. Where's your evidence against Robbi, other than your accusation that she shoved a signaling vibrator up her backside? Talk is cheap.
link to original post

What evidence are you referring to? I didn't believe there was any hard evidence. It was all circumstantial or why wasn't he arrested or prosecuted for cheating at gambling? Did he lose his Lawsuit? Hmmm. What one did he lose and why? From my understanding, a
federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed against him by the affected players. I understand that he also dropped a lawsuit. Perhaps there were multiple lawsuits going I can't remember now.
link to original post

Cheating at cards is not a crime in California. That's why he wasn't arrested. Prove me wrong.
link to original post

I can't prove you wrong or right, because I don't know if that's the case or not. If you are correct, it makes a little more sense why it's been happening.

Quote: GenoDRPh

]

What hard evidence did they have? I was under the impression people believe he was cheating based on suspicious hands played, suspicious/strange activities during those hands, and possible access to people on the inside.

Hmmm... Who else had all that and more including partners/backers/lovers at the same table?

My experience talking to poker players mirrors the Wizard's.

Poker players are constantly analyzing what an opponent may be holding based on what actions have been taken preflop and on later streets. This mental analysis -trying to understand what 2-card hands they cannot possibly have - is at the core of high level poker analysis.

And all the poker players I know are unanimous - they cannot conceive why Robbi called the Turn bet by Garrett with the cards she had. They all believe that she was cheating; that she had knowledge of what two card hand Garrett had.

The fact that poker neophytes here in the forum don't get why poker players believe Robbi was cheating is irrelevant -because these forum neophytes don't play and analyze thousands of poker hands a year and don't understand the sophisticated cost/benefit analysis that a professional poker player (playing with >$100,000 in a hand) conducts to make decisions.

Analogous example: When a blackjack player has a $100,000 bet on the table and decides to hit a hard 20 and then draws an Ace - which then wins versus the 20 that the dealer eventually makes - then the casino security team is going to suspect some cheating has occurred. Because a high stakes BJ player has no apparent reason to make that decision to hit a hard 20. If a few members of the WOV forum who don't play much blackjack later expressed their puzzlement over such a judgment -well, it wouldn't carry much weight.

And the fact that Phil Ivey gets some publicity by offering an alternative theory is nothing more than Ivey polishing his brand and keeping his name in front of people - it is overwhelmed by the tens to hundreds of thousands of high level poker players who do believe that Robbi was cheating.

Robbi gave Garret approx $100,000 back after their hand was concluded. No player gives away that much money without a guilty conscience. No player refuses to press charges against someone who was filmed stealing $15,000 in chips from their stack -only to reverse that decision one week later when that is being labeled in the media as proof of her guilt. I can't wait until the staffer who had "God-mode" knowledge of the cards (and was a Facebook friend of Robbi's) is apprehended by law enforcement and is represented by a defense attorney who wants to make a plea bargain deal -or a book deal. Ask yourself -why is that guy running from the law the way he is now? Nothing to look at here?

Is it thought that she cheated on more than one hand? It seems like much work and conspiracy to beat someone in a single hand.
At least with the other guy, there was pattern of suspicious plays. Does she?

Quote: GenoDRPh

It should be correctly noted that Robbi did indeed press charges against the person accused of stealing from her, and that dude has been on the run since October last, currently escaped to parts unknown. He himself however has said that while he had "God mode" access to card information, there was no nefariousness to cheat that day.Hustler Casino Chip Thief Speaks Out from Hiding

Yes because we should take his word for it, the guy who stole(paid himself?) 15k, that just so happened to be from her stack. LOL. Wasn't he a previously convicted criminal?


Her pressing charges on Brian well after the fact due to the pressure and fallout once she knew he was paid off and probably never getting caught doesn't really bode well at all. I have a feeling Robbie wasn't the only one who was cheating with Brian and Whomever else. She was the only one dumb enough to do multiple dumb things and get caught.

I'm thinking multiple people had good reasons to pay off Brian and helped him get lost.

Quote: billryan

Is it thought that she cheated on more than one hand? It seems like much work and conspiracy to beat someone in a single hand.
At least with the other guy, there was pattern of suspicious plays. Does she?
link to original post

There kinda was, you have to watch a bunch of breakdown videos.

This isn't about one unorthodox hero call. If it was, it would've been a nothing burger.

You have to follow the back story, the characters involved, the events during that day, and the events afterward to get the full picture. It's actually all very interesting, to say the least.

Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: billryan

Is it thought that she cheated on more than one hand? It seems like much work and conspiracy to beat someone in a single hand.
At least with the other guy, there was pattern of suspicious plays. Does she?
link to original post

There kinda was, you have to watch a bunch of breakdown videos.

This isn't about one unorthodox hero call. If it was, it would've been a nothing burger.

You have to follow the back story, the characters involved, the events during that day, and the events afterward to get the full picture. It's actually all very interesting, to say the least.
link to original post

I say 51% cheated 49% no cheating.

Quote: GenoDRPh

So the absence of evidence of her cheating is actually MORE evidence of her cheating?

Yeah, this is the qanon level thinking people who believe she is guilty engage in.

The exculpatory evidence is pretty overwhelming. 0 other suspicious hands. A hand where she puts thousands in drawing dead (this by itself is a serious blow to the cheat theory). Passed poly. Unclaimed $200k reward. Clean investigation. The biggest one for me remains the fact that the alleged cheaters, who can see their opponents' cards, were not winning over 3 sessions and hundreds of hands.

They have elaborate fictions to address all these things, just like people who think Lizard Men from the moon run the world. No matter what happens, you can always make up a new story.

Even THIS hand is not consistent with cheating. She called on the flop when she was very far behind. Then shoveled all the money in for a coin flip. So basically, she played the hand in a -ev fashion. Generally speaking, you don't cheat with the intention of generating -ev.

Then (in case you believe they knew the turn and river) she insisted on running it twice, while Garrett wanted to run it once. So there goes that idea.

Nobody who knew their opponent's cards would play this way.

Rather than accept this evidence at face value, the conspiracy theorist invents an elaborate scenario that MUST be true because it arrives at the desired outcome. So, they were using some weird cheating system that nobody has ever used before where Robbi is getting signaled "ahead or behind." This would be a very dumb system and it's unlikely anyone would use it. Why wouldn't you at least signal, call, raise or fold, for example? There is no rational answer, but we're not dealing with rational thought here.

OK, so let's pretend somehow they're using this crazy, stupid, non-existent cheating system that was made up for no other reason than to explain how this particular hand could be cheating. The fact remains that Robbie was WAY behind on the flop. The signal would have been "you're behind" and she would have folded. So case closed?

Oh no, you see, on top of using this crazy, non-existent cheating system, the person giving the signal like... doesn't know how to play poker or something. He thinks, "well, Jack high would beat an open ended straight flush draw if the hand stopped now. So I'll signal that a 70/30 dog is ahead."

It's not plausible that Robbie's partner would be that clueless. And if he were, something else would have happened in the 3 sessions they played.

If you think she cheated, you have to buy the above. Or...

The alternative version is that the goal of the cheaters was not to make money but to create a viral video or to complete some larger conspiracy involving Ivey, dealers, floormen, etc. People do believe this. As with Qanon, there are hundreds of versions, each crazier than the last.

One thing rational people might do in these spots is look at a baseline probability. How common is it for someone to misread her hand? How common is it for someone to make a crazy hero call? How common is it for someone to cheat in a poker game to create a viral video?

In a vacuum, these cheating scenarios are very, very unlikely. Now you have to parlay them with the other things. x Cheaters with hole card access not beating the game. x The massive company conducting the investigation produced fraudulent results. x they put in money drawing dead for some reason. x passed polly. x unclaimed reward. x no suspicious hands, or really no substantial evidence of any kind.

Unlike Postle, or Russ Hamilton, Robbie has been welcomed back into the games. Even Doug Polk had her play on stream at his club. He cooked up some nonsense when the story broke to get clicks, as he often does. But there were more clicks to be had by having her play in his club, and now he's fine with Robbie. And by now, most everyone who has paid attention knows it was just a crazy hand. Nobody is complaining about a "cheater" being in the games or playing at the WSOP.

There are 2 types of people who still think she's guilty. 1) People who don't really know many facts and just make a guess, as happens in many public controversies. 2) Qanon level conspiracy theorists.

I don't know which type Mike's friend is, but it's one of those or a mix. The fact that the guy has no idea how the cheating might have occurred but still thinks it did, sort of makes me think he hasn't thought or read about it much and is just giving a gut reaction.

I could still go either way. Definitely not a hero call. Either she misread her hand or she cheated but miscalculated her odds (she was an underdog when she called the turn). Pretty dumb mistake either way.

The God Mode thing from the employee was new info to me. I think that makes cheating more likely (but a really dumb call if you’re cheating; whee I’m cheating let me get all my chips in on a -EV spot that is inexplicable when people see my hole cards!).

ETA: rigadeux makes good points.

one thing you all have not mentioned was that her boyfriend was at the opposite end of the table.. thats not sus to me though just a random fact about that night

Quote: Rigondeaux

Quote: GenoDRPh

So the absence of evidence of her cheating is actually MORE evidence of her cheating?

Yeah, this is the qanon level thinking people who believe she is guilty engage in.

The exculpatory evidence is pretty overwhelming. 0 other suspicious hands. A hand where she puts thousands in drawing dead (this by itself is a serious blow to the cheat theory). Passed poly. Unclaimed $200k reward. Clean investigation. The biggest one for me remains the fact that the alleged cheaters, who can see their opponents' cards, were not winning over 3 sessions and hundreds of hands.

They have elaborate fictions to address all these things, just like people who think Lizard Men from the moon run the world. No matter what happens, you can always make up a new story.

Even THIS hand is not consistent with cheating. She called on the flop when she was very far behind. Then shoveled all the money in for a coin flip. So basically, she played the hand in a -ev fashion. Generally speaking, you don't cheat with the intention of generating -ev.

Then (in case you believe they knew the turn and river) she insisted on running it twice, while Garrett wanted to run it once. So there goes that idea.

Nobody who knew their opponent's cards would play this way.

Rather than accept this evidence at face value, the conspiracy theorist invents an elaborate scenario that MUST be true because it arrives at the desired outcome. So, they were using some weird cheating system that nobody has ever used before where Robbi is getting signaled "ahead or behind." This would be a very dumb system and it's unlikely anyone would use it. Why wouldn't you at least signal, call, raise or fold, for example? There is no rational answer, but we're not dealing with rational thought here.

OK, so let's pretend somehow they're using this crazy, stupid, non-existent cheating system that was made up for no other reason than to explain how this particular hand could be cheating. The fact remains that Robbie was WAY behind on the flop. The signal would have been "you're behind" and she would have folded. So case closed?

Oh no, you see, on top of using this crazy, non-existent cheating system, the person giving the signal like... doesn't know how to play poker or something. He thinks, "well, Jack high would beat an open ended straight flush draw if the hand stopped now. So I'll signal that a 70/30 dog is ahead."

It's not plausible that Robbie's partner would be that clueless. And if he were, something else would have happened in the 3 sessions they played.

If you think she cheated, you have to buy the above. Or...

The alternative version is that the goal of the cheaters was not to make money but to create a viral video or to complete some larger conspiracy involving Ivey, dealers, floormen, etc. People do believe this. As with Qanon, there are hundreds of versions, each crazier than the last.

One thing rational people might do in these spots is look at a baseline probability. How common is it for someone to misread her hand? How common is it for someone to make a crazy hero call? How common is it for someone to cheat in a poker game to create a viral video?

In a vacuum, these cheating scenarios are very, very unlikely. Now you have to parlay them with the other things. x Cheaters with hole card access not beating the game. x The massive company conducting the investigation produced fraudulent results. x they put in money drawing dead for some reason. x passed polly. x unclaimed reward. x no suspicious hands, or really no substantial evidence of any kind.

Unlike Postle, or Russ Hamilton, Robbie has been welcomed back into the games. Even Doug Polk had her play on stream at his club. He cooked up some nonsense when the story broke to get clicks, as he often does. But there were more clicks to be had by having her play in his club, and now he's fine with Robbie. And by now, most everyone who has paid attention knows it was just a crazy hand. Nobody is complaining about a "cheater" being in the games or playing at the WSOP.

There are 2 types of people who still think she's guilty. 1) People who don't really know many facts and just make a guess, as happens in many public controversies. 2) Qanon level conspiracy theorists.

I don't know which type Mike's friend is, but it's one of those or a mix. The fact that the guy has no idea how the cheating might have occurred but still thinks it did, sort of makes me think he hasn't thought or read about it much and is just giving a gut reaction.
link to original post

I think you are missing a wrestling match at Cram Brian & Teri Middle School. Or is that where you are posting from?

Disclaimer: I dont like poker and seldom play.

When I watched the replay and I talked to myself. How could you call 110K USD for what you had. That brought the next question. Robbi had known what the river card would be. Water id deep, deep and deep in HCL.

I should have simplified this. If she was cheating, explain the following without sounding crazy.

The accuation is 3 players were cheating together and knew their opponents cards at least sometimes. Records show they were not winning over 3 sessions. Why?

In the j4 hand, why call as a 70/30 dog on the flop?

A cheater could make a lot with little suspension just calling bluffs and making bluffs really well on the river. This didn't happen. There were no other suspicious hands over 3 sessions. Why?

They played a pretty big pot putting in $ drawing dead, when a fold would be reasonable.Why?

Why don't the passed polygraph and 3rd party investigation by a large, reputable firm make innocence more likely?

Why no inquiries about the reward $ to prove guilt?

If you can't even imagine a reasonable guilty scenario that explains all the facts of the case, it's crazy to think she's guilty.

Quote: Rigondeaux

I should have simplified this. If she was cheating, explain the following without sounding crazy.

The accuation is 3 players were cheating together and knew their opponents cards at least sometimes. Records show they were not winning over 3 sessions. Why?

In the j4 hand, why call as a 70/30 dog on the flop?

A cheater could make a lot with little suspension just calling bluffs and making bluffs really well on the river. This didn't happen. There were no other suspicious hands over 3 sessions. Why?

They played a pretty big pot putting in $ drawing dead, when a fold would be reasonable.Why?

Why don't the passed polygraph and 3rd party investigation by a large, reputable firm make innocence more likely?

Why no inquiries about the reward $ to prove guilt?

If you can't even imagine a reasonable guilty scenario that explains all the facts of the case, it's crazy to think she's guilty.
link to original post

Savage takedown and not a bit of the logic is reasonably disputable.

Quote: Rigondeaux

I should have simplified this. If she was cheating, explain the following without sounding crazy.

The accusation is 3 players were cheating together and knew their opponents cards at least sometimes. Records show they were not winning over 3 sessions. Why?

In the j4 hand, why call as a 70/30 dog on the flop?

Robbi did win over the previous sessions.

In the j4 hand, Robbi calls on the flop for a small amount. It is not until the turn, when she has to decide whether to call a $100k bet that the God-mode staffer signaled his confederate in the audience who then signals Robbi. Brian (the god-mode staffer) was clearly not signaling what to do on every single ten-penny decision Robbi had in the match, only on the large decisions in which he felt that the information he knew would make a difference if he signaled it. Brian behaved like this because he obviously wanted to minimize his chances of being detected.

So, let's please stop asking "In the j4 hand, why call as a 70/30 dog on the flop?".

Quote: Rigondeaux

I should have simplified this. If she was cheating, explain the following without sounding crazy.

The accuation is 3 players were cheating together and knew their opponents cards at least sometimes. Records show they were not winning over 3 sessions. Why?

In the j4 hand, why call as a 70/30 dog on the flop?

A cheater could make a lot with little suspension just calling bluffs and making bluffs really well on the river. This didn't happen. There were no other suspicious hands over 3 sessions. Why?

They played a pretty big pot putting in $ drawing dead, when a fold would be reasonable.Why?

Why don't the passed polygraph and 3rd party investigation by a large, reputable firm make innocence more likely?

Why no inquiries about the reward $ to prove guilt?

If you can't even imagine a reasonable guilty scenario that explains all the facts of the case, it's crazy to think she's guilty.
link to original post

Q:"Why no inquiries about the reward $ to prove guilt?

A/Q: " By whom, Brian? They paid him off and possibly threatened him. They may know much more about him than we know. It may go much deeper than we know. Anyone else who knows anything is probably involved and they are smart enough to keep their mouths shut.

Q: "Why don't the passed polygraph and 3rd party investigation by a large, reputable firm make innocence more likely?"
A/Q Find that address, head on over there, check it out, and then tell me what you think.
Why did she head to Vegas to get it done?
Did you see the handwritten Document envelope it came in?

Q "A cheater could make a lot with little suspension just calling bluffs and making bluffs really well on the river.
This didn't happen."

A/Q: The same goes for Mike Postel, and I believe the guy actually knows how to play well. He would have a huge advantage by being very cautious and selective. Why was he so very blatant about it for so long, even after speculation and people saying stuff like, "it's as if he can see the cards" ?

She may have had limited information, Her chances to get information may have been few and far in between.
Perhaps only a few times for the session.


Q "There were no other suspicious hands over 3 sessions. Why"

A: I'm not so sure about that. But again, She may have had limited information, Her chances to get information may have been few and far in between.

Q" The accuation is 3 players were cheating together and knew their opponents cards at least sometimes. Records show they were not winning over 3 sessions. Why?" That's not my understanding, but even so and again, She may have had limited information, Her chances to get information may have been few and far in between.

Q: "They played a pretty big pot putting in $ drawing dead, when a fold would be reasonable.Why?"

A/Q: Have you seen this chick's narcissistic ego and strong personality? She even said she didn't like him pushing her around or whatever. Unskilled player, limited information, miscommunication.

Regarding her personality, that's why I'm certain she lied when she claims she felt intimidated or whatever.