Quote:
Originally Posted by BSumner
It boggles the mind how so many can be so convinced of someone's guilt with literally zero evidence.
She was a poker noob, on a stream, playing with someone else's money, and had a brain fart.
To build a bridge to get to her cheating while using the absolute worst possible hand to do it, is embarrassing (for the "She cheated crowd")
You have literally zero evidence, remember when we were told there was some vibrating device on her hip or her chair?
Ya, let's have the device used on the chick with half a skin tight shirt wear it!
You people who think she cheated are so stupid it's hard to imagine you' re able to drive and make it to the tables at all.
To me, the only evidence that would point to cheating actually exposes your hero Garrett.
how Garret assumed instantly that he was cheated . . . it was as if he knew cheating was going on and was in on it, and couldnt believe it was used against him
I mean, the guy who destroyed the field to the tune of millions, using extreme aggression and getting folds . . . faaaaaar more likely he was cheating than Robbi.
When was the last time you lost a big pot to a noob and threw the biggest stink in the history of poker seconds later crying about cheating?
Then demanded the money back on the spot you were so convinced you were cheated?
That takes some serious God-complex or insider knowledge of cheating.
Gun to my head, if I had to choose who was more likely to be cheating, I'm picking Garrett.
Far more evidence of that than for Robbi
Garrett fanboys are pathetic.
I'm not a "Garrett fanboy", I find NL hold em boring as hell. I play PLO. But I relate to what Garrett experienced because I was cheated (but my cheaters were caught)
Back in Tampa on Monday mornings they had a 1/2 PLO game with a $5 mandatory button straddle and unlimited restraddles from any position. Buyins were 200-1k. It was a wild game, lots of guys would buyin for 200-400 early and try to spin it up and you'd see lots of multi-way all-in pots.
There were two Cuban guys who always arrived at the start of the game, and they always sat in seats 1 and 6. The guy who sat seat 1 even paid another player $50 for the seat when someone beat him to the seat when the game started.
We knew these two knuckleheads would try to trap people between them for raises, but their hand selection was so piss poor that we didn't really care. However, I wound up going through a two-month long stretch where these guys would take odd betting lines against me, calling bets when I had massive equity edges and range advantage, but they were coming out smelling like roses time and time again.
I wound up doing a google search and found a post from Kristi Arnett from a year prior. It said there were two Cubans at Commerce who always sat diagonal from one another, and they were believed to be marking cards. I revived the tweet discussion and explained what I was experiencing, and was told that it sounded like them.
I sent this to the manager of the poker room and was met with "I've been in this industry for 25 years, we use a burn card, how could they possibly know the outcome of a hand???" and I said "look, I don't know what they're doing, I don't know how they're doing it, but if they're playing there, I'm not". He said he'd put a fresh deck into play on Monday and monitor it throughout the day.
I hadn't played that game for two weeks when a buddy texts me "hey, the Cubans were just escorted out by security, they're banned for life"
After doing some digging (since I knew dealers and the manager wouldn't reveal what they did) I found out they were using their fingernails to mark the outside edges of the cards, based on the value of the cards. While this wouldn't allow them to know suits and they could still lose to flushes, it would allow the guy in seat 1 to see the side of the deck and know if the deck was favoring broadway, middle or low runouts (the guy in seat 6 once put in $1200 as the 4th all-in preflop with Q976 and won both runouts because they knew the deck favored middle cards)
I had noticed these two were wearing Best Bet Jacksonville hats, so I contacted a manger up there and he said "oh yeah, we banned those guys two weeks ago". They got caught at a room in TX, they got caught at Chasers in NH.
But the thing is, when I initially brought up the cheating issue, I was met with pushback. Not only from the room manager who had "25 years of industry experience" and couldn't fathom how his operation could be cheated, but also by players in the game who were like "no, these guys just play wild and got lucky"
So arguing that "she just played bad and got lucky" or "why would they cheat on such a stupid hand to cheat on?" don't hold a ton of weight for me. Just because someone is a criminal or a cheat doesn't mean they are sophisticated. They can be greedy, desperate or full of hubris and think they're invincible.
Yes, I agree that there is no HARD PROOF that Garrett was cheated. But, there's a TON of circumstantial evidence. And in the moment, you could see Garrett as his spidey senses started tingling and he felt something was rotten, and that is exactly what I experienced when I was cheated, so I can emphasize with the situation, and with the people not believing it was possible.
I won't rehash all the J4 circumstantial evidence as it's been done to death and you guys aren't changing your minds without hard proof. But just because no proof has been found doesn't mean a crime hasn't been committed.
I'm willing to give that it's POSSIBLE there was no cheating involved and you're all correct. But I think it's fair for those on your side to at least consider that it's POSSIBLE there was cheating involved, but it may never be proven.
I don't think this is a 100% black/white situation, there's lots of grey and possibilities on both sides of the belief train here.