I think you need to hunt down all the Poker players who think she misread her hand and let them know they are adopting an absurd vista, should keep you busy!

3 of of points do not relate to her cheating at all. You just illogically rammed them in. The 1st point is possible evidence but no exclusive to cheating because its easily explained as just a crazy donk call. Fail.

Garret’s so desperate at this point I wouldn’t be surprised if he reached out to you.

1. It was an ambitious call for sure but not without precedent

2. Means nothing really, a bad player will often flounder when asked to defend their stupid play.

3. Warrants investigation for sure but need evidence that it just wasn’t incidental

4. Means nothing, its unethical and maybe they were soft playing and even possibly colluding. But that doesn’t relate to the J4 hand.

If it wasn’t for the Bryan 15K incident there would basically be nothing.

No difference getting it all in as a 47% dog in exactly one hand as a member of a ring that is currently even in the game?

That's where the similarity to all others ceases to exist to me.

Big talk for a guy who thinks it's 40-80% likely that she didn't misread her hand.

"ask the experts" for red flag number 3!

IF, and that's a big if, she faked that DM from Bryan, then that's enough to tilt me from probably not cheating to probably cheating. It just doesn't make sense, personality disorder or otherwise. Why else would she think Bryan wouldn't immediately say "I didn't write that"?

Basically I agree with you that this whole case rests on Bryan now. If he was stealing before, or wasn't. If he and Robbie knew each other, or didn't. I just find the whole Bryan saga so strange still and I am amazed we still don't have video or details of the theft.

Here's a short pre-stream clip from 09/29/22 of Bryan Sagbigsal (@BryanLVC) taking a photo of Rip (Jacob Chavez) with his smartphone, then talking to Mike X about something related to Rip. This may seem trivial but may indicate Bryan's familiarity with Rip (or lack thereof if he's taking a photo of something new to him). Knowing either might be useful somehow.

Garret??? Who'se that?

Oh yeah its that guy who started this thing off. He was quite famous in the poker world at some point right? I think I even remember him having loads of fanboys on here. Funnily havent heard from him at all in this whole drama, but have heard alot from Robbi, Joey, Hansen, Durr, Julie, Harabolis, Polk, Vertucci and others....

This guy needs to make more noise cos atm he just looks like a nobody in the poker world. You cant be considered GOAT if you are quietly hiding in the corner....

Yeah I understand that, and my post was concerned more at the Polk/durrrrs who seem hell bent on cheating no matter what. I'm obviously not over the whole of Poker Twitter, but from what I've seen it does seem like the majority of Pros/bros are adamantly pro-cheat, and are especially entrenched post-Bryan.

And I agree it is a crazy hand, but it is certainly is fathomable on some levels. I'm not sure why it's so hard for people to recognise that. And it is just one hand. There is absolutely zero proof of cheating. There are many circumstantial facts pointing otherwise.

I'm not sure why you would say I am brand new either (I predate UB/AP) but that's okay.

The irony. The problem is people like you incorrectly believe each of those individual things are far more improbable than they really are.

Playing with an undisclosed backer is nothing abnormal in these games.
A dodgy employee existing and taking advantage of the confusion is very incidental and hardly extremely improbable.

Fish lying and being incoherent about a hand they played is very common.

There goes most of your bayesian theory nonsense already. You have been fooled into thinking each of these things are extraordinary and suspicious because you are working from the lens of she's a cheat to begin with.

Alex and David Williams are literally the only two people who have been on Joeys stream, with a competent level of critical thinking and logic. Go rewatch Alex making sharp relevant points and harabolous replying with vague nonsense that often had very relation to the point he was replying to. That's the difference between a thinker and a muppet.

That's a very long winded way of saying he's gas lighting you.

Hi Charles Lew,

I think you and your other minions here have really great conversations, can you let us know how Robbi’s lie detector went?

Alex's point that this wouldn't have blown up if Garrett had won isn't anything new and it's irrelevant. It blew up because she gave the money back and of course that never happens if he wins. I just found him choking on his snot annoying to listen to.

I love the part about how he thinks all poker players are idiots but is deferring to them as authorities at the same time.

Playing with an undisclosed backer is normal. Them sitting with you and nobody mentioning it is not normal.

A dodgy employee existing happens sometimes. When they are one of 5 people who could see the cards, it's noteworthy at the least.

Have that dirt on Eric?

The guy risking three state casino licenses to cheat in HD?

so she bail on lie detector test or is she still nursing a hangover?

Yeah , we are all having a laugh watching this ride out. It’s been quite entertaining, the things people do these days to try and get some “clout” or fame is crazy.

The amount of people being paid to push an agenda on these forums, on Joeys stream, on Twitter is outstanding. I think it’s great to have opinions, both bias and unbiased. The way Robbi treated Julia on stream last night was just so sad and uncalled for.

Alex was excellent. The only guest who appeared that displayed common sense and logic.

I think it’s time to send this case to the jury. I started a new thread in the forum if anyone is interested.

She cheated.

But at this point maybe it's best for everyone to just put her back in the games with hundreds of thousands on the line and make sure no cheating is possible. See how much she wants to play in the game then and for how long she lasts.

The call being made is obviously suspicious on its own right. But the way she answered Garrett's question made it 5x more suspicious. If she said "I wanted to gamble," "I thought a jack was coming," or "I misread my hand (and it be believable based on her facial expressions and her first response)" or "I thought you had a low combo draw because I blocked the higher combo draws" or a handful of other responses, this wouldn't be a cheating scandal, and we'd just laugh at her and move on. Her answer of "I put you on Ace hi," "actually I had blockers," "actually I misread my hand," "actually I knew you had nothing," etc. It makes it pretty clear that she's fishing for an acceptable response, which is exactly what a liar would do. A liar and bad cheater wouldn't know to come up with a coherent explanation for why they made a ridiculous call. It DIRECTLY relate to one another.

A similar comparison is a police chief asks you why your fingerprints are on the gun. If you say, "I sold my gun to Joe," that's a believable explanation. It's vastly different from giving 4 changing nonsensical explanations like "because it was planted," "actually Joe forced me to touch the gun so I was framed," "actually I worked at the factory that manufactured the guns," "actually I sold my gun to Joe." Would you say those two situations have an equal probability of you being guilty, because the fingerprints are the thing that really matters? Explanations affect probabilities of guilt. Guilty people have a harder time telling a consistent story because they just made it up. Of course, in both situaitons, it's possible to get flustered and randomly make up stuff and still be innocent; however, it changes the likelihood.

Ya, I'm hoping a lot of smart people learn what information warfare looks like from battles like this so that we can have a more rational society. Seems like we're almost there as most platforms have to resort to censorship to maintain narratives now.

It probably almost all is and they tell people how they want this to act .

About ten years ago MTV tried to make a Jersey shore type show about some people in Washington Heights.

One of the guys on the show played in my baseball league. We weren't even the best league in NY. They tried to frame it as though it was his stepping stone to trying to make the major leagues. Meanwhile he was like 25 and while good for our league not even good enough to play D1 baseball. They even showed some over the top rediculous staged phone call with his mother about how happy he was to make the team and how this put him one step closer to the majors.

I've gone from liking Garret to really disliking him a lot but I wouldn't place any stock in that survivor clip.