Garrett Adelstein Report on Likely Cheating on Hustler Casino Live - Page 390 - Poker News

Two Plus Two Forums Poker News & Discussion News, Views, and Gossip

Garrett Adelstein Report on Likely Cheating on Hustler Casino Live

Closed Subscribe

...

Page 390 of 737

First

190 290 340 370 380 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 400 410 440 490 590

Last

Page 390 of 737

First

190 290 340 370 380 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 400 410 440 490 590

Last

10-30-2022 , 04:15 PM

#9726

RJT

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 4,520

Quote:

Originally Posted by emitnulB

It's a lot different to say something like that when I haven't been in the same room as a little boy since I was one, while we're looking at you guys create 7 different stacking 1% likely reasons for why you think Robbi didn't cheat. At some point you're just bad at rounding.

Guess what guys, scammers will never admit that they are scamming you. They just depend on increasingly stupid people to scam as more and more people recognize what they are.

You have this exactly backward. The guilters are stacking 1% reasons she cheated. The #freeRobbi folk don’t need to say or do anything. The onus is on the accuser. Not the defendant.

10-30-2022 , 04:15 PM

#9727

Eskaborr

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 2,903

Quote:

Originally Posted by emitnulB

You're right, I won't accept arguments for not cheating, because we know she ****ing cheated. This is such a stupid take. I won't accept some guy telling me that my grass is blue when I look out the window and see it's green. I'm not being disingenuous at all. I'm 100% sure she cheated. It's reasonable to be 90% sure she cheated, but if you think she didn't cheat, you are lying. I ask for reasons why she didn't cheat because I know he doesn't have any. When he can't provide any, it just means that he thinks she cheated.

Some mega logic fails. Maybe they don't answer because they realize they will have a better chance having a discussion with a wall than you.

10-30-2022 , 04:16 PM

#9728

emitnulB

veteran

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,444

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eskaborr

Some mega logic fails.

Sick gaslight bro.

Quote:

Maybe they don't answer because they realize they will have a better chance having a discussion with a wall than you.

Obviously that isn't true, or they wouldn't answer with strawmen.

10-30-2022 , 04:18 PM

#9729

RJT

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 4,520

Quote:

Originally Posted by BringBackMo

Do you happen to be a Scotsman living in Dubai?

I might have to report that remark to the mods. I might resemble that remark. But I also resent it. I’ve been called worse though and am actually guilty of worse. So I’ll let it slide.

10-30-2022 , 04:18 PM

#9730

Scaredyfish

journeyman

Join Date: Oct 2022 Posts: 284

It's quite simple really. Thinking Robbi didn't cheat is impossible. Therefore if you point out the flimsy evidence of cheating you're lying. The only reasonable motive for lying is if you're being paid. If you're being paid, that's proof that Robbi cheated. Therefore thinking Robbi didn't cheat is impossible.

I think you'll find the logic is all in order, your honour.

10-30-2022 , 04:19 PM

#9731

Eskaborr

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 2,903

Quote:

Originally Posted by emitnulB

Sick gaslight bro.

Obviously that isn't true, or they wouldn't answer with strawmen.

The easiest way to "prove" her innocence, is to doubt the weight of the "evidence" the guilters have supplied.

Being anything close to 90% seems completely absurd but on brand with how your brain operates. Oh wait you are at 100%, yeah I'm done talking to you.

10-30-2022 , 04:20 PM

#9732

emitnulB

veteran

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,444

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJT

You have this exactly backward. The guilters are stacking 1% reasons she cheated. The #freeRobbi folk don’t need to say or do anything. The onus is on the accuser. Not the defendant.

So you think that if you confront someone after an all-in and ask for your money back because you thought you were cheated, that there is a 99% chance you would receive your money back?

10-30-2022 , 04:21 PM

#9733

Eskaborr

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 2,903

Quote:

Originally Posted by emitnulB

So you think that if you confront someone after an all-in and ask for your money back because you thought you were cheated, that there is a 99% chance you would receive your money back?

99% chance huh, cant wait for this logic fail. Please explain this.

10-30-2022 , 04:22 PM

#9734

emitnulB

veteran

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,444

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eskaborr

It's absurd because of what? How are you explaining her giving the money back, the lies about misreading her hand, and the devices in Eric and Rip's hats? There's more, but let's start there, and then we can multiply the probabilities together and keep going after that.

10-30-2022 , 04:23 PM

#9735

RJT

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 4,520

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eskaborr

Never become a juror. Also just copy and paste this drivel anytime you engage with someone in this thread, so they can learn like I have that there is zero reason to engage with you.

Do you and anyone else realize why I am so passionate with this case. It’s exactly what you just said. We have this in every single jury pool in every type of case, from a trivial civil to a death penalty case. It’s scary af.

10-30-2022 , 04:23 PM

#9736

emitnulB

veteran

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,444

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eskaborr

99% chance huh, cant wait for this logic fail. Please explain this.

Because he said that her giving the money back means it's 1% likely that she cheated, that means that 99% of the time you can get it back from non cheaters by doing the same thing. We're saying that only 1/100 times someone gives you your money back when you say they cheated it's because they cheated?

10-30-2022 , 04:24 PM

#9737

Scaredyfish

journeyman

Join Date: Oct 2022 Posts: 284

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eskaborr

Maybe they don't answer because they realize they will have a better chance having a discussion with a wall than you.

Against my better judgment, I did answer just to see what Bluntime would do. I even gave them the whole weekend to respond.

I presume that Bluntime doesn't think what I wrote qualifies as 'reasons I think she's innocent' because it's all just reasons I'm unconvinced by the evidence put forward that she's guilty. But Bluntime seems to have difficulty understanding that's how innocence works.

10-30-2022 , 04:26 PM

#9738

BringBackMo

grinder

Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 576

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJT

I am. See post 8966.

Figured I’d try it. I’m loving it.

Don’t have to use my brain. I just think something and it becomes true.
There’s so many advances to being a guilter.

Being a freeRobbi is not enjoyable. Formal logic is taxing and time consuming.

This post right here is evidence for why society’s regard for people who try to live with a shred of dignity and pride is completely misplaced.

Here we have a guy who has repeatedly had his dissembling publicly dissected in excruciating detail, and he’s perfectly willing—eager, even—to accuse the people who have pointed out his blunderings of not using their brain. The rest of us would feel ashamed for having been proved wrong so many times about the most basic facts of this case. But this guy? Well, why let something like shame home him back? Like his compatriot Mike Tommo, he’s just gonna keep letting it rip.

10-30-2022 , 04:26 PM

#9739

RJT

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 4,520

Quote:

Originally Posted by emitnulB

So you think that if you confront someone after an all-in and ask for your money back because you thought you were cheated, that there is a 99% chance you would receive your money back?

Do you think Garret in a million years thought she’d give it to him?

10-30-2022 , 04:26 PM

#9740

emitnulB

veteran

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,444

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scaredyfish

You gave unlikely scenarios to explain away the evidence. Even if your unlikely explanations are 50/50's, we're talking about an extremely low probability of non cheating.

10-30-2022 , 04:27 PM

#9741

emitnulB

veteran

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,444

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJT

Do you think Garret in a million years thought she’d give it to him?

Not if she didn't cheat.

10-30-2022 , 04:29 PM

#9742

Scaredyfish

journeyman

Join Date: Oct 2022 Posts: 284

Quote:

Originally Posted by emitnulB

You gave unlikely scenarios to explain away the evidence. Even if your unlikely explanations are 50/50's, we're talking about an extremely low probability of non cheating.

You've just changed your argument. You said I couldn't respond. Please retract and apologise.

10-30-2022 , 04:29 PM

#9743

BringBackMo

grinder

Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 576

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJT

Thanks for this. Guess I should stop reading from phone. Miss details.
For some reason I thought yesterday article was written by another reporter.
And there was miscommunication between LA reporters. I also misread that Andrea received email at 4:59. I thought it said she was confirming and that is was 4:59 when she was tweeting.
Also didn’t know Andrea was at hustler when Robbi met detective. Do we know if reporter was in room.

I mean, proceed with caution from anyone who has to admit this many mistakes in a single line of argument, after making that argument across ten or twelve posts, only to finally be corrected.

10-30-2022 , 04:34 PM

#9744

emitnulB

veteran

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,444

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scaredyfish

You've just changed your argument. You said I couldn't respond. Please retract and apologise.

I didn't change anything. I think those 10 things add up to 100% chance of cheating. I was proving that you also think she cheated.

10-30-2022 , 04:37 PM

#9745

Eskaborr

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 2,903

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scaredyfish

Pretty clear how he operates. He even just asked me to "explain away the devices in rip and erics hats!"

He wants me to start under the assumption that there is a device, lmao.

10-30-2022 , 04:42 PM

#9746

RJT

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 4,520

Quote:

Originally Posted by BringBackMo

This post right here is evidence for why society’s regard for people who try to live with a shred of dignity and pride is completely misplaced.

Right. So I joined the guilters who for example have no shame in using conjecture for logical arguments.

Quote:

Here we have a guy who has repeatedly had his dissembling publicly dissected in excruciating detail, and he’s perfectly willing—eager, even—to accuse the people who have pointed out his blunderings of not using their brain. The rest of us would feel ashamed for having been proved wrong so many times about the most basic facts of this case. But this guy? Well, why let something like shame home him back? Like his compatriot Mike Tommo, he’s just gonna keep letting it rip.

Right again. It doesn’t take a brain to not misread something. You showed/proved I was wrong. Hopefully you aren’t bragging how you so intelligently pointed out I was misreading things. Must have studied all the great philosophers. You didn’t prove my logic wrong. I was wrong because I misread the basic facts. I started out with wrong premises. (Change the premises to what I was thinking and the logic flows.)

10-30-2022 , 04:45 PM

#9747

RJT

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 4,520

Quote:

Originally Posted by emitnulB

Not if she didn't cheat.

You have no idea that you didn’t answer my question.

10-30-2022 , 04:47 PM

#9748

emitnulB

veteran

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,444

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eskaborr

Pretty clear how he operates. He even just asked me to "explain away the devices in rip and erics hats!"

He wants me to start under the assumption that there is a device, lmao.

Your answer to that can be "I think there's a 10% chance there aren't devices in their hats", but you aren't answering because you know that my point about it being unreasonable to be less than 90% sure of cheating is correct and you won't admit you were wrong.

10-30-2022 , 04:47 PM

#9749

Scaredyfish

journeyman

Join Date: Oct 2022 Posts: 284

Quote:

Originally Posted by emitnulB

I didn't change anything. I think those 10 things add up to 100% chance of cheating. I was proving that you also think she cheated.

Quote:

Originally Posted by emitnulB

You haven't given a single argument for why you think she didn't cheat. That's how I know you're being disingenuous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by emitnulB

No, I asked why he thought she didn't cheat. Guess how many times I've gotten an answer to that question from the people who think she didn't cheat?

Quote:

Originally Posted by emitnulB

I ask for reasons why she didn't cheat because I know he doesn't have any. When he can't provide any, it just means that he thinks she cheated.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scaredyfish

my post with reasons

Retract and apologise for your repeated lying.

10-30-2022 , 04:48 PM

#9750

emitnulB

veteran

Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,444

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJT

You have no idea that you didn’t answer my question.

Garrett thought that if she gave the money back there was 0 chance that she didn't cheat. He thought that if she didn't give the money back, there was some chance that she didn't cheat. Does that answer your question?

Page 390 of 737

First

190 290 340 370 380 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 400 410 440 490 590

Last

Closed Thread Subscribe

...

Page 390 of 737

First

190 290 340 370 380 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 400 410 440 490 590

Last