I don't particularly believe you could get over 110. But you, a smart gambler should know, I'd prefer a better spot. Thought you'd be accepting of that, the line has moved sir with more information revealed. Didn't the people modeling the stuff you are pushing explain how it happens? (These are assumptions)

Really I just want you to admit you won't bet vs me even if I spot you points, but I still may do the under 110 bet.

slilde slide cant hide

garrets replacement sticks pinky into fake arm in the holes. I as state knew the truth and would work looking to prove it via ther mistakes. this tech is designed the used 2 ft away from a suspected victim unnoticed.

What are they going to charge her with, a dozen counts of failure to keep trap shut in the first degree? In addition to the 5th amendment, there is also the 4th amendment which protects the individual citizen against unreasonable search and seizure of private property, and against warrants issued without probable cause. The people have no burden because there isn't now and will never be a case because there is no probable cause.

For those under the card swap tin foil umbrella, wouldn't that require dealer involvement? No one on any side of the dispute has accused any dealer of any chicanery.

PS.
Apologies to forum for responding earlier to another political post from someone. For my part, it stops there.

That's fine dude, you can admit you're a scumbag again, I'm cool with that. I'll put up 33k vs your 100k on your original bet though. Obv I don't trust a scumbag, so we will need escrow. Only one buy in for you, so shouldn't be a huge deal.

Nah Ill bet my 1000 vs your 333. Free money for you. The other bet I will bet much more and spot you 5 points, since you are seeming to look like a misunderstood genius. These are negotiable terms

Btw why do you keep ignoring me when I ask you what kind of gambler you are? Did I spear it? You taking credit for pushing syndicate info? LMFAO. If this is really what you mean by successful gambler yes I may bet more.

I can't think of one detail in the card swap theory that would point to dealer involvement.

I do DFS.

https://rotogrinders.com/profiles/emitnulb

I bet he didn't tilt like in the infamous live stream hand. We're all human. Almost any poker player can be tilted. Everything was fine with GA after the all-in call. And after the first river, when he looked over to Robbi, smiled and said "First one's yours." Even after the second brick, he wasn't tilted and was ready to take it on the chin like any other big loss. It was only after the cards were shown that he tilted. He had no thought that a cheat was on until several minutes after that moment. If the hallway confrontation stories are true, his alleged treatment of Robbi after the hand was unethical, in poor sportsmanship and generally abusive.

That is truly shocking. Not sure how you are so stupid in other areas. You can get the 1000 to 333 still tho. thats over 30 buy ins for you, so should be worth your time

i play like 900 buy ins a day lol.

"No-one ever gives money back after winning!"
"Here are some instances of that happening."

Oh, no worries, let me shift the goalposts:

I lost track of what emitnulb and eskaborr are arguing about, or which side of the cheating they're on.

But this has been the most entertaining thing to happen in this thread for a few days at least.

There are two cards swapped out. There are 4 relevant hole cards in the hand in question (more if you count the players that fold). The odds of one of those 4 hole cards being one of the swapped out cards in any given hand is about 1 in 7. Not exactly staggering odds against.

Wasn't an insult. Man you must be trying to get more action.

You miss categorized my buy ins when I gave context, and I literally quoted your exact AVG buy ins. Only idiots don't know that you enter multiple times or ignorant people, not sure how you haven't figured out I don't try to appeal to them. What part of me saying most of my action is at 25/50 makes you think 100k is my avg buy in? Absolute idiot.

Also, I'm sure you are very confident you will win, probably think it is literally a free 1000 usd.

I highly doubt your hourly doing dfs is higher than the hourly I'm providing you to prove you are not a drooler.

But yeah I may increase the betsize, there certainly was a time in poker where the dumbest of the top 150 tourney players was sub 110 iq, prob even sub 90 lmfao. You are proving to me this is likely analogous, so well played by you trying to get more action.

Want the free 1k or not?

Disagree to disagree.

Id be shocked if your ROI nets you much over 1k usd a day, let alone how long it would take to do an IQ test.

You just admitted to like 30m+(cocrrect me if im wrong) of buy ins and showed a couple million dollar scores. Cool bro

AKA but how much did you lose.

God, I'm such a failure for only being able to clear 400k a year according to you. I'll play you at 10k heads ups in any sport you want though.

Your question was why people in this forum aren't holding to the american (criminal court) standard of "innocent until proven guilty."

First, I don't think that's what they're really doing. Robbi brought more suspicion on herself with her conflicting stories, behavior and the seemingly sociopathic circus that played out in social media. So don't be so surprised that people are pointing out those inconsistencies after she's already willingly thrown herself under the microscope.

Second, you already kind of answered your question - that this isn't the court of law. But even if a court with the highest standard of proof still uses a persons own words against them, should you really expect anything less from social media?

Third, Is anyone really expecting this to go to a criminal court? It didn't happen with Postle, Jake or Ali, so why Robbi? Not sure how the screwy laws work in Cali, but has anyone involved even shown any interest in pressing charges, even if they could?


At the end of the day, it is what it is. Everyone here did a great job analyzing/presenting opinions as best as could be expected form an internet forum, and most of the wild eyed theories have been falsified - what more do you really expect?

Yeah not what I was saying or implying. Was just making it very clear that 1000 for something you think is a stone lock is worth your time. You dont want it?

I dont think his behavior was out of line. He legit thought he had been cheated.
He showed a lot of restraint.

Most poker villains like lederer, ferguson, postle, borovetz, etc. are crucified. In this case there is a lot of leeway given

I want to bet more.

I dont. IM betting higher than your hourly. On the the other bet i proposed you can get bigger action

Even if you believe she didn't cheat, you have to understand he's already highly suspect after the hand, & about 10 mins later at 2:20:00 while Rip & Eric are still laughing & talking about the hand Robbie swipes her finger over her mouth & Garrett clearly sees it & looks even more shocked. So from his point of view at that particular point he was convinced as I imagine most of us would there.

I am no big fan of Garrett but I think he handled the situation better than most people would.

Lol the fake bets are almost as cringe as people taking about their ignore lists