Also, very few people say “they know for sure she is cheating “
We may never know 100%
Many people have looked at the hand and the surrounding wacky occurrences and have assigned a high probability level of cheating.
Maybe 50% to as high as 95%

potentially NSFW



question: would a binary signal be sufficient, assuming a collaborator could see everyone's hole cards? all they would need to do is send one or the other signal: bet/call or fold

That is the theory. She puts out the time chip. That is the signal for help.
A single 5 second buzz means “you are behind” she folds
She puts out the time chip on j4 hand.
Gets the signal she is ahead. She makes a call only postle could make.
Remember she had jack hi on the hand that she got buzzed. She wanted to call with jack hi there, but didnt. Both hands were auto-folds. The announcer is saying”what is she doing?” when she puts out the time chip. In either case 100 of 100 players fold unless they know for sure they are ahead. There is no need to even think for 3 seconds as the announcer and doug polk both mention separately.

Im sure it would be a monumental endeavor but i wonder if anything would be found if someone went through a bunch of streams to see if the supposed signals correlated with specific player actions. For example does the player in the hand always fold when DGAF scratches his left elbow

You have NO EVIDENCE that anyone is next.

It’s been shown to be solver approved. I’m sorry if you don’t understand peoples bluffing ranges on paired boards and or pot odds.

Bulletproof is a company with a sterling reputation. Their entire mission is gaming compliance and security.

They have no association with HCL. They were brought in to conduct an OBJECTIVE investigation.

I see a certain someone has a new phrase he will copy/paste every few days now.

lol at the parody shill account.

Yet again the actual discussion of what the alleged “signs” could mean is drowned out by trolls on the pro-cheating side.

As far as I can tell the signs are not correlated to anything at the moment.

I told you where to look for this. There's a guy who made an app where he claims to have time stamped all of the signals from some of the streams and decoded them. It's on the discord group's twitter page.

Link to the discord group’s twitter page?

https://twitter.com/hclpokerscandal

I think it's important to remember that Garrett is primarily responsible for the signaling narrative. I personally think it was because he believes Eric to have set up the J4 hand and the signals have something to do with whatever Eric is up to on these streams. It seems like a wider scale collusion thing. I think the signals will not implicate HCL or Garrett, but there's likely something going on there. If Garrett thought he was at risk from them, Garrett would have deflected from looking into it just like he has with the hand history. It just seems like there's no way you can ever put data behind it in a way that proves anything, even though it's obvious that something is going on.

It's important to remember that on HCL, they film on a 3 hour delay and openly admit they edit prior to the streams going out. Things like signals and the shuffler light are production errors. They're not left in on purpose, though I think some players signaling may be intentionally left on the videos in order for the cheating ring to create leverage on them and hold their reputation hostage. There is a theory that they bring in marks that believe they are in on it, Rip being a possible example of this, and it would make sense if they left Rip's signals in. Garrett was really hype about finding this guy named Julio signaling, and spent a lot of his time trying to convince us that Julio was cheating in spite of him only having 2 appearances and being around breakeven.

I did recall you saying this but the combination of neglecting to share a link and it being an app instead if just a list of corresponding gestures and meanings made it seem like it was not relevant. The pinned tweet is a good example, this would be much easier if people just made a list of clear descriptions and explanations exactly like that one pinned tweet, except in a post or document, and then people could read all of them at once.

^this would be good content for those memes which are conspicuously missing anything like it.

Nobody really cares about your suggestions. If you have an idea, go do it. Otherwise you're just trolling.

FYP

FYI - emitnluB has said in this very thread (and the other J4 thread) multiple times that there was absolutely 100% cheating going on with the J4 hand and HCL in general and that anyone that cannot see that 100% cheating has occurred is an idiot, shill, loser, that has no idea what they are talking about. A simple search can verify this.

The few sane ppl itt like myself are more level headed in stating that it is hard to tell if any cheating happened in the J4 hand and have not seen any evidence to support that yet. We also believe there is shady stuff going on with HCL in general, but again have not been presented with enough proof yet to be certain one way or another. The majority of ppl should be in this camp with only the lunatic fringes on the definitely cheated and definitely did not cheat side. Unsurprisingly, that is not the case lol.

You can't call yourself sane and say no evidence at the same time. That makes you insane.

1. in team play some members of the team can have losses or be even.
2. if the cheating ring leaves signals on tape that would mean the cheating ring controls the editing of the streams. which would mean one collaborator at HCL knows all the signals and that person edits the streams. its more likely that it would just be impossible to edit out all signals of the collaborators because the people of interest in the hand are some of the people signaling so it would be incredibly awkward to always be cutting away from them anytime they did a signal.
3. bringing in marks who believe they are in on it would be incredibly risky because they'd be able to snitch on the entire operation when they inevitably got stung. but even worse, when your theory of the case needs signalling marks to make sense then its possible you're adding epicycles to explain things because the theory is flawed.

it is duly noted that you do not care about presenting evidence or making a credible case for these allegations.

OK buddy, whatever makes you sleep at night. If you think my post is more insane that the drivel you post, I can't help you there. You are by far the craziest, most insane person itt and its not even close as you have 500+ posts itt to prove that. Even ppl on your 100% cheating side would admit that. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if you were a QAnon supporter as well.

I agree with your first and second points. The 3 hour delay as well as the limited hiring pool for the video editing job in a criminal enterprise will lead to several mistakes over the thousands of hours of streams.

I don't think there's really a ton of risk in them bringing in marks that think they're in on it. It's no different than people who aren't in on it. In fact, it's probably safer for them, because they can use coercion on them. They can let you know that you're involved in a crime without giving you details of what the crime is, eliminating the risk of you ratting and rolling on them.

In terms of making a "clear case" for cheating, it's what I'm working on with the hand history. Part of the reason the case for cheating is "unclear" is due to the disinfo campaign as well. They spent a ton of resources trying to frame the cheating narrative as insane and convincing people to fight each other. They did that in the discord chat too, I was fully aware that everyone would think I was crazy for a few weeks when I started shifting the narrative publicly. It's just what needed to be done. Now that enough information has gone public, the gaslight attempts fall flat with more people. For some reason, I'm held to an outrageous standard when it comes to sharing information. All I'm trying to do is share the facts that inform my belief of cheating, but for some reason I get told that I need to write a ****ing novel that you can read and then throw people in jail. When people actually try that, they're called schizo and nobody reads their book. It's not my intent to prove cheating at this moment, the intent is to make you feel stupid for thinking cheating didn't occur.

It's also not my job to do any of this, which is why it's ****ing laughable that you can sit there and tell me what I should do while doing nothing yourself.

How would the marks think they are in on it without being given details of the scheme? Even fake details (because they are marks) which would lead to them losing money, which would lead to the threat of exposure "so-and-so said we could collude and signal but then they sent me the wrong signals on purpose so I would lose"

if I'm 'involved' in a crime but have effectively no knowledge or role in the crime then there's no basis for coercion, the would-be coercer would be snitching on themselves.

Maybe your argument is that that is the position the marks are in? but if the marks get burned then they have reason to flip.

Have you considered that your insider sources are potentially some of these marks? They are feeding information privately in order to preserve their reputation because they don't want to publicly admit to being a wanna-be cheater and real-life mark. and they are feeding you information to shape the narrative so they seem like victims instead of collaborator-victims.


well I found the app: https://roundersinfo.com/dl/a400f7 , something my generation calls a 'website' but no matter. This is the kind of evidence that should be presented. I grant that it takes time.


Paying attention to the drama, counter-narrative, disinfo like this; and then expecting every reasonable person to see everything exactly the way you see it, but thinking that a detailed exposé would weaken your case is just like a train wreck of poor judgment. The purpose of disinfo is to distract from the evidence and fill the infospace/cognitive space with superfluous, unnecessary **** and drama, bait, etc. so people never get around to seeing any evidence. By engaging with the personal crap and disinfo and refraining from making a solid case with evidence you are playing into their hands.



Yeah, poor decision right there. its entirely reasonable for people to suspend judgment for many reasons, and you seem to be unaware of the difference between knowing something and being able to prove it to a person who does not know it. In general trying to make people stupid just makes them aware that you don't like them and they don't change their own opinion of themselves merely because some rude person calls them a moron.


who cares if its your job? you're doing it, and you're doing it badly, which suggests you're on the disinfo side, not the exposure side. when sympathetic people try to improve your case, you rudely dismiss them and explain how you don't want to make a stronger case. but you still go on endlessly, spewing and spewing. if you actually cared about exposing cheating, you'd take suggestions for improvement in the spirit they were given.

oh its not my job either.

They did this effectively, and then tried to close the thread because they claimed there was no evidence lol. I'm aware of the costs of engaging with the disinfo team, the fact that it may delegitimize my opinion or make people angry at me are costs that I know about. I've said it before, if the disinfo campaign wasn't effective, they wouldn't have devoted resources toward it. They did it, and it worked. You can hate people for playing the game if you want, but you can't differentiate them from unbiased people without engaging with them, which is why I've taken some of the actions I have. People like Ace upmy Siv and KingOfFelt are demonstrably irrational, and now they can't effect the narrative. Staying silent would let them blend in with regular people and effectively gaslight. I know people disagree with my method of doing this, but they can try their own way. There are people preparing long winded cases for cheating, and now it's going to be more difficult to discredit them.


There's a difference between "suspending judgement" and actively discrediting everything that could be used against cheaters. What we've seen in this thread is a bunch of posters acting as defense lawyers, not unbiased individuals. I want their intentions outed, because it makes their opinion irrelevant.

It's rare that I'm dismissive of "sympathetic people". There are a lot of people who may have been tricked by the disinformation teams who I have dismissed, and there are some people who pretend to be "sympathetic" in order to legitimize their opinions, but I'm not dismissing people who rationally discuss the facts and disagree on certain aspects. We're just way beyond on the point of "nothing to see here", and anyone taking that line is objectively a bad faith actor.

3 days until Christmas and Koshko's promised report!