Originally Posted by thedrowningfish
I've always thought the general poker community had way over idolised Garrett and overlooked many of his micro-aggressions on the table e.g. towards regs like Zeo who are obviously better than him. Like the darker traits always existed, only ignored.
That said this shouldn't be at all relevant to the infamous J4 hand, unless Garrett had a history of being a sore loser and accusing other players of cheating. You can tell Garrett was all smiling still after he was called and the two rivers bricked out. He made a semi-bluff, got caught and ran dry - totally cool with him. It was only when Robbi revealed her hand did his demeanour change. And so did the entire table, together with the commentators.
If I were to put myself in Garrett's shoes, I find Garrett's behaviour very understandable.
I suspect someone has cheated me on a live stream. I'd do all means to get my money back with the logic that a non-cheater would refuse, because I know that in past cheating incidents, the cheaters almost never had to repay the victims (Mike Postle). It's a now or never kind of situation. Plus, if I could cherry pick line ups and was making a killing off the stream with Ryan Feldman as a good friend, I would too want to protect the stream and minimise the impact of this hand (which in my mind was cheating). So making Robbi return the $135K makes sense, to minimise blowout and attempt to push his matter under the sheets.
Robbi, on the other hand, has a history of compulsive lying. And with the production staff sniping 15K off her stack... yes we've got no definite evidence of cheating, but it sounds way too suspicious to totally debunk it.
I wonder if we, as poker players, could perhaps assign probabilities to both scenarios (say cheating - 60%, not cheating - 40%), and then Garrett making refunds based on that. Yes, I know the burden is on the accuser to prove the point... but damn, you and I also know how many criminals have gotten off scott free in our imperfect justice system (hi OJ Simpson :/)
This makes sense if you dont think about it