I don't know if having an old database and RTA are comparable. I'd agree with you somewhat if the HHs in that database were current, something from Brandon's most recent match(es), same format and maybe same stakes. I just don't see how he could've been advantaged by getting a glimpse into how Brandon played two years ago, presumably in different formats, at different stakes against a different set of opponents.

And I just find it hard to believe Brandon didn't know who Paint hired as coach, at the very least he would've had some basic information.

To me it looks very much like Brandon knew, at the very least, about the possibility of Paint having access to some old HH's but realised they were pretty much useless and thought he'd crush him anyway. When that didn't happen he wanted arbitration. Then when the decision went against him he felt the arbiter was in a conflict of interest (although the arbiter was well known to him/a friend). A pretty good freeroll IMO.

I'm not well versed in how terms for these HU matches are set. To me it seems logical that if I had a database of my HH's in the possession of xy, I'd stipulate xy can't coach my opponent. To my knowledge that didn't happen here.

Btw, I didn't get the impression Paint continually lied to and misled the arbiter(s).

And I think this was precisely what happened - until he lost.

In these HU matches you make rules, you make agreements and you send to an escrow. If you didn’t get it included in the rules then it doesn’t matter.

Well, they didn’t make rules or use an escrow. Pointless words!

Curious why you think that's hard to believe. Because it seems he would have no way of knowing who Brandon hired as a coach unless he was told by one of two people, Brandon or the coach. And neither would have incentive to tell him. Especially considering what they were up to.

Dude the coaching videos are literally on Zenith Poker's Youtube channel, as a 30 part series titled "obliterating bbrown". Did you miss that part of the thread?

If you're about to enter into a major HU challenge, and someone who offers coaching to the public has access to a segment of your DB, that's definitely a loose end you need to tie up. At a minimum you need to message the coach about it. Ideally, establish clear rules for the challenge.

Of course it's going to be a major problem for you as soon as you lose 40k. But no due diligence done on the front end? That's why ppl are saying there's some non zero chance it ended up a freeroll.

What? You realize these videos were released after the challenge ended, right?

No, I wasn’t aware of when the challenge was played relative to the videos being published.

Ah, yeah a lot of misinformation being thrown around. Thomas decided to release the coaching videos afterwards as some sort of FU to Brandon/some attempt to show they didn't do much with the DB.

They took ~2 weeks to send in coaching videos to the arbs, and purposefully did not send/possibly deleted several incriminating ones, but didn't check the ones they sent thoroughly enough. The first one the arbs watched had Thomas/Paint/Marcus talking, and Marcus said something like 'you're lucky that Thomas is a revenge motivated person. He created a perfect counter strategy based on Brown's old hands'. This was after Thomas/Paint/Marcus continually denied having access to this database, that there could be no proof they had it or used it, etc.

Thanks for the info. You were one of the arbs? Can you guys just post a brief statement in the interests of clearing this up?

https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink/top...ink_source=app

Just gonna share the OP from the other thread about this that has more info and a statement from the arbs. Don't really want to get too much more into it again. Was just really tilting reading a bunch of misinformation

Yeah and why do you think thereÂ’s misinformation? You guys could have posted something so IÂ’m not jerking around trying to understand wtf is going on

I just read everything and now I’m even more convinced that paint was scammed. The players agreed that data mining was ok and Brandon didn’t think to follow up that someone had access to old DB? Idc who it was if someone has hands of yours and you agree to data mining you have to due diligence on that before you lose 44k. Idgaf that paint and TP called brown a loser, he was a ****ing loser that is factual! This is some ****ing bs. And the posts by mike Brady and Jeremiah are tilting AF all moralizing and **** this is online poker in 2023 ppl are studying The information they have. Arbs took themselves way too seriously it’s ****ing HU match for Christ’s sake like Rosa parks posted if it weren’t agreed to as a challenge it would be just two dogs playing HU

Two weeks is a reasonable amount of time in the real world.

The key differences are

#1 The database wasn't data mined. It was obtained by former coach.

#2 The database had all hole cards shown.. big difference from data mined hands where only showdowns are available.

They also knew it was an issue or they wouldn't have lied about it. Hilarious to say paint was scammed here.

And what would you do if you stood to lose 44k? I’m sure you would play everything totally by the book. That’s the problem with this decision, it’s clearly based more on TP/CKs admitted and alleged deceptions during the arb process rather than an objective assessment of the POKER portion of this.

Here are my issues with the arbitration decision:

1. 'thomas pinnock...exploitative counterstrategy which he now sells on his training site.'

> completely irrelevant, if you have a separate issue with TP, sue him

5. '...many nosebleed professional players'

> major cringe, ideally the arbiters would use their own poker experience and be able to make an objective decision without deferring to guys who play higher stakes

'...edge gained would exceed that of RTA'

> irrelevant and completely useless reference to RTA, which refers to replicating GTO strategy rather than anything expoitative. Reference to RTA thrown in there to try to provide a benchmark for unfair play and edge gained from it, but ultimately it's just to pile on and make it seem like what Paint did was really, REALLY BAD

Now for the larger issues..

4. 'statistical evidence pointed to Cole hard exploiting Brandon's leaks from the beginning of the match'

So what? I typically go into HU assuming leaks of my opponent and playing 'default exploitative' lines and adjusting, rather than assuming GTO play and adjusting from there. Not to mention the fact that Brandon could have been doing the same thing to Cole using datamined hands rather than privately obtained.

The fact that Cole exploited Brandon in the match is not in and of itself evidence of unfair play. Arbiters don't seem to be able to understand that.

1. and 2. 'exploitative counterstrategy' First of all these are based on 2 year old hands. Secondly, the arbitration decision acts as if preparation and gameplay are one and the same. As if having a plan going into the match doesn't mean you also then have to execute it. CK would have needed to observe B's leaks during play to confirm suitability of gameplan. The ability to win in a HU match is about confirming and adjusting a gameplan, there's way too much emphasis on TP's supposed 'counterstrategy' (reason I say supposed is from the information I have, this was verbalized by TP in one of the coaching videos, it's not clear to me that Paint did not, in fact, do the majority of the approach/strategy prep himself).

Arbitration decision gives no credit to CK for being able to play poker.

Yes we all try to exploit our oppents but how does one consistently make perfect exploits without data on their opponent

I don't believe the exploits were 'perfect' or how the arbiters could possibly have known that unless they are HUSNL professionals
It's highly unlikely to ever be performing 'perfect' exploits dude. You're talking about the max EV strategy of all possible strategies that exist. There are many, many possible strategies, so it's statistically unlikely that you happen to be playing the max EV one.

Who are you saying did this

Has there been any progressions in this case? I think a formal review by the arbitration is necessary based on there being no evidence of cheating. OP has already lost a lot of money on this by paying out the side bets and forfeiting the challenge. The fact that most have swung opinions in the direction of paint would suggest that like the public the arbs have made the wrong decision and is in need of review.

Not for any $ sale but for justice as a whole. Otherwise this will forever be known as the poker player that didn’t tell the truth about a 6k hand sample and eventually got scammed by every man and their dog trying to angle the situation.

Everyone is so quick to judge and in my opinion don’t act so quick when they are clearly in the wrong.

Lmao if you think nvg 2p2 is evidence for the swing in public opinion.

Why would there be a review of the case or whatever. They both agreed to the outcome. Was acceptable to harsh punishment. Move on.

More weird that paint disappeared from this thread but a few keep doing the talking for him. Hmm.

Brown boys are no match for my 27 alt accounts that are 4yrs-old with 500+ posts each

I'd like to say one last thing on this topic. There have been people who made the point that, oh, well, you got screwed but you have no right to complain about it now. No. Not only do I have the right to give my perspective, it's my responsibility to. It's not other people's job to defend me or set the record straight. I made this thread to touch on the remarkable double-standard I had been held to throughout the entire process as well as to argue the point that arbitration's decision made no sense. I did not post this to argue 1. I handled this great 2. I'm an innocent victim 3. The arbitration panel is full of bad people.

I've said it before, but I mostly blame myself for this episode. I had an idea of who Brandon was before this and what he was like, and I was warned about him, but entered into the challenge anyway. Sure, he lost the poker portion of the challenge (which I erroneously expected to be the entire challenge), but I'm almost impressed at his ability to use his connections and influence to sway public perception so drastically, and to convince the arbitrators of his case. I still don't like the guy, but Brandon is very good at being Brandon, and I can't fault him for that.

I, on the other hand, massively fumbled nearly every aspect of the challenge. From the initial terms (I conceded to pretty much everything Brandon wanted), to the selection of the escrow, to selection of a coach, to the choice to go back to arbitration after Josh quit, to the selection of the arbitration panel, to the arbitration process itself, and the public fallout of the whole ordeal. The only part of this I'm happy with is how I played the challenge. I was pretty naive about the entire process and didn't understand why or how to adequately protect myself.

A few of the members of the panel were biased against me from the get-go, which I could've figured out had I taken the selection of the arbitration panel more seriously. I think the fact that Brandon was able to repeatedly violate site TOS and then convince the arbs that datamining all my HU hands was not only perfectly fine, but admissable as evidence of *my* wrongdoing, and that what I did should void the match entirely, was ridiculous. Are the arbitrators bad people? No, I think they made a bad decision, and some were biased against me either consciously or unconsciously. Which is honestly just my fault for agreeing to them.

The post-decision smear campaign was uncalled for, and responding to that is the main purpose of this thread. There were people who would actively bully anyone who questioned the public narrative, and I just let Brandon and crew run this operation without any pushback. That said, being vilified on a large scale is not something I've ever dealt with before, so I didn't have any idea how to deal with it publicly or personally. I'm not a narcissist or a pathological liar (but I guess that's just what a pathological liar would say lol). I have an ego and I think I'm good at poker. Guilty.

I've learned that it's usually a bad idea to engage in ego battles in poker. It was never about the money for me, I just wanted to beat this dude. And he wanted to beat me. In a spot where we were trying to embarrass one another, it's pretty remarkable how we both succeeded. We both would've been way better off not engaging one another at all.

Lastly, I would like to make known my appreciation for people who have spoken up in my defense. Getting torn apart publicly is a fairly jarring experience, and people who pushed back helped me retain (or regain) my sanity. I'm not great at litigation or publicly, so moving forward I'll probably just take PE's advice and stick to what I am good at, which is playing poker. ✌️

Lmao yeah no proof required, just ship back all funds and shut up
Care to post any more complete drivel in this thread? It’s nice to see the type of thinking that spurred this awful decision encapsulated