How much good money would you like to wager, sir?
He changed his mind once he had more info. There's a lesson there for you. Don't make bets without all the information.

Has anyone deduced whether there was a point in time that he switched from the crotch method to the hat method or vise versa?

It wouldve been so awesome if someone ballsy just snatched his crotch phone and saw the live feed

Pretty sure it coincided with Stones' announcement that phones were banned in the poker room following the first cheating allegations.

Thanks. I haven't had a chance to follow everything in this thread so closely, this helps and your posts could also be potentially part of the first page FAQ.

As for the ban, was it like at typical casino table games, where you can't take it out at the table?

Bro the entire interview is a goldmine of evidence LOL

Not sure if Postle's win rate was higher or comparable but it's definitely possible.

Otherwise, I agree with what you're saying.

Saying it's impossible to have a ~200 bb/100 winrate over a 5500 hand sample without cheating is what I don't agree with.

thayer, what am i looking for in that photo?

Can't tell if Mike is cheating in this episode/hand, or just inexplicably in full-on agro mode whilst de-Godded:

https://youtu.be/4pSUbMEXHGM?t=2953

(from $1$2$3 NLHE ($1 on the button) with Justin Kelly and Kasey Mills 12/17/18)

As several people have stated at various times, it is perfectly reasonable and appropriate to be skeptical of the degree of "proof" of these allegations we are discussing in this thread.

I suppose it could be reasonable to personally not believe the "math" is sufficient to "prove" that Postle was cheating and/or not believe that a jury will find the "math" sufficient to convict Postle of cheating in a criminal case.

However, (1) the story is still less than a week old and a true investigation has not yet been undertaken; (2) this is an internet forum where our standards of "proof" may not necessarily coincide with a criminal prosecution; and (3) the evidence presented by 2+2'ers consists of far more than just the math (countless hours of videos).

Anyway, harping on the "fact" that we don't have "proof" is a bit beside the point at this time and in this thread.

Matusow put a poll on his twitter and I hope folks are voting yes (it's tight right now) to release part 2 despite the disgrace that is Mike M's interview prep and conduct.

Saying "yes ty for doing your best" acknowledges that Mike M's best is the nut low but nonetheless..I know I'd like to hear part 2

then why would Harlan play if he gets owned by Mike on the daily. doesnt make sense. and Justin playing sounds like a shill. this casino is currupt up and down. typical casinos

HARLAN is in on whats happening and works for the casino.

when they find the system was hacked Harlan will play the victim

Just wanna say that no one that flats J4o to a 50usd raise from the button can be a crusher at poker.

hell, not even a winner

ps. look at the flop lol

He'd be an idiot to not release it. It is going to be most listened to podcast hes ever done. Not a single person even knew he had a podcast until he got this golden ticket.

OMG have you ever noticed the majority of people that regularly go to casinos?

The white stuff(stuffing?) under the bill of his hat. Could just be the kind of hat, but it seems pronounced to me and it doesn't show on his left side. You can see it a few times during the interview.

My favorite thing about Mike is that he has clearly been trying to brand himself as a poker crusher for many years. He's not a crusher, but is probably a competent live player who can beat some lineups. As a competent player, he could have been sneaky with his cheating, kept it going for longer, and gotten away with it. Instead, he made the cheating blatantly obvious because he was having so much fun being recognized as a poker god.

this x100.

do not understand any criticism at all for mike matusow. Mike Matusow playing devils advocate at times and not giving his opinion, and remaining neutral is smart. It does not matter, whether mike matusow, is up to date with all the discussion or has a strong opinion where he come out guns blazing causing postle to not say anything and lawyer up (which is obviously smartest thing postle could do). What matters is he gets mike postle to talk. with that said, really hoping part2 is a lot more interesting then part1.

mike didn't want to say it in joey interview, but its clear at least to me and how he phrases his questions that he thinks postle is guilty but wont ever say it at this point in time because he is trying to keep him talking and lines of communication open. postle will possibly say plenty of stuff that he might have to contradict later ..... so its a gigantic freeroll that he gave an interview in the first place.

Whats more valuable?
1.) matusow coming out like hundreds of other professional poker players have already and saying " yeah postle guy is a cheater"
2.) listening to postle give his version of the events and spout nonsense, possibly incriminating himself in proccess




With that said ... upload part2 already!!!!

Since people have been talking about Postle's "They didn't count my rebuys" defense, I will post a follow up for how I collected my data. Since I don't have Twitter or anything like that, anyone who wants to get this to Joey and/or Doug feel free.



When I started watching the stream, I looked for his first listed chip stack, and I visually confirmed his chip stack with the streams count. Since the vast majority of streams only used $5 and $25 chips, and since he usually stacks his chips in stacks of 20, it is fairly easy to eyeball his stack and be within a few hundred dollars of the exact amount. Even those games where there are $100 chips (and the odd game with $1k chips), it is still easy to be fairly sure to the amount of his chip stack.

As I went through each stream, any time his visual chip stack increased or changed by more than a few hundred, OR if any listed chip count changed by a few hundred (and yes, this includes if any other player made a sudden increase in chips) I would search for any hands with big pots. If Postle ever had a significant increase in his chip stack (more than a few hundred) and there was no visible pot won, I would assume this was an add-on and increase buy-in total on my spreadsheet.

If I had to do it again, I would have the buy-in and an add-on amount separate so this was obvious, but I did account for rebuys when I made my initial spreadsheet.

And in any case I was unsure, I always erred high on the buy-in amount, meaning it's likely his buy-in total was less than what I have listed.

With regard to Postle losing money before the stream, my (and Alecspades) totals still show (and are accurate) to what he won $250k in the 277 hours on the stream. bourrc9 also went through his PLO and mix-game streams, as well as finding 3 NL streams that I missed, and found another $50k in winnings in about 50-60 hours of player. Bringing his total to just over $300k in about 325 hours. Even if he dumped before the stream, his winnings in those on stream hours are still around the $1k/hr mark.

Also, there are many streams where everyone starts with about $500-1k in chips, so clearly no dumping/wild play in these. In other streams, the chip stacks start greatly varied, but I still counted his earliest visible chip stack and count add-ons. Since we can't know exactly what happened in the few hands before stream, we really can't do anything about that. But his on stream hourly is still approaching $1k/hr.

It's clear people tried, and it was covered up or not taken seriously.

You do realize most people in poker lose right? Some people are fun players. I am not saying hes one just saying your logic is absurd here. I think for sure some people in game need to be investigated. Mike could have given them the same tech hes using or just be signaling them in big pots. I don't know this guy but if people are saying hes a regular in the room and plays the same then its probably the case. I have played in games where a players show up for months or even years that are clearly not beating the game. Some people have money and enjoy the game let them play. Again not saying thats what he is by any means he could just be running bad on stream and also hard to win in a game with someone superusing and doing it the way mikes doing. If mike was only using it a hand or 2 maybe few others could book actual winning in game but mike feels the need to play every hand and play every hand optimally vs the hands in play.

He's definitely getting the information relayed to him in this tourney through a speaker and not the stream on his phone. You can specifically see him hold near his ear while he's getting the card info.



Hand at 32:51: https://youtu.be/CgSEVtJqfzE?t=1961

Theres no shot hes a competent live player in 2019 if he thought his play wasn't full of red flags. How do you know about potripper scandal and not realize what it takes to cheat. Thank god hes a total idiot or he could have printed for the lifetime of the game. Dude should have just played normal ranges and situations and just superused in big spots. Instead the dude wants to play every hand preflop and win every hand he can even if it means calling 2 streets with gutter (67 os) vs 2 people then donk jam when they both miss their fd and have no pair.

I guess. I see it more as 5K views (maybe enough to hit up chipotle) and 4,999 people that will never intentionally listen to him speak again.

In either case I'd like to hear it