Thanks, I was missing this file for some reason.

What if he doesnt? The community can still blacklist him and not give him action when he sits down. If everyone stood up when he sits down, he cant cheat anyone.

Does anyone think this incident will have a negative impact on poker legislation in the states? As someone that lives in texas and is only able to play live poker because of a loophole " we have cardrooms that don't take rake but charge an hourly fee", I would hate to see this have a negative impact on live/online poker legislation in the future.

If this is true, then I would start to question whether there is cheating going on at your room and maybe look for somewhere else to play.

Mike wasn't cheating in the July 24th 2019 stream. Much of the stream he had his hat backwards and was nursing a relative short stack (~$1k). He ended up getting stacked with an under full K7 vs QQ and rather than rebuy he just left (playing without seeing your opponents cards sucks!)

Exactly. It would be very costly to fight and I do not believe Postle has that kind of resources.

I will admit that I was on the the more vocal ones saying we need to take a look at Lance. I did not in any way say it was definitely him but rather anyone with his background should be looked at. This clearly has some type of technical component to the whole thing and he looks to have the right no how to pull something like this off. With that being said, so does anyone who was on the production team so I don’t want to definitively say it’s this person or that person.

You clearly know Lance from your posts. Have you chatted with him about the situation and gotten his take on everything? Does he think mike is cheating? I feel like a big head scratching piece to this whole saga is that none of the commentators/employees have spoken up.

He looks at them when he laughs in their face and shoves knowing they can't call. I've seen enough to be convinced he's cheating, now we need to find his accomplices.

Outside of Veronica and poker momma. Sure maybe some of theme have made vague comments but if I was in their shoes I’d be openly answering questions or talking to the poker community.

If someone is going to subscribe to the fallacy of appeal to authority, at least pick a better authority than Mike Matusow.

I am objective enough to agree, everyone with access should be looked at. I'd look for the simplest explanations for Lance's two appearances on stream and there's nothing suspicious about either imo. But again, we agree, everyone with access should be looked at.

Honestly, Lance just wants to keep his job. This kind of gets lost in all of this controversy, but Stones is a great card room, with 99% awesome employees. The management is pretty good, the owners that I know are folks with integrity, even if I disagree with their handling of this situation.

I don't want to speak for him publicly if he isn't going to, but we've talked about everything.

I don't think there's any upside for commentators/staff voicing their opinion.

Yea at this point there's enough circumstantial evidence piling up and the most logical explanation for his behavior is consistent with him cheating by seeing the cards. Just coldcalling 3bets for $700 w/ 54o and other plays that no player - rational or irrational, including him before July 18 2018 would ever make? He can try to explain all this but dodging questions by talking about your daughter or Prahlad won't work anymore, and he'll have to be spot on for quite a while - I'm thinking it's getting likely a court won't be against anally probing all of this.

The commentators talk is major hindsight bias and people clutching at straws.

The whole Postle God memes

I think its likely that JFK was the man who implemented that. Now whether that is because JFK is a complete moron and believed that Postle was the greatest crushers of all time, or they were created in order to build a narrative that Postle was indeed a god to help hide the cheating.

Commentators talking to Mike on stream

All of these commentators must live in the area. Mike clearly spends a lot of time in poker rooms, so its possible they have known him for years even before the Stones stream. He has the person of a nice guy (conmen always are). Of course they are friendly with him. And also a commentators job is to get info about the hands, so yeah you are gonna see them go from the booth to the table to talk to the players.

Not wanting to rock the boat

How many jobs in poker like this are there? None of the commentators are great poker minds. All of their styles and thought processes fit this stream perfectly! - a friendly, local live low stakes donk fest.

We don't know their financial situation. Maybe this job was the difference between making rent or not per month. So yeah they made have been suspicious or heard rumours, but it's hard to pull that trigger.

Also the commentators switch up so often it would have taken some time to really start suspecting. Remember we are watching these hands in short clips, back to back, time and time again and knowing exactly what to look for. They are working, dealing with chat etc for 4 hours and then might not have another gig for a month.

It's very easy to explain 1 of Mike's sessions as just some punter crushing. We've all been at a table with a guy like that.

Being directly in one it

I just don't see this. You are risking the operation being leaked AND having to give someone else a cut. This is a 3 man operation at most IMO.

I still think Mike bought their friendship with the odd tip here and there and also getting dinners etc.

The only commentator who might be in on it is this guy. He is the only one who I get the wrong kind of vibe from and he has on numerous occasions talked down to Kasey and Veronica.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHmuAqJ_sVo

You couldn't be more wrong - the bar for expert witnesses is so high especially in fields where the science is more established (like math). The judge not only has to qualify you on each case, but you can only testify to facts that can be peer-reviewed because you're not testifying on *opinion* you're testifying on *fact*

This isn't some shitty field like forensic science where even the FBI can get away with testifying to bunk **** - I have friends who are well cited and publishes who weren't qualified based on arguable bounds around their expertise

Just google "who can be an expert witness" - and you run into all sorts like this:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_702

and the fact that prosecutors and defense council don't let just any yahoo with a grey beard and patches on his coat elbows testify because they understand that appeals can be fought and won or lost on the qualifications of experts alone

The other side of it is that in CA specifically, since Brown v Plata, prosecutors are reluctant to go after felonies not involving violence, because our prisons are overcrowded, and have been ordered by the Supreme Court to have reduced prisoners.

We are seeing extremely violent people let out early due to this, and prosecutors unwilling to go after big sentences.

Considering how large and diverse this thread is perhaps it's a good idea to split it up so that everyone doesn't have to sift through pages of tangents of no interest to them. Here are some suggestions for sub-threads:

Mike Postle cheating allegations - 2+2 Members Investigation
Mike Postle cheating allegations - Legal Discussion
Mike Postle cheating allegations - Implications for industry/poker

I thought u said before that he no longer works there?

4 posts in and you claim to know everything that has been posted here? We have gone over the graphics change ad nauseam. most likely, his cards werent wrong, an insider changed the graphics. and by your logic, then tbones cards could be wrong too, so why are you attacking his play if theres a chance everyones cards are always wrong?

educate yourself and watch Matt Berkey's podcast. It'll probably just go over your head but worth a shot.

Wow I actually think the exact opposite. I think employees/staff staying silent is more damning then them speaking out. So you are telling me that Lance (a member or former member of the production crew) thinks that there was cheating and has his theory on how it was done? I would be interested in hearing more about that. I’m sure all of us would.

I said he's no longer on the streaming team. He absolutely still works there.

Would a mathematician/statistician and professional poker player like Liv Boeree or Bill Chen qualify as an expert witness?

Bear in mind, there are also potential federal offenses here. And it's also a kind of "fun" case for prosecutors, who can look all high and mighty busting up the poker cheating scam, the same way federal prosecutors are having some fun with the college admissions scandal case.

So you shouldn't be reductive about this. The biggest problem isn't that prosecutors aren't going to want to prosecute because of the merits, or prison overcrowding; the biggest problem is that there's an industry that isn't going to want this to be prosecuted.

The analysis from the booth is suspicious, often justifying mikes nuts lines. The clip where someone in the chat asks if mike ever loses is priceless,the silence is deafening. Kacey shifts in her chair and looks uncomfortable but says nothing so the bald guy with the beard chimes in with something about mikes high variance style and then it's on to the next hand. Nothing to see here.

From the perspective of Stones, when running an internal investigation you don't want to leak information that could be relevant or helpful. An employee not in the investigation team, and an employee as we all agree, who should be looked at, should probably not be making public comments. I think that's reasonable. I think we have to separate what we want to see/hear from what's best for an internal investigation (assuming we have faith in it).

I'm not sure how much faith I have in the internal investigation, but JFK has been on leave, which is the step I needed to see to ever consider playing there (even if my suspicions have changed).