What’s mike up to these days? Is he in hiding or playing poker under disguise somewhere? I mean he’s a pro player right he needs to keep playing. Oh wait he still has that 300k to live off of while he lays low

The civil lawsuit really doesn’t come down to how much Mike won, it’s going to be irrelevant when/if Storz can find proof of cheating in the computer systems.

The proof that there is cheating is all that will be needed for a settlement to be negotiated. The question will then become, what’s the right number and that goes far beyond what Mike actually won for various reasons.

The plaintiffs have the burden of proof on everything. Even if the amount of Postle's winnings wasn't reasonably in dispute, they still need to prove by a preponderance of the evidence the portion of such winnings that is attributable to cheating. This is difficult even given the ability to go hand by hand by hand.

My point is that you have it backwards. Postle will have to come up with the numbers since he should have all that recorded for tax purposes, and it will be VerStandig who will be poking holes in them, or at the very least, if Postle wants to object, he will have to object to each one individually or come up with his own spreadsheet. What the internet sleuths and all those who worked on the spreadsheets have done will go a long way in helping VerStandig find any misreporting done by Postle and his defense. Also, the numbers were so high that many were extremely generous with their calculations. I estimated calculation at 20/40 with 30 hands per hr and he still had an insane win rate. I'm sure if we did the math at 125k it would still blow the best in the world out of the water.

During discovery each side should provide the other with all the documents they intend to rely on and introduce into court. Postle's side will no doubt comb through all the prosecution's data and stats and highlight anomalies.

One thing that the defense will probably look at is the affect that one or two abnormally large pots per session would have on overall win-rate. That, coupled with proof that the games actually played far greater than 1/3 and 5/5 could challenge the alleged impossible win-rate theory for an honest player.

Sure I'll take your word for it. May I ask if you are a lawyer, what is your relevant experience?

If VerStandig has to come up with the numbers and one of them is wrong, where do things go from there? Are they all wrong and the case is thrown out, is it only that one that is considered wrong while the rest still have to be disputed, do they have to go back and fix each one?

Wouldn't the defense want to release Mike Postle's records, wouldn't it be suspicious if they don't, does VerStandig have the right to attain them, does Postle have the right to refuse?


Great so they should have access to MP's records.

We've gone through the whole "this 1/3 game plays bigger" bs. An uncapped 1/3 game only plays bigger than a capped 1/3 game. We calculate win rates in bbs for a reason, so you can compare it across the board.

The fact that the game played "bigger" due to 1) it being chip up to table max and 2) that it was an "action game" only goes to support the plaintiffs. The variance will be higher in looser games with more action, and yet he has a win rate of 94%.

I agree that this is a likely outcome and what should happen but I don't view it as being this certain. As far as the casino's derivative liability for the actions of JFK or whoever, this is a pretty extreme case, and it will be hard for them to ever argue against the applicability of respondent superior if they decline to do so here. Bad precedent vs bad publicity is possibly the only interesting conversation left to be had about this debacle.

Postle also said he was often down 20k - 50k during the 30 minutes of play before the stream would start.

The absolute absurdity of that claim shouldn't need to be pointed out, but let that sink in for a minute. Not only is he saying that he brings in excess of 50k to the game, but with the initial max buyin set at 2k and players often buying in for less than that, he's claiming he has lost 25x that in 30 minutes.

To go a step further, try to find a stream that starts with that much money collectively on the table.

And finally, that's such a laughable defense for his inhuman winrate while the stream is live. He's so bad at poker that he just loses heaps and heaps when the stream is dark, yet somehow he completely turns it around when the lights are on.

Thanks, I'll take your subtle way of calling me a ****** as... an honor? Keep it classy internet warrior. And btw, I do get it, Mike stole more money than people are factoring, in total. Going by a simple definition, yes: buy-in, cash out, what's his profit at the end of the session? BUT doing a much more advance accounting, every session Mike played in he caused players to rebuy/add on and in-turn that money was spread around. True, he didn't technically leave with that money, but his actions caused others to profit from his theft.

If you see a bank robber throwing money out the car window and you stop and scoop it up and don't return said money to the bank or police and you end up getting caught (in California at least) you're on the hook for larceny. This is slightly different because the players at the table unknowingly profited from Mike's actions. I'm positive there is a paralegal that just got the sad duty of watching every stream to account for every chip on the table that passed through Postle's stack while he was playing.

I am. 13 years and counting civil litigation. 8ish criminal defense. Measurement error as far as Postle's total winnings isn't fatal to the case but it's not the real problem. Of course Postle's records are discoverable.

Computation of damages is incredibly difficult here. Say he valuebets a certain river 100% of the time knowing what his opponent holds. Absent cheating he's still going to have bet it some nonzero percentage of the time. Making a legally sufficient showing of the difference between the two, even to only a 51% certainty, is not a walk in the park. The extent to which assumption of the risk is implicated whenever his opponent then proceeds to call or fold is also eminently arguable.

Again, he cheated for sure. The vast majority of his winnings, possibly in an amount exceeding 100% of total profits, are the direct and proximate result of said cheating. It is still a tough case to take to verdict.

Let me tell u something, I aam going craaazy here.

He goes on live tv, looks at his dick a thousand times, plays splashier than anyone youve ever seen (which by the way they told him to, to make a great show), wins a fookload, then moneymaker jumps in says he is a friend whos crushing, then mike matusow( my man ) jumps in, makes an interview, then doug jumps in then berkey jumps in then brynn kenney.

what in the f. is this?

whats with the 98 hand,(the wrong cards) I thought it is impossible to explain. Isnt that the biggest proof they cheated?

i think they need an expert for computer forensics- that can find proof if there is any

Yeah you're focusing on the pots he won as stealing and the pots he lost as giving it away and that's not how things work. When Berkey flopped a boat versus him did Postle "give that away"? What about when he tried to bluff A9 got called and lost? No. It's still gambling. You are looking at it wrong. The amount he stole is how much he won in the games.

Which is why I shouldn't have responded to you because you aren't going to understand the point and you still probably don't. It's not at all like a bank robber tossing money out of a car. I wouldn't say a bank robber only stole 50k if he actually stole 200k and tossed out 150k. He stole 200k. But according to you, that's how I would account the theft.

It's not about whether he cheated. He did. Whether the plaintiffs here have a viable shot at an adequate remedy is unfortunately a different question.

Which Commentators Vouched For Mike Postle ?

Go easy on me boys, this is my first time ever making one of these contraptions.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...ZsQ/edit#gid=0

Awesome, its great to have another lawyer to chime in on things.

So what you are saying is that it will be difficult to prove how much money to award the plaintiffs, even if they believe he is guilty of cheating? Or are you saying it will be difficult to prove he is cheating in general? I don't doubt either to be true, well maybe the former more so than the latter.

But its almost as he wanted to do something so out of the ordinary to became famous.

I mean the dickstare, Its like "Im doing something that U havent seen before, I will not look for tells I will look at my dick!, look Im looking at my dick three times every hand im in! " And then I will take all your money on Live TV"

How much money did stones give him what do you think? just for putting on the show. Is it possible he was staked by stones so he can make some crazy plays for good tv?

I mean the 54 hand, reminds me of gus hansons splashy play on full tilt.

Including the times he holds the nuts? In such situations, is it correct to account for his ability to size perfectly against his opponent's holding by treating the entire bet as stolen? None of this is anywhere near as simple as any of you are making it out to be.

As Postle lays down top pair king kicker.....
And they have no comment changing the subject....

Did Scott Know Mike P Was Cheating?

https://youtu.be/oOxc4qbQiLo?t=10429

I can't imagine the civil suit getting to trial, but if it did, the plaintiff has the burden of proof, even in a civil trial. The plaintiff has to provide a non-speculative estimate of damages. The defense, on the other hand, just has to poke holes in whatever damages theory the plaintiff offers. The jury has wide latitude to set damages, as long as the theory is articulable and not speculative.

So Verstandig et al. will need to have decently accurate numbers of Postle's winnings. They don't have to be accurate to the dollar. Just reasonable estimates.

The defense lawyers will offer various explanations as to why the numbers are unreliable, such as the rebuy theory. And the jury can choose any number that is a reasonable estimate and supported by the evidence, or they could (they won't, but they could) decide that the Plaintiffs didn't prove their damages at all and award nominal damages ($1 per plaintiff).

Cheating is easy to prove. Establishing with any reasonable degree of precision the amount of plaintiffs' damages proximately caused by the cheating is very hard. 100% of winnings is a reasonable approximation as the guy is from all appearances a total moron, but a reasonable approximation is all it is. Anecdotally he's a winning player so maybe it's less. Empirically it's 1/3 so maybe it's more.

I think that's too pessimistic.

Under Nelson v. Reisner, when the nature of the defendant's wrongdoing makes damages difficult to calculate, any reasonable non-speculative estimate is admissible and will stand up on appeal. The amount of Postle's winnings is almost certainly close enough for the Nelson case.

https://youtu.be/_dFzke6mn0M
Check this.... He knows the camera blanks and comes back on during replay....
And commentator tries to cover....
4:23:37

Yea you raise a good point. But the fact that he held the nuts is of no concern because he still had an unfair advantage in seeing the other opponents cards. A big part of poker is having the skill to know how much to bet and at which times and which frequencies. I might even say that is the hardest and most important asset a poker player can have and what affects there win rate the most. It makes the difference between a winning player and a losing player, a good player and a great player. Even 1bb/100 over the course of an entire career is a lot of ****ing money. And if he knew exactly what his opponent had, then he would have an advantage in knowing how much to bet, raise or x/raise in that exact instance to extract max value from his opponent.

Also, it is of not much importance whether we know how hard it is, albeit, the more we know the better. We are providing value in our findings and research, even if its simply participating as a community and bringing awareness to bring down a cheater, but we are of course providing much more value than that, and that is what matters.

Its a 5 hour video, you need to say when bro