Quote:
Originally Posted by atenesq
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.
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?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olswang
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.
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%.
Last edited by wiiziwiig; 10-12-2019 at 05:36 PM.