Thx!

Happy there are people like you who understand the technology side of what's potentially going on. Trying to prove it to a jury from his play of hands alone could be very difficult.

If JFK is innocent I think JFK banned cell phones because he found out what Postle was doing. Instead of being embarrassed that he would have to go public to the world that he allowed cheating under his watch for over a year, he decided he could make this all go away by instituting a cell phone ban. Its just a theory.

But then why (if thats true) did he have Mike play in the big game with Berkey? Maybe Justin thought it would be good to fix this by having all cell phones banned, and having Mike play against real top pros. The only problem is Mike betrayed Justin again and still cheated on the stream through bone conduction with a friend outside casino. (And he used his phone a bit too).

Yeah because they catch it and call back to peek room and never go back because it would show he knew.

He could just be counting out money or chips but it does look a little odd.

So what is the latest update for someone who hasn't followed the thread in 3 days?

I tracked down one session of Veronica's game, 2018-12-15, they played 80 hands and the total amount of straddles was $3591. Some were really big, $750 and $420 that i recall

I can't work out what's going on there. Sometimes there's a small dice-sized object on the table and I think it's something to do with bomb pots, but I'm not sure if that would explain this. Postle clearly gives the dealer something before he leaves (maybe it's just a tip?), but there's possibly an innocent explanation for it.
Thanks for this. In my spreadsheet the phone was marked as "on rail", but it clearly gets moved to the Postle's lap just before the 40min mark.
That's Lance, the production technician, giving him the charging cable. Lance was earlier in the peek room (the commentators say something to him about graphics), but I think the production guys swap roles at the same time as there are dealer changes. I suspect that Taylor went into the secret room when Lance came out with the charging cable when there was a dealer change, as Taylor is seen much later in the footage.
Any suspicious hands? This was initially thought to be a non-cheating session, but there may be something fishy after the first two hours.
YouTube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Al-mY8G5pg
Cheers. I'll add a note for that session and look for timestamps later.

Was that a $1/$3 game?

The first session from December 17th I went over last night - might have missed one or two hands Mike folded but every hand he played. Had two fun players giving him a lot of action in position. Once The Lawyer moved to his direct right, he completely changed the way he played.

71/32
(small samples here overall but this low WTSD = tighter stats)
20% WTSD 23% WTSD PFR
50% W$SD 59% W$SD PFR
Perfect river play in every spot

3BB - 6 hands | $155
6BB - 42 hands | $2141
10bb- 11 hands | $568
15bb- 3 hands | -$70
20bb- 6 hands | -$355
23bb - 1 hand |+1300


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I did a NO GOD MODE/CROTCH LOOKING session from June 3rd 2019 off stream
Faster play, different phone usage, no table antics, no crotch looking.
If you watch these two streams back to back - you won't believe it's the same player.


61/19
25% WTSD 23% WTSD PFR
43% W$SD 29% W$SD
8 non-god mode river decisions
14 hands without max exploit if you know the hands vs 0 previous session

3bb - 7 hands | -$376
6bb - 51 hands | +$459
10bb- 24 hands | +$775
11bb - 1 hand | -$100
12bb - 1 hand |
13bb -1 hand | +$82
15bb -5 hands | -$125
16bb - 1 hands | -$16
20bb - 2 hands | +$174
21bb -5 hands | -$42
22bb- 1 hand | +$45
30b -1 hand |


-----------------------------------------------------------

The original spreadsheet is definitely off for these two sesions.
Session 1 - $700 BUYIN + $3200 REBUYS = +$3739
Session 2 - $1100 BUYIN + $2000 REBUYS = +$853

It was advertised as such. It's one where they all wear Christmas outfits, and god mode was in operation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_Dza9Z8LMo
Thanks a lot. I've added details of the "hud stats" and add ons, and a link to your 2+2 post, to my sheet.
Do you know who 'owns' the original sheet? I've got quite a few notes to pass on to them.

Great job Joey! Was there a major difference in earnings in the June 3rd stream as well?

p.s. Ever thought of making a conspiracy theory yt channel?

Original estimate $1700 for that session


I have before but I would probably make a few other type of YT channels before I do full on conspiracy.

Are you saying he made $2K more that session than the original spreadsheet said?

I'm the creator of the original sheet. I'm curious to see what you have.

Anyone is free to contact me either on 2+2 via PM or by e-mail through the sheet. I'm always open to adding more columns or otherwise improving the sheet, especially if you've done some of the work for me.

Washoe; The database doesn't show tournaments you enter and don't cash in. Please don't embaress yourself

SW

Thanks Joey. The profit column on the sheet is off for many sessions simply because I don't have rebuy data. I only looked at the initial stack and final stack, and then I stole some rebuy data for 2019 off of somebody else's sheet. I should been more clear about that. I will update it with your findings.

Ah then I guess both sessions were more than 2x over reported. I thought that it might be possible that since they didn't catch the add ons, the stacks were also under reported but guess not. I redid his bb/100 with $125k and its still up there, and of course his hand histories are proof in and of itself. so, its still not a matter of if he did it, just a matter of how much.

Going to go over more sessions on stream tonight/this week to see how much the different might be for some of them. Also, it's the only time I'll ever be able to watch someone play with knowing what the cards are.

my assumption would be that as he progresses with the system, he ends up re-buying/adding on less.

Question for the poker analytics experts:

If the above stats are correct and this is a $1/3 game; when you're calculating bb per 100 winrate, what's the baseline bb? Is it based on the stated stakes i.e. $3? Or do you calculate based on the straddles? $3591 in straddles over 80 hands is like an average approx. $45 straddle per hand. Is the bb per 100 winrate calculated based on $45 being an "effective bb"? Or do you use some sort of "normalization"? Example, if average straddle per hand is $45, that's like a "normal 2x bb straddle if the bb was $22.50 and then use $22.50 as the baseline bb?

Here is a really easy quiz. See if you can pass it.

In a 1/3 game with a $45 straddle, one player will post a small blind of $1. The next player will post a big blind of $3. Some other player will straddle for $45.

Okay here comes the hard part.

For player that posts the big blind, what is the amount of the big blind? When you express something in big blind units instead of dollars, what unit size should you use if you are going to call that unit measurement "big blinds"?

Get together with your friends and see if you can come up with an answer.

Playing devil's advocate: Here's a case for Mike Postle Innocence (or not guilty for that matter).

Most of the arguments so far are based on evidence of abnormal behavior.
However, anomalies should be compared against a control group (or NULL model) to be a piece of proper evidence, statistically speaking.
For instance, have we checked how Mike Postle behaves when he is NOT playing?
Have we checked how the commentators speak, when Mike Postle is NOT playing? etc

I will list some of the most discussed arguments used so far and discuss plausible reasons against them.

1. "Postle looks at his crotch frequently and unreasonably"

Possible explanation: He is simply watching the delayed stream to pick on other players' frequencies and aggression.
While he keeps looking at his crotch frequently while he's playing, have we checked how frequently does he look at his crotch while he's NOT playing?
We need to check whether there is a statistically significant difference between the distributions of "look in the crotch" event when he is playing and when he is NOT playing.

2. GFX Poker Software and the "Blue Screen"

Berky showed a demo of GFX, a poker streamming software.
He showed that one could watch the live stream by simply knowing the IP of the host computer.
The screen of this software is a bright blue screen.
There's a video showing Mike Postle with his cellphone with a very similar blue screen.
That's very circumstantial evidence as Berky himself during a live stream with D Polk confirmed that he does not have knowledge on whether Stones used the same software and if that's not the case all his demonstration could be invalid.
Moreover, you can simply search "cellphone blue screen of death" on Google and you will find several situations where a cellphone could display such a bright screen background.

3. The hand AK AK 45 with MoneyMaker

Mike Postle went all-in pre-flop with 45 (I believe) against AK and AK.
They ran the hand twice and Mike Postle won the second run, hence making a profit.
During the Mike The Mouth podcast, he said that after he won, he actually told the other players that they could take their pots back.
Why would he be cheating if in the end he actually allowed the other players to take their shares of the pot back?
We should watch the stream again and check whether Mike Postle is lying here.

4. Total WInnings are unreasonably high

It's already known that the spreadsheet shared cannot be trusted and has wrong data.
Joe Ingram is now trying to run proper statistics in a herculean task as we speak.

5. Commentators reactions are unreasonable

Yes. But that's expected.
As Veronica discussed during her live stream with D Polk, the commentators were asked to not criticize anyone/any hand. It was a promotion.
She also said that while Justin could be commentating in an unreasonable way, there is an "equally good chance he did not know **** about poker".

6. He wins a lot and on very unlikely spots

That's not always the case.
There has been an emphasis on hands where Mike Postle won in very unlikely spots.
Have we accurately evaluated the hands that he lost?
The more we watch the streams the more off-God situations are found. But then we try to find attributes to "explain" why he was not cheating on the hands that he loses.
First, it's said that he didn't play well when Justin is not there.
Then, it's said that he does play well PLO, because one needs more time to read the cards and PLO has more tight odds.
And then there is the chair, and the camera position, and the keys and a hidden object and then the hat etc etc.

One could argue that: Mike Postle is betting a lot. And when he loses we find an attribute that "explains" why he's off-God. That's called overfitting in statistics and also bias, as we are overfitting the belief that he is cheating.

The hypothesis: "Mike Postle was cheating" can only be tested when all the hands and accurately documented.
Until then, looking at crazy hands in a $1/$3 game is just not strong evidence.

PS.: Kudos to the community which is putting a lot of effort into this. I do not want to take anything away from the massive job done so far. This is just an exercise to help this investigation and people's lives and careers are on the line here.

I know it's an exhaustive thread and impossible to keep pace with everything, but all you did was complain that you personally haven't been paying attention

That gimmick name probably won't age well either imo

sweet, looking forward to it!


At 1/3, the bb is 3. If it gets bumped up to 1/3/5 with a mandatory straddle or 3rd blind, then the bb is 5. If the straddle isn't mandatory, as in someone's just doing a one off, I wouldn't count it. You're not forced to put in that blind bet yourself so you're basically just getting a free roll for more action. If you're a winning player, it could inflate your winnings a bit but over a big enough sample, I'd assume it wouldn't make a difference since you'll just be folding most of the time anyway. I mean, how often are they doing huge 9x+ straddles and is it mandatory?