Quote:
Originally Posted by lovedaphils
If I know poker Veronica.
If I was an average person, I would want some solid proof that gambling can't produce that kind of run.
I mean, someone wins the lottery every now and again.
In order to do that you need to flip heads 25 times in a row, stand on the tallest building in your city and throw a coin off the roof and hit someone in the head YOU KNOW.
Runs like this are possible to the general public.
They continue to play the lottery.
I think you can easily win a civil case against Postle just by the evidence we have now. All you have to do is ask, based on the play of the hands, the crotch looking, and other evidence from the videos, which of the following is more likely:
a) Postle had illegitimately obtained information about everyone else's hands.
or
b) Postle is a mind-reading clairvoyant soul reader who could not only know when his opponents were strong or weak, but their exact holding in many cases where he made the perfect play to exploit this.
or
c) Postle ran godly hot not only in the deal of the cards, but in each and every hand decision and bet sizing decision in the suspicious sessions. This includes some hands where he must have purely by chance made plays that would be not optimal if he were cheating off-stream, and would not be optimal if he were playing normally, and which only serve to prevent suspicion that he was cheating given that it was live streamed.
By any sane accounting, the probabilities of b+c combined do not add up to 50%. You don't need to prove that b and c are impossible, or not reasonably possible, as in a criminal case. Now the question of whether Stones or some unidentified parties also bear responsibility is a different question that may or may not require additional evidence.
I personally happen to think that both b and c are not reasonably possible enough to acquit in a criminal case either. In my last jury duty case the judge repeatedly emphasized that guilty beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean beyond all possible doubt.