They ****ed up when they asked mike to discuss his hands and the guy couldn't even put together a coherent thought because he can't remember anything. There is reasonable doubt if someone played this godly and had at least some fundamental knowledge of how ranges work and could have a semi logical thought process for their plays, but he didn't.

The following gives an idea of the kind of questioning the plaintiffs' attorneys could give Postle in the interrogatories. I am sure I made amateur mistakes and a competent trial lawyer could do much better. This just includes a few topics.

How long have you been playing poker professionally? Have you made a living playing poker due to exceptional luck or skill? Are most professional players people who are extremely lucky or do the have skill or expertise? If you heard about a player who had been playing full time for 15 years and was mostly playing 1/3 NL how would you categorize that player? Would you think that player had some skill but was not a top player? Is that a fair categorization of your poker abilities?

What kind of hand would a professional poker player generally need to call 2 allins for 300 big blinds in a cash game? How often have you seen players go allin in that situation with below average hands? How often have you seen a player you thought to be a professional player go allin with a below average hand in that situation? Why did you call two allins with 54 offsuit. Is it common for professional players to call allin in that situation with a hand like that because it is their lucky hand? Have you made a living for 15 years betting thousands of dollars on lucky hands? Did you go allin with 54 offsuit because you knew both opponents had ace king? If you knew both opponents had ace king, would it be profitable to call with 54 offsuit?

In this situation, is it correct that you folded AJ to a reraise? Is that a standard play? OK, it could either be a call or fold. In the hands you played on the live stream,what percentage of the time did you fold to reraises? Did you often call reraises with junk hands? Did you know that one opponent had AA and the other JJ? If you did not know your opponents hole cards and you called the reraise and you made a pair what would you expect would happen? Would you expect to lose a lot of money if you made a pair? What if you did not make a pair, would it have been easy to continue against a bet on the flop? So how do you decide to fold AJ to a reraise but get allin preflop with 54 offsuit? Are you a loose player in one case and a tight player in the other?

If the board is what is considered dry with king on it, what is the general approach when playing AK. Is it standard to fold AK on that sort of board? Would you usually try to get money in or at least call down in that situation? Why did you fold AK here. Is it because you knew the other player had a set? Is it standard to fold AK here because you had a feel? Did you have a feel or did you know your opponents cards? Do you make folds like that often when you are not on the live stream?

What percentage of hands did you play when on the live stream? What percentage of hands do you normally play when not on a live stream? How were you able to play such a high percentage of hands and win consistently? Were you just lucky?
Were you able to make good reads and outplay your opponents? Was the reason you made those reads that you knew their cards?

Is it correct that your average win rate playing 1/3 and 2/5 no limit on the live stream was $900/hour? What was your average win rate on the live stream? Is that win rate normal at those stakes? At what stakes is that win rate reasonable? Were you sometimes labeled God and Apostle on the live stream? Do you consider yourself a poker God? Did you have God like powers to see your opponents cards? To what do you attribute your high win rate on the live stream? Why don't you play at the highest games available rather than low stakes like 1/3 NL?

Your concern with the 3.4k amount just goes to prove you aren't comfortable risking that amount. That's your feelings. Instead look at the EV of the decision +$600. That's pretty huge. I think you are incorrect saying 90% of people playing with god mode on would fold in a spot that's going to average a profit of $600. Especially considering the future action he will get because of this gamble it's even more implied EV later on down the road. Only an idiot would fold in this spot knowing all the cards. The only reason to fold is because it's too obvious a spot of cheating, like Mike McD folding kings when worm had dealt him trips.

Please stop arguing a good poker player would fold a +$600 EV spot because they don't want to risk money, it's ridiculous. Thank you.

(just having fun)


Is it correct that your average win rate playing 1/3 and 2/5 no limit on the live stream was $900/hour?

Not sure did not keep track.

What was your average win rate on the live stream?

I don't know, again I did not keep track.

Is that win rate normal at those stakes?

Not sure what "normal" is.

At what stakes is that win rate reasonable?

1/3 2/5

Were you sometimes labeled God and Apostle on the live stream?

Not by me but I heard those thrown around.

Do you consider yourself a poker God?

Yes

Did you have God like powers to see your opponents cards?

(objection)

To what do you attribute your high win rate on the live stream?

Lots of practice and reads

Why don't you play at the highest games available rather than low stakes like 1/3 NL?

I play 2/5 also. The competition is better and it would hurt my win rate, what was it again?

I'm not sure if he is actually trolling, but after taking almost a year off he seems to be back into the old stride. Take him on at your peril!

He is a very solid poker player. Top 1%.

I don’t think he remembered because he was told to play hands. For perhaps action or money. We are getting back into explaining individual hands though. Nobody is going to jail over not being to explain cards.

This wasn’t just money. This was creating action to get more players and viewers. The casino had some interest in the game being juicy. It makes for far better tv. He didn’t win a crazy amount of money. Many sessions were break-even.

There is a lot more to this. Just not sure what. I’m not convinced of the story being presented of hacking into RFID and an incredible winning streak.

theory:

you're a shitty troll

As things stand now assuming all the proof in court would be what has been posted in this thread...

Less then 10% chance he is found guilty in a criminal proceeding.

While all of us poker nerds are 100% convinced he cheated myself included. It wouldn't be a jury of poker players. Postle wouldn't even need to testify. His lawyer can just say he played great and ran lucky. Then proceed to poke holes in all this "circumstantial" evidence. Even if the odds were against his win rate as much as 1,000,000-1 they can just site events that happened that are even more unlikely.

Without some further video evidence or some witnesses it's gonna be tough. I don't see the casino as having too much motivation to find this evidence either, I think they just hope this whole scandal fades away.

Now if it's just a civil case the odds would be better but still probably not 50/50.

Golfnutt,

You don’t have to be sure of anything because your opinion is wholly irrelevant to anything that’s proceeding in the civil case, the internal IT investigation or any other agency’s investigation

I read these numbers as he is still a 60% dog to the field and, if you see the hole cards and see flop, turn and river why put such big money in preflop with a crap hand still behind. 55,44 makes a lot more sense than 54.

I still think he was cheating but not based on this logic.

I would only add:"Is it or is it not true that you have made goat sacrifice in basement?". Great movie, Devil's Advocate.

He had 40% three ways. He didn't go all-in he called an all-in raise. Why put such money in preflop when behind? Because of $600 in EV.

To put that into perspective the EV of going all-in for $1000 with AA vs KK is $600. Would you fold AA preflop because you're risking 1k or would you be more focused on the EV of that decision?

55,44 makes more sense but that's not what he was dealt, he can't pick his cards.... Why pass on a +$600 EV decision?? His actual result in the hand was to win half the pot, a profit of 1.7k. Seems like a good reason to gamble when behind to me.

Every question he answered that way would result in several follow up questions. I went through interrogatories and they weren't able to get much. This kind of questioning looks real bad for Postle and he looks real guilty. I jury if it got to a jury wouldn't need to know poker to tell he was evasive and acting guilty.

Why do you think there will be a criminal case and why do think they don't have more evidence of how the cheating actually took place etc.

He does have to testify in a civil case, as discussed, unless he takes the 5th, which is generally not a good idea.

The thing about golf is that he comes across so stupid at times, that he could very well believe the nonsense he spouts, honestly. So in the sense of "does he have it, or is he bluffing" with his stupid takes, his troll game is perhaps GTO. POKER ANALOGY GAME ON POINT.

There was a two month period starting on May 5, 2019 where he went:
+800
+1400
+1300
-5700
-200
+500
+4,200
+400
-200

How is this God-mode? The average buy-in is ~$2k. I would think God would make far more money than this. There are many long sessions where he barely makes money.

He was told to play loose for the cameras. He said so himself.

I definitely agree though that there is something going on.

I think I’ve been trolled.

This was a made-for-TV event that got of control. Like the movie Quiz Show with the Game 21. History repeats.

They were setting it up with this guy as the perennial winner like Charlie Van Doren. Feeding him what to do. Make it entertaining but still win. And of course you want it close. AK-AK-54 is awesome tv. That is absolutely the “go” button. It isn’t a +EV calculator at the table. It translates into viewers and a story. The local pro takes on the WSOP champ.

THIS WASN’T A NORMAL POKER GAME. It is being recorded. There are commentators. People were wearing costumes one day. There was a lady doing a disco dance after winning a hand. I felt like I was watching the Price is Right.

This was a fix more than a fraud. He didn’t destroy the games. He certainly didn’t use God-mode to his full advantage. He played a style that was going to attract audiences.

And yes, he was given some info to win hands. Or he would have gotten destroyed. Just enough on those critical hands.

Prove me wrong that this was God-mode or a Superuser trying to take as much money as possible. He is a very experienced player. Top 1% of 1%. Elite. He would annihilate rookies if he knew their hole cards. Crushed them.

He didn’t.

He played along with them. He didn’t win that much money. Just enough. Toyed with them.

This was Entertainment-mode+. Made for the cameras.

If this makes sense to anyone they should seek professional help.

Actually, with the hole card knowledge, he could pick the hand where he was ahead pre with a small pair vs two players shared Aks or other big cards. That is exactly my point.

Every answer to me would have been a version of "As it has been reported that the DOJ and the gambling commission is proceeding with a criminal investigation of this matter, my attorney has advised me to not answer that question and assert my rights under the Fifth Amendment."

No way someone that plays poker would believe this.

However this is an angle that can be presented in court IMO.

You are totally screwed if you do that in a civil case. The jury is allowed to infer guilt from that.

I definitely agree that the defense will be it's gambling, so you can play whatever and win. They will appeal to the jury not understanding what professional players do.

However, the plaintiff and prosecution if there is a criminal case will present evidence and all the defense will be able to do is try to confuse things.

45 is 40% vs AK and AK so it's a profitable call but would only be made by a player trying to win if he knew both his opponents hole cards.

Ok, how could he have possibly known his opponents hole cards?

(you see there was this blue light and for a second, it reflected off some glasses and...)

Evidence, where for art thou evidence?