Of course it's a mistake, you're right. But Postle doesn't care. He's a megalomaniac. Do remember that what he's claiming here is that he's a literal poker god who had his phone just constantly being filled with nude pictures from all the women he was seeing. The sex god doesn't care.

22 Plaintiff is considered a loose player on and off the live-streamed table … Plaintiff is known to take marginal hands all the way to the “river card”.

108 they were contrary to the fact that Stones Gambling Hall conducted two investigations and found no evidence of cheating.

144 Atlantis revoked plaintiff's invitation to a $25,000 blackjack tournament that he qualified to

156 As a result of these acts, plaintiff has not been able to play, or will not be able to play, at Peppermill and Atlantis. At this time plaintiff is not aware of his playing status at other gambling institutions because he has not been able to leave home due to extreme emotional distress.

I mean this should be pretty easy to prove/disprove through metadata lol

Obviously Postle won't be naming those women though or giving permission for lawyers to go through the data to prove whether he was receiving what he says he was rofl

Feels like someone talked him into trying to get a settlement of some sort to make him go away and instead he's opening himself up to discovery and taking on deep pockets like Negreanu and somehow pissed off Bill Perkins
enough to go to war with him for lols

If he'd left things alone his name is dirt and he's out of the poker community for good but he sort of got away with things. Change his name and in 5 years time no one cares. He's opening himself up to a world of hurt here and I for one can't wait to see Postle get ruined for being the scumbag he is

Lol. Will he provide evidence of those inappropriate messages and pictures from women? I never received an inappropriate message or picture from any woman.

He can play poker all he wants. He claimed to have been banned from two casinos. Maybe he can't beat honest games.

I would think past earnings would be the main grounds for what his potential future earnings would be that he is "no longer capable of earning". And just a shot in the dark, but Im guessing this guy doesn't claim **** on his taxes, so he would have no to very little earnings.

So when he tells the judge I usually make X amount and that's why I'm entitled to it, maybe the IRS will want a talk with him. As a matter of fact, someone can whistleblow on him and be entitled to 30% of the money the IRS gets if he has been cheating on his taxes. I can't imagine anyone who would want to do that.

I'm no lawyer, but it's my understanding that a required element of either libel or slander is that the defendant made a false statement. If the statement is not false, then it's not libel or slander, no matter how damaging the statement.

Wouldn't the onus therefore be on the plaintiff, as the one making the complaint, to prove the statements are false? That is, the plaintiff must prove that he did not cheat. But how could that ever be proved? The absence of concrete and irrefutable evidence of cheating doesn't in itself prove the statements false.

Would love for any actual lawyers to weigh in on this.

So an 8k hand sample is enough to say somebody was cheating even though not one bit of actual evidence has been put forward other than opinions.
This is the sane community that tells ppl you need atleast 100k hands for a decent sample lol. Hypocrisy much?
Id also love to see another sample from live players at his stakes to compare it with postles. But i doubt anyone keeps HH from live games.
Now you have complete idiots like Veronica using cauggt cheating in her Go fund me twitter post and digging herself an even bigger hole lmao talk about idiotic
They need to learn how to start using allegedly cheated etc.
Reputation is everything in poker and especially in live game these days (he aint getting invites) so he has every right to Sue the **** out of anyone who profited of this slander - Joe ingram, Doug polk etc.
The others who circulated their opinions rather than facts about it also should be sued as he is doing. Dengs, Veronica etc

Bill perkins is a complete clown and uses twitter mobs to put pressure on his cheating friends in home games.
He is an idiot with too much money and is friends with a huge scammer In Dan bilzerian whos ignite thing is a complete scam
No surprise lol like father, like son

Postle's most convincing case for innocence is you guys pointing out how stupid is for him to sue ... IF he's guilty.

Depends on the hands. So can you explain that JT hand where he calls on the flop w/ air and folds on the turn when he hits top pair?

It's odd that whenever you ask Postle defenders to speak to any of these types of hands they always ignore it and go back to talking about other things that don't matter like how he had add ons or whatever during sessions.

If he could reconstruct an animation of his screen and overlay or side/side from the feeds with his actions, that'd be good. What was on the screen, when he appears to interact with it?

There’s a big difference in saying you are a winner based on 8K hands than concluding one is cheating if a player won every one of those 8k hands or, more realistically, say 80 wins out of 100 hands.

To statistically conclude you are a winning player, you might need 100K hands but you might need much, much less than that for concluding one is cheating, depending on the data and circumstances.

When you get sued or sue someone you get to depose (ask questions live) as well as submit interrogatories (written questions). In one or both of these the defense lawyers should ask "Give us a list of the women who sent you nudes and their phone numbers and the approximate dates/times these occurred."

Third parties such as AT&T will respond to these requests as well, and will be providing all the text/phone messages to the defense. When I got sued the opposition went to paypal and asked for my transaction history and paypal provided it.

Postle's lawyers will argue it's private/too many to list/unduly burdensome/fishing expidition/etc and the judge can tell them they have to or may tell them don't worry about it. If Postle refuses to answer and the judge doesn't make him then the other lawyers will use it in opening/closing arguments.

"Mr. Postle claims he put his phone in his lap due to getting indecent images sent to him by people, but when asked he was unable to name one single person who did so. In addition we went through his text messages provided to us by AT&T and the only numbers he received a text from during the time he was at the table during the livestream belong to his mom, his sister and 4 male friends of his. This is the first of many outright lies in his accusations. "

but on a wet board with top 2 don't you want to pile for value? which is bad vs a set.

I wonder if he realizes that you can see the physical flop on the stream. You don't have to rely on the graphics. Some of these posts people write make me wonder if they even watched any of the streams at all.

I dont know why he folded but i can say 100% that one hand means sweet f all in reality.
Nobody has or can prove he was or wasnt cheating and legally thats all that matters.
He will definitely get a settlement oit of this just because his reputation as a loose player is now one of a cheater which affects his ability to make money.
Im not a postle defender but im also not a blind sheep who believes things without real evidence.
Its like a Q convention when it comes to postle threads online
All it would have taken would for ppl to say alleged cheater or he allegedly cheated in a game rather tjan he is definitely a Cheater.

Yeah it would be if that was the only hand. But there are plenty more. And given the bizarre nature of these types of plays, when you factor in that they were all correct and also deviate greatly from how he played in previous months and years in similar spots; you don't really need that many hands before it becomes pretty clear what is going on.

This is the problem.
Nobody knows what went on.
If anyone actually came up with a valid theory on how he did it and how much he actually won in comparison to other places he played then it becomes more believable.
If he did cheat he should be blacklisted 100% but ruining a guys ability to make money on a hunch is horrendous
Id also love to know the probability of his run vs Phil Galfonds 1.8mil swing playing against VeniVidi.

With no physical evidence being uncovered, the case would rely on circumstantial evidence to form the likelihood that he cheated. This would be in how he played his hands, and Phil Galfond's approach of analysing the play is admirable, though my only concern is whether a jury would understand the poker subtleties of Galfond tracking the following indicators, which poker players would understand the significances of to expose anomalies, Galfond believes outlier numbers in these stats would be powerful circumstantial evidence against Postle:

River bluff success rate (bets)
River bluff success rate (raises)
River call efficiency
Preflop four-bet frequency when no AA or KK is out
Preflop four-bet frequency when AA or KK is out, no AA in Postle's hand
Preflop five-bet frequency when no AA or KK is out
Preflop five-bet frequency when AA or KK is out, no AA in Postle's hand
Fold to flop raise when raiser is unpaired
Fold to flop raise when raiser has pair or better
Fold to turn raise when raiser is unpaired
Fold to turn raise when raiser has pair or better
Fold to river bet with best hand
Fold to river bet without best hand
Fold to river raise with best hand
Fold to river raise without best hand
Rate of river bets with hands that chop
Rate of river raises with hands that chop

We do. He cheated. The theory that he knew what his opponent was holding during these hands is the only theory that perfectly explains his plays.

There's no mystery there.

He is going to get ripped apart if this goes to trial or the preliminary stages with depositions etc. The claim about the indecent images is so absurd even without asking for evidence etc.

Even without evidence based on the hands etc., the claim that all these major training sites just decided to spread lies about an obscure grinder for no reason doesn't make sense.

Stay off the thread Mike, you aren't helping your case.

PLF:

It's obvious you failed (or never took) a grammar and spelling course in high school. (Either that or you were drinking or stoned while composing your masterpiece.)

You should hire a competent proofreader/editor to correct all your errors before you bless us with your next tirade. With the excellent quality of your verbiage - - I wouldn't be surprised if you're the Postle.

I really don't feel like going back to listen to his dumpster fire of an interview on Matusow's podcast, so I'll ask the group for your collective recall: did he ever offer this explanation a year ago?

Here's a typical long-winded Wilbury story:

About 10 years ago, I served on the jury for a grand theft burglary case. The alleged crime came on the heels of a bad breakup, the boyfriend took off with two laundry baskets worth of stuff from his girlfriend's apartment. Among the purportedly stolen items was a family heirloom necklace, which not only had huge personal and sentimental value, but a high enough market value to reach the threshold for grand theft on its own.

The assistant DA placed a tremendous focus on this one piece of jewelry, far more than the computer, a bicycle, a digital camera, and a number of other items missing from the apartment. He did so for good reason: although it didn't come up until later in the trial, there is a concept called "claim of right." The oversimplified version is that someone can take an item from another if they believe the item belongs to them.

Unlike the other items, a woman's necklace would fall beyond the right of claim defense.

When we gathered in the back room for deliberation, a juror asked a key question: "To the ladies in the room, if you had a one-of-a-kind necklace that you got from your grandmother, and she got it from her grandmother, PLUS it was potentially worth five figures just in fair-market value, wouldn't it be one of the first things you look for when your house gets robbed?"

We all looked at the police report. The plaintiff never included this necklace on the laundry list of missing items following the robbery. She also never added it to the report in the year or so that followed, even though the responding officer testified during the trial that the plaintiff had that ability – e.g. if the victim discovers another missing item a few weeks later. The necklace never showed up until the criminal complaint that ultimately led to the trial.

Oddly, the defense attorney, a then-rookie public defender, never really addressed this discrepancy, other than to ask the question about revising the police report. I didn't think about it myself until my fellow juror asked that question. Of course, that odd little omission all but destroyed the plaintiff's credibility (which was already teetering due to other factors).

That reminds me of this. Postle went months with people claiming shenanigans over the alleged use of his phone as a cheating device. And while he stayed silent for the most part, he did appear on the Matusow podcast, attempting to explain away the various accusations and allegations. He also had other people, most notably Rounder Life magazine, coming to his defense.

If Postle had used sports bets and sexting as an explanation for staring into his crotch-buried phone a year ago, I might have listened. (I would still want to know why he pretended to peek at his cards while checking an NBA score.)

But if this is indeed the first time we're hearing his explanation, then I simply can't assign it one shred of reliability.

I can't believe the lawyers including that crap about why he had the cell phone their in the complaint. There seems no reason that it needed to be included.

They asked for $300 million plus $30 million punitive damages. I assume this is because the ver Standig suit asked for $30 million.

That pot limit fish is either Postle or a troll imitating Postle.