saw the videos and still have no idea what I am accused of. I knew mike from tunica where we played 2-5. We spoke but not often, not sure how we were besties. My wife has never met him and I have never met this lady. Did not talk to him outside of the poker game. He moved years ago and never spoke to him or knew where he moved too. Did my first appearance at Stones and he was there and we reconnected. We talked more often once reconnecting and I was going to Stones for appearances and to play in that insane game. Went on a "field trip" with about 5 players and Justin to San Francisco during that time, was the only time we were ever social off the poker table.

He called me the day Veronica broke the story and I went to bat for him as I did not think he was cheating in the games when we played together. Been cheated in two games and figured it out, did not feel like it when we played. Once I saw all the evidence I distanced myself from him. We had a text message exchange probably a year ago about the documentary and wanting me to be involved somehow. He reached out again to me today to apologize but I did not know for what. Pretty much sums it up.

Awesome, thanks Chris. She made it sound like you and Mike were tight for some period of time and still were to this day. I’m pretty sure you’ve told this story before here when the story broke.

I have to take everything Sabina says here with a grain of salt after that. Need to rewatch it tomorrow.

the video was to show Mike's character and not hers. She wasn't accused of cheating so it wasn't about her.

wow...would be good to hear some educated legal views on this..seems a lot

Just putting 1 and 1 together...

She (sabina) claims postle colluded on poker stars
She throws money makers name out during convo
We know moneymaker and postle played on ps
She claims postle would collude by playing at same table as friends (2-3) and talking on phone
Moneymaker admits he has spoken to postle before

So the only logical conclusion is moneymaker may have colluded on ps w postle.

—

Chris why would you stay around a “fleecer”?

—

And veronica of course sabina is now going to be put on public trial. She basically matter of factly implicated moneymaker. We also still dont really know why sabina would come forward. Was she paid to do this interview?

It doesnt make sense for her to buy a guard dog out of fear and then go public w this info which seems borderline slanderous if not true.

Are you surprised? The guy is a dirtbag grifter that has been cheating the poker community since Ultimatebet and probably before.

Any lawyers here? I feel like to actually be incarcerated for domestic violence 3 separate times and still acquire custody of your children in court as a man this woman has to have been determined legally insane at some point no?

Mod note: very careful here. We’re not going to allow any “conclusions” that are in fact accusations solely based on someone saying in an interview that their ex-husband knew Chris or played with him on PokerStars.

Sabina called moneymaker a cheater... someones lying or not telling full truth

I wasnt accusing anyone of anything just restating points in the video and trying to make sense of them.

The only logical question is how sabina did moneymaker cheat?

Got to the last half hour. Mike should have a huge rap sheet. He’s had run ins with the law during his time in the south. Tried bullying their landlord after not paying the rent. He is banned from Caesers properties for getting drunk and fighting a security guard. He was busted three times for domestic violence, once in Vegas and twice in Sacramento. Mikes mom bails him out every time. Currently he is preventing his ex from seeing her child.

There was an amusing story which I can remember Mike saying publicly before. She tells how Mike said that Veronica was trying to pick up their child at her school. I’m pretty sure Mike had to this story on Matusow’s podcast. Somewhere he publicly said that because it rings a bell as it was pretty silly then. Who or why would someone randomly try and pick up a kid they don’t know to save them.

In the end she says Mike has a violent past and will do whatever he can to scam a person/company for damn near any reason.

That’s the part of the interview I wish I wouldn’t have heard and I stopped listening initially after that.

She does state twice in the clips that Chris had no involvement in cheating or really knew about any cheating, but also said that the two were friends. IDK, it was a strange part of the interview.

Not to speculate, but just because someone is abused that doesn’t automatically mean that they will receive custody of the kids. In fact, if this abuse involved financial abuse, there may be a huge disparity in the quality of representation. Furthermore abusers cultivate a public vs private persona. In court he may have been presented as a changed person and the judge can only adjudicate on what’s presented in court. Or there could have been out of court settlements. Or the abuse could have led to other mental health issues for the mother.

It’s not as cut and dry as “he committed domestic abuse and still got the kids, therefore she must be even crazier.” Trauma and abuse are both self-perpetuating.

Oh sure, judges just glance at how an abuser is dressed and tosses out domestic abuse charges if it looks good. Got it. We have all observed this phenomena.

Seems odd and kinda out of line to just throw moneymaker's name out there like they're super cool with each other. Glad he's not involved

I was uncomfortable with the Moneymaker talk in the show, as it is a big thing to call someone a cheat, so if one does that one needs to be able to back up the accusation with evidence. That wasn't done with Postle, and it wasnt done with Moneymaker. The gist appears to be he was accused of colluding at Pokerstars, but they investigated and found no evidence. Again, if any of this is true, it could have been a fake JFK non investigation so that Moneymaker was free to carry on cheating, as the site had so much reason for him to carry on spotless, just as JFK had every motive for Postle to carry on. Or allegations of Moneymaker cheating on Pokerstars could all be unfounded nonsense. Unfortunately it was an interview where the interviewee tried to have it both ways, say he cheated, then say he didnt cheat and there was no evidence against him. I remember watching Moneymaker on the Stones streams, if I recall correctly he wasnt a winner in the sessions, so it would be unlikely for him to be colluding with Postle in Stones.

The interviewee ex-wife knew very little about the poker stuff. Next to nothing.

The only for sure fact is that Postle was once friends with Moneymaker and may have text messaged him 4-5 months ago (which Moneymaker for the most part verified here).

The accusations that Moneymaker cheated were very mumbled. At first the ex-wife meant Moneymaker played on pokerstars with Postle, and Veronica thought she was talking about cheating at Stones. Then that was cleared up, and in the end the interview subject knew nothing about Moneymaker cheating at poker stars or even anything about Moneymaker except that he has messaged her husband.

Also this "court house" connection stuff is nonsense for sure. Doesn't make sense. My guess is Postle and his Mom just know how to game the system until they couldn't game it
anymore with this defamation/documentary/lawsuit/cheating.

Most people don't know how to use/game the system or don't want to game the system, so don't follow lawsuits and threaten and stalk people. But over litigious scammers, aka "frequent fliers" know how to and can get little settlements here or there.

The most amazing thing in all of this is how such an obvious low life scammer conned Stones poker crowd and employees so long.

I'm not trying to victim blame, but just seeing Mike Postle make a fool of himself repeatedly and then hearing him talk for 2 minutes during his oral argument at his hearing, he has the look, sound, and decision making of a scammer.

No, she didn't. In fact, she specifically stated that Moneymaker had no knowledge of anything going on and that she "absolutely, 100% believe(s) this was all Mike's...Mr. Postle's doing."

You then drew your idiotic conclusion.

It's interesting to see how quickly posters in this thread are jumping to discredit this woman. After hearing her talk about Postle making fake accounts online, it makes you wonder how many accounts he has in this thread.

Nice strawman

There were some nuggets in there that makes me believe her overall. The story about staying at The Orleans with her parents and kids and Mike trying to scam freebies because the mirror moved I can see happening. Orleans would be a cheap place you’d take your parents and kid. It has a bowling alley/movie theater/arcade and it’s a busy poker room for her dad. The hotel is run down a bit. Want to take a dump and talk on the land line? That’s a feature at The Orleans with the phone located right next to the toilet. No way she made that up.

The domestic abuse, have no choice but to believe it. I have no reason to doubt her until police reports about her come up. Mike has a history as a liar and a narcissist. Wouldn’t shock me if there was some abuse.

Keep up w the convo bud..

That was for the postle/stones situation.

She clearly calls moneymaker a cheat and alludes to poker stars but then the details get blurry and she kinda backs off.

Why even mention moneymaker at all?

Makes no sense

The poker was not the focus of the interview and anyone who gets stuck and focused on her poker details are missing the point of the interview.

She was not in the poker scams and doesn't know poker. She had no idea about the poker details. Even the Stones cheating she confirmed from her dad, a poker dealer, who used the same data we have.

Her memory was fuzzy on most details, however she gave her best recollection.

She basically brought to the table the backstory on Postle not being a fun loving good guy, but a frequent scammer via personal stories with hotels and how he treats others to use them for monetary gain. Then in the second half, it turned into a recollection of more violent, predatory behavior from Postle.

You have made this point multiple times now. I have listened to the interview twice and do not think your reckoning is 100% correct.

As others have pointed out that is not the focus or intent of the interview. The interviewee seems to have somewhat limited knowledge/expertise in certain things related to poker. And seems to have little knowledge of any cheating situation/investigation on PokerStars.

And, as a mod has already posted above, 2+2 does not allow baseless cheating accusations to be posted, even if the poster is "repeating" something they heard on the internet.

Any subsequent posts along these lines will be deleted.

The only mothers that I have seen lose custody were in the middle of a substance abuse problem/treatment and had voluntarily given their children to the father for care and the fathers moved for custody afterwards. Not saying this is applicable to how Postle obtained custody....

Of course, you rarely get a balanced truthful accounting of a marriage and divorce from only one of the involved parties who has an axe to grind.