I love the commentary on the river.

Great Post! After watching this video a couple times the call from Rich is simply amazing considering Postle is obviously in godmode and knows what the guy has and how difficult it would be to call the all-in with ace high nine kicker. Rich is my new favorite player on the Stones live streams.

Or maybe he has just seen Postle make that sort of play as a bluff so much.

You only win a couple nice pots with counter-CTO before it starts becoming CTO to jam bottom pair good kicker 2x pot for value.

I hadn't watched this whole video before. This whole session is the most grotesque and unhinged display of cheating I have ever seen. It makes me so sick. I feel so bad for The Wolf, Paul, Ronnie, and all the rest of the players in this session.

The commentator even reads a pretty apt comment at the end of this hand: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AAD...utu.be&t=12180

^ Holy shnikiez.

“He’s a super user. He has to look like he’s in pain so they can’t tell he can see all the cards.”

wtf?!

IF Postle is capable of third-level thinking.

Some of this commentary is really really sick. You can just see Veronica is having the hardest of time keeping it together and ends up resorting to wine.

If only he knew how spot on he was. And let's hope he didn't know, for his sake.

Not quite.

You should call or min-raise a small bet with second nuts, because it is often a blocking bet that he makes to avoid paying off big.

But you should fold a big bet with second nuts, because he can see your cards and knows you have a huge hand.

RFID "malfunctions" can't show random or arbitrary cards.

There are two possible ways it can malfunction

1. persistence error: A card fails to scan, so the graphics display the previous card that was scanned. When someone's hole cards are wrong it's pretty much always showing a card from their last hand.

2. accidental scan: For example, dealer drags a mucked hand over the board sensor, so an incorrect community card is displayed.

Or an easier explanation:
It actually looks to them as he can see the cards as in astonishment and/or they suspect something and hope that some internet nerds pick up on that (data etc.)
Which is my impression of some of the commentators later on.

Its quite scary to think how hard it would be to catch someone who's not a moron doing this.

Would just seem like they were good at hero calling / aggression, and they'd probably regularly get it in "bad" in spots where they know they're actually +EV due to dead cards, while just seeming like a luckbox.

Someone that at least bluffs against the nuts at some frequency on the river. Someone that at least shoves his flush draw against a set because he realizes he still has a ton of equity and he needs to do stuff like that because that is what normal players do. Someone that at some frequency, but slightly lower, calls river bets and loses. Someone that doesn't fold KK pre while also getting 54o all in pre vs 2x AK. Someone that doesn't have this pathetic laugh every time he is gonna **** someone up the ass.

Seriously I really want a full breakdown of all his frequencies when cheating vs not cheating. Like his river bluff efficiency, his river call efficiency, his aggression factor, even his all in EV is going to differ because he knows mucked cards etc. If we have the hands in HM format you get to see some crazy stats.

Well some skills in poker and intuition would tell you something might be up, that is why they frequently made that comments (commentators), i assume for amazement early on and later on because it looks fishy.
If a donk at microstakes gets it in with 54o because he is on tilt or "has a feeling" then this guy would also be losing a lot, if a presumably godlike player does that there is no reasonable explanation for that other than wasted or cheating.
I mean that 54o vs ak vs ak tells me that he has to be living in some kind of delusion, a delusion so he can pull off the cheat in the first place right under the eyes of an audience.

The fact that he really only does this when he chops is some pretty indicting evidence against him, and kind of funny when you think about how limited and obvious his strategies actually are given we know he knows the hole cards.

That's a pretty bad one.

Here is a look at what appears to be the persistence error, where the hole cards from the previous hand continue to be displayed on the following hand:

Hand #1 starts at 1:47:46 (but start at 1:46:49 for lol commentary)
Dave O aka Lone Stranger AsKd
Flop: Kh6s9c
DO pfr, cbet flop, takes it down

Hand #2
(1:49:00) next hand - $20 straddle
(1:49:13) Dave O aka Lone Stranger cards are on the reader but not centered
33 calls
screen shows DO having AsKd again, he calls
another call
Postle bumps to $130 w/ 9c7d
33 calls
DO calls
(1:50:16) flop: 6hAs9s (note, As #2, which commentators completely miss)
DO now shows as 41% to win
(1:50:28) DO changes to 7%, but cards are still listed as AsKd
33 checks
DO makes it $175
(1:50:37) Postle checks his cards (yes, his actual cards for once)
Postle calls
(1:50:49) Postle sets his cards back on the reader and puts a chip on top of them
(1:50:50) about one second later, Postle pulls his cards back to do the fake card check crotch stare
33 folds
turn Jd
(1:51:13) DO now shows 7%
(1:51:25) DO changes to 97%, cards now listed as Ad7h
river 10c
DO bets $200
Postle instamucks

I know we've been over this a million times, but this needs more love

it makes me suspicious of all live streamed games. a recent garret hand in particular is just one of those things that stands out where he folded T7 on a J8923 rainbow board to a river bet in a big pot.

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...-andy-1753323/

the reality though is you'd be able to find a lot of hands on any player who's been playing on a live stream as long as garret has that look sketchy so I wouldn't put much stock in it.


what does seem unusual to me is that latb hasn't posted this on their site as far as I can tell (maybe I overlooked it / it was a secondary hand in a video where it isn't labelled). this is an amazing hand as played and should be it's own video. also kind of strange that the link someone posted to footage of the hand was deleted due to a copyright claim by latb - they don't seem to normally do that, and you can find a lot of channels that repost hands without any issues.

In my opinion, if the organizers of these games had suspicions about cheating and were still inviting people to the games then they are just as bad as Postle. I don't understand why no one is holding the organizers responsible for the losses incurred by the people who were cheated in a game S/HE HAD SUSPICIONS ABOUT.

If I thought somebody was cheating, I'd refuse to have them in my game. That's just me.

I was finding this throughout this session:

https://youtu.be/-AADIsPTsxc?t=15332
He scoops all the chops. Of course he does.
Btw. we should point out that in this river spot actually Paul is the good Poker player, and not Mike "the GOD" Postle. Paul should not call this shove, which he did, and Mike should not shove here, which he didn't!

https://youtu.be/-AADIsPTsxc?t=4478

https://youtu.be/-AADIsPTsxc?t=11520

I'd by organizers you mean the Stones Casino, they are named in a lawsuit, along with several John Doe's that ran the room and stream.

can someone explain to me like i'm five why they list john doe in the lawsuit rather than the actual name

and please for the love of god, don't answer if you are speculating

So they can add more people to the suit as more information becomes available. Right now they just have a theory: the theory being one or more Stones' employee(s) were in on it. All the John and Jane Doe's are just placeholders until they get access to more information and get a better picture as to who could have been an accomplice.

LOL, no, that's ridiculous. In no way are organizers who are suspicious of cheating as bad as someone who is actually cheating and making money off it.

I don't disagree that if they were suspicious that they need to be held accountable, and I'm not trying to be nitty, but the fact that they aren't equivalent is why they aren't getting the same level of scrutiny. People are holding the organizers accountable - I don't know how many hundreds/thousands of posts we're up to now that are taking Stones and commentators to task. But of course Postle is going to get most of the hate. And also the fact that no one's sure exactly who knew/did what, outside of Postle, makes it harder to hammer anyone in particular.

There was a fair bit of discussion of this a few days ago; you could try using the "Search this Thread" box up at the top right, and entering "John Doe".