If he is a troll, the guy deserves an award!

Unfortunately by now any evidence of how he cheatedis long gone. With how Postle got outed, him and his acomplice(s) had a good heads up to destroy the evidence. That said, it seemed like Stones and especially JK had no interest investigating the allegations properly. Of course, given the information available it seems plausible JK was in on it.

Im not sure Veronica had many other options, people were being cheated and it needed to be stopped. Ideally the best way to 100% prove he was cheating is to catch him at the table, this likely would out the accomplice(s) also. I do not know what else Veronica could have done, perhaps contact the gaming commission that regulates Stones but I doubt they would do much, and if they did it would be a timely process and Postle would still be robbing people at the poker table while they investigated.

I see it like this, JK was in on it hence his attack on Veronica when she mentioned it. Stones was not concerned because they were not directly affected financially(yet the would care if say a team of people were counting cards at the Blackjack tables). Perhaps they thought having Postle as some sort of poker savant was good for the webcast ratings and the casino in general because it they thought it would draw in more people. Now those webcast are infamous, however it's not the kind of attention the casino wanted to get.

While that would be strange (and you apparently have no knowledge that he has done that and are just throwing out as a red herring), it has nothing to do with the evidence that shows the difference in his results how he plays between when he has his phone in his crotch (and stares at it) vs. when he doesn't.

What he does on non-streamed tables with his phone has no bearing on the inferences that can be drawn from the drastic differences on the stream with/without the phone in his crotch.

Pandabot,

I don't really understand the point of your posts about Discord as you seem to be implicating JFK in providing Postle the source information allowing him to cheat. Whether cheating was accomplished by audio or video feed or both seems like you are drawing a pretty silly line in the sand.

If Postle was cheating on the live stream 3-5 hours a week for the last year, why would it matter that he did not cheat for 15 years playing live and online? Seems to me the stream gave him the means to cheat where the normal game protections of live poker did not. (We could even speculate that he was a multi-accounter on line or perhaps signaled a partner at the table in live play if he cheated during the stream.)

The facts are that Postle won an extraordinary amount of money and sessions while making near perfect decisions on certain streets after looking into his lap. What information he was obtaining from his lap is the subject we are all speculating about. Believing it was information on others cards pirated from the live stream is a logical conclusion. It's not the only conclusion, but most others don't make much sense.

As he is such a great player I'm sure he will have no problem making a living.
Maybe Justin can be his Waterboy on poker road trips.


If I was a betting man (which I am) it would not surprise me to see Mike or Justin turn up in a few years getting caught for some other shady dealings.
Clearly they got super greedy (and very stupid) and it will probably happen again to these criminal types.

Interesting point to bring up. Is this covered by Stone's insurance? Often lawsuits due to misconduct are not covered.

Insurance will likely be paying for defending the case given the negligence allegations against stones and JFK but not for indemnification of the players losses. Most employee theft coverages have small limits and benefit only the first party insured, the casino.

Given the unique nature of the casino "service" I would assume the insurance policy for the gaming operations reads more like an errors and omissions policy but, admittedly, I have never seen an insurance policy for a casino other than liability policies for physical injuries.

Stones has won so far. They got rid of the money-losing stream.

Why don't all the plaintiffs and their "counsel" talk about things they know?

What is the status of their investigation?

The stream was mainly for publicity for the cardroom, to attract blackjack players and so on. They did achieve that objective, as they got lots of publicity.

I don't know why you bothered quoting a post that you apparently didn't even bother to read - I guess it was just to make the same point over again?

He acknowledged in that post that there is no "hard proof" like you describe, so your "gotcha" is rather silly. The exchange reads kind of like this:

Mr Spyutastic: It's true that we don't have logs from the server, camera stills of MP looking at live hole cards, or sworn affidavit from JK admitting that he cheated.
PayDatBotItsMeoney: Do you have logs from the server? Camera stills of MP looking at live hole cards? Or sworn affidavit from JK admitting that he cheated? Didn't think so.

What does crotch staring have to do with his post?

This thread has narratives that fit the evidence of the results. People have seen results that appear somewhere between extremely unlikely to impossible without some kind of assistance. That evidence is not speculative; it's there for anyone to see. How those results occurred, well that certainly is a matter for speculation. But you repeating over and over that there is no hard evidence of how it happened is really unnecessary - everyone knows that. But it doesn't change the results.

It's really nothing like that. The results are compelling evidence that something is amiss.

Now, if you want to argue that the results prove nothing - that there is another plausible explanation for said results, then you should do so. But posting over and over again that people's explanations of how those results were achieved is speculation is sort of a waste of time.

this is Justin's reasoning., he thought bringing Mike into the booth was an explanation for his play - regardless of the fact that mike sounded dumb and unable to make sense of what he was doing...he is trying the same illogical explanation here.

Good effort, and probably better than mine. I've already gone down this road with him twice in this thread. I still think it's all hinging on his understanding of the meaning of the word "fact." It's coming across in this thread that he uses "fact" simply to mean "something I agree with." (Similarly, he seems to be using "speculation" as if it means "something you made up," which is at least in the right ballpark.)

You hear kids talk like that all the time.

"[Thing X] is better than [Thing Y]!"
"Well, that's your opinion."
"No, that's a fact!"

Funny thing is, I was in a different discussion on a different site with a different person about whether or not a certain thing was "possible." (He claimed it wasn't, I said it was.) This conversation has gone around and around, and it's occurring to me that the other poster might think the word "possible" is a synonym for "likely."

Making it very tough not to invoke the Princess Bride "you keep using that word" meme.

Could someone give me some cliffs on the last 10 pages?

Nothing said. Not much new information. Lawsuit will take maybe a couple of years and get settled with a confidentiality agreement. Someone posted who might be Justin or someone involved with Stones, Justin or Postle.

How can the poster be Justin? He said he can't stand Justin, and that Justin should never work in any cardroom of the world. I hink he also basically said Justin is an idiot putting the blame on him.

So you really think Justin would say this of himself?

I got the clear impression that this is just a random idiot.
He keeps throwing out the word facts and defending Postle.

Also the conducting headphones he doesn't understand.
Describing them as only being able to transmit morse codes... It's laughable. I Tried the new bose bone conducting sunglasses I can tell you that it creates sounds just like normal headphones.

Here he is talking about Justin and Postle in way that I doubt he is one of them.

Are the same dolts running the room as when Postle’s cheating was allowed to run rampant? If so that is the real crime here.

This threat is super lame and lazy.

1) Table VPIP 40%, avg stack 400BB. Players typical quite bad live players. You all are saying there is one GTO game, which is only winning play in those games? Soooooooooooooo stupid.

2) Still no real hand histories, so one can get true variance and winrate? In games with antes, bomb pots etc. you have no clue how big games are without those. This is time 4 mounths after first post with big words and big claims of wrongdoing.

3) Postle won x out of y sessions. Yes. How many times he run into bad beat? Like set over set in a big pot? Like zero times? Then he run good. If he had like 77 and folded when flop come 7T4 and opponent had TT, then it's strange, or evidence of cheating.

4) 10+ years live poker pro. Before that pro online player. You think that Postle is most ******ed human being in planet earth if you think that he is fish at 400bb deep typical live 1/3 game. Even if we assume somehow, that money come from somewhere else, then why would anyone casino whore and play 1/3 (even with bomb pots) so many years all the time, when his outcome does not come from poker, but somewhere else? Grinding is not fun all the time. Same if you are online or live pro. Even more when it comes to casino whoring.

5) Stupid speculations without evidence are stupid speculation without evidence. Only evidence in this case is, that Postle plays differently, than pros that have no idea how small stakes 40% VPIP, 400bb games in Stones are really played. And thus have no idea how one should play in those games.

6) Postle know holecards and runout. Yeah. And then played some supercompliated way to hide that right away, bc 100k$ max, if there is only two cheaters, and 200k$ won is correct. if someone have all the information in those games he would won like 1000bb/100 and made some superstrange plays all the time. And if you try to hide that you know holecards and runouts and play badly with purpose, then very easily it's much more compliated than just play and beat supersoft 1/3 with antes bomb pots etc.

YOU HAVE NOT LOOKED INTO THIS AT ALL!

IF YOU WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS CONVERSTAION U NEED TO DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH
Look at a few streamed sessions or reviews of the sessions from anyone. Joeingram, Doug or anyone.
This you clearly haven't done!
You didn't see how he played for hours and hours so everyone will laugh at your post.

Don't you think the attorneys on both sides would tell all the parties to STFU?

Everything online is discoverable. I would think they are going to explore when each party thought when they were being cheated and why they continued to play after that point.

They chose to play on the televised table and may have done so for an economic return other than winning money.

There are countless examples of people playing online that have a minimal chance of winning due to an inferior skill level.

Have any of the identified "experts" ever testified in a federal trial, obtained a professional credential, and survived a Daubert challenge?

Plus you are a dummy. Did you ever go to a casino?
Did you go to casino 70 times in a row and every time you came out a winner? Did you look at your crotch while deciding if you fold or raise?

To point 6 ,.he made superstarnge plays, u only haven't seen them and now you have the nerve to go everyone's nerves. Lol

Take any of 1-6 and argue against it. I will not argue against anyone who generally claims you are just wrong. Like it would be first time in history of internet when someone is wrong.

I'm very happy to be wrong, but then you need to point where I'm wrong. If you want to argue.

How many hands have you seen mike Postle play?
If the answer is less than 50 you are in no shape for a debate.

Maybe little bit less than 500. Few streams when I have been bored.

100k$ is small potateous. Adelstein cheating and winning like 1m$+ would be different. But cheating to gain 100k$ and potentially destroying your life after that soooooo stupid. And not saying that some stupid human beings do not do that. Less likely when you are in your fifties.

Pretty sure you are either not very bright or a troll so not sure it's worth the effort because in either case you will not understand. But I'm a sadist.

1) Table VPIP 40%, avg stack 400BB. Players typical quite bad live players. You all are saying there is one GTO game, which is only winning play in those games? Soooooooooooooo stupid.

We are not saying he cheated simply because he won in a game with non-GTO play.

2) Still no real hand histories, so one can get true variance and winrate? In games with antes, bomb pots etc. you have no clue how big games are without those. This is time 4 mounths after first post with big words and big claims of wrongdoing.

We have all the hand histories actually. People think our argument is because of the amount of $ he won. For me it's not that, so continuing to base your counter arguments based on that is pointless. It's based on the frequency with which he made perfect decisions combined with the fact that these decisions don't really have any logical basis if you don't know what the cards are. A couple times here and there, you could chalk it up to randomness and chance. But given the amount of times it occured and were correct point to a pretty clear conclusion. He cheated.

3) Postle won x out of y sessions. Yes. How many times he run into bad beat? Like set over set in a big pot? Like zero times? Then he run good. If he had like 77 and folded when flop come 7T4 and opponent had TT, then it's strange, or evidence of cheating.

Funny you say that as he had a hand very similar to the one you describe that would prove him to be a cheat.

4) 10+ years live poker pro. Before that pro online player. You think that Postle is most ******ed human being in planet earth if you think that he is fish at 400bb deep typical live 1/3 game. Even if we assume somehow, that money come from somewhere else, then why would anyone casino whore and play 1/3 (even with bomb pots) so many years all the time, when his outcome does not come from poker, but somewhere else? Grinding is not fun all the time. Same if you are online or live pro. Even more when it comes to casino whoring.

Based on my viewing of his pre-cheating play I have a hard time believing he made money solely off of poker. He seemed like a breakeven player at best.
My guess is he had different sources of income that he has not disclosed.
Also he did not crush online and was likely a loser there as well much less the best player on UB of all time. It doesn't matter to me that much on this point in either case other than that I know he is willing to openly lie about his results and abilities.

5) Stupid speculations without evidence are stupid speculation without evidence. Only evidence in this case is, that Postle plays differently, than pros that have no idea how small stakes 40% VPIP, 400bb games in Stones are really played. And thus have no idea how one should play in those games.

Again it's not that he just played differently. He made the perfect plays consistently over a large enough sample where there is no other reasonable conclusion other than he had hole card information. It's not like his decisions were consistent with any other game theory model you could concoct. This combined with when you hear him talk about poker strategy it's pretty clear without the hard evidence that you are talking about.

6) Postle know holecards and runout. Yeah. And then played some supercompliated way to hide that right away, bc 100k$ max, if there is only two cheaters, and 200k$ won is correct. if someone have all the information in those games he would won like 1000bb/100 and made some superstrange plays all the time. And if you try to hide that you know holecards and runouts and play badly with purpose, then very easily it's much more compliated than just play and beat supersoft 1/3 with antes bomb pots etc.[/QUOTE]

I don't think he knows the runout. Based on what I've seen I actually think he did not know the runout. But he definitely knew the hole cards.

I get what people like you are trying to argue. I make super weird plays all the time. But I run into the nuts here and there. Make wrong calls, etc.
But if you look at my play you can see it is pretty consistent in similar spots. And I am wrong a lot.

The point is you have a guy who at one point was basically a breakeven live player who couldn't articulate even the most mild of midstakes level poker concepts if you asked him. Yet overnight is making perfect decisions on flop, turn, and river while playing extremely unorthodox lines pre and post which just happen to be right every time?

Come on man you got to open your eyes here.

Good points, but a few questions about them.

Where? Variance in games is interesting part, for the argument that he won too much not just being a luckbox.

He played quite a lot poker in last 15 years? Or am I wrong? So your logic is, that Postle is like super******? Or are you saying live deep 1/3 and 2/5 are hard to beat? Typical player Postle played against have played like 1/100 hands max what Postle have. More likely 1/1000 and still ****** Postle is not even slight winner?

There are players who play on intuition. So they are not able to articulate what they did. Same goes for all sports.

Of course not buying that Postle is best player ever.