they did file per se, iirc.

I am not a lawyer, but iirc they did file per se. I expect his case will be, "they called me a crook, I'm not a crook, book 'em Dano."

Yes they did, but not only that. The other claims will require them to prove damages.

I agree That too many people have already been hurt and all sides should walk away. No one should face anything more than ridicule for what they write on the internets.

If the suit is even real.

Yeah but that's the pea shooter, not the cannon. per se is the cannon.

I don't understand your point. Including all those other claims is where the big money is, potentially.

Maybe the defamation prevented him from making a living in crooked cards games.

Is he a poker player or a card sharp? He said he was one of the biggest winners on UB.

Does he know how to play? Can he beat an honest game? On the games one the stream, he didn't 3! premium hands in a very loose game. Although he won big anyway, that cost him tremendous EV.

Are you suggesting it's almost as if the cards of the other players hadn't registered yet and he wanted to wait for that information and to see the flop before committing one way or the other? Couldn't be.

Even if he knew the hole cards, it would be better to build the pot with a premium hand.

Non-Update: I looked at the docket today. No further activity since the oct 8 entry of a blank summons form.

got my settlement check in the mail woohoo

sell out

you're not wrong!

I hope Postle collects from everyone involved. Especially from polk and ingram. There should be consequences for destroying a persons reputation and ability to generate income with no proof. they all went to far imo. I hope they all pay.

They did not destroy his reputation, or remove his ability to generate income.

How are there still "Postle is innocent" trolls? wtf

The join dates of such people tell me they're either friends of Postle himself, or people who missed out on the year-plus of research done by dozens of people.

But yeah, it's pretty insane. Figure that it's one of the few things on which both Doug Polk and Daniel Negreanu agree, so being firmly on the side of Postle being clean puts a person pretty far into the weeds.

The problem all along was that people confused - and still confuse - suspicion as being as strong as actual evidence. Marle Cordeiro's case was rejected on jurisdiction grounds, but when one reads the case against Postle, there is suspicion, but no evidence. The accusation "She further alleges that defendant suspiciously folded a strong hand, allegedly because he was aware that plaintiff’s hand was stronger." is such a weak example, as he would doubtless counter he had a read on her, and it feels more like clutching at straws to build a case, rather than being a decisive example of his cheating.

While playing in these live games, defendant won more money than any other participant. Plaintiff alleges that defendant was being fed the other players’ hands, apparently through his cell phone device, which defendant kept between his legs during these games. From July 18, 2018, to September 29, 2019, defendant allegedly recorded net winnings in more than 94% of the games in which he played, becoming an in-house celebrity.

Plaintiff alleges that defendant was able to achieve these results by engaging in a pattern and practice of using one or more wire communication mechanisms to defraud his opponents by gaining knowledge of the other players’ cards. Plaintiff has participated in a Stones live poker game with defendant at least once. She further alleges that defendant suspiciously folded a strong hand, allegedly because he was aware that plaintiff’s hand was stronger.

So although the few defenders of Postle (notable by their average single figure number of 2+2 posts) have no credibility, they do actually have a point, as like it or not, to date there has been no proven cheating by Postle, and his accusers are still not certain how he cheated.

Here in the UK people learned the hard way that one should preface accusations with the word "alleged", that is something that would be good practice for his accusers to follow, as at the moment he has effectively gagged public debate about the cheating allegations against him.

For journalists reporting on allegations made by others, they make use of the word alleged to prevent themselves being accused of making the allegations themselves. If you make an allegation about someone, it's not like using the word "alleged" is a get out of jail free card, you will still need to substantiate the allegations or the injured party might have cause to come after you.

UK law and American law on this is miles apart. You should really know that basic fact before making these kinds of posts.

Marle not knowing UK is as unsurprising as her liking Alex Jones though, not sad at all she lost, even to Postle. Guess she can't dump another 6 figures in high stakes games when they could barely beat 2/5.

Everything is evidence, especially when you quantify it. Not talking legally here, but scientifically. Feelings like "the winrate is too high" or "that's an odd fold" are reasons for suspicion.

Someday, hopefully, the exact win rate will be quantified and compared, along with the sample size and the standard deviation for MP alleged godmode sessions, MP non-godmode, and all the other players. That's evidence, but just one piece. Add in other evidence like behavior at the table, certain action frequencies, and you can build a case. Lots of people were convicted or found responsible for things without knowing exactly how they did it, but it takes a lot to do that. The Marle complaint is ridiculously inadequate if that's all it was.

I'd also like to see an analysis of how often he was dealt premium hands, how often he hit the flop, hit draws, etc. I'm expecting these to be not terribly out of line, as the videos do not show him being on a card heater, which is what most non-players will think of when they say maybe he was just lucky, that's why he won so much.

Yeah, this. The results are evidence.

An extreme (and stylized) hypothetical would be someone offering an even-money bet that he can flip a coin 30 times and get 30 tails. You snap call, only to watch as he pulls off the feat right before your eyes. You may not have any idea how he's doing it, but the outcome by itself would be evidence of shenanigans, simply because it's almost literally a billion-to-one shot.

Of course, what Postle accomplished is not nearly as mathematically improbable, but it was still unlikely enough for knowledgeable poker people to look crook-eyed at it. I say it all the time, it's why experienced poker players are certain he was cheating, and the doubters tend to be either donks or poker muggles.

No news about Galfond?

Man I hate these marketing stunts. No reason to for him to put himself to this, but when he did then no news is really bad conduct.

His company is named in the defamation suit. Of course he is quiet now.

The good news is now he has every incentive to quietly continue work on the stats.

Have he said so?