Thanks, but the bar is not set too high in legal discussions in NVG.

I thought the sharp increase and the subsequent decrease in moronic posts was correlated to your entrance and exit from the thread. Gzech is a good poster though.

So have any defendants been served? When does this case go to trial?

Did you see the schedule notice from the court? It's in covid never coming to trial hell. Sometimes the justice system works by putting a file in the garbage.

Pretty sure that is a standard order in the Covid era regardless of the merits of a civil case as it was issued the same day as the filing.

Hi WIlbury:

I've visited the Manzanar Internment Camp located on US 395 near Lone Pine and found it extremely interesting, and would certainly recommend the visit for anyone driving through that area.

The amazing thing is that many of the young men stuck there, joined the US Army and served in Europe during WWII.

Best wishes,
Mason

Interesting topic. (At least to me, since I work in media relations.)

For starters, I assume executive is limiting his scope to people who got exposure specifically for being alleged cheaters. That's very different from being an alleged cheat who got massive exposure unrelated to possible misdeeds – cough cough, Annie Duke.

The aforementioned Russ Hamilton is an obvious inclusion, since he was the focus of an entire piece on 60 Minutes. Additionally, his saga lingered for quite a while, getting revisited in the wake of Black Friday and even making the virtual pages of Slate in 2013. I even found a 2018 piece about poker and crypto that mentioned Hamilton and the UB scandal as part of the narrative.

Postle rates right up there because his name was mentioned (albeit mispronounced) on SportsCenter and that sizable piece on Wired, plus there was a little bit of local news coverage. But for the most part, "exposure" of both of those two men have largely been in niche outlets and/or within the relatively insular world of poker. Thus, the title of "most exposed alleged poker cheat" might have the same type of weight as "most famous jai alai player."

And for those who want examples of other publicized cheaters...

Consider Ali Tekintamgac, who was handed a 41-month sentence for his cheating at a 2010 WPT event in Barcelona. He certainly made headlines, but those articles were limited to poker media outlets. Same with the Pasqualini-Rossi duo: their names got thrown around quite a bit back in 2013, but via the same media. More than Postle? Less than Postle? Really hard to say, because you would have to determine how the readership and viewership of places like Bluff and PokerNews compares with, say, Joey Ingram's YouTube channel.

The one poker cheater whose deeds DID hit non-poker media was Christian Lusardi, oh he of the fake Borgata tourney chips. That drew some attention mostly because it was such a goofy story that it made "weird news" sections of newspapers and nightly telecasts.

I will say this: although Postle's name is usually NOT mentioned when this happens, the Stones Gambling Hall situation is the first time since AP/UB that my non-poker friends have asked a "hey, did you hear about..." type of question. (In fairness, the people who ask also know that Stones is the closest I have to a home casino.)

No jury is going to take expert testimony seriously without data to back it up ... data to show what MP did is not possible.

If someone won the lottery 50 times in a row, I don't know that they oculd be convicted of theft without more evidence. It doesn't mean that it's possible to win lotto 50 times in a row. It means it isn't fair to convict if that's all you have, something like that you need evidence.

That's amazing? Lawyers and doctors were signing up. Of course prisoners were. It was a different time, and we had REAL enemies.

[QUOTE=Nippleman;56711687
So instead of guessing right at 30 coinflips, it's more like he picked the correct number 30 times at a roulette table.[/QUOTE]NOt real sharp in the maths myself, but intuitively the second sounds more like the odds a parallel universe exists in mirror image to our own.

If someone wins the lottery 50 times in a row, you don't go straight to trial with only this information. You start with the assumption that the guy found some way to cheat, and then investigate. In this case, it would be such a disaster for public confidence in a lucrative state run lottery system that the investigation would be very thorough. In the case of a few random poker players being cheated, not so much. In either case it's perfectly reasonable to believe that cheating must have taken place, and to be able to speak about it without fear of losing a defamation suit.

Podcast up today on wired if you need more analysis

I'm not a lawyer but without evidence, if the suit reaches court I believe it's a slam dunk. But damages? More likely to be $1 than any other figure.

Chess GM Hikaru Nakamura randomly referencing a certain event

https://clips.twitch.tv/EsteemedVainTarsierOhMyDog

McDonalds ran a Monopoly sweepstakes that was rigged, for $24 million over the years, before anyone caught on that the winners had a series of connections.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/07/how-...poly-game.html

brought new meaning to the HamBurglar character, which no longer is a marketing icon.

HBO did a special on that one, up for 5 Emmys.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/hbo-do...-5-emmys-nods/

.... doubt there will be a clamor for a Postle documentary, although it would be ironic if one ultimately were made because of this added lawsuit angle........ what's ElevenGrover up to ? .....

A lawsuit without evidence ? Maybe the Plaintiff can add Giuliani as counsel, .... what are the implied odds of Rudy losing 31 lawsuits in a row ?

No wonder I never won that ****.

They found a statistically super unlikely thing and investigated it. And guess what? It turned out to be something other than just luck.

Looks like someone watches hbo documentaries

The hate is strong with you

I am not aware that the courts consider amount of exposure so much that the WAS exposure.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

What are the odds Trump stiffs Rudy?

Amazing, indeed. Cool that you visited, too. I've never actually seen any of the camp locations, in part because my grandparents refused to attend any of the "pilgrimages." (Oh yes, Tule Lake holds reunions, like a high school graduation class, only they meet every other year.) I've offered to take my dad to Poston, but I guess the only thing left is a monument next to a fire station. Plus, he was three years old when they left – not like he has memories of the place.

Speaking of those servicemen, the motto of that 442nd Regimental Combat Team was "go for broke," which apparently was common gambler's parlance of the era. Thus, I'm guessing it was the equivalent to people today using the phrase "all-in" outside of poker?

Finally, one of the soldiers from said 442nd unit made for my favorite episode of Comedy Central's Drunk History series:



As for this...

Take a drink any time the guy in the glasses says "that's fair."

Was Hikaru talking about streaming himself while playing live poker? I can't imagine that would be much to watch unless there were hole cards and chip counts, etc.

But still... interesting that he knew/knows about it at all. I remember Negreanu talking about going around the poker room asking for opinions, only to find that most players had never even heard about the Postle cheating allegations. So no, not exactly a secret, but also not something that traveled far and wide.

I've seen Hikaru play poker many years ago. If he still plays the same way, seeing hole cards and chip counts won't be your main source of entertainment.

Just got back from a trip and this thread still delivers. Missed you NVG.

Ah, bit if the 7 pm televised lottery drawing was a 30 minute delay of a live drawing of the winning numbers, and the person who won the lottery 50 times in a row was shown to be using technology with the potential for intercepting that live drawing and placed bets between the time the drawing took place and was shown on television, there'd be quite a bit more circumstantial evidence.

Like there is with Postle's cheating.