Quote:
Originally Posted by charlesChickens
Postle was the most blatant cheater in the history of poker, why does anyone give him their time listening to him trying to deny it. Unless if he did a tough interview like with Doug Polk purely for the fun of seeing him get roasted
Unfortunately some seem to think we should withhold judgement absent irrefutable evidence where the method of cheating is known and verified. Not to re-litigate Robbi v Garrett, but the standard applied for many is that circumstantial evidence is not sufficient to declare cheating.
The volume of questionable hands (completely unexplainable unless he knows the hole cards) from postle combined with him staring at the phone in his crotch before making critical decisions should be enough for anyone to know postle is cheating; however, no one has ever proven how the information was relayed, who was relaying it, etc. Seems pretty obvious that someone in the booth with real time access was texting the exact holdings, but not at the standard of "proof" many seem to require.