I initially leaned not cheating (w/ a device) or possibly seeing his hole cards preflop. I ruled out the latter after watching the replay. He didn't lift it high enough for her to be able to see.

But now I am even more confused after reading some of the details.

She felt like scared money so she let someone buy half her action and then subsequently put six figures in on the turn with jack high and no draw? Makes no sense especially given it looks like she is already very wealthy.

But cheating doesn't make sense either. Calling there is only $17,900 better than just folding. So we have to assume she doesn't just have access to his hole cards but also has access to who has the winning hand. But then she was offered to only run it once but suggested they run it twice.

So we'd have to assume she has access to the winning hand on a second river or she is willing to risk federal prison to become a poker star. And if it's the former we have to also assume she is too stupid to realize how terrible it will make her look.

Regardless of whether she cheated or not money doesn't seem to be motivating her to play. So it basically comes down to whether she's willing to risk prison to become a poker star for non-monetary reasons. Stranger things have happened but it seems unlikely.

Occam's razor tells me she has too much money and randomly decided she was tired of GMAN running her over. Her hand just happened to be the most ridiculous hand that still beat his hand. No explanation makes sense but this seems the likeliest at the moment.

Unless I'm mistaken the only person who actually stated it was cheating was Doug Polk. What could they sue the others for?

Gman and Ryan for extortion

I cant believe pppl are calling out cheating on this thing so soon. If that was me I would be pissed. We are all allowed to make bad plays and play whatever way we like, cheating allegations are very serious.

I dunno why everyone is rating Adelstein, is just upset cos he got read like a book and called by J-high.

If she was cheating somehow, there are like a million better ways and hands to choose. "hmm I am cheating so let me call 120K into a 150K pot cos I have 50% equity and I dont wanna lose that 40K in there of which I have 50% equity, I know its gonna look super weird to everyone but I aint giving away that 20K equity I have in the pot"

I cant believe Garrett and some of these people calling her a cheat it so bad she is clearly an amateur and not everyone has the same style or even knows hows to play properly.

All this cos Garrett couldnt take being called by a weak hand he feels like a chump being read and being given 0 respect and embarrased to lose to J4 in front of everyone so obvioously it must be cheating and obviously he is gonna get his money back.

Cause its what Lawyers do

Maybe because even a bad player doesn't make that call unless they somehow know its a winner

Gman’s Twitter post says “of course I’m going to accept my money back after being clearly cheated”

Maybe people like you see everything as "good player" and "bad player" and are oblivious to the concept of "fun player".

Not when Robbi has the J Clubs

This statement is the oxymoron of poker takes.

I've seen calls with the effective nut low justified by "I thought they were bluffing." They always lose and everyone knows they are clueless. I've seen people not realize their 3 card straight/flush draw was dead with only 1 card to come (IMO that's what happened here, one of the first things she said was "little bit of a straight draw" then when Garrett says "yeah ok but the turn" that's when she starts kind of talking gibberish).

It's just in all the cases when that's happened, the person making the call loses the pot, because let's face it in live games no one bluffs as aggro as Garrett and the other times it has been a bluff it's been a bluff that can beat the call.

This Charles Lew guy has one of the worst websites I've ever seen

You guys are trolling right?

It's 99.9999999% she cheated you guys are beyond hope.

Yes, because cheats always just hand back the money immediately after.

Bruh, if I go to a casino, maybe I dont give a **** about the money, maybe I am playing for fun, maybe I am mad, maybe a losing player. If I wanna call with J-high, and somehow I win, I dont want ppl calling me a cheat.

So lets say she had info:

On the turn there is 40K in the pot, she has 50% of that as equity, so 20K, or 25. Then she has to call 110K just to not lose the 20K equity she already has. So if she was cheating, she did it just for the 20K equity she already had. Why would you even call here just for 20K and risk being caught when you could wait for so many better, especially river spots. If she was cheating she wouldnt be working alone and would be getting signals or whatever from someone who knows the game well, no one who can play would ever risk being caught cheating just to hold on to that 25K equity she would lose if she folded.

Ryan helping to lean on her to give the money back is pretty bad, imo.

The show is kind of a clip joint. Like, if you ever go to Hustler, they have these big banners of the losing players. I suppose this is just part of the realities of high stakes. Announcers go out of their way to compliment losing players, etc. Just butter up the rich guys. Pretend to be their friends, and so on. In fact, this goes on at all stakes to some degree, but I think HLC just pushes it farther than anyone. And of course, it is run by Nick, a documented con artist.

I'm not a lawyer, or even a particularly intelligent person. But when you already have this scenario, and one of the fish manages to get out of the net, to have the big famous pro and the man in charge of running the operation take her aside, especially a woman, and bully her into returning the money feels really dirty. Hopefully, a jury gets the same vibe.

TBF, I don't fault Garret for being suspicious in the moment. But it's becoming pretty clear that there is no real evidence for cheating. And I DO heavily fault Ryan for his role if this is true.

I started my journey at 2nl and can honestly say ive never seen a call like that. A bad player will say chase a GS with bad odds but they dont call when it bricks out on the river

Garrett's account of the conversation backstage makes it seem like she did something shady or got some tip during the hand. Why else would she suddenly give back the money? Most people facing accusations and "tons of people will see this" will respond with "good, let them".

Garrett's "this is about to go viral" is super douchey though, true or not. He mumbled something like "****'s about to go down/hit the fan" to the dealer as he was packing up his chips.

Now that an attorney has tweeted about lawsuits with #wifey and the N.Y. Post has picked up the story, we've reached new levels of trashy on the Hustler Casino show.

The machine/device angle doesn't make much sense. If anyone is that technically sound


How funny would it be for the cards to just be marked with invisible ink, and for her to have picked up on that and taped in a pair of her own lenses. It would explain the table chatter, and how she was able to know he likely had the low end of a straight draw (if she could see his hand or one card of it only) and also how she can make the call there with J-hi.

Huge oof for everyone involved if the entire hand was legit, but that's the outcome HCL benefits the most from settling on.

The problem is HCL gains nothing if they discover a method of cheating used in their game after the accusations are already public. In the short-term, they lose players due to paranoia. Games will suffer as a result. They can handle the matter privately and ban or make up a story on when Robbi wouldn't be back, but that will just fuel the speculation.

If no wrong-doing is found/no evidence is found, Garrett has to publicly give the money back, apologize, and explain why he got so wound up. That makes the whole thing go away in faster fashion, and since Garrett will need to issue a public statement that is the more clickbait route for HCL to hope for. In light of that, they're almost incentivized to make this go away privately, and the only way to do that and not incur speculation/distrust is for "no cheating" to be the verdict/Robbi to remain in the game.

I do think the security measures implemented by a casino are mostly just surveillance, which means they can see what everyone at the table was doing at every moment during the hand. The technical knowledge needed to employ an RFiD scanner or similar computer methods is something that you can't just scan for, and it'll be near impossible for HCL to go back and figure out what happened if that was at play, just as it was impossible to Postle to be nailed down in any way.

why is this thread allowed when we already had 2 going

I don't know a ton about marking cards, but my understanding is you just mark the aces and perhaps a few other cards.

It would be kind of crazy to mark 52 cards uniquely, or even mark every card by rank.

Garrett should do the following and probably will soon because she’s being nice and giving him a chance “to make it right” but her husband is a Loyola law adjunct and lawyer I would not want to fight a clear cut extortion case.

The key problem is Garrett can’t handle losing to a woman who punks his soul he’s just insecure which drives his success.

The idea she cheated is just a racist/misogynistic shade and everyone who eats off Garret’s games (Andy, commentators) are enabling that completely unfounded defamation.

The talk about a vibrating device is also harassment, she really got under his skin.

Sue him and a LA county judge will 100 percent make him pay a settlement.

Should be interesting to see how long he keeps his current ridiculous stance up losing a lot of respect the longer a non-admission of his total bias occurs for

polk and garrett are both scumbags

no clue how to read human nature
before last night i liked both of them

polk breaking it down likes she some super pro lol

so so clueless

i have nfi what to make of this, but here are the variables that are running through my mind...

garrett and robbi's first stream together, there was a small pot where garrett and robbi got to showdown, garrett implied to her that she had the winner, she said "ace high" but mucked before garrett, as garrett prefers to not show his hand whenever possible. he immediately lets her off the hook that it wasn't an angle and instructs the dealer to push her the pot.

garrett later in the stream barrels off vs her and doubles her up, a few hands later she loses most of her profit from the garrett hand, and needles him saying "don't worry it's garret's money" or something to that affect, and garrett gives her a fistbump for her funny needle.

so in my head, garrett may still have the ace high muck thing still on his mind, thinking she is at least capable of angling...however the hand she loses to another player with "garrett's money" leads me to believe she just wants to bully the bully - further evidenced by the needling of him after the J4 v 87 hand.

is she capable of angling/cheating while also tapping the shark tank in the process? does she just have some complex towards big stack bullies and doesn't mind spite calling and rubbing it in?

rfid, water bottles, anal beads aside, this is the stuff i'm trying to use to come up with some logical answer to wtf is going on

ETA: i wish i didn't have the incident spoiled before the stream due to the delay...all i knew at that point was garrett stormed off bc of possible cheating. there was at least two hours between the incident being leaked, but no details as to which other parties were involved, but that A high muck immediately came to my mind and i thought to myself after seeing the lineup that if i had to pick one player that garrett took issue with, it would be robbi

sidenote nobody covers his cards closer than garrett

Actually i would feel exactly the same if a White male that made the same play but please keep spewing whatever Ist words you can think of