Is there evidence that Robbi cheated Garrett?
Hello all. My first post on here. My name is Chester Mead. I am a poker dealer for more than 15 years and a poker player
lol that video is literally just a person super excited . its cringe but i understand what hes saying good what for sure. I doubt hes thinking about the tvs
he's actually talking smack to a 12 year old in the stands
no I knew he was charged thought he might be on the lamb tho. what does him going to go to jail have anything to do with robbie? He was a convict so hes going to be in trouble no matter what. Why would he admit to a larger crime of stealing 250k from garret? This isn't a movie theres not 4 fbi agents asking a career criminal to snitch out his partners. The way I understood it y
The point is that when any piece of evidence, either him being on the run or him being in jail, or robbi not pressing charges or pressing charges, if they both point to her cheating to you, then it’s not evidence for cheating it just means that it is compatible with the cheating theory. There are plenty of things that are compatible but not evidence.
The other point is that you don’t know much about what actually happened and that you’re not looking very deeply into things. You’re operating on rumors that are easily dispelled.
Well... by looking at her eyes? She is apparently looking at the table. I watched around 70% of your video, and there is not a single time that she looks where you are suggesting. She is looking at the table, and she is looking at Garret in those moments you find suspicious. She apparently wants to be funny on TV and make an appearance, like many other people. You scratch your nose when you are indecisive or uneasy; that was what she wanted to say. People talk just to talk, as they try to be social on TV and get invited back. I don't say if she is guilty or not, but your video is apparently biased against her.
Which would make sense if she didn’t look back at her hand right after Garrett shoves clear as day.
The point is that when any piece of evidence, either him being on the run or him being in jail, or robbi not pressing charges or pressing charges, if they both point to her cheating to you, then it’s not evidence for cheating it just means that it is compatible with the cheating theory. There are plenty of things that are compatible but not evidence.The other point is tha
the only piece of evidence I've considered is the fact he took 5k off her stack when she was likely cheating. and he was the guy in charge of the control room or one of two people with access
the only piece of evidence I've considered is the fact he took 5k off her stack when she was likely cheating. and he was the guy in charge of the control room or one of two people with access
I think it was 15K. And why specifically her stack and no one elses?
Because she's utterly ******ed and it was obvious to him he could steal it and she would have no idea. And he was right.
Because she's utterly ******ed and it was obvious to him he could steal it and she would have no idea. And he was right.
why would he steal it when she was being accused of cheating under a huge spotlight. Hes working the game he knows what just happened. he wanted his cut ! Theres plenty of rich idiots on that show he could have stole from instead. going after a newer player would actually be a bad gto play. You would observe longer to make sure they are actually that dumb and watch to see if they count their stack when they end a session
I really appreciate how the developers of Evoplay Arena focused on the tournament aspect. It feels more like an e-sport than just a regular site, especially when you see the same competitive names popping up on the board. See who's winning: https://arenaevoplay.games/?utm_source=forum&utm_medium=shilling&utm_campaign=aren_launch
People still think she cheated? lol. Should chatgpt all the info and see what it says. I bet it concludes she did not cheat.
Edit.
A key point people forget: if she was cheating, the hand is actually strangely inefficient as a cheating hand. She called in a spot where she was only slightly ahead at that moment and still vulnerable to river cards. A sophisticated cheat would usually avoid such marginal situations unless they knew exact runouts or had imperfect information.
Another major point is exactly what you said: investigators and the poker community combed through huge amounts of footage looking for patterns. If someone is cheating with real-time information, statistically you’d expect:
repeated impossible hero calls,
uncanny folds,
consistently abnormal win rates in key spots,
signaling patterns,
correlations with specific staff behavior.
But no convincing systemic pattern was ever proven.
For those saying she was wealthy and had no money motivation to cheat. Her LinkedIn profile is here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/robbi-jade-l...
In it she lists:
Hematology Oncology Consultant for Celgene from May 2011 - Jan 2020. My research shows the pay range is 225-317K per year, and obviously she was there for 9 years so probably wasn't at base pay
Right around the covid pandemic she switched to Cell Therapy Account Manager for Bristol Myers Squibb. That pay is listed as 171-207K per year, so not quite a halving of her salary, but a significant drop around the time of Covid.
Based on all the plastic and how she presents herself, I highly doubt she was cutting her spending , living in Pacific Palisades where the median home price is in the multi-millions and trying to keep up appearances.
Fast-forward to September 2022 and perhaps that money well is running dry as she struggles on a much lower income to maintain her lifestyle. And then the opportunity to cheat at poker is presented and she feels like she can finally recover from the past two years of reduced income.
Most players are subjectively biased when viewing other players' games. (That would include Garrett.) Would they have played it that way? Should the player have called? Did they calculate the EV properly? Did they have the odds to call?
HCL videos can show the actual possible win percentage of each player in every hand at every stage, because they know all of the cards that are out of the remaining deck: those dealt to the other players, and probably also the discards. Robbi only knows her cards, so her estimations of win percentages are based on her guesses of ranges, reads and history. (I have used "Any two cards", below.) A Viewer knows both players' cards, but not those folded or discarded, and their estimations are accurate over the long term, (ignoring others' "unseen" cards).
In this hand:
Robbi Garrett
HCL's stats
PF 42% 58%
F 30% 70%
T 47% 53%
Observations: Robbi should have folded PF? Should not have called F. Should have called T?
Robbi Garrett
Robbi's stats
PF 46% 54%
F 39% 61%
T 28% 72%
Observations: Should have folded PF? Should not have called F. Should not have called T.
Robbi Garrett
Viewer's stats
PF 53% 47%
F 36% 64%
T 55% 45%
Observations: PF call ok. Should not have called F? T call ok.
It's impossible for anyone else to know the actual possibilities, per HCL. Robbi only knows her own cards, with guesses about others'. The Viewer doesn't know what cards are already out of the deck in the subject hand.
If Robbi was receiving signals from someone using HCL's feed, knowing the exact percentages, it would be insane for them to tell her to call the All In and lose 53% of the time. Even someone knowing Garrett's cards, but not folded cards, wouldn't have risked a 45% loser; when a far better bet could arise within a few minutes.
If she wasn't cheating, then it can be said Robbi played badly, in conventional terms, relying only on the belief that Garrett was bluffing or semi-bluffing in this hand. She was lucky.
Or was she?
In the words of Basement Jaxx in Red Alert: "On and on."
It's impossible for anyone else to know the actual possibilities, per HCL. Robbi only knows her own cards, with guesses about others'. The Viewer doesn't know what cards are already out of the deck in the subject hand.If Robbi was receiving signals from someone using HCL's feed, knowing the exact percentages, it would be insane for them to tell her to call the All In and lose 5
This is assuming they're going off of just an ahead/behind signal rather than a signal that knows the actual outcome of the hand. Just because HCL investigated themselves and found nothing wrong does not in fact mean that nothing was wrong.
They used an outside firm for the investigation that concluded "The Deckmate shuffling machine is secure and cannot be compromised"
But researchers from IOActive demonstrated the Deckmate 2 IS vulnerable to USB Access, Code Alteration, Data Transmission and an app to re-order the decks sequence.
if the Deckmate was hacked, couldn't they just correct that before the investigators got ahold of it and not have it discovered? It's not like the guys behind HCL have their own money motivations to ensure "no cheating" is the result of the investigation. And it's not like they have the cleanest reps in the industry
For those saying she was wealthy and had no money motivation to cheat. Her LinkedIn profile is here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/robbi-jade-l...In it she lists:Hematology Oncology Consultant for Celgene from May 2011 - Jan 2020. My research shows the pay range is 225-317K per year, and obviously she was there for 9 years so probably wasn't at base
remember when this happened there was a lot of talk of her being married to a very successful lawyer
remember when this happened there was a lot of talk of her being married to a very successful lawyer
This is her husbands website:
He's an attorney, an entrepreneur, an "ai thought leader" and probably can make delicious julienne fries as well. there's nothing this man can't do, except avoid being cucked by his wife for Rip
I don’t think there was ever any hard evidence but the consensus among experienced poker players was that she cheated.
in cards and on her husband! a cheater is a cheater am i right. looking at his instagram he probably dumped the cheater too
The Logic of the OP is that the min-raise with Jack High came because she figured a minraise would get it done in situations where Jack-High was actually good, as signaled to her.
Now, if this is true, this would make her a grade A moron. Obvious play is to blastoff raise if cheating here and I won't insult the thread's intelligence with the explanation why.
And if she wasn't cheating, she is, well a grade A moron.
Glad both camps can agree on that.
Given we've now 'proven' this, and there is no 'evidence' of cheating in any other hand, or even this one really... I just truly don't understand why people think she cheated in this hand. It boggles my mind. I can't even see anyone really independently believing it without Garret's silly tirade on the matter..
1) Robbi is really unintelligent and bad at poker
2) It was a livestream
3) It was with someone else's money... and the person who gave her the money probably won't even be 'that mad' if she loses it
Most of us can't even conceive playing poker under those conditions. The minraise was because she "thought Garret was bluffing", the call was because she "thought Garret was bluffing"... that's really just the end of it.
Why i this simple explanation not more believable than a group of cheaters recruiting a complete numbskull and their only suspicious hand being this super weird all for a massive 51/49 edge?
You don't even have to believe she normally plays close to this bad. Think of all your worst hands you've played when flustered against players who are better than you, and how bad you played those hands. Imagine how bad , her bad hands are.
Why i this simple explanation not more believable than a group of cheaters recruiting a complete numbskull and their only suspicious hand being this super weird all for a massive 51/49 edge?
If the inside guy knows the end result of the hand (i.e. her hand wins at showdown) then the equities don't matter (on the surface at least, if you don't consider the optics of how sus this happening in this specific hand looks to the viewers)
I don’t think there was ever any hard evidence but the consensus among experienced poker players was that she cheated.
No, this is just one of the recurring hallucinations among the conspiracy crowd.
Daniel N, Ivey and Galfond were the biggest names among many who thought cheating was unlikely. You can toss in that guy Eskoboor or however you spell it from 2+2 ranks.
Among people who have actually taken the time to really dig in and make videos about it, Jonathan Little, Bart Hanson and Limon think cheating is unlikely. Limon made a video with Zach Elwood. Between those two guys you have 1) like 40-50 years experience at live mid-high stakes. 2) A guy who actually ran live at the bike and understands how cheating would work. 3) The best known analyst of tells and behavior at the poker table. They went over it for an hour. Very detailed analysis from live poker/gambling experts, not some online player giving his gut reaction.
It's been posted before, but here it is so you can edit out of your memory again: https://www.youtube.com/live/-1hgj5ck2Q8
The finding equilibrium guy was only known as a vlogger, but did high level stuff and also made a couple of very good videos explaining why cheating was unlikely.
TBF, we also have a Polk video claiming that some anonymous guy told him he thought he remembered Bryan moving a filing cabinet a couple weeks prior which might have hypothetically blocked a camera that was on him. We can hallucinate more reasons why they never cheated between then and the j4 hand or why Polk later invited Robbi on his stream.
The RPT stream was buzzed limon repeating the same points over and over: players make stupid calls on live stream, he's seen non-sensical 5-high calls at 5/10, and she was motivated by fame rather than playing good poker. Spent all of 5 seconds engaging with gman's 2p2 post, handwaving it all away by noting RIP getting up from the table was not suspicious therefore nothing was suspicious. If that episode is the best argument for why there wasn't cheating i'm updating to like 90% there was.
Are there links to Ivey or Galfond's takes on it?
wasn't there a control room guy who came out while nobody was at the table and took a precise number of chips off of RJL's stack??
No, this is just one of the recurring hallucinations among the conspiracy crowd.Daniel N, Ivey and Galfond were the biggest names among many who thought cheating was unlikely. You can toss in that guy Eskoboor or however you spell it from 2+2 ranks.Among people who have actually taken the time to really dig in and make videos about it, Jonathan Little, Bart Hanson and Limon th
correct and dougs equivocations were all about clicks. He 0% thought robbi cheated a stream or was capable of cheating a stream. He had her on his stream putting his entire business and all of his partners at risk if so! (we can also safely assume brad and andrew found zero risk from robbi who is just a bog standard influencer fish)
