Mike Postle cheating allegations (FAQ in first post)
Surprised nobody has jumped on this to post here...
On Twitter yesterday I believe Mike Postle is being accused of cheating on Livestream. Not much proof (that has been shown) besides a lot of speculative hands. Will link the YouTube videos below.
Thoughts? The lines he takes are absolutely absurd but I don't see how he could be pulling this off.
FAQ:
Q: Who is Mike Postle?
A: Mike Postle is a long time poker pro. He is suspected of having cheated at the video-streamed pokertable at Stones Gambling Hall in Sacramento
Q: How much money has Postle won from other players in these games?
A: Approximation is $250k (source https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showp... )
Q: How statistically deviant is his play?
A: Very. Some calculations put it as more unlikely than 1 to the number of atoms in the universe. See bb/100 vs
Mod edit: Here is a summary of Postle's sessions made by one of the many members who have spent tons of hours reviewing the Stones Live videos.
This document made by Utopia needs to go in the OP and is an absolute thing of beauty - notice the bottom tabs
October 13, 2019 edit:
Post about lawsuit filing.
https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/tra...
Mac VerStandig shared this. Interesting that Kasey Lyn Mills is there; the commentator that many thought was in on it. Surely if she was she wouldn't file against them
mod edit (oct 13, 2019): added another good "summary" post
What if I told you that the exact win rate doesn't matter?
a) The dramatic change in behavior July 18th that coincided with a dramatic change in results.
b) Numerous occasions where Postle prompted other players to rescan their cards as if he knew the live feed had not picked them up.
c) The visible frustration of the PLO hand were the live feed was only picking up two cards.
d) The changing of the cards hand. How did anyone know the cards of mucked unseen hand were wrong in the middle of the han
Spreadsheet with information on Postle sessions:
Following the Beau Rivage event, MGM Resorts International banned Postle from its properties and confiscated the Rewards he’d earned on his players card.
who gives a frick about POSTLE, he just looking at his phone playing his role and the real scammer sending the messages. Its the blonde all day
OHHH totally forgot he did that LOL makes sense
Didn't know Postle went on air a few weeks ago.
Do you think if enough people complained YouTube would demonetize that video?
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
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.
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 t
Some **** was in on it. He was running the game and helping get players. He was way too enthusiastic for someone who didn’t know what was going on. **** that guy
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 t
If the cheat is undetectable, plenty of people would like to know how.
Comparing Postle to Robbi/Garret shows 0 competence about statistics as a piece of evidence.
Comparing Postle to Robbi/Garret shows 0 competence about statistics as a piece of evidence.
Yes, playing one hand really ****ing badly and it happening to be the best play against the hand they had is unlikely but possible.
It happening dozens of times with no cases where the terrible play was incorrect against the villains hand is close enough to impossible
Yes, playing one hand really ****ing badly and it happening to be the best play against the hand they had is unlikely but possible.
It happening dozens of times with no cases where the terrible play was incorrect against the villains hand is close enough to impossible
Postle case it pretty similar to a famous cheating case from speedrunning, where some streamer posted an insane run in the game Minecraft. The run was determined to have such a low percentage of happening in terms of everything lining up perfectly that it was deemed statistically impossible, even though the layman could say " well he could have just been lucky". There is a mathematical limit to luck where it becomes actually certain that theres no longer statistical variance in play.
There can never be certainty. The mistake is thinking that certainty is needed.
Certainty as an absolute term can never be achieved, true. But statistically we can reach a point where the probability of something happening is so minuscule that we can say "for certain" that it didnt happen.
“Convincingly certain” yes.
“Legally certain” yes.
“Absolutely certain” no.
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 t
He had the actual stream feed in his lap, not texts.
And this is known because it was just as obvious as the fact he was cheating was obvious. He was staring down at his crotch for a good while (way longer than reading a simple text containing 2 hole cards) on several occasions, as you could see after watching so many hours of him doing it. If he had a text to the effect of "Ah 4s" his cheating probably would've gone undetected for much longer. Even a couple idiots like him and his buddy would've quickly figured out that they could just send the texts via airpods and he wouldn't even need to look at his phone. The stream feed in real time was in his lap 100%.
