6 ms·

The cheating claims for the poker example are absolutely stupid. Only people who know very little about poker would claim that. What is obvious is that the lad

The cheating claims for the poker example are absolutely stupid. Only people who know very little about poker would claim that. What is obvious is that the lady made a mistake. If someone were helping her cheat, there’s no way they would have told her to call, especially after the flop. She was behind the entire hand after the flop, and even after the turn she still had a disadvantage. She shouldn’t have called it at all and there was no reason to even think about it. If she were cheating her accomplice would have told her under no uncertain terms to fold. Who would advise anyone to make a 6 figure bet on a coin flip???There’s no circumstance under which her actions make sense except in the case of her making a mistake. She made a mistake and got lucky, that’s all there is.

draw_down 4y ago
gregw134 4y ago
> The cheating claims for the poker example are absolutely stupid. Only people who know very little about poker would claim that. Doug Polk is suspicious of cheating here, and Tom Dwan called this one of the most suspicious plays he's ever seen.
csa 4y ago
> The cheating claims for the poker example are absolutely stupid. Only people who know very little about poker would claim that. A not small number of well-known pros don’t think it’s so simple: https://preview.redd.it/e4x1y513wer91.png?width=1409&format=png&auto=webp&s=dc359c6d71546ac7c4d10933387f2a377cab32fd https://preview.redd.it/e4x1y513wer91.png?width=1409&format=... Most of the pros think it was just a new player who did something stupid that she didn’t understand, having seen that at the table many times before. I don’t think that’s an unreasonable take. That said, she has several other issues that need to be addressed beyond making that specific hero call.
- mod 4y ago
  > Most of the pros think [she didn't cheat] I don't have that impression. I follow about 100 pros on SM.
  - csa 4y ago
    That may be true. I’m just basing it on what I’ve read on Twitter. I have not read a random sample. There are plenty pros (as shown in the linked list) who are not convinced more than 50% that she cheated. Given the circumstances, I doubt there will be a smoking gun unless someone confesses. As such, I think it’s really tough to fully rule out either side of the discussion.
    - mod 4y ago
      I agree it's way up for debate, there's no consensus among pros, or anyone besides people with political agendas. I also doubt this will resolve, it's going to be the next Postle scenario.
      - bombcar 4y ago
        Postle at least had acres and acres of evidence. One bad call on one hand is nothing compared.
        csa 4y ago
        > Postle at least had acres and acres of evidence. One bad call on one hand is nothing compared. It’s way more than one hand. 1. She used a time bank chip to tank a turn bet by Garrett when she had J8 (no pair no draw — same J-high situation) against Garrett’s made full house. In that case, there was an over or two on the board, so it was even more ridiculous to 2. Her changing story is not a good look. It could be because she was lying. It could be because she had no idea what she was doing and was just making up poorly-constructed possible explanations on the fly. 3. If you’ve ever played poker at a competitive level, her reaction when she makes an absolutely super thin hero call and is good and just sort of smiles is different than every other hero call I’ve ever seen. It’s super suspicious. To be fair, she could have been on something (Xanax?), so that’s a possible explanation. 4. She played really tight the other two sessions she played on HCL. Why was she all of a sudden including super thin value calls for this session? There are many good possible explanations, but someone deviating this much from their normal strategy and be right both times is suspicious. 5. Her undisclosed backer who was also at the table mouthed something to her during the session. What was that about? I was super suspicious, but could just be something simple. I mean, a simple explanation is that she is a relatively wealthy person who was on a heavy dose of Xanax, and she was tired of getting bullied by Garrett (a top notch pro). She made a stand at a relatively random time, and she happened to be right. If that was her story, no one would bat an eye. But she’s going with various whackadoodle stories that don’t really make much sense unless you start engaging in some random theorycrafting like she’s a narcissist who can’t admit that she had no idea what she was doing (possible, but who are we to say?).
baobabKoodaa 4y ago
> The cheating claims for the poker example are absolutely stupid. Only people who know very little about poker would claim that. Well, I can offer a counter-example that proves you wrong. I played professionally for a decade (so I'm not a person who "knows very little about poker") and I am claiming that she's cheating. I would be very confident making this claim based on her turn call alone, but when you add in the contradictory follow up explanations and the fact that she RETURNED THE CHIPS, I'd rate her cheating at >99% probability.
- deanCommie 4y ago
  Daniel Negreanu [0] has the opposite read from you: "The fact that she gave him the money back isn’t an admission of guilt, but likely the contrary. A money hungry scumbag cheat isn’t likely to give money back in that spot. Felt like she didn’t want to deal with conflict and can afford it." [0] https://twitter.com/RealKidPoker/status/1575726681117011968 https://twitter.com/RealKidPoker/status/1575726681117011968?...
- alasdair_ 4y ago
  Some people are easier to bully than others. I paid for college partly through poker. Early in my career I used speech play to tilt a guy and get him to call when he shouldn’t, winning a big pot. The guy was furious and cornered me afterwords, yelling “we don’t do that here. You better give me my fucking money back!” And so on. I was 19 and not used to defending myself against angry adult men and I gave him the money back, despite definitely not having to. I wouldn’t do that now, but if you have a loud angry man yelling at you, it’s definitely possible to just want it to stop. (And I’m six two and was heavy into martial arts at the time.)
- fzeroracer 4y ago
  Why does her returning the chips matter? Are you not familiar with how chronic cheaters operate in pretty much any other field? From fighting games to Donkey Kong to fishing to whatever else you can think of, people that chronically cheat often have the mentality to double down and/or muddy the fields to try and disprove that they're cheating. Because the best counter to any sort of cheating accusation is to never fold. This is even when they're explicitly countered with hard evidence of the cheat.
friedman23 4y ago
> Only people who know very little about poker would claim that At least half of the best professionals in the world believe she cheated. This is why poker is a great game. People like you that presume to understand poker very well and are so confident in what they believe. Please keep playing. And btw, I'm 50/50 on her cheating or not. It would be extremely simple to cheat in this environment.
- mod 4y ago
  As an ex-professional player and a software engineer, gotta agree here. There have actually been proofs-of-concept for reading cards off these RFID tables. It's not hard to believe someone improved on that technology and put it all together with a buzzer in her pocket saying "you have the best hand." Agree that these levels of bold, decisive claims are signals about what makes poker a great game. Nobody has near enough evidence to be sure. I think the play is incredibly suspect, and I think I've met many players at the tables stupid enough to make it. It's not common, but they exist and keep playing. What is exceptionally stupid are the guys saying "it would be a mistake to call here if you were cheating" while still believing "she called with J4 because she's really bad." Their logic requires her to make a (massive) mistake with J4, but assumes she wouldn't make a much more nuanced mistake doing an EV calculation. I personally think if there was cheating involved, it was a binary signal ("you have the best hand") and she's too dumb to understand the implications of calling with J4 in the spot.
  - BeefWellington 4y ago
    > It's not hard to believe someone improved on that technology and put it all together with a buzzer in her pocket saying "you have the best hand." What bears repeating here is that this would not have helped in her situation. She at no point prior to making a seemingly outrageous call had the best hand. That's what makes it so unconvincing that she would be cheating to me. The odds were completely against her and cheating would have required knowing what card/cards were going to come up on the river.
    - mod 4y ago

draw_down 4y ago

gregw134 4y ago

> The cheating claims for the poker example are absolutely stupid. Only people who know very little about poker would claim that. Doug Polk is suspicious of cheating here, and Tom Dwan called this one of the most suspicious plays he's ever seen.

csa 4y ago

> The cheating claims for the poker example are absolutely stupid. Only people who know very little about poker would claim that. A not small number of well-known pros don’t think it’s so simple: https://preview.redd.it/e4x1y513wer91.png?width=1409&format=png&auto=webp&s=dc359c6d71546ac7c4d10933387f2a377cab32fd https://preview.redd.it/e4x1y513wer91.png?width=1409&format=... Most of the pros think it was just a new player who did something stupid that she didn’t understand, having seen that at the table many times before. I don’t think that’s an unreasonable take. That said, she has several other issues that need to be addressed beyond making that specific hero call.

mod 4y ago
> Most of the pros think [she didn't cheat] I don't have that impression. I follow about 100 pros on SM.
- csa 4y ago
  That may be true. I’m just basing it on what I’ve read on Twitter. I have not read a random sample. There are plenty pros (as shown in the linked list) who are not convinced more than 50% that she cheated. Given the circumstances, I doubt there will be a smoking gun unless someone confesses. As such, I think it’s really tough to fully rule out either side of the discussion.
  - mod 4y ago
    I agree it's way up for debate, there's no consensus among pros, or anyone besides people with political agendas. I also doubt this will resolve, it's going to be the next Postle scenario.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      Postle at least had acres and acres of evidence. One bad call on one hand is nothing compared.
      - csa 4y ago
        > Postle at least had acres and acres of evidence. One bad call on one hand is nothing compared. It’s way more than one hand. 1. She used a time bank chip to tank a turn bet by Garrett when she had J8 (no pair no draw — same J-high situation) against Garrett’s made full house. In that case, there was an over or two on the board, so it was even more ridiculous to 2. Her changing story is not a good look. It could be because she was lying. It could be because she had no idea what she was doing and was just making up poorly-constructed possible explanations on the fly. 3. If you’ve ever played poker at a competitive level, her reaction when she makes an absolutely super thin hero call and is good and just sort of smiles is different than every other hero call I’ve ever seen. It’s super suspicious. To be fair, she could have been on something (Xanax?), so that’s a possible explanation. 4. She played really tight the other two sessions she played on HCL. Why was she all of a sudden including super thin value calls for this session? There are many good possible explanations, but someone deviating this much from their normal strategy and be right both times is suspicious. 5. Her undisclosed backer who was also at the table mouthed something to her during the session. What was that about? I was super suspicious, but could just be something simple. I mean, a simple explanation is that she is a relatively wealthy person who was on a heavy dose of Xanax, and she was tired of getting bullied by Garrett (a top notch pro). She made a stand at a relatively random time, and she happened to be right. If that was her story, no one would bat an eye. But she’s going with various whackadoodle stories that don’t really make much sense unless you start engaging in some random theorycrafting like she’s a narcissist who can’t admit that she had no idea what she was doing (possible, but who are we to say?).

baobabKoodaa 4y ago

> The cheating claims for the poker example are absolutely stupid. Only people who know very little about poker would claim that. Well, I can offer a counter-example that proves you wrong. I played professionally for a decade (so I'm not a person who "knows very little about poker") and I am claiming that she's cheating. I would be very confident making this claim based on her turn call alone, but when you add in the contradictory follow up explanations and the fact that she RETURNED THE CHIPS, I'd rate her cheating at >99% probability.

deanCommie 4y ago
Daniel Negreanu [0] has the opposite read from you: "The fact that she gave him the money back isn’t an admission of guilt, but likely the contrary. A money hungry scumbag cheat isn’t likely to give money back in that spot. Felt like she didn’t want to deal with conflict and can afford it." [0] https://twitter.com/RealKidPoker/status/1575726681117011968 https://twitter.com/RealKidPoker/status/1575726681117011968?...
alasdair_ 4y ago
Some people are easier to bully than others. I paid for college partly through poker. Early in my career I used speech play to tilt a guy and get him to call when he shouldn’t, winning a big pot. The guy was furious and cornered me afterwords, yelling “we don’t do that here. You better give me my fucking money back!” And so on. I was 19 and not used to defending myself against angry adult men and I gave him the money back, despite definitely not having to. I wouldn’t do that now, but if you have a loud angry man yelling at you, it’s definitely possible to just want it to stop. (And I’m six two and was heavy into martial arts at the time.)
fzeroracer 4y ago
Why does her returning the chips matter? Are you not familiar with how chronic cheaters operate in pretty much any other field? From fighting games to Donkey Kong to fishing to whatever else you can think of, people that chronically cheat often have the mentality to double down and/or muddy the fields to try and disprove that they're cheating. Because the best counter to any sort of cheating accusation is to never fold. This is even when they're explicitly countered with hard evidence of the cheat.

friedman23 4y ago

> Only people who know very little about poker would claim that At least half of the best professionals in the world believe she cheated. This is why poker is a great game. People like you that presume to understand poker very well and are so confident in what they believe. Please keep playing. And btw, I'm 50/50 on her cheating or not. It would be extremely simple to cheat in this environment.

mod 4y ago
As an ex-professional player and a software engineer, gotta agree here. There have actually been proofs-of-concept for reading cards off these RFID tables. It's not hard to believe someone improved on that technology and put it all together with a buzzer in her pocket saying "you have the best hand." Agree that these levels of bold, decisive claims are signals about what makes poker a great game. Nobody has near enough evidence to be sure. I think the play is incredibly suspect, and I think I've met many players at the tables stupid enough to make it. It's not common, but they exist and keep playing. What is exceptionally stupid are the guys saying "it would be a mistake to call here if you were cheating" while still believing "she called with J4 because she's really bad." Their logic requires her to make a (massive) mistake with J4, but assumes she wouldn't make a much more nuanced mistake doing an EV calculation. I personally think if there was cheating involved, it was a binary signal ("you have the best hand") and she's too dumb to understand the implications of calling with J4 in the spot.
- BeefWellington 4y ago
  > It's not hard to believe someone improved on that technology and put it all together with a buzzer in her pocket saying "you have the best hand." What bears repeating here is that this would not have helped in her situation. She at no point prior to making a seemingly outrageous call had the best hand. That's what makes it so unconvincing that she would be cheating to me. The odds were completely against her and cheating would have required knowing what card/cards were going to come up on the river.
  - mod 4y ago