3 ms·
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
by 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 agoI'm not sure what you mean. She had the best hand at every point, before and after the outrageous call. The odds were not against her, they were in her favor.