Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 10-08-2019, 10:35 AM
Stanislaus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London
Posts: 3,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
Also, yes I accept that the stats make the case for cheating pretty soundly. The null hypothesis can reasonably be rejected here. I guess my quibble was with the "caught" terminology. That implies a scooby-doo style ripping off of the overcoat to reveal the cheating mechanism beneath or a spy camera that catches a dodgy deal. That doesn't seem to have happened in this case.....yet.......and that makes it all the more fascinating I guess.
I don't how mysterious the mechanism is:

1) The opponents' cards had RFID chips that sent their values to a computer in real time.
2) This information was supposedly safeguarded and only released after 30mins delay.
3) Postel was looking at his phone during play.
4) When players had their cards outwith the area where the RFID details would be picked up, Postel asked for them to be put back in it.
5) The system for safeguarding the RFID data had some measure of involvement by humans.

It's pretty clear from the above that Postel was receiving live RFID data on his phone showing him what the cards were. There's some technical/system Qs to be answered about how that info was being sent to his phone, and who the insider was who helped him but these are just details.

It's like if Postel were to disappear from home only to be sighted 12 hours later in Tahiti. We might not know if he flew private or commercial, but "He got on a plane" is a solution that covers the salient details of his movements. Similarly, "A confederate helped him access the RFID data" is a good enough answer as to how he was cheating. Like most magic tricks, it will seem a lot less impressive once you can see all the moving parts.
  #52  
Old 10-08-2019, 11:07 AM
notfrommensa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 11,940
Doug Polk highlighted one hand where Postle had 7-2 offsuit, where Postle raised preflop and his opponent called who had Pocket Jacks,

The Flop was ACE-ACE-QUEEN, opponent check and Postle makes a bet and his opponent Called

The Turn was a blank, Opponent Checked, Postle bet, Opponent Called

The River was another blank, Opponent Checked, Postle bet, Opponent Called

Postle turned over his cards and immediately raises his hands in exasperation before his opponent turns over his cards. Its pretty apparent that Postle knew that his opponent was calling his bluff light because he was reacting before he could read the cards of his opponent.

That is one of Postle trademark moves, bluffing into hands that really aren't that good. Having 9 high while his opponents have a mediocre hand. And doing it consistently
__________________
notfrommensa is clearly awesome - oslo ostragoth
  #53  
Old 10-08-2019, 11:22 AM
RickJay is online now
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonAsh View Post
No card room or casino I've ever been in - literally none - would let you sit at the table while involved in a hand, on your phone entering data.
I literally watched people doing this this past weekend. Right in front of me. Ontario sucks.

I agree no one's got time to punch in a shitload of data, but texting confederates their hands can be done very swiftly.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #54  
Old 10-08-2019, 11:33 AM
Peter Morris's Avatar
Peter Morris is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The far canal
Posts: 12,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
Yes, thanks GrayGhost, I now know more but at the same time I've been introduced to even more areas of ignorance.

Okay, I'll give you a simplified explanation.

In the game of Texas Hold-'em player are initially dealt two card - their hole or pocket. They make initial bets based on the strength of those two cards. Later, five more cards are dealt in the middle of the table - the board. Players must make a 5 card poker hand from their pocket and the board.

AK (Ace and King) is a strong starting hand and worth betting money on. To win, it would usually require an Ace or King on the board making a high pair with a big kicker. There are six cards or "outs" left in the deck that would make this happen. (Three Kings and three Aces)

54 (Five and Four) is a weak hand that should usually be folded. It has the same six "outs" to make a pair, but it would be a low pair that could be beaten by a higher pair.

In this specific case, the maths is different. Two players hold AK and one KQ. There is only one King and two Aces left in the deck. Their normal 6 outs have been reduced to 3. Meanwhile, Postle still has his six outs remaining. His chance of winning has just gone up a lot.

He also has a higher chance of making a straight than his opponents. 54 has four ways to make a straight, while AK has only got one way. And one of the queens is gone, so it's even less likely.

So he makes a bet in a situation where most other people would fold. That is suspicious.

It isn't rare for someone to make bad play and luck into a win. The above story could have happened by chance. But if he keeps doing it, it becomes more and more suspicious.
  #55  
Old 10-08-2019, 02:01 PM
Novelty Bobble is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 9,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Morris View Post
Okay, I'll give you a simplified explanation..
Thanks Peter, that makes more sense, less colourful but more sense.
__________________
I'm saving this space for the first good insult hurled my way
  #56  
Old 10-08-2019, 04:19 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,111
So, regardless of whether you consider Postle himself to be "caught", there's probably still at least one other cheater who hasn't been caught by any standard. Who was it who was leaking the information to him? I'm sure a lot of people would really like to know that.
  #57  
Old 10-08-2019, 05:03 PM
DragonAsh is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,497
Basically everything Ghost said. I've made speculative calls against multiple opponents making big bets, but there are usually specific factors: One hand a few months ago, at a 2/5 game, one player raised to $25, a few players called, a short-stack (player with not much money behind, in this case I think about $240) moved all in, and the player on the button also moved all-in for about $900.
Based on previous play, I knew the short-stack could be moving in with any pocket pair or suited broadway cards, anything from AK/AQ to KQ/KJ or even QJ/QT. He of course could also have QQ, KK or AA, but there are a lot more combos of smaller pocket pairs and suited broadways. If we include non-suited broadways, his range is even weaker.

The button shove was interesting. It's unlikely anyone after him is going to call the $240, but it's really really unlikely anyone would call the $900 without a really really big hand.
If the button player -had- a big hand, like AA or KK, why shove and guarantee nobody else can call? Why not just call the $240 and hope/pray someone behind him figures they have close to pot odds to call with AK/AQ or a small pocket pair that he's way ahead of?

I had pocket 9s. Obviously if the button has a higher pocket pair than me, I'm in rough shape - but as noted above, I thought that was unlikely, I thought he had a hand like AK/AQ/AJs or something and he was trying to get heads-up against the small stack, given that AK/AQ or even AJ is probably ahead of the likely range for the short stack (suited broadways and pocket pairs).

99 is a small favorite against one player with AKs/AQs/AJs and ATs, about 52%/48%. So if I think the button has a hand like AK/AQ, it's a coin flip. If I think the small stack could have a hand like KQ, pocket 9s do even better, since there are fewer cards that a hand like AK or AQ can hit to beat me.

So I called. Short stack had pocket 7s, button had AK. The short stack hit a 7 to win the main pot, my pocket 9s beat AK to win the side pot. The outcome really is irrelevant - in the short term, anything can happen, winning or losing in one specific pot shouldn't matter (ie, don't be results orientated).
Sometimes you make the correct play and lose, sometimes you make the wrong play and win. Over the long run, however, you come out ahead by making the correct play. In my case, I was happy that my read of the player and the situation was broadly accurate.

As far as 'rejecting the null hypothesis' - yeah. We're talking about something like many, many, many standard deviations above what would be expected
Someone in the 2+2 thread said that the odds were greater than there are atoms in the universe or something.

Without clear-cut video evidence or a confession, could you get a jury of non-poker players to understand how overwhelming the evidence (statistical and otherwise) is?
Probably not, Casey Anthony walked out of the courtroom, FFS...
__________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think hiring a pro to do the job is expensive, wait until you hire an amateur...

Last edited by DragonAsh; 10-08-2019 at 05:04 PM.
  #58  
Old 10-08-2019, 05:11 PM
DragonAsh is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,497
Re my example above: If I had 54o (not suited), there's no way in hell I can call.
I'm a huge underdog against AK/AQ/AJ and the short stack could have a hand like QJ (ie, not sharing cards if the button has AK) or a pocket pair, and those hands have me crushed.
It'd be suicide to call unless I knew specifically both had AK.
__________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think hiring a pro to do the job is expensive, wait until you hire an amateur...

Last edited by DragonAsh; 10-08-2019 at 05:11 PM.
  #59  
Old 10-08-2019, 07:52 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,111
Quote:
Without clear-cut video evidence or a confession, could you get a jury of non-poker players to understand how overwhelming the evidence (statistical and otherwise) is?
Probably not, Casey Anthony walked out of the courtroom, FFS...
You could probably do it with good expert testimony. You'd want to make sure to have a variety of experts, though: professional players (who haven't played against Postle), casino employees, academic mathematicians, etc. The two points you want to hammer home are that:
1: There are many instances where Postle took what should have been a big risk (if he didn't know the hole cards), (but which make sense if he does know them), and
2: There are many instances where Postle declined to take what should have been a small risk (if he didn't know the hole cards), (but which he'd know were bad if he does know them)
Plus maybe a dose of
3: He's more successful than we'd expect the most successful player to be out of (ludicrously large number of players), even though there are only (much smaller number) of actual players in the world.

If it were just 1, then he could argue that he just likes taking risks (and happens to get lucky). If it were just 2, then he could argue that he just likes avoiding unnecessary risk (and happens to get lucky). But both together isn't consistent with any honest risk-taking profile. And 3 shows just how implausible his just happening to get lucky is.

All that said, you still really want to nail the confederate, and any evidence that would be useful against that person would probably also nail Postle himself to the wall.
  #60  
Old 10-08-2019, 09:15 PM
garygnu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Port Orchard, WA
Posts: 11,483
The only thing I'd need is the hand where he folded KK pre-flop.
__________________
o
  #61  
Old 10-09-2019, 02:49 AM
Calavera's Avatar
Calavera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
You could probably do it with good expert testimony. You'd want to make sure to have a variety of experts, though: professional players (who haven't played against Postle), casino employees, academic mathematicians, etc. The two points you want to hammer home are that:
1: There are many instances where Postle took what should have been a big risk (if he didn't know the hole cards), (but which make sense if he does know them), and
2: There are many instances where Postle declined to take what should have been a small risk (if he didn't know the hole cards), (but which he'd know were bad if he does know them)
Plus maybe a dose of
3: He's more successful than we'd expect the most successful player to be out of (ludicrously large number of players), even though there are only (much smaller number) of actual players in the world.

If it were just 1, then he could argue that he just likes taking risks (and happens to get lucky). If it were just 2, then he could argue that he just likes avoiding unnecessary risk (and happens to get lucky). But both together isn't consistent with any honest risk-taking profile. And 3 shows just how implausible his just happening to get lucky is.

All that said, you still really want to nail the confederate, and any evidence that would be useful against that person would probably also nail Postle himself to the wall.
Postle is obviously cheating, but surely the fact that the same person sometimes takes huge risks and sometimes declines small risks is all part of creating an unpredictable persona, something that would be beneficial to any non-cheating player. It's just the pure percentage that shows he's clearly guilty.
  #62  
Old 10-09-2019, 05:02 AM
Dead Cat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 4,281
I think I've told this story on the board before, but I've folded KK in a cash game pre-flop, and I wasn't cheating. Short version is, situation was something like: UTG raises the pot, I look at kings and raise the pot again, player to my left raises the pot again, UTG player goes all in. At this point I folded since I was pretty sure one of them had AA. Lo and behold, the player to my left called and won with AA over UTG's JJ. I got some flack for folding (possibly, in light of this thread, because they thought I might be cheating?) but I don't care - it was a good read and the right move, which is relatively unusual for me!

ETA: the point of this post is in response to garygnu, to show that you can't be sure someone is cheating just because they fold KK pre-flop. I'm not saying Postle isn't cheating - he totally is, based on all the other evidence already posted.

Last edited by Dead Cat; 10-09-2019 at 05:04 AM.
  #63  
Old 10-09-2019, 07:07 AM
Robot Arm is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Medford, MA
Posts: 23,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
You could probably do it with good expert testimony. You'd want to make sure to have a variety of experts, though: professional players (who haven't played against Postle), casino employees, academic mathematicians, etc. The two points you want to hammer home are that:
1: There are many instances where Postle took what should have been a big risk (if he didn't know the hole cards), (but which make sense if he does know them), and
2: There are many instances where Postle declined to take what should have been a small risk (if he didn't know the hole cards), (but which he'd know were bad if he does know them)
Plus maybe a dose of
3: He's more successful than we'd expect the most successful player to be out of (ludicrously large number of players), even though there are only (much smaller number) of actual players in the world.

If it were just 1, then he could argue that he just likes taking risks (and happens to get lucky). If it were just 2, then he could argue that he just likes avoiding unnecessary risk (and happens to get lucky). But both together isn't consistent with any honest risk-taking profile. And 3 shows just how implausible his just happening to get lucky is.

All that said, you still really want to nail the confederate, and any evidence that would be useful against that person would probably also nail Postle himself to the wall.
There could be other things that are suggestive of his guilt. Does he ever play at any other poker room or table? If he chooses one particular place to play, and avoids others, that suggests he has some reason to favor that game. Maybe someone could even set up a game with non-RFID cards and see how well he does. Heck, let him keep playing at the same table, but take away his phone and see what happens; make sure there's no other way he could be receiving information.

He may not have a partner. The chips in the cards are read by a computer. He may have been able to implant some code into that computer that's feeding the information directly to him.
  #64  
Old 10-09-2019, 07:24 AM
Gray Ghost is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead Cat View Post
I think I've told this story on the board before, but I've folded KK in a cash game pre-flop, and I wasn't cheating. Short version is, situation was something like: UTG raises the pot, I look at kings and raise the pot again, player to my left raises the pot again, UTG player goes all in. At this point I folded since I was pretty sure one of them had AA. Lo and behold, the player to my left called and won with AA over UTG's JJ. I got some flack for folding (possibly, in light of this thread, because they thought I might be cheating?) but I don't care - it was a good read and the right move, which is relatively unusual for me!

ETA: the point of this post is in response to garygnu, to show that you can't be sure someone is cheating just because they fold KK pre-flop. I'm not saying Postle isn't cheating - he totally is, based on all the other evidence already posted.
5-bet shoving Jacks seems ambitious. I couldn't fold Kings there though absent an 'Old Man Coffee' or senior Asian lady vibe that all they were playing were KK+. Just too much over valuing AK---even though it is a hand that prefers to see all 5 cards---and general live player spazz for me to think I was truly beaten. I'd think you fold the better hand too many times for folding to be +EV overall. QQ is getting mucked without a question though.

However it's true that lots of live players don't 3 and 4-bet unless they have it. The 5-betting UTG player with Jacks is someone I'd end up paying off later in the session, and preferably avoiding pots s/he's in.

For God's sake, I hope you didn't show.
  #65  
Old 10-09-2019, 07:37 AM
RickJay is online now
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,616
Phil Gordon's old adage that "the fourth bet is aces" isn't always right, but quite often it is. If that bettor is a nit, yeah, I might toss KK.

Anyway. odd behaviour in ONE hand is not evidence of cheating. People can do funny things. Postle acting like this for a year and winning more than God? That's cheating.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #66  
Old 10-09-2019, 08:13 AM
Gray Ghost is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
...If that bettor is a nit, yeah, I might toss KK....
This is something I'm glad to see here, that is absent from so many hand histories or other poker stories: reads on the other players. How many hands have they been playing? Lots of hands pre-Flop (a 'loose' player) Or very few voluntarily (a 'tight' player) Have they been 'passive' (calling the bet, rarely raising)? Or have they been 'aggressive' (whenever they bet, it's usually a raise.)?

Are they a winning/losing player? Do they look like they know what they're doing? How they manipulate their cards, their chips, how they talk to the dealer. Do they exhibit any of the tells that, e.g., Mike Caro wrote about?

Keep in mind labels can change throughout the stages of a hand. Plenty of players are loose pre-Flop, but tighten up once they see three cards. Does the player 'thinly value bet' (press any perceived equity advantage, no matter how small)? Or does the player only get aggressive with a made, strong hand? Are they 'sticky', will they constantly call bets, no matter what you are representing? Or do they constantly see 'monsters under the bed' when a potential for a big hand shows up, like a pair on the board or three to a flush, and are therefore easily bluffed off their hand?

Do they 'semi-bluff'? Which is to say, do they aggressively bet a currently non-made hand, but one with many chances to improve, even if they aren't a current equity favorite vs your range. The classic hand here is overcards (cards of a higher rank than any of the current community cards) combined with a flush draw. 9 cards make the flush, and six cards make a larger pair. One may semi-bluff an open-ended straight draw (8 outs), a naked flush draw (9 outs) and so on.

Then we get to levels of thinking. What do you think their impression of you is? Do you perceive that they think of you as someone likely to bluff them? Do you think they are cognizant of your opening ranges, your calling versus raising ranges, or are they just playing their own cards and maybe thinking about what you think about their hand?

All of these things go into developing a mental picture of what cards an opposing player is likely to have, and what they are likely to do next. Yet are rarely mentioned in typical poker stories.
  #67  
Old 10-09-2019, 09:00 AM
muldoonthief's Avatar
muldoonthief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North of Boston
Posts: 11,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonAsh View Post
Without clear-cut video evidence or a confession, could you get a jury of non-poker players to understand how overwhelming the evidence (statistical and otherwise) is?
Probably not, Casey Anthony walked out of the courtroom, FFS...
FWIW, here's an old GQ thread I started asking a similar question - if someone cheated using ESP, could they be convicted? Sure, ESP doesn't exist, but the underlying question really was - do you have to demonstrate the cheating mechanism, or could you convict solely on the probabilities? The consensus there was that you couldn't convict solely based on the math.
  #68  
Old 10-09-2019, 10:28 AM
RickJay is online now
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost View Post
All of these things go into developing a mental picture of what cards an opposing player is likely to have, and what they are likely to do next. Yet are rarely mentioned in typical poker stories.
While true, the thing is that tell reading is generally not the first place you should go.

Folding KK in the face of three or four bets absolutely is a move where the villain's apparent table image really, really matters. Most of the time, however, the amateur should worry about the math. I love Mike Caro, but I honestly think a lot of folks are too quick to get into a Kremlinology-like internal monologue on how the guy in Seat 4 shuffles his chips and start to lose sight of fundamental poker math.

Poker fundamentals are like fundamentals in any game. The amateur golfer should concern herself with proper technique in driving, iron game, and putting. Flaws in their swing should be detected and eliminated. The amateur should not spend much time at all worrying about whether to use a 7 or 8 iron for an approach shot to the 12th hole at Butthump City Municipal Golf Course during their company's annual scramble tournament. It's not a decision that really matters in the grand scheme of becoming a better golfer, especially if you are not thinking about the fundamentals.

This is especially true of the kinds of poker games we're all playing which, unless someone here is way richer than I'd expect, are not exactly the VIP room at the Bellagio. If I'm playing 1/3 at Casino Niagara, mathematically sound poker is 99% of the battle. At least. Once in a blue moon a "do I fold KK here based on the fact this lady is obviously ultra tight" decision will come up.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #69  
Old 10-09-2019, 10:50 AM
Gray Ghost is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,391
Part of the fundamentals is studying opponents, and getting an idea of what their ranges and tendencies are. Not some Teddy KGB Oreo-type tell, but an attempt to quantify through observation, all of that information we'd normally have on a HUD, if we were still playing online.

Otherwise, we have to default to a 'typical' LLSNL player model for our opponents, and try to exploit those players' average errors through our tight aggressive play. Which, as you point out, usually works well.

If we are playing in a game where we can't identify those average errors, we need to change tables. Given the rake, the only realistic winner at LLSNL if everyone is sound is the house. Which is an answer to the question posed upthread, "Why cheat, if you're a good player?" Because everyone else is often good too, and we're all trying to cull out the one or two bad players from the herd, and feast on their bones.

I was only trying to explain that one of the most important parts of live play is playing next to living, breathing human beings. Observing their traits is a gigantic pool of information, and yet is rarely conveyed in stories/requests for assistance like, "Halp, I have AT, flopped top and bottom, and got checkraised on the Flop. What do I do?" And so on.
  #70  
Old 10-09-2019, 11:20 AM
Dead Cat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 4,281
I may be giving myself too much credit here, but my (hazy - it was a few years ago) memory of the situation was that it was the kind of game with all sorts of crazy bets and banter going on, really good fun to play and potentially quite profitable for those skilled at taking advantage of such (which does not include me - I normally turn up drunk and just play for fun in a rather LAGgy way, which means I usually wind up donating my chips to others at the table). The player who had JJ was a relatively small stack and had been playing pretty tight compared with the rest of the table. But my real read was of the player to my left (who turned up with AA) - hitherto he had been quite talkative and bossing the table, but on this hand he went quiet, and the difference in his demeanour and body language suggested to me he wanted a call. So while I agree that generally folding KK here is a bad move, I maintain that in this particular situation it was a rational move and a good read. Which as I said, is unusual for me, so perhaps more good luck than good judgement.

I didn't show my cards as such because when I folded there were still players to act behind, but I openly admitted I had KK and it was obvious I wasn't lying. Since I generally like to over-represent and bluff/semi-bluff when I can, I think it helped my table image to show that I was potentially really tight, it should have put doubt in people's minds next time I came in light. Generally I'm all about 'pay to see', unless (exceptionally) I think showing one or two cards might be helpful in the long run.

Oh, I almost forgot to mention the best part of the hand - the board ended up with an A, K, and J, so we all made a set in the end (don't remember the order, but do remember that being another reason I was very glad to have folded pre-flop!). Pretty sure I still ended up losing everything by the end of the session.
  #71  
Old 10-09-2019, 12:45 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,111
Y'know, the thought occurs to me... All of the evidence we have amounts to "this guy definitely knew other players' hands". What if, in his defense, he just says "Yes, I knew their hands. I've gotten really, really good at reading facial expressions and so on, and I've studied all of my opponents in depth, and I'm so good at it that I can tell what they're holding just from their tells". Yes, of course he's lying, because nobody's that good at reading tells... but can you prove that he's lying? Even if you can prove it, do you want to? A lot of the mystique behind poker, what keeps people coming to the table, is that you can read other players, and the (mistaken, but still appealing) idea that most of the skill in poker comes from such reading. Vegas doesn't want to dispel that myth.

The only piece of evidence that works against this is the one time that he told an opponent to put their cards in the RFID area. But taken by itself, that one piece of evidence doesn't amount to much.
  #72  
Old 10-09-2019, 12:58 PM
Great Antibob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
What if, in his defense, he just says "Yes, I knew their hands. I've gotten really, really good at reading facial expressions and so on, and I've studied all of my opponents in depth, and I'm so good at it that I can tell what they're holding just from their tells".
That was basically his defense.

And no, it wasn't convincing. It would take ESP level reads to reproduce the same results. And if he's got ESP, there are more profitable ways to employ it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Vegas doesn't want to dispel that myth.
It's not blackjack. The casino gets its cut no matter how well or poorly individual players do. In poker, they take a small cut off each pot or charge players every hour or half-hour for the seat.

They don't want to dispel the idea that skill plays a major role (which is true in poker), but it's in their own best interests that people believe the games are honest.

Last edited by Great Antibob; 10-09-2019 at 12:59 PM.
  #73  
Old 10-09-2019, 01:07 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,111
Yes, Vegas' cut in poker is a straight percentage of the action, or a table fee, or something else predictable like that. But they still get more profit from more people playing. And the mystique of reading tells gets more people playing.
  #74  
Old 10-09-2019, 02:01 PM
RickJay is online now
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Y'know, the thought occurs to me... All of the evidence we have amounts to "this guy definitely knew other players' hands". What if, in his defense, he just says "Yes, I knew their hands. I've gotten really, really good at reading facial expressions and so on, and I've studied all of my opponents in depth, and I'm so good at it that I can tell what they're holding just from their tells". Yes, of course he's lying, because nobody's that good at reading tells... but can you prove that he's lying?
Wat you;re desccribing is a line. Specifically, it's the line between "Sir, you are no longer allowed to gamble here. Please don't come back, or it will be considered tresspassing" and "Sir, you're under arrest."

If a casino is pretty sure you're cheating but cannot prove how, you get the first sentence. If they can prove how, then you get arrested.

As Great Antibob points out, it''s the the casinos' benefit to have the players assume the games are generally on the level. They are not going to make a big fuss over vague accusations of cheating or minor angle shooting; it's why people can look at their phones while they're in a hand in many places that nominally ban it. It isn't worth the players getting into big shit fits with the room manager. But something like this is rather way past that. If a room is this out of control and someone behind the scenes is helping a player cheat, I sure wouldn't play there.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #75  
Old 10-09-2019, 02:15 PM
notfrommensa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 11,940
If Postle has some sort of Super Power like ESP, why is he playing 1-3 No Limit.. there are plenty of huge games available if he had a super power.

From what I understand from the Ingram, Polk and the 2+2 thread, he is only playing on the live feeds, not in a regular spread game. disclaimer, I haven't read all of the threads or listened to the entire library of you tube videos from Polk/Ingram.

And I think one of the benefits of playing on a live stream, the poker game is rake-free. Not sure of the "dealer-tipping".
__________________
notfrommensa is clearly awesome - oslo ostragoth
  #76  
Old 10-09-2019, 02:35 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,111
It's obviously not a live stream. If it were, then all he'd need to do to cheat would be to use his phone to watch the live stream. I imagine that they put enough of a delay on it to prevent that.
  #77  
Old 10-09-2019, 02:55 PM
Xema is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 12,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
And the mystique of reading tells gets more people playing.
But belief that a player is relying on a myth of reading tells to excuse cheating isn't going to have that effect. I seriously doubt anyone now has much interest in playing with Mike Postle at his home casino (near Sacramento, not Las Vegas) - or perhaps anywhere else.

Indeed I think the Stones Gambling Hall is in for some tough times. I note that there is now a lawsuit naming Postle and the casino as defendants.
  #78  
Old 10-09-2019, 03:05 PM
enalzi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 8,183
What's weird to me, is that if his phone was showing him what cards other people had, you would figure at some point someone would look over and see.
  #79  
Old 10-09-2019, 04:29 PM
Patch is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: In my house
Posts: 2,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by enalzi View Post
What's weird to me, is that if his phone was showing him what cards other people had, you would figure at some point someone would look over and see.
If he's getting the RFID info, maybe he's not seeing their cards, but is simply being told to bet or fold by a confederate who's doing the analysis?
  #80  
Old 10-09-2019, 04:36 PM
Great Antibob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
It's obviously not a live stream.
As mentioned earlier in the thread, it's on a 30 minute stream delay.

But the cards each have an RFID tag that broadcasts the hole cards for each player and the information is broadcast to a control room. One of the scenarios posited in this thread is Postle has a confederate feeding this information during play.

When the stream ends, the RFID information is also no longer sent, which is another suspicious factor - Postle stops playing when the livestream ends and doesn't play anything else in the Sacramento area but these streaming events.

Quote:
Originally Posted by enalzi View Post
What's weird to me, is that if his phone was showing him what cards other people had, you would figure at some point someone would look over and see.
Wouldn't be too hard to make it a simple code just in case anybody else is peeking.
  #81  
Old 10-09-2019, 05:03 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,111
The casino that hosted these events already has its reputation destroyed-- To get it back, they need to bust both of the cheaters. Just busting Postle won't do any good, because everyone will assume that the guy who was feeding him inside info will now just find someone else to feed inside info to.
  #82  
Old 10-09-2019, 08:33 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,350
Speculation is on a producer named Taylor Smith.
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...postcount=6114
“Exactly, only when Taylor is in the producer's booth, Mike cheats. If Taylor is doing commentary or being the floorman or something else, Mike magically stops cheating.”

There are a lot of coincidences mentioned in that discussion.
  #83  
Old 10-10-2019, 09:34 PM
scabpicker's Avatar
scabpicker is online now
Yo soy pinche idiota
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Funkytown (Fort Worth)
Posts: 4,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
The casino that hosted these events already has its reputation destroyed-- To get it back, they need to bust both of the cheaters. Just busting Postle won't do any good, because everyone will assume that the guy who was feeding him inside info will now just find someone else to feed inside info to.
Yeah, that was my thought, too. He's the guy with the value, he'll find someone to sell it to, but it looks like that trail is being followed up.
  #84  
Old 10-10-2019, 10:23 PM
Maserschmidt's Avatar
Maserschmidt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 5,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
Yes, thanks GrayGhost, I now know more but at the same time I've been introduced to even more areas of ignorance. 'Twas ever thus. Because it is such an alien world to me I can't intuitively get a feel for the ebb and flow like I can for other sports and pastimes.

Also, yes I accept that the stats make the case for cheating pretty soundly. The null hypothesis can reasonably be rejected here. I guess my quibble was with the "caught" terminology. That implies a scooby-doo style ripping off of the overcoat to reveal the cheating mechanism beneath or a spy camera that catches a dodgy deal. That doesn't seem to have happened in this case.....yet.......and that makes it all the more fascinating I guess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonAsh View Post
He's been caught with evidence that is as strong - if not stronger - than DNA evidence. I think it's unlikely he'll ever see the inside of a prison cell, and I don't know how other players would ever get any money back.

But I think it's quite likely the casino is going to be in for a world of hurt, and Postle and others involved or viewed as likely involved could face civil suits and such. It's about as certain he cheated as you can ever be certain about anything. There's arguably more uncertainty about Trump's 'no quid pro quo claim' re: Ukraine than there is about Postle's cheating. He cheated. We don't know the mechanism just yet - and maybe never will given that the Casino has basically hired its own lawyer to 'investigate'. State regulators would need to really get involved for actual info to come to light, so I'm not holding my breath.

But he's been caught cheating. That much is not in doubt.





No card room or casino I've ever been in - literally none - would let you sit at the table while involved in a hand, on your phone entering data. There's no way you could do that on your phone, entering all the data required to find out your equity in a hand - cards, board, stack sizes, opponents - no way. And even if they did let you sit there with a solver on your phone - it'd be essentially useless since you'd need to enter reasonably accurate hand ranges for your opponent(s) on the fly - and if you're able to do that on the fly anyway, rough math in your head is going to be sufficiently accurate to guide you in any decision. I'd happily let someone sit there with a phone and a solver, because if that's how he thinks he's 'gaining an advantage' I know there's no way he's remotely accurate with his hand ranges and he's probably only playing his two cards.


You can be on your phone when you are not involved in a hand - which is when people make notes about hands for review later and such. Could you 'collude' by telling another player still in the hand what cards you folded pre-flop etc? I suppose. Would that be a minor edge? Sure - but very very minor.

Knowing all the cards - including cards that were folded preflop? That could be / would be very profitable. This hand is amazeballs. Nobody that's ever played any amount of poker can watch this and not conclude with 100% certainty that he's cheating.

It's a 5/5 game but appears to be a $50 straddle in this hand.
Cut-off calls with 96o (lolwut), Button calls with T8s (I might raise here), SB raises to $245 with AK, WSOP champ Moneymaker 3! to $705 also with AK.
UTG folds KQ.
Postle is UTG+1 with 54o. He *calls* $660. SB ships for $2700, Moneymaker ships for $4100, and Postle - with 54o - calls off.

The only reason he can call pre-flop is because he knows that nobody else behind him can call, and because he knows that 54o is a huge favorite against AK/AK when KQ has folded, his opponents share each others' outs, so only three cards for his opponents and he has six outs.

There's simply no way any winning player ever does this. "Oh, he's just a gambler" - if that was the case, there's no way Postle would ever fold KK pre-flop...which he did here, when it just so happened that his opponents had Aces.
He'd never fold to a small raise with AA, on a board with a crap-ton of straight and flush draws, when his opponent just happens to have a straight, like he did here.
OK, that hand is just ridiculous. After watching that, all I can think is hes laughing up his sleeve and showboating...other than drunks at the table, Ive never seen anyone make a play like that.

Is he banned from the tables at this point? And who on earth would play with him?
  #85  
Old 10-10-2019, 11:17 PM
Bootis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patch View Post
If he's getting the RFID info, maybe he's not seeing their cards, but is simply being told to bet or fold by a confederate who's doing the analysis?


He’s probably getting more than that- one particularly damning hand Doug Polk featured recently, was an Omaha hand, but the RFID system didn’t get reset to look for 4 cards, so only registered 2 cards for each player. Postale is visibly agitated throughout the hand, and can be seen numerous times after the flop diligently trying to get the rfid reader to register his 4 cards, no doubt trying to make it realize the game is Omaha and not holdem. He somehow knew only 2 cards were being read for each player. No player would have any reason to be so concerned with their cards being all registered properly after the flop unless they knew there was some sort of read error happening
  #86  
Old 10-12-2019, 10:57 AM
Ponderoid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Off the Deep End
Posts: 701
The casino and the cheater are being sued by a group of players for $10 million.

https://www.pokernews.com/news/2019/...suit-35621.htm

Fair warning, my ad-blocker was working overtime on that site and it still didn't manage to stop everything. That's the most aggressive advertising I've seen on a site in years.
__________________
That's my post. Hope you liked it!
  #87  
Old 10-12-2019, 01:16 PM
John DiFool's Avatar
John DiFool is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 18,262
The thing is, he likely could have made a decent [if still totally dickish] living gambling by ignoring his electronic reads say 50% of the time or so.
  #88  
Old 10-12-2019, 01:48 PM
Ludovic is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by John DiFool View Post
The thing is, he likely could have made a decent [if still totally dickish] living gambling by ignoring his electronic reads say 50% of the time or so.
But the people he collaborated with may not have thought it was worth it for such compartively little payoff. They'd still be looking at the same time in jail/fines and for half the profit. I agree though and I assume that stuff like this goes on all the time in the ftf poker world but obviously not on all hands and at all rooms.
  #89  
Old 10-12-2019, 05:14 PM
DragonAsh is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,497
I've folded KK pre-flop only a few of times ever - like, less than 5 - and it's always been player-specific - mainly players that I know 100% of the time have AA when they pull the ol' 'limp/re-raise shove' move pre-flop, or an OMC type that waits for AA (like, will only limp/call with KK) then will shove his entire stack pre-flop into a pot of $3, then will slam down his Aces like he made this amazing move and cackle at 'that's how you win with AA'.

He had the phone stuck between his legs, which is why he is actually staring at his crotch when he pretends to be looking at his cards.
As was pointed out in the thread, the obvious alternative answer to 'he was cheating' is 'he has a magic penis telling him what to do'.
__________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think hiring a pro to do the job is expensive, wait until you hire an amateur...

Last edited by DragonAsh; 10-12-2019 at 05:15 PM.
  #90  
Old 10-13-2019, 10:16 AM
dba Fred is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,084
My magic penis has only two setting: all in or hold em’, depending on whom I’m playing with and the game.
  #91  
Old 10-13-2019, 03:16 PM
Kobal2's Avatar
Kobal2 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 18,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by dba Fred View Post
My magic penis has only two setting: all in or hold em, depending on whom Im playing with and the game.
Mine keeps folding
  #92  
Old 10-13-2019, 03:46 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobal2 View Post
Mine keeps folding
Erectile dysfunction is a very common problem, with over 3 million reported cases a year in the US alone. It is treatable with medical help. Talk with your physician about options and treatment.

Last edited by Atamasama; 10-13-2019 at 03:47 PM. Reason: Typos
  #93  
Old 10-13-2019, 04:26 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,111
Are you sure he's talking about ED, and not penile origami?
  #94  
Old 10-13-2019, 05:44 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Are you sure he's talking about ED, and not penile origami?
Its a crane!
  #95  
Old 10-15-2019, 11:24 AM
RickJay is online now
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by dba Fred View Post
My magic penis has only two setting: all in or hold em, depending on whom Im playing with and the game.
I'm always playing solitaire.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #96  
Old 10-15-2019, 12:17 PM
enalzi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 8,183
If your Royal Flush lasts for more than 4 hours, please contact a doctor.
  #97  
Old 10-15-2019, 12:38 PM
glee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Obama country
Posts: 15,615
If only this thread were about chess I could tell you about 'mating positions'.
  #98  
Old 10-15-2019, 01:38 PM
Tatterdemalion is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 639
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
I'm always playing solitaire.
You mean Texas Hold'em?
  #99  
Old 10-15-2019, 01:57 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,350
Give it time and you might be playing Old Maid.
  #100  
Old 10-15-2019, 02:43 PM
RickJay is online now
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatterdemalion View Post
You mean Texas Hold'em?
Sure as hell isn't Stud.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:59 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017