Hustler Casino Live (4 Viewers)

[bergs]

But it certainly increases the liklihood that they'd be the types of players who had no qualms about cheating, it's very relevant

People slowplay in the casino all the time. I don’t like it but it’s extremely prevalent.

I’d be shocked to shit if any of the 4/8 8am weekend O8 octogenarians were cheating.

Your analogy is like saying people that run red lights are more likely to commit multiple homicides.

Why do people want it to be cheating so bad? It’s weird.

 

[Marius L]

A few podcasters have pointed out that Robbi and Rip very blatantly slowplayed each other in an earlier hand.

Both had AQ, and both flopped trip aces. Yet they put basically put little or no more money in.

That is possibly the clearest evidence so far of them colluding, and furthers suspicions of what else they may have been up to. Combined with them not disclosing their backing arrangements, it at minimum suggests they are unethical players.

If two people came separately to your home game, and you found out they were partners afterward, and could recall even one hand where they clearly colluded, would you invite them back?

While I agree this should be notified before the game, I'd very much would want to invite them back if they are significantly worse than me at poker. Not really important that they soft play against each other, imo.

 

[krafticus]

But it certainly increases the liklihood that they'd be the types of players who had no qualms about cheating, it's very relevant

You speed, which means you've broken the law. Does that make you a criminal? (if so, I'd say 95% of drivers in America are criminals)
Have you accidentally seen someone's cards at the table (either during a home dealt game, or at a casino) because the dealer or player wasn't careful .. and you didn't say something (we've all done it before). If you don't say something, that's unethical. Does that make you a cheater? Are there levels of cheating that matter, or is a cheater a cheater?

Being unethical is not mutually exclusive to being a cheater.

For the record, I'm not taking either side. I'm more of a "show me all of the facts and evidence" before I take my side.

At the end of the day, We'll probably never find out. If Hustler did find some illegal activity, they probably won't publish it to save face and keep the game going. That stream and that game is a huge draw. Any potential to lose clients over this would be beyond damaging to the business and their name. I doubt they will allow any 3rd party detectives or otherwise in as well. If anything, the only thing that would happen is that Robbi won't be invited back. At the same time, if she's that huge of a fish, maybe they all want her back??

 

[Frogzilla]

This hand is the equivalent of catching Worm’s hanger and seeing Mike was rolled up. It’s insane. And she’s sus af after.

The difference is that cheating scenario is also insane. It’s basically impossible.

Which one of those ~0% probabilities do you like more?

 

[MatB]

Ahh the good old false dichotomy.

 

[Frogzilla]

Ahh the good old false dichotomy.

You’re with me on team “lose on purpose”?!?!

 

[MatB]

You’re with me on team “lose on purpose”?!?!

You started to make sense when you said Garret was cheating.

I like that

 

[MatB]

My tin foil hat reasoning for this ?

Only a cheat that had been cheated could possibly have the response of HOW DID I JUST GET CHEATED WHEN I WAS THE ONE CHEATING !!

It was the equivalent of making sure you had dealt yourself 4 kings . ( going all in with 78cc) knowing your opponent MUST fold.
Then they call with Quad aces they dealt themselves.
Only a cheat that got cheated would have a meltdown

 

[ekricket]

My tin foil hat reasoning for this ?

Only a cheat that had been cheated could possibly have the response of HOW DID I JUST GET CHEATED WHEN I WAS THE ONE CHEATING !!

Being unethical is not mutually exclusive to being a cheater.

Accusing someone of cheating without any proof is unethical. Not saying you are accusing anyone, but G is.

 

[Frogzilla]

You started to make sense when you said Garret was cheating.

I like that

That wasn’t me, or I didn’t mean to. I’m good at math and shit at writing

 

[MatB]

Accusing someone of cheating without any proof is unethical. Not saying you are accusing anyone, but G is.

I preface my argument with a tin foil hat because Froggy and I shop at the same flat earth merch store.

But the argument for Garret cheating is as strong as his argument for Robbi cheating

 

[MatB]

To summarize.

No one cheated (probably) And man baby Garret needs to give the money back

Edit:added probably

 

[justsomedude]

Looks like a lot of renewed focus is being put on her jewelry. Initially it was on her necklaces, but now it’s shifting to her rings.

Just stumbled upon these Blinq smart rings…

 

[Darson]

Looks like a lot of renewed focus is being put on her jewelry. Initially it was on her necklaces, but now it’s shifting to her rings.

Just stumbled upon these Blinq smart rings…

View attachment 998969

There are youtube videos of amateur sleuths showing her water bottle, chair and leg all vibrating. Now we have a ring. Really no one has a clue how this was done so it's pure speculation. Grabbing at straws...

 

[justsomedude]

There are youtube videos of amateur sleuths showing her water bottle, chair and leg all vibrating. Now we have a ring. Really no one has a clue how this was done so it's pure speculation. Grabbing at straws...

OHhhh shiiiit. This is just speculation??? Dammit. I thought I was in the /onlyfactsandscience thread.

Thanks for the clarification. My bad.

 

[Darson]

OHhhh shiiiit. This is just speculation??? Dammit. I thought I was in the /onlyfactsandscience thread.

Thanks for the clarification. My bad.

Dude, I'm just embellishing your post. If you want to take it personally then do so, but that was not the intention.

 

[Anthony Martino]

CHECKMATE NONBELIEVERS!

 

[justsomedude]

Dude, I'm just embellishing your post. If you want to take it personally then do so, but that was not the intention.

Nothing personal here. Just having a little fun with you. No need to be triggered bro.

 

[JScott]

How many of you have been following the chess cheating scandal from last week with Magnus Carlsen doing effectively the exact same thing as GMan? If you don't know about it yet, you should definitely look it up. Cliff Notes are that Magnus Carlsen (the best chess player in the world and the highest-rated player of all time) just withdrew from a chess tournament about a week ago after losing to another grandmaster named Hans Niemann. The chess world completely erupted trying to figure out what the hell happened, and afterward Magnus took to Twitter to accuse him of cheating and says he will not play with Niemann again. The evidence? Nothing, nada, zilch. No proof. He just said he knows it because it's not possible for Niemann to have played that well without cheating. Other grandmasters have chimed in as well, many of them saying they were also suspicious of his play.

I'm curious about your thoughts on Magnus calling him out here, particularly for those of you who think GMan is way out of line for accusing Robbi of cheating in a very similar manner.

Seeing his point of view and agreeing with certain things he did aren't mutually exclusive to thinking he ruined his reputation. Unless it's absolutely proven that Robbi cheated, which is extremely unlikely even if she did cheat, GMan has been found guilty in the court of public opinion.

It'll take proof to clear his name, not hers, which is how it should be really... burden of proof and all that jazz.

 

[TheDuke]

A few podcasters have pointed out that Robbi and Rip very blatantly slowplayed each other in an earlier hand.

Both had AQ, and both flopped trip aces. Yet they put basically put little or no more money in.

That is possibly the clearest evidence so far of them colluding, and furthers suspicions of what else they may have been up to. Combined with them not disclosing their backing arrangements, it at minimum suggests they are unethical players.

If two people came separately to your home game, and you found out they were partners afterward, and could recall even one hand where they clearly colluded, would you invite them back?

Yeah, Berkey noted that hand on his video. That's not collusion though. That's softplay. It's still bullshit but it does happen. It's not at the level of cheating. Nor is it evidence that information is being relayed from one another.

 

[ninedeuce]

A few podcasters have pointed out that Robbi and Rip very blatantly slowplayed each other in an earlier hand.

Both had AQ, and both flopped trip aces. Yet they put basically put little or no more money in.

That is possibly the clearest evidence so far of them colluding, and furthers suspicions of what else they may have been up to. Combined with them not disclosing their backing arrangements, it at minimum suggests they are unethical players.

This is one of the reasons that that Robbi and Rip are suspect, not to mention that Rip is professionally affiliated with Jake Paul, who's a confirmed piece of garbage. Like folks have said, being unethical/colluding does not mean you cheat, but it increases the likelihood.

Of course, very few folks playing casino poker are what I'd call moral beacons, so I wouldn't go too crazy with it. And even relatives/friends will slowplay in that setting. I remember a hand at the $2/$5 NLHE game at Lucky Chances where two guys checked down a hand three streets and the IP player had a set on the flop with a dry runout. Someone complained, and the IP player just smiled and said, "Hey, he's my cousin!"

My first impression was likely cheating, after hearing Robbi change her story multiple times it increased to high likelihood of cheating, but after rewatching the hand some more, I'm now leaning towards more likely her being nutty and cheating not likely.

It appears Garrett doubled down on the cheating accusations post stream. He's not infallible, though, and actually based on his poker expertise, more susceptible to certain cognitive biases than average players like myself, not to mention lay people. Also have to factor in the recency bias of the Magnus accusations in chess and the Postle situation a couple of years ago. Someone that's played a bunch recently with Garrett even had his own cheating accusations discussed on this board in the past year or so

For Garrett's sake and Robbi's, I'm hoping that if nothing turns up he makes a big, public, heartfelt apology and returns the money. Actually, I think he should do as some have suggested and put the money in escrow right now.

That said, I have a lot of respect for Garrett and his intuition. I've watched him play in a lot of streams, and this episode is very uncharacteristic of his reaction to losing big hands, even to obnoxious players. He was there (with a lot more inputs than I have watching an edited stream), and it wouldn't shock me if he turns out to be right. And if he is, I hope all the folks calling for his head give the man his props.

 

[bergs]

This hand is the equivalent of catching Worm’s hanger and seeing Mike was rolled up. It’s insane. And she’s sus af after.

The difference is that cheating scenario is also insane. It’s basically impossible.

Which one of those ~0% probabilities do you like more?

No it’s not equivalent.

You know Worm cheated. You saw the hanger.

Pray tell, how exactly did Robbi supposedly pull this off? You don’t know. Nobody even knows if she did cheat, nevermind how.

IMO it’s just logically unlikely this was cheating but you keep leaping to conclusions.

 

[RainmanTrail]

A few podcasters have pointed out that Robbi and Rip very blatantly slowplayed each other in an earlier hand.

Both had AQ, and both flopped trip aces. Yet they put basically put little or no more money in.

That is possibly the clearest evidence so far of them colluding, and furthers suspicions of what else they may have been up to. Combined with them not disclosing their backing arrangements, it at minimum suggests they are unethical players.

If two people came separately to your home game, and you found out they were partners afterward, and could recall even one hand where they clearly colluded, would you invite them back?

They're definitely colluding. The question is to what extent? If you don't think they had some long talks prior to going on stream about how they would handle certain situations, then you are naive. This is also why I keep pointing to Robbi's play as being much more likely to be her either having caught a glimpse of Gman's hole cards or Rip having caught a glimpse and signaling to something to Robbi about it. I think this is much more likely than her having some sort of device that is tapped into the RFID reader, though both are possible obviously. But nobody seems to want to discuss this angle. Everyone seems to only want to entertain a Mike Postle like operation for some reason. But most cheating in poker doesn't look like that. Most cheating is from players colluding.

 

[ekricket]

They're definitely colluding. The question is to what extent? If you don't think they had some long talks prior to going on stream about how they would handle certain situations, then you are naive. This is also why I keep pointing to Robbi's play as being much more likely to be her either having caught a glimpse of Gman's hole cards or Rip having caught a glimpse and signaling to something to Robbi about it. I think this is much more likely than her having some sort of device that is tapped into the RFID reader, though both are possible obviously. But nobody seems to want to discuss this angle. Everyone seems to only want to entertain a Mike Postle like operation for some reason. But most cheating in poker doesn't look like that. Most cheating is from players colluding.

K. Now we have to review all the previous footage to see if Gman has ever slow played any of his friends. Want to bet about any amount you want we’ll find at least once?

 

[umbkcshah]

They're definitely colluding. The question is to what extent? If you don't think they had some long talks prior to going on stream about how they would handle certain situations, then you are naive. This is also why I keep pointing to Robbi's play as being much more likely to be her either having caught a glimpse of Gman's hole cards or Rip having caught a glimpse and signaling to something to Robbi about it. I think this is much more likely than her having some sort of device that is tapped into the RFID reader, though both are possible obviously. But nobody seems to want to discuss this angle. Everyone seems to only want to entertain a Mike Postle like operation for some reason. But most cheating in poker doesn't look like that. Most cheating is from players colluding.

Agree that the RFID is fairly unlikely, but Rip or Robbi rubber necking his cards his just as unlikely imo. Inside man if you really believe the cheating aspect is the most probable imo.

Why? Robbi is in the 2, Garrett is the 9 with Loudmouth in the 8 and Rip in the 7. Garrett has stacks next to the reader which further cut down the angles for Loudmoth and Rip. Garrett would have to be incredibly lazy with his peeks for either to catch a glimpse. Players are pretty willing to call dealer flashes, rare that only one notices.

 

[RainmanTrail]

K. Now we have to review all the previous footage to see if Gman has ever slow played any of his friends. Want to bet about any amount you want we’ll find at least once?

What does this have to do with anything whatsoever?

Although I must admit. It does sound fun to send you on a wild goose chase! So I say, "yes! Prove it! Go find us that footage and be the hero we all didn't know we needed! You can do it!"

 

[RainmanTrail]

Agree that the RFID is fairly unlikely, but Rip or Robbi rubber necking his cards his just as unlikely imo. Inside man if you really believe the cheating aspect is the most probable imo.

Why? Robbi is in the 2, Garrett is the 9 with Loudmouth in the 8 and Rip in the 7. Garrett has stacks next to the reader which further cut down the angles for Loudmoth and Rip. Garrett would have to be incredibly lazy with his peeks for either to catch a glimpse. Players are pretty willing to call dealer flashes, rare that only one notices.

As a former dealer, I can tell you that dealing to the 9 seat is the most problematic when talking about cards being visible on the pitch. It's just an awkward angle and many dealers adjust their pitch to make it. The 2 seat is in the best position possible on the table to see it if the bottoms of the cards do get exposed. It is not lost on me that Garrett is in seat 9 and Robbi is in seat 2. I wish we had better footage of the dealer's pitch. That could be pretty helpful. I don't think most players realize how common this is though. It just happened on my final table the other night in Omaha. Even very experienced dealers do it without realizing it.

 

[CrazyEddie]

That is possibly the clearest evidence so far of them colluding, and furthers suspicions of what else they may have been up to. Combined with them not disclosing their backing arrangements, it at minimum suggests they are unethical players.

Not disclosing backing arrangements is unethical. Softplaying is collusion and is straight-up cheating.

... but it's an entirely different kind of cheating than Garrett thinks happened against him. That the two were colluding makes the accusation that she somehow exploited knowledge of Garrett's hole cards more credible - it shows that she's more likely to be the sort of person who would do so if it were possible - but it doesn't add any evidence that it actually happened.

There still is absolutely nothing more to this than "Garrett thinks that nobody would ever make that call without knowing his cards."

 

[RainmanTrail]

I'm actually surprised that more people aren't discussing the possibility of her catching a glimpse of his cards from the dealer's pitch. She very easily could have seen just enough of his cards to know that he was dealt two small black cards at the very least, and possibly even two small clubs. She'd only need about a 5 degree angle or so to pick up on that. It's not like the cards would have to completely flash. When I used to train dealers back in the day, I was constantly getting on them about this. It's way more common than most players realize. Maybe they're just not paying attention, but it doesn't take much to at least be able to tell if someone was just dealt a face card or if they were just dealt a small red card or a medium black card even if you don't know exactly what it was.

If Robbi knew that Garrett had two small black cards in this hand, that would be enough info for her to make the call. Perhaps this is actually why she was so hung up on the 3h turn card. Maybe she was trying to figure out if Garrett actually had the 3c, knowing he had two smallish clubs or two smallish black cards?

 

[MatB]

The mental gymnastics people are doing to get where they can justify calling her a cheat is astonishing