• This site contains affiliate links. If you choose to make a purchase after clicking a link, Poker Chip Forum may receive a commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for your support!

Hustler Casino Live (4 Viewers)

Chipandchair said:
One question: if he steals $15k of chips from her stack where is he cashing it in at??
Click to expand...

Robbi claimed she wasn't pressing charges because the guy already spent the 15k (how she KNOWS that is beyond me) so it would appear he had no issue cashing them. Whether they allowed him to at the casino by himself or if he has other shady people who take a cut to cash them out for him
 
Rieguy said:
It was mentioned and supported a few times in this thread and elsewhere in a serious manner.

All kinds of shit gets unironically thrown at the wall in these controversies. Some people even become the embodiment of the Charlie Kelly meme in trying to rationalize their takes, sometimes successfully. It's actively happening with the connection between this ex-employee and Robbi. It will be interesting to see what their internal investigation finds next, because this is absolutely not the end of it.
Click to expand...
I was serious when I threw the possibility out there, and yesterday's development makes that closer to the truth than fiction. However, as shady as I think Vertucci and Feldman are, I don't think they'd stoop to the level of orchestrating something like this from top to bottom for some YouTube clout and fame. Still, there's something that's gnawing at me that makes me think I wouldn't put it past them.
 
JMC9389 said:
I was serious when I threw the possibility out there, and yesterday's development makes that closer to the truth than fiction. However, as shady as I think Vertucci and Feldman are, I don't think they'd stoop to the level of orchestrating something like this from top to bottom for some YouTube clout and fame. Still, there's something that's gnawing at me that makes me think I wouldn't put it past them.
Click to expand...
I don’t like this kind of talk, but it got me thinking. Where did this friggen Persson guy come from? Seems like he’s everywhere now, and did anybody ever hear of him before that heads-up match with Hellmuth?
The simple explanation is that he’s riding the wave of fame created by that match. But if we’re getting cynical and conspiratorial, it might seem a little coincidental that this huge douche with the biggest mouth ever, who nobody’s heard of, just happens to get paired with Hellmuth in an exclusive, high profile heads-up match.
 
upNdown said:
I don’t like this kind of talk, but it got me thinking. Where did this friggen Persson guy come from? Seems like he’s everywhere now, and did anybody ever hear of him before that heads-up match with Hellmuth?
The simple explanation is that he’s riding the wave of fame created by that match. But if we’re getting cynical and conspiratorial, it might seem a little coincidental that this huge douche with the biggest mouth ever, who nobody’s heard of, just happens to get paired with Hellmuth in an exclusive, high profile heads-up match.
Click to expand...
He owns casinos in the north east. I’ve heard him say he was a 5/10 pro for many years before getting out of public games. If true, experience as a 5/10 pro plus a certain level of wealth would explain his approach to the game a bit. He’d get ranges and live tells and be looking to exploit people who discount his game.
 
JMC9389 said:
I was serious when I threw the possibility out there, and yesterday's development makes that closer to the truth than fiction. However, as shady as I think Vertucci and Feldman are, I don't think they'd stoop to the level of orchestrating something like this from top to bottom for some YouTube clout and fame. Still, there's something that's gnawing at me that makes me think I wouldn't put it past them.
Click to expand...

Ugh. This has bothered me for a while. Namely… why the hell are they allowed to play in the games they run?

I’m not at the point of saying these guys are in on it, but I’ve had some pretty big cringe moments at the antics that are allowed on these streams over the years.
 
There remains exactly one piece of evidence that Robbi cheated, and that is "no one would ever make that call without knowing the opponent's exact hand".

Everything else is theorizing, not evidence. It's telling stories about what's possible and then finding facts which fit the theory. But those same facts fit many theories, including theories in which there was no cheating. If a fact can support two opposing stories then it's not evidence for either of them.

Even the latest discovery - that one of the staffers who knew all the cards is dishonest - is not evidence that Robbi cheated. It makes certain theories (such as "She got tipped off by someone on staff") more possible (that theory couldn't be true if a staffer weren't dishonest) but it doesn't make those theories more likely.

By all means, theorize. Come up with stories. Look for facts that fit the stories. That's how investigations work, whether scientific or criminal. But never get confused between facts which fit your stories, and facts which necessarily imply your stories. The former are ideas which might lead to possible scenarios; the latter are evidence which can lead to conclusions. "Nice theory, now show that it must be true, not that it might be true."
 
Highli99 said:
He owns casinos in the north east. I’ve heard him say he was a 5/10 pro for many years before getting out of public games. If true, experience as a 5/10 pro plus a certain level of wealth would explain his approach to the game a bit. He’d get ranges and live tells and be looking to exploit people who discount his game.
Click to expand...
Oh I know who he is and that he’s got some history playing 5/10. I’m just saying that before that match he was pretty much unknown and after it he was a poker celebrity. And it’s probably coincidence. Or him taking advantage of the stage he got with Hellmuth. Or maybe him (or some producers) intentionally put him into that tournsment, against Hellmuth, to create a celebrity.
I means, as long as we’re talking conspiracies.
 
I was dead set against the cheating theory because there wasn’t a plausible explanation initially other then hacks on multiple systems and a willingness to cheat to get the worst of it on the turn.

Still not convinced, but half of the equation is potential solved with Krish’s feedback on how production works and this Bryan fella swiping 15K. I feel like HCL sorta knows what happened now and is leaking the Bryan info to setup a bigger reveal down there road.

I think I’m 50/50 on this. If they can figure out either a) how Robbi got the info to call if her mic pack isn’t visible or b) confirm her mic pack was visible or c) confirm that production may have thought she had Jc6c - I’d start to lean heavily towards she cheated.

That said, even if she did, it’s still not a good look for Garrett at all. The money should’ve gone into escrow pending an investigation. Clawing it back and keeping it was really poor form. Donating it made things look slightly better but doesn’t absolve him from taking a bad line there.

I do start to wonder how HCL is considering the investigation with an eye towards keeping Garrett on the show (eg finding some corruption here gives him a path back on).
 
bergs said:
That said, even if she did, it’s still not a good look for Garrett at all. The money should’ve gone into escrow pending an investigation. Clawing it back and keeping it was really poor form. Donating it made things look slightly better but doesn’t absolve him from taking a bad line there.
Click to expand...

Clawing it back? You wouldn't be speculating to what happened based on heresy and without a lack of evidence, would you?

There's two sides to every story, and then there's the truth. We don't have proof one way or another what exactly was said or done in that money being given back to Garret.

But we do have Garret stating that the reason he accepted the money back was that in previous cheating instances the people who got cheated wound up holding the bag and never seeing their money, and he felt that was likely what would happen if he didn't take the money back.

His donation is showing that it wasn't about the money for him, he's doing fine financially. It was about the principal of the matter. It was probably a poor attempt to garner some support since so many people were hating on the guy. I don't disagree that him putting the money in escrow while the situation was investigated would've been a much better look.
 
CrazyEddie said:
There remains exactly one piece of evidence that Robbi cheated, and that is "no one would ever make that call without knowing the opponent's exact hand".

Everything else is theorizing, not evidence. It's telling stories about what's possible and then finding facts which fit the theory. But those same facts fit many theories, including theories in which there was no cheating. If a fact can support two opposing stories then it's not evidence for either of them.

Even the latest discovery - that one of the staffers who knew all the cards is dishonest - is not evidence that Robbi cheated. It makes certain theories (such as "She got tipped off by someone on staff") more possible (that theory couldn't be true if a staffer weren't dishonest) but it doesn't make those theories more likely.

By all means, theorize. Come up with stories. Look for facts that fit the stories. That's how investigations work, whether scientific or criminal. But never get confused between facts which fit your stories, and facts which necessarily imply your stories. The former are ideas which might lead to possible scenarios; the latter are evidence which can lead to conclusions. "Nice theory, now show that it must be true, not that it might be true."
Click to expand...
Well written post.

People are patting themselves on the back because from the very beginning they had a strong opinion (one way or the other).

They're quick to jump on every bit of speculative innuendo coming out as affirmation of their unfounded opinion.

But this is really just a reflection of our society in this moment. Facts are no longer really important for decision making. Just go with your gut and worry about facts later.
 
All the people who still think Robbi is innocent be like

barbrady.gif
 
Anthony Martino said:
Clawing it back? You wouldn't be speculating to what happened based on heresy and without a lack of evidence, would you?

There's two sides to every story, and then there's the truth. We don't have proof one way or another what exactly was said or done in that money being given back to Garret.

But we do have Garret stating that the reason he accepted the money back was that in previous cheating instances the people who got cheated wound up holding the bag and never seeing their money, and he felt that was likely what would happen if he didn't take the money back.

His donation is showing that it wasn't about the money for him, he's doing fine financially. It was about the principal of the matter. It was probably a poor attempt to garner some support since so many people were hating on the guy. I don't disagree that him putting the money in escrow while the situation was investigated would've been a much better look.
Click to expand...
Whether he took an offer or asked for it the perception is that he clawed it back.

Not sure why he asks for Robbi in the hall unless he has an objective other than “I think you’re cheating”. Him asking for or angling for the money is a logical goal for the outside conversation.

Either way, it should’ve gone into escrow. Way better approach and better visual all around.
 
Anthony Martino said:
Robbi claimed she wasn't pressing charges because the guy already spent the 15k (how she KNOWS that is beyond me) so it would appear he had no issue cashing them. Whether they allowed him to at the casino by himself or if he has other shady people who take a cut to cash them out for him
Click to expand...

So, if I steal $15,000 from someone and quickly spend it, I can’t be charged with theft? Good to know :bigbucks:
 
TheDuke said:
Well written post.

People are patting themselves on the back because from the very beginning they had a strong opinion (one way or the other).

They're quick to jump on every bit of speculative innuendo coming out as affirmation of their unfounded opinion.

But this is really just a reflection of our society in this moment. Facts are no longer really important for decision making. Just go with your gut and worry about facts later.
Click to expand...

That one piece of evidence is also a theory. A very believable theory.

Criminal trials often do not present more than circumstantial evidence, plus theories which bind them together as a coherent narrative of what happened. The question is not whether any one piece of evidence is 100% proof, but what a reasonable person would conclude based on the totality of all facts and plausible interpretations.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

Santa123
Hustler Casino Live brings back clay
Replies
6
Views
307
bananapeel
B
M
New Cards on Hustler Casino Live?
Replies
5
Views
593
RocAFella1
RocAFella1
Santa123
New Chips @ Hustler Casino Live
2
Replies
39
Views
6K
LeLe
LeLe
C
Hustler Casino Live Chips.
Replies
13
Views
1K
seyff45
seyff45
L
Hustler Casino new chips
Replies
8
Views
600
Santa123
Santa123
Back
Top Bottom