Poker Cheating Accusation

**franklee168** · 10-01-22, 12:00 AM

Reminds me of how I play.

**playersonly69** · 10-01-22, 06:15 AM

She actually gave him $135,000 back about 30 minutes later in the stream

**JAKEPEAVY21** · 10-01-22, 06:28 AM

Saw the hand last night not sure what to think.

Garrett is 100% she was cheating...no idea who this broad is or what her history in poker?

Interested to read the chatter about this the next few weeks.

**Optional** · 10-01-22, 07:42 AM

Originally posted by JAKEPEAVY21

Saw the hand last night not sure what to think.

Garrett is 100% she was cheating...no idea who this broad is or what her history in poker?

Interested to read the chatter about this the next few weeks.

My first thought about Garrett acting so certain she cheated so quickly, was "That is weird. Garrett must either cheat himself or know about people doing it for certain to act that way".

**JAKEPEAVY21** · 10-01-22, 07:45 AM

Originally posted by Optional

My first thought about Garrett acting so certain she cheated so quickly, was "That is weird. Garrett must either cheat himself or know about people doing it for certain to act that way".

I don't think he cheats but who knows?

She should not have given him his money back from the hand, that seems like admitting guilt but read that she said she didn't want any drama...

**Optional** · 10-01-22, 07:47 AM

Originally posted by JAKEPEAVY21

I don't think he cheats but who knows?

She should not have given him his money back from the hand, that seems like admitting guilt but read that she said she didn't want any drama...

I don't know the guy, so that was purely based on his reaction in that hand.

I agree it was weird to give the money back and thought that played into the theory he knew for sure too. She said he intimidated her into it.

**JAKEPEAVY21** · 10-01-22, 07:56 AM

Originally posted by Optional

I don't know the guy, so that was purely based on his reaction in that hand.

I agree it was weird to give the money back and thought that played into the theory he knew for sure too. She said he intimidated her into it.

He is one of the best cash game players in the world. I think he reacted that way because there is not really a logical reason for someone to call with the hand she had. Even if she thinks he is bluffing, a lot of his bluffs/missed draws beat her(QJ, KJ, KQ, Ax).

Yeah, I read what she said and I'm not sure I believe her. She also said she misread her hand but she checked it numerous times after he went allin on the river. She also said she thought he had Ace high...OK, why call with J high then? That poker stream shows up on my Youtube recommendations from time to time and the first I saw of this woman was a few days ago, Garrett has been on the scene for a decade or 2. Given that, I'll side with Garrett for now. She might have orchestrated this to get her name out there?

She should have told him to kick rocks if she won that hand legitimately.

**Ian** · 10-01-22, 08:21 AM

On 2+2 there was a lot of speculation that Lew misread her hand and thought she had bottom pair when she called, and then was embarrassed to admit it. That's seems plausible, but there's no way to prove it for sure.

Watching the hand the main question I have is whether or not Robbi Lew is transgender. I'd set the line -150 yes +150 no. Which side would you bet?

**Auto Donk** · 10-01-22, 11:23 AM

she wasn't cheating, she's just a dumb kunt......

**Auto Donk** · 10-01-22, 11:27 AM

this fuk garrett's reaction kills me..... the dumb fuk ships em with nothing but a draw then appears pissed when his lowly 78 gets outdone......

fuk him..... that dumbass 3 bet cost his arrogant ass

**captrobey** · 10-01-22, 11:35 AM

I barely play poker other then 3 card but how did she cheat didnt she say to him at one point she had a crap hand . She was using the truth to bluff him right?

**VeggieDog** · 10-01-22, 11:42 AM

So how did she cheat?

**Optional** · 10-01-22, 12:02 PM

Originally posted by VeggieDog

So how did she cheat?

Same as Mike Postle I guess is the suggestion.

Someone intercepts live feed and messages her if she ahead somehow.

**Auto Donk** · 10-01-22, 12:20 PM

**gooner89** · 10-01-22, 12:40 PM

Originally posted by Optional

Same as Mike Postle I guess is the suggestion.

Someone intercepts live feed and messages her if she ahead somehow.

This.
Adding the fact that the accusation is the "equipment" used to get the message to her is similar to that which Magnus Carlsen accused Hans Niemann of using in chess earlier this month.
The accusation isn't without merit. She uses time banks (to possibly allow for delay of information to backstage) then just seconds before calling displays some odd body movement, sits forward, body clenching a bit as if certain equipment was switched on or in use. That's what is being suggested.

Personally, do I think she was cheating? I genuinely don't know. If she hadn't spoke after the hand, I would have just said no but to say she was playing it as a "bluff catcher" and "thought he had A high" that makes no sense to call on 4th with just a J high and no draws.

**JAKEPEAVY21** · 10-01-22, 12:52 PM

Originally posted by Auto Donk

she wasn't cheating, she's just a dumb kunt......

That is possible as well

**Auto Donk** · 10-01-22, 12:53 PM

verifies my 'dumb kunt' comment.....

**blankoblanco** · 10-01-22, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by Auto Donk

she wasn't cheating, she's just a dumb kunt......

Originally posted by JAKEPEAVY21

That is possible as well

I mean, isn't it not only possible but way more likely that she's a fish who made a terrible and dumb play? Then she instinctually tried to defend herself because nobody likes to look dumb, but of course it was an indefensible play, so it made no sense. Doesn't really strike me as strong evidence of cheating. And this is nothing compared to Mike Postle who was straight up staring down at his crotch for a year

I get Garrett's shock and disgust when it happened -- it's clearly not about the money or losing, since he was smiling before cards were turned over when he pretty much knew he'd lost. He was disturbed because he instantly questioned the integrity of the game he was in. It's a really insanely bizarre call, made more bizarre by the fact that he had like the only hand she could be ahead of. I just think he went too far on the cheating insinuations when the more likely explanation is a fishy fluke. She has no idea what she's talking about when it comes to poker, what accomplice would ever trust her to cheat without being caught??

**fried cheese** · 10-01-22, 05:12 PM

i think she probably cheated. its just too improbable to me that she is that bad at poker, that bad at reading her cards after looking at them for a long time (it sounds like she told someone she didnt have a 3 when asked during the hand also), and also just so unconcerned about 135k that she just gives it back so a stranger wont be upset. if her husband is a billionaire i would think she didnt cheat and just didnt care about the money at all. but if hes just got a few million or less then she cheated unless she is actually literally insane.

**blankoblanco** · 10-01-22, 05:29 PM

If we're comparing having some sort of cheating system that probably requires an accomplice that she has the balls to try in a streamed game in the post-Postle era... to... her just being a huge fish making a really, really terrible play that doesn't make sense - do you really think the latter is the improbable one? Because I'm inclined to think the opposite

As far as giving back the money... you can easily argue it doesn't make sense whether she's innocent or guilty. If you're greedy enough to cheat like this, why would you instantly give the money back?? It's a weird thing to do period, but I don't think it points to innocence or guilt. Daniel Negreanu actually argued that it made her more likely to be innocent

**jrgum3** · 10-01-22, 11:18 PM

I watched the hand on twitter and people like Daniel Negreanu said that she wasn't cheating and that she just misread her hand. I don't know what to think other than I don't see how she was cheating and also that it's somewhat embarrassing that she gave him his money back.

**fried cheese** · 10-02-22, 12:06 AM

Originally posted by blankoblanco

If we're comparing having some sort of cheating system that probably requires an accomplice that she has the balls to try in a streamed game in the post-Postle era... to... her just being a huge fish making a really, really terrible play that doesn't make sense - do you really think the latter is the improbable one? Because I'm inclined to think the opposite

As far as giving back the money... you can easily argue it doesn't make sense whether she's innocent or guilty. If you're greedy enough to cheat like this, why would you instantly give the money back?? It's a weird thing to do period, but I don't think it points to innocence or guilt. Daniel Negreanu actually argued that it made her more likely to be innocent

postle was never criminally charged and won the civil suits against him according to his wiki. if i was a cheater then that would be a big green go light for me. i dont think police care very much if you cheat a regular person. so if she is only facing civil suits for cheating, then there arent any damages to sue over if she gives back the money.

plus, thieves try to give stuff back all the time when caught hoping you will just let the matter drop and not go through the hassle of calling the cops and stuff. i used to work at a hotel and a maid got caught stealing. she said that she coincidently happened to own the exact same item that a guest lost earlier. she offered to give them it if they would forgive her theft.

i could see her doing this legitimately if she is incredibly rich and the money meant nothing to her. like i could see someone in sbr playing this badly, getting called a cheater, and then giving the points back just to not have ppl be mad at them on the forum. but even with sbr poker that is extremely unlikely if there are no etiquette violations and would probably only be someone who is really only there to socialize and doesnt care about poker/winning. she seems like she is pretty serious about poker if she is getting coaching.

**Brandt Moat** · 10-02-22, 07:27 AM

Real easy guys. Our Jewish brethren losing coin NEVER goes good for them! It was a very strange hand. She is just a dumb azz that got lucky. She can't even explain as to why. Her saying I got a blocker was giving the info you need to analyze her thought process through the hand. She called the shove with J high. She is a horrible player that got lucky. How did she cheat? If the dealer is not in on it, it wasn't cheating. He very well could have had J, Q for his straight flush draw. Nice

though.

Originally posted by Optional

My first thought about Garrett acting so certain she cheated so quickly, was "That is weird. Garrett must either cheat himself or know about people doing it for certain to act that way".

**thetrinity** · 10-02-22, 07:33 AM

It was a rig for the show. She gave the money back. Publicity has skyrocketed since. Her explanations are so dumb that is the only explanation

**Brandt Moat** · 10-02-22, 07:33 AM

Point: Of course the squeeze box that was offered his money back accepted. No fookn way that a guy with the name Adelstein will refuse $$$. lol Only lesson here to learn is don't bluff an idiot and never offer your Jewish brethren money back.

**Optional** · 10-02-22, 10:38 AM

**blankoblanco** · 10-02-22, 11:38 AM

Originally posted by fried cheese

postle was never criminally charged and won the civil suits against him according to his wiki. if i was a cheater then that would be a big green go light for me. i dont think police care very much if you cheat a regular person. so if she is only facing civil suits for cheating, then there arent any damages to sue over if she gives back the money.

But Postle's also pretty much broke from lawyer fees (from what I've read) and has made himself a total outcast in the poker world with a shit reputation. I mean, do you really think his life is going well since the scandal? I certainly don't. It's not as if he made millions from cheating. It was a few hundred k, that he likely had to split with between 1 and 3 people who helped him cheat. Over the course of more than a year. None of it was worth it for him at all

You also just gave the perfect reasoning for why she wouldn't give the money back if she was cheating. You cheat because you're greedy, care about the money, and know you can get away with it and will never be punished by the law

So why give the money back immediately? Probably because she's a woman who doesn't really care about the money, who's a little bit intimidated, embarrassed about her play, can see everyone turning against her, and wants to avoid confrontation. I can only imagine what it's like to be a woman who looks like her in high stakes poker, and I'm sure she's used to being judged on the way she looks. Making a really dumb play only makes it worse

**JAKEPEAVY21** · 10-02-22, 11:40 AM

Originally posted by Optional

If you look at all the hands he goes over, how she tanks with absolute garbage, the vibrating chair while she is tanking etc...something is not kosher here...

**JAKEPEAVY21** · 10-02-22, 11:44 AM

Originally posted by blankoblanco

But Postle's also pretty much broke from lawyer fees (from what I've read) and has made himself a total outcast in the poker world with a shit reputation. I mean, do you really think his life is going well since the scandal? I certainly don't. It's not as if he made millions from cheating. It was a few hundred k, that he likely had to split with between 1 and 3 people who helped him cheat. Over the course of more than a year. None of it was worth it for him at all

You also just gave the perfect reasoning for why she wouldn't give the money back if she was cheating. You cheat because you're greedy, care about the money, and know you can get away with it and will never be punished by the law

So why give the money back immediately? Probably because she's a woman who doesn't really care about the money, who's a little bit intimidated, embarrassed about her play, can see everyone turning against her, and wants to avoid confrontation. I can only imagine what it's like to be a woman who looks like her in high stakes poker, and I'm sure she's used to being judged on the way she looks. Making a really dumb play only makes it worse

Watch the Doug Polk video that Optional posted.

I can't stand Polk but he brings up some good points on this matter.

**blankoblanco** · 10-02-22, 11:48 AM

Btw I'm totally open to the possibility she cheated, I just think it's less likely than the alternative and I'm waiting for compelling evidence

The vibrating thing Optional posted is interesting, but, like, I can fidget while sitting by bouncing my leg up and down and then also instantly stop it if I choose to. And more than one part of my body will visibly move/shake. The idea that you'd use a device that made your body outwardly vibrate that hard seems a little absurd to me, I guess? Not sure though

**JAKEPEAVY21** · 10-02-22, 11:48 AM

Those that are chiming in that know little to nothing about poker and did not even watch the videos, she did not misread her hand.

Right after the hand she said she "did not have a 3" and the call was "a pure bluff catcher". Then later, she changed her story(she has changed her story numerous times).

Also, why on Earth would she give the money back? The story about being confronted and intimidated in a dark hallway by Garrett seems like a lie. Was Garrett going to beat her up? Gimme a break.

**JAKEPEAVY21** · 10-02-22, 11:51 AM

Originally posted by blankoblanco

Btw I'm totally open to the possibility she cheated, I just think it's less likely than the alternative and I'm waiting for compelling evidence

The vibrating thing Optional posted is interesting, but, like, I can fidget while sitting by bouncing my leg up and down and then also instantly stop it if I choose to. The idea that you'd use a device that made your body outwardly vibrate that hard seems a little absurd to me

Why does she keep changing her story? I'd be much more likely to believe her if she did not keep changing her account of what happened.

Why did she give the money back? I do not believe she was scared for her life while being intimidated in a public place with cameras everywhere.

I'm still open to the possibility that she is new to poker and made a terrible call but my bullshit radar is going off with all the inconsistencies.

**blankoblanco** · 10-02-22, 12:10 PM

Originally posted by JAKEPEAVY21

Why does she keep changing her story? I'd be much more likely to believe her if she did not keep changing her account of what happened.

The innately human desire to not look stupid, would be my guess. She maybe sorta realized at some point that she made the fishiest call ever, but since it somehow worked, she'd rather try to justify it and say she read him like a book. Most people would rather look smart than dumb. And they'll lie in your face if they think it accomplishes that end. That's just how many people are wired. Not to make this political, but Donald Trump comes to mind..

Originally posted by JAKEPEAVY21

Why did she give the money back? I do not believe she was scared for her life while being intimidated in a public place with cameras everywhere.

I mentioned this earlier in the thread, but did you consider asking the question the opposite way? Why would she give the money back if she was cheating? You cheat because you're greedy, and precedent says the law won't punish you for cheating in a poker game. You cheat because you think you can leave that casino with the money with total immunity. You don't cheat to give the money back

I think it's very possible she felt overwhelmed by the response to her terrible call, felt embarrassed, doesn't care that much about the money and wanted to fix it and be able to stay in the game. If she was cheating, she's under too much of a microscope to ever get away with it in the long-term, so giving back the money to stay in the game wouldn't be a good move either

**Optional** · 10-02-22, 01:30 PM

I can relate to the theory of not wanting to look stupid after playing in a way "good" players think is "wrong". And not being able to give a good justification for it on the spot.

Some people still gamble. Go on gut feel. Or get to the point they just won't be bluffed by the same player again.

Look at the original video again and look how heavily Garrett started breathing right after pushing allin. His chest was moving inches with every breathe and he could not control it.

I'd want to call that guy down with A high or better too, if I could afford to.

I also think Polk is trying to back up his pro pal's reaction and claim with his new evidence.

But am starting to suspect something weird is going on with the strange tanking spots, how she cannot justify her play like she really has not thought about why she did it, just reacted to a message. And how she can win in every session there when clearly not a student of the game.