There was one session I was playing really aggro and a dude called my river all in (very small compared to the pot) with a busted straight draw, just to see what I had.
I think once she min-raised the turn she just went fuck it, I think it’s a bluff, I want to see what it is. And knowing there a still a possibility she’s ahead.
I think Occam’s razor applies here
Why would I give odds? Lol
In the (infinitesimal) chance that it comes out she cheated and the method is exposed, I will bet up to $1K that it was a binary ahead / behind system.
How long do we have to wait before “not cheating” pays out? Oh wait, I think I misunderstood. Got it now and not interested in that.
The part I can’t make any sense of is the alleged super rich person playing $200 tourneys for years then suddenly playing nosebleed cash games and never losing despite clearly being an imbecile.
Never losing? She played two sessions. One she won 4bb. The other she won one buyin.
She played like a handful of sessions? I watched a couple of hours of her sessions prior to this controversy and thought she was pretty decent for a newcomer. She is not an imbecile at all. (I guess she played some hands poorly later in this session? But it seems like she was prolly really flustered and should have perhaps racked up after all that nonsense.)
I’ll take $500 of we can agree on how it will be decided. What will be considered proof?
Literally two sessions. Total.
Well from what I saw (I guess I must have seen parts of both of those sessions if those were the only 2) she was way better than fish like Kirill (sp?) and Keating and actually seemed to have a pretty good feel for where she stood in a lot of spots. I guess there were some bad overcalls and other hands people pointed out, but I didn’t see those hands.
If you haven’t yet, actually go back and watch her talking. She starts by saying she thought Garrett had Ace high (so she called with Jack high lololol), at another point lied about thinking she had a 3 despite a 10 second card check before calling, yet another point says she called because she had blockers (lol), completely all over the map and never once an explanation that makes a lick of sense. Also she’s dating Logan Paul’s manager who put her in the game after a lifetime of micro stakes tourneys but trust her she’s worth $50 million.
Someone who actually has $50 million doesn’t do this
Investigation outcome / admission of guilt with details. Otherwise, it’s a push.
She says she thought he had A high after being put to the grill. Before that (before she called) she actually said “so my 3’s are no good”. Why are we giving weight to one of these statements over the other? She said a lot of confusing stuff. What she should have said is “I don’t need to explain my thinking, just pass the sugar darling.”
Booked. But to be clear the outcome has to be she knew nothing more than ahead or behind for you to win. Any other outcome I win. Correct?
What about no cheating at all?
Push.
Yeah, it would have been great if she just said I thought you had 78 or a shitty flush draw and I was almost positive J high was good
Ok well not much of a sweat here then.
Agreed. I think I am a big favourite in the 1/400 chance there was cheating so I have maybe $5 equity here.
Personally I think the most likely cheating is a one time flashed card by dealer or something similar. To set up a postle like rig that only tells you ahead or behind, to have it evade the security post-postle, and to choose to use it one time and it to be this fucked hand makes zero sense.
If you are using an ahead/behind rig the most basic moron level of self preservation to avoid detection would be to pass up the massive All-in call with no hand, no draw and j high.
You would set something like an ace high with some back door draw as your absolute minimum calling hand using the rig so it looks minimally plausible.