I don’t think they can replace him with Andy as the headliner, but I don’t think he’s irreplaceable. I think a rotating cast could do it, even. Just depends how interested they are. Would Antonio play once a week? Would Maria? Would Negreanu?
Gotta be 15-20 names that would be a big enough draw and entertaining enough at the table.
Seems like it would be easy to analyze views with and without him.
Doesn’t he also play in the bigger and better games though? Can’t really compare the last game with him and Ivey to the Monday Night Brawl.
Someone who really wanted to could run numbers to analyze the effects of stakes, players present, days of the week, commentators and anything else that might be relevant.
spotlight that’s been thrust upon me
Lol
I think there are some subtle nuances in building a successful stream for a wider audience. It needs a balance of interesting characters, some bad/questionable plays and someone likable to punish them.
Garrett is the perfect storm there.
I doubt they can get Negreanu to play on a regular basis.
I would really like to know Garrett’s theory for how she cheated.
Based on the chat I would say he was very popular before the incident, but now half the comments are calling him a Karen and making jokes about getting refunds.
Such a weird move. It’s not like the money is gone — he’s got millions, right? He’s basically just saying “I’m not giving it back?”
If you’re a fan of true crime and are tired of talking about J4, Jennifer Newell is doing Twitter coverage on the murder trial for the alleged killer of Susie Zhao.
https://twitter.com/WriterJen/status/1576891811670331392?s=20&t=XKwPM99GZjVru8ce_FtoBA
Its further proof, for like the 15th time in this ordeal, that poker skills have zero correlation with analyzing human interaction
Gman fanbois vs rational people
I think both sides have rational and irrational segments.
What’s up with all the “Adelstein is gay” stuff I see when I poke around in different parts of the internet where this is being discussed?
I didn’t follow that closely, but she went with the killer to a motel or something, right? Has there been anything said publicly about how they met/knew each other?
I don’t think so. I think all that has been revealed is that they were in contact with each other and cell phone data ties them to the same motel room.
I’m curious, if HCL finishes their investigation and comes out with some statement to the effect of, we have found no evidence of wrongdoing by any party, will you accept that as sufficient proof she didn’t cheat?
For my part, if they came out and said we have concluded she cheated, I think I’d accept that as conclusive so long as they had some substantive evidence beyon the speculation we’ve seen so far.
It depends how transparent it is, and how much we know about the methodology. They’re offering to let Berkey, Doug, and/or Joey go review tapes. If that happens and includes all of the camera feeds and possibly surveillance footage, and those guys say they couldn’t find anything, combined with a third party cyber security investigation turning up nothing, I’d reduce my confidence to 60% or less and say Garrett should return the money even though he was likely cheated.
My position has been that it’s going to be extremely hard to prove definitively. Last night I saw an object that could easily have been used with no inside party that would explain everything that happened, that would not be detected by a cybersecurity investigation, and that could be easily hidden at the table unless they fucked up badly. So for me the hand is strange enough that it’s going to be very hard to take me below 50%, but that doesn’t mean Garrett should keep the money if they can’t prove cheating happened.
I don’t know if there’s a consensus on anything, and I wouldn’t say there’s a working theory that specific. I consider some of his actions to be suspicious, but I haven’t looked at all the hands he played to check on whether the theory has much merit. I would just say a not insignificant amount of people are suspicious of him.