Do we know this guy has access to the hole cards? Seems like he would but do we actually know that? Genuinely asking.
You know what’s really dumb? Being 99.9% sure someone didn’t cheat when they called with Jack high after rechecking their hand for 10 seconds before calling a $150K bet. You know what else is really dumb? Treating the guy that plays the most live poker ITT like a piece of shit for posting serious, thoughtful comments (even while getting badgered by our resident white knight).
3 Likes
from elsewhere …
Background: I know Bryan very well, as I almost always got to the livestreams early, and he’s one of the guys that helps you mike up.
One of the things they tell you to do is to NOT turn on and off your mike yourself, and to just let the dealer know you want to be muted. Bryan is one of the guys that mutes you when you request this.
When you’re muted, your mike pack moves to a red indicator light, from green.
Her not pressing charges is potentially indicative of him outing her for collusion with him, doesn’t make any sense. Him stealing money from her is potentially indicative of him being angry that she gave the money back, which would have been his cut. If his cut was 10%, $15k seems like an appropriate calculation of that from $135k.
The easiest indicator for that person to make a “call / fold” signal would be to mute / unmute that mic. I haven’t reviewed the hand to see if she looks at her mike pack, but it’s a decent theory.
.
.
.
To clarify, the person muting / unmuting players has real time access to the hole card footage as he is monitoring if people are getting up / sitting down, and also has to turn down certain players if he monitors the conversation isn’t interesting, or is muddying an otherwise interesting exchange.
The mike pack is the ONLY tech that’s on a person at any given time, and the muted / unmuted indicator is the perfect mechanism for a yes / no signal.
Again, all circumstantial.
I also know that every poker player knows if their stack is reduced by $15k if they’ve left the table and come back. I know by a margin of $500 at least, at all times. For someone who gave back $135k, it would have been even more evident. I wonder if she didn’t say anything because she figured he took it.
1 Like
Right my point is, someone comes back to their stack, sees how much they have when they go to cash out or whatever, then they’re re-watching the stream and they had $15K more.
Plus, it’s still on a bunch of cameras and he’s still gotta cash out $5K chips somehow. Not like you can just stroll up there and say you won them at the $10 blackjack table.
Wait, the hand was suspicious? Why didn’t someone say that until now. Case closed.
JohnnieyVibes said so linked just upthread. Anyone know who that is?
nInEtY nInE pOiNt nInE pErCeNt sUrE!
This is the first plausible theory I’ve read. Who is that from?
I see nothing weird if what happened was that she declined to press charges so long as he returned the money. She could have thought that being fired was sufficient punishment.
Evidence!
He would never take down his twitter after getting busted stealing $15k on camera… Must have been working with her. Hey anybody remember the guy that was stealing out of dealer tip boxes using chopsticks? Oh yeah, he took down his twitter too I think.
But how hard does the mic pack vibrate?
1 Like
I’m going to guess I’ll find many posts from you saying how dumb Nate was for not getting the 2016 election right. Probability is a bitch hey.
You’re still mocking me? LOL ok buddy.
If it does have a red light that would be a plausible ahead behind signal. Only odd thing is wouldn’t her being muted be obvious on the stream?
No idea how plausible this is but seems like all the pieces are known to be in place for this one at least and it doesn’t require unknown tech to be used.
Regardless of how this plays out from here, and my own thinking is of course changing with these new revelations, (imagine that!), all the incel conspiracy shit with vibrating chairs and what not was still dumb as fuck.
2 Likes
I don’t know how to do the Vince emoticons but pretend this is a bunch of the ones falling backwards
You are still poorly applying evidence so yes.
Fucking lol.
Just admit how full of shit you were when you said 99.9%. Admit you were being a hyperbolic, arrogant asshole so you could mock the Q-Anon freak.
2 Likes