This is the part that baffles me. He had a setup that would allow him to print money for a very long time. Instead he makes it blatantly obvious which leads to him getting caught. Criminals aren’t the brightest I guess.
I’m not very good at poker, but I could have kept it going for years for a couple of million a year. All you really have to do is just play solid TAG poker with an inside edge that lets you make really great folds. Nobody would ever be the wiser.
You could even say stuff like ‘the thing I think I do better than anyone else is fold well’. I guess you could also bluff catch like god every few sessions.
My guess is he got caught up in the hype - felt like he had to make ever more insane plays every week to keep the fans entertained.
1 Like
You couldn’t make millions at those stakes. They were mostly playing 1/3
It’s greed. Plus, these guys are professional gamblers, they’d inherently want to take a shot at really big money instead of grinding out $20k a week or whatever risk-free.
Two different takes on WHY:
-
Someone who attempts this is considerably higher probability to have an anti-social personality disorder. Most likely psychopathy and in this particular case narcissism to go with it. Owning people every hand and being called the poker god appears to be catnip to him. He also laughs weirdly when they fold winners.
-
More accomplices are more mouths to feed. I dunno what the current working theory is on how many people were involved, but everyone taking a cut drives the incentive to steal more $ in the short term.
You really couldn’t. There are very few low stakes, regularly streamed games. If you tried this on like, LATB you’d get caught. The main reason he didnt get caught for awhile was because he was playing 1/3 and 2/5 with recs. The 125-300k he won is a gigantic amount for a small sample of those stakes.
Postle case dismissed by judge. There is no justice in this world.
lmfao
1 Like
Saw this thread and thought Mick Jagger got caught juicing.
Denzell.gif
2 Likes
“California’s strong public policy against judicial resolution of civil claims arising out of gambling disputes mandates the dismissal with prejudice of plaintiff’s claims against Postle for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, negligence per se, and unjust enrichment,” Shubb wrote.
lawbro gonna lawbro
outing him too early and not catching him red-handed was probably the biggest mistake. if you trying to use math in court to prove your case you have already lost.
6 Likes
Jesus Christ what a joke. Judges don’t understand high school math.
Its even worse than that. The judge heard the word “gambling” and that was it. He clearly thinks its like adjucating a dispute among drug dealers or something.
The judge is 82 years old, of course.
3 Likes
They didn’t rule on the merits
Not a ruling on the merits. That would have been decided by a jury.
“The court has given us leave to amend, and I anticipate we will avail ourselves of that right,” VerStandig said. “The court’s opinion acknowledges the core viability of certain claims (obviously without making any judgment as to facts), and we look forward to restating those claims in a manner that will comport with the court’s order.”
However, any amended complaint will only be in regards to Stones and Kuraitis. In regards to this case, Postle will walk away scot-free barring an appeal.
The judge probably knows it’s all just random chance and only the house wins.
1 Like
IANAL but it seems like a dude using a licensed gaming operator as a conduit to literally defraud patrons out of least a quarter million dollars, and almost surely using one of the employees of that establishment as an accomplice falls outside of a personal “gambling dispute.” On the other hand, my claim requires you to hold like 3-4 things in memory at once and that’s probably a big ask for an H.W. Bush appointee.
6 Likes
This was always the problem with the case. It’s obvious cheating and not a gambling dispute to those who play poker regularly but problems arise when you have to explain what’s going on to people who have never played poker before.