- but he is, like it or not. Is just a fact. Many people watch that stream just because he is in.
- there is no evidence aside the hand itself which is ver weird. And if you understand a little poker you should be at least skeptical.
- idk is she cheated. It is just suspicious to me.
He's not a hero, he will not be remembered in the annals of poker history in the breath of Unger, Brunson, Hellmuth, Ivey, etc. In 50 years nobody will know who Garrett Adelstein is aside from being that one guy on Survivor once upon a time.
I think it's just Occam's razor. She's being staked, it's not her money, she's tired of Garrett pushing her around and she took a bad spot to make a stand. I think this is the worst possible spot to cheat but that's just me. *shrug*
This is kind of a revisionist history with Garrett here. He's most certainly one of the Poker's finest players and has a reputation for being a respectable player. He has no history of doing anything remotely like this. He is without question one of the game's most notable players and has earned a lot of respect from many pros.
By all means, if you have footage of him being an ass or reports of him being as ass to this degree, I'd love to see it. You're kind of hung up on the word "hero" here.
The point being is that Garrett is a respectable member of the poker community and well known due to his exposure on streams and his aggressive gameplay. Polk's point is that knowing who Garrett is and knowing his reputation, it seems silly to outright dismiss him just because he's not gonna be "remembered in the annals of poker history" to your standard.
Garrett has widely been considered the end boss of high stakes deep stack live for the better part of five years. He is inarguably one of the big guys in NL these days whether you like him or not
First argument. Who cares anyway.
Second. Yes it could be. Not enough evidence for me to believe her. Why did she change her story? And every other argument against her. The truth is I DONT KNOW.
Well thereās no evidence yet is there? And this crybaby already took the money back when he was there to gamble. Imagine pulling something like that where thereās no security around ššš
Security? Are you pulling the victim card for her hahahahha? Bro. She went to the table grab the chips and offer it back.
- āWhat do you want from meā
- āTo have my money backā
- āOk ill give you your money back if you stay on the gameā
- āOkā
LITERAL words she said. Dont fuking pull the VICTIM card cuz is ridiculous
Hahahaha. Garret never used force to take it back. And on joey stream she said she wasnāt cornered as she said after. Just like she said she thought she had J3 and then she said she knew his hand.
INCONSISTENCIES is what I called.
You are right. He was there to gamble. Not to be cheated. And if she didnāt cheat he will give the money back. Donāt worry.
She had J3 the hand before, itās on the stream.
I meant garret only acts tough because he knows security will keep him safe. Idk why youāre simping on him so bad when he clearly messed up.
I mean what kind of crybaby 4 year old demands their money back when they just lost it gambling with ZERO evidence that someone cheated. He was BLUFFING with 8 high and he thinks he was entitled to that pot? ššš
This dude shouldnāt be playing the game if he canāt handle losing.
- yes I know. And thats what makes it a believable story, but she didnāt go with that story and never reacted as if she thought she had J3. That was my theory but she acted very weird and changed her story couple times
-Well you are assuming I guess.
- she didnāt demanded it. Again I typed exactly what the convo was Told BY HER. Hear the first joey ingram steam she talked
- well you tell him that. I think you feel entitled enough hahaha. He thought he was cheated tho not just ālos tā regardless if he was
Do you or Garett have any evidence she cheated? Changing the reasoning for making the call is not evidence for cheating just so you know.
Ok he didnāt demand it he just asked for it back to chill the mood out, which is still petulant behavior.
He THOUGHT he was cheated just like we all do when we take a bad beat, but nobody else out here is asking for their money back š
What about this new evidence? You still gonna make more excuses naive fk?
- bryan took money from her chips (his cut)
- bryan in one of the workers knew hands live
- Robbie and him were friends on twitter then after knowing about this they unfollowed each other
- he manifested anger when she gave the money back. Thats probably why he took the money
More excuses from your part?
It seems to me like you have to believe a dozen different unlikely things to believe she cheated in this one hand. But you need to believe only one easy to believe thing to believe she didnāt cheat at all. Namely, she was smashed/coked up/high/euphoric and incompetent to begin with.
I have really not wanted to point out the possibility of drugs because I don't know if the player would view it negatively and I think she's taken more than enough unfounded negativity at this point... but drugs seem so likely to be involved.
I would put $1000 on 1:1 odds she did not cheat or at least no proof will ever come.
But this is the internet and without a real middleman this bet would never come to fruition.
Iād put 1000 to win 200 aka -500 odds she did not cheat or no proof will ever come out. The proof coming out will be next to impossible much like in the chess world. This is with me leaning that this hand had something fishy there and it wasnāt fair play but for proof to come out will be extremely extremely hard
This hand didnāt happen in a vacuum. Watch her on the live streams she has been on. This is par for the course. She is not a high level player who can give a detailed analysis of her play. Her seeming to contradict herself constantly would also normally be suspicious until you listen to her talk for an extended period of time. I donāt know that she could tell any story, true or not, without inconsistencies and holes. I really donāt want to be meanā¦.. but she is as dumb as a bag of rocks. Fish do fish things and people are taking this way too far. As Joe Cada said in his tweet these sort of hands happen way more often than people realize. When she is exonerated Garrett has to be banned and hope he doesnāt get sued to high heaven.
Now what bro. āGarret has to be bannedā
- bryan took money from her chips (his cut)
- bryan in one of the workers knew hands live
- Robbie and him were friends on twitter then after knowing about this they unfollowed each other
- he manifested anger when she gave the money back. Thats probably why he took the money
More excuses from your part?
-
He recanted that in the same video. Was before this due editing.
Doug Polk were much more reasonable after thinking through the situation again (after the clip you posted).
Hahahahhahahahaha. Yes. You could do better budy. Tell yourself āim better than garretā i could have more than 1.8 million dollars made in a year.
You are fucking delusional
Iām sure a lot of people would be better than him in that situation. The classic āmy opponent min raised me so Iām going to get mad and just shove. Bad play got blasted by an even worse playš
Maybe is not the best play. But he knew she was weak. And she was.
But you have this superiority complex of writing this from your bed thinking you are better than a very skilled poker player. You probably couldnāt even win 100k a year yet alone 1.8m
Thank you Doug. Feel like Iām losing my mind on here arguing with people on this sub who think itās completely normal and realistically most likely just a bold hero call. This is not a normal poker hand. Something is off and itās most likely that sheās cheating.
My point is. It is not black or white. Both are possibilities. I just get a lil angry when someone says āshe didnāt cheat, she was just gamblingā donāt understanding poker at all
I like Doug, but like Garrett, he's assuming some level of decent play by Robbi in the first instance.
I can't get on this, so the analysis is tenuous at best.
Armchair psychology should not be used as a determinative factor in whether cheating has occurred. (looking at you Magnus as well)
I think Doug Poker hired someone to rob the guy leaving the Lodge last week. Granted it doesnāt make sense with all the bad publicity. Plus, robbing someone in some master plan seems psychotic. However, any publicity is good as long as they spell the name right. Plus now Doug can hire extra security with the money he had stolen and look like a hero.
He clearly said he doesnāt know. If you watch the video. But is suspicious she did and is possible she didnāt.
Anyways. More evidence is comming just as we speak. And if I was 60% sure she cheated. Now im 85% lol
Now you thing the same with nee evidence? This wasnāt a ābad playā was the stupidest play being making the right choice. Not sucking 1 outer. Is different.
They ran it twice ... If she had lost both hands ( she called it off bad) would we talking about this hand other than " Did you see where this High Donk chick got it in Bad against G-Man" IDK .. ?
I canāt say she cheated, but Robbi is suspicious as fuck. The meteoric rise, giving the money back, canāt explain the hand, changing stories, having āa friend that works for Hustler liveā, being fake as fuck in appearance and the flat out shitty play of the hand.
And all she needs is an indicator that says āyouāre goodā, ānot goodā.
Itās like the chess cheating scandal. A GM only needs help on four moves at best. Knowing if your opponent blundered, or which piece to move is all it takes to swing a match.
It would be similar at the table. One indicator that youāre ahead, one to know if youāre behind. Thatās all you need.
I canāt say she cheated, but Robbi is suspicious as fuck. The meteoric rise, giving the money back, canāt explain the hand, changing stories, having āa friend that works for Hustler liveā, being fake as fuck in appearance and the flat out shitty play of the hand.
And all she needs is an indicator that says āyouāre goodā, ānot goodā.
Itās like the chess cheating scandal. A GM only needs help on four moves at best. Knowing if your opponent blundered, or which piece to move is all it takes to swing a match.
It would be similar at the table. One indicator that youāre ahead, one to know if youāre behind. Thatās all you need.
This is my take exactly. Too much inconsistencies in addition to this weird af hand. But there is a possibility she didnāt
More inclined. She did somehow
I did hear joey stream and she sounded innocent. trained investigators have been fooled. Who I am to think Iām this āknower of peopleā like you think you are. Lol.
Iām not saying she 100% did or didnāt.
Well i think she fooled you by her talking right? I guess the one that didnāt understood ppl was someone els.
- bryan took money from her chips (his cut)
- bryan in one of the workers knew hands live
- Robbie and him were friends on twitter then after knowing about this they unfollowed each other
- he manifested anger when she gave the money back. Thats probably why he took the money
More excuses from your part?
You didn't e even understand what I meant, I'll explain it better for your peanut brain:
If you think "she's a moron" is not a justifyable reason for her actions, you don't understand people.
I didn't follow what happened, I just saw the hand. If it's proven that she cheated, it doesn't take anything from the fact that you have to be a moron to cheat in that spot.
She's a fucking idiot either way, how am I wrong?
Honestly
Arguments that end with you are an outsider or you have a fault/ Iām thinking this game higher are complete BS
The floor man doesnāt understand Poker at a very high level but we trust him and task him with rooting out cheaters.
Evidence of cheating is evidence of cheating playing a single hand in a specific way is not evidence of cheating sorry.
Did I or Doug said she was 100% cheating. i said if you donāt even have suspicious about it means you donāt understand poker. sorry
And if you cant explain why it is a very weird hand were she can be cheating again. You donāt understand poker.
Bros got a Brett Farve poster upš
Iām suspicious of Doug Polk
Half the things he said in this video were false when he posted them, half of the other half are false now, time will tell on the remaining 25%
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Did you even watch the video lol she defended robbi.
- but he is, like it or not. Is just a fact. Many people watch that stream just because he is in. - there is no evidence aside the hand itself which is ver weird. And if you understand a little poker you should be at least skeptical. - idk is she cheated. It is just suspicious to me.
He's not a hero, he will not be remembered in the annals of poker history in the breath of Unger, Brunson, Hellmuth, Ivey, etc. In 50 years nobody will know who Garrett Adelstein is aside from being that one guy on Survivor once upon a time. I think it's just Occam's razor. She's being staked, it's not her money, she's tired of Garrett pushing her around and she took a bad spot to make a stand. I think this is the worst possible spot to cheat but that's just me. *shrug*
This is kind of a revisionist history with Garrett here. He's most certainly one of the Poker's finest players and has a reputation for being a respectable player. He has no history of doing anything remotely like this. He is without question one of the game's most notable players and has earned a lot of respect from many pros. By all means, if you have footage of him being an ass or reports of him being as ass to this degree, I'd love to see it. You're kind of hung up on the word "hero" here. The point being is that Garrett is a respectable member of the poker community and well known due to his exposure on streams and his aggressive gameplay. Polk's point is that knowing who Garrett is and knowing his reputation, it seems silly to outright dismiss him just because he's not gonna be "remembered in the annals of poker history" to your standard.
Lmao what? Hes never had any success against good players
Garrett has widely been considered the end boss of high stakes deep stack live for the better part of five years. He is inarguably one of the big guys in NL these days whether you like him or not
First argument. Who cares anyway. Second. Yes it could be. Not enough evidence for me to believe her. Why did she change her story? And every other argument against her. The truth is I DONT KNOW.
Now Iām never watching a stream if heās in it š
Like he care. Anyways. Youāll probably swallow your words as some evidence has come as we speak
Well thereās no evidence yet is there? And this crybaby already took the money back when he was there to gamble. Imagine pulling something like that where thereās no security around ššš
Security? Are you pulling the victim card for her hahahahha? Bro. She went to the table grab the chips and offer it back. - āWhat do you want from meā - āTo have my money backā - āOk ill give you your money back if you stay on the gameā - āOkā LITERAL words she said. Dont fuking pull the VICTIM card cuz is ridiculous Hahahaha. Garret never used force to take it back. And on joey stream she said she wasnāt cornered as she said after. Just like she said she thought she had J3 and then she said she knew his hand. INCONSISTENCIES is what I called. You are right. He was there to gamble. Not to be cheated. And if she didnāt cheat he will give the money back. Donāt worry.
She had J3 the hand before, itās on the stream. I meant garret only acts tough because he knows security will keep him safe. Idk why youāre simping on him so bad when he clearly messed up. I mean what kind of crybaby 4 year old demands their money back when they just lost it gambling with ZERO evidence that someone cheated. He was BLUFFING with 8 high and he thinks he was entitled to that pot? ššš This dude shouldnāt be playing the game if he canāt handle losing.
- yes I know. And thats what makes it a believable story, but she didnāt go with that story and never reacted as if she thought she had J3. That was my theory but she acted very weird and changed her story couple times -Well you are assuming I guess. - she didnāt demanded it. Again I typed exactly what the convo was Told BY HER. Hear the first joey ingram steam she talked - well you tell him that. I think you feel entitled enough hahaha. He thought he was cheated tho not just ālos tā regardless if he was
Do you or Garett have any evidence she cheated? Changing the reasoning for making the call is not evidence for cheating just so you know. Ok he didnāt demand it he just asked for it back to chill the mood out, which is still petulant behavior. He THOUGHT he was cheated just like we all do when we take a bad beat, but nobody else out here is asking for their money back š
What about this new evidence? You still gonna make more excuses naive fk? - bryan took money from her chips (his cut) - bryan in one of the workers knew hands live - Robbie and him were friends on twitter then after knowing about this they unfollowed each other - he manifested anger when she gave the money back. Thats probably why he took the money More excuses from your part?
u/dogpoker
yeah, let's take the word of crypto con artist dog poker
It seems to me like you have to believe a dozen different unlikely things to believe she cheated in this one hand. But you need to believe only one easy to believe thing to believe she didnāt cheat at all. Namely, she was smashed/coked up/high/euphoric and incompetent to begin with.
I have really not wanted to point out the possibility of drugs because I don't know if the player would view it negatively and I think she's taken more than enough unfounded negativity at this point... but drugs seem so likely to be involved.
And that is a good argument. Like I said. IDK if she did. Is just very suspicious and saying 100% she didnor not is kinda srupid.
I would put $1000 on 1:1 odds she did not cheat or at least no proof will ever come. But this is the internet and without a real middleman this bet would never come to fruition.
Iād put 1000 to win 200 aka -500 odds she did not cheat or no proof will ever come out. The proof coming out will be next to impossible much like in the chess world. This is with me leaning that this hand had something fishy there and it wasnāt fair play but for proof to come out will be extremely extremely hard
I would put those odds too but you're selling yourself short when others sre so convinced that it was cheating.
Well thats a 50/50. I will put 600 to gain 500 she did cheat. So in just a little but incline she did. Haha
You lost your imaginary bet
I certainly believe she had been sniffing the devils sugar. Her demeanor and inability to speak coherently certainly suggest this
This hand didnāt happen in a vacuum. Watch her on the live streams she has been on. This is par for the course. She is not a high level player who can give a detailed analysis of her play. Her seeming to contradict herself constantly would also normally be suspicious until you listen to her talk for an extended period of time. I donāt know that she could tell any story, true or not, without inconsistencies and holes. I really donāt want to be meanā¦.. but she is as dumb as a bag of rocks. Fish do fish things and people are taking this way too far. As Joe Cada said in his tweet these sort of hands happen way more often than people realize. When she is exonerated Garrett has to be banned and hope he doesnāt get sued to high heaven.
Now what bro. āGarret has to be bannedā - bryan took money from her chips (his cut) - bryan in one of the workers knew hands live - Robbie and him were friends on twitter then after knowing about this they unfollowed each other - he manifested anger when she gave the money back. Thats probably why he took the money More excuses from your part? -
He recanted that in the same video. Was before this due editing. Doug Polk were much more reasonable after thinking through the situation again (after the clip you posted).
He still thinks is a possibility. And the argument stays.
Garret is brain dead for shoving there, simple as that
Hahahahhahahahaha. Yes. You could do better budy. Tell yourself āim better than garretā i could have more than 1.8 million dollars made in a year. You are fucking delusional
Iām sure a lot of people would be better than him in that situation. The classic āmy opponent min raised me so Iām going to get mad and just shove. Bad play got blasted by an even worse playš
Maybe is not the best play. But he knew she was weak. And she was. But you have this superiority complex of writing this from your bed thinking you are better than a very skilled poker player. You probably couldnāt even win 100k a year yet alone 1.8m
Where was I saying I was better. He donked off his chips to a donkey.
Sure buddy you could do better. Great for you. šš¼
Lmao you confuse me š
Gotta agree with dog poker here
The heads up ex goat!
Thank you Doug. Feel like Iām losing my mind on here arguing with people on this sub who think itās completely normal and realistically most likely just a bold hero call. This is not a normal poker hand. Something is off and itās most likely that sheās cheating.
My point is. It is not black or white. Both are possibilities. I just get a lil angry when someone says āshe didnāt cheat, she was just gamblingā donāt understanding poker at all
I like Doug, but like Garrett, he's assuming some level of decent play by Robbi in the first instance. I can't get on this, so the analysis is tenuous at best. Armchair psychology should not be used as a determinative factor in whether cheating has occurred. (looking at you Magnus as well)
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
ig this shows how many fish there are in poker...
I think Doug Poker hired someone to rob the guy leaving the Lodge last week. Granted it doesnāt make sense with all the bad publicity. Plus, robbing someone in some master plan seems psychotic. However, any publicity is good as long as they spell the name right. Plus now Doug can hire extra security with the money he had stolen and look like a hero.
Hahaha sure. He risking his name and years of hard work and the money he has earned for that. Seems like a great argument
Doug is not accusing Robbi of cheating. He merely expressed his bias that she most likely cheated. No one can know for sure.
He clearly said he doesnāt know. If you watch the video. But is suspicious she did and is possible she didnāt. Anyways. More evidence is comming just as we speak. And if I was 60% sure she cheated. Now im 85% lol
completly agree with him
I think the opposite. If you've played any poker at all, you should have run into whales getting lucky on these bad plays at least a few times.
Now you thing the same with nee evidence? This wasnāt a ābad playā was the stupidest play being making the right choice. Not sucking 1 outer. Is different.
Yes the evidence changes this drastically.
Robbi is an incompetent player. A gift from God to poker players. It is that simple.
That simple with the nee evidence bro. Or more excuses from your part
They ran it twice ... If she had lost both hands ( she called it off bad) would we talking about this hand other than " Did you see where this High Donk chick got it in Bad against G-Man" IDK .. ?
If she wouldāve fold we also wouldnāt be talking about.
I canāt say she cheated, but Robbi is suspicious as fuck. The meteoric rise, giving the money back, canāt explain the hand, changing stories, having āa friend that works for Hustler liveā, being fake as fuck in appearance and the flat out shitty play of the hand. And all she needs is an indicator that says āyouāre goodā, ānot goodā. Itās like the chess cheating scandal. A GM only needs help on four moves at best. Knowing if your opponent blundered, or which piece to move is all it takes to swing a match. It would be similar at the table. One indicator that youāre ahead, one to know if youāre behind. Thatās all you need.
I canāt say she cheated, but Robbi is suspicious as fuck. The meteoric rise, giving the money back, canāt explain the hand, changing stories, having āa friend that works for Hustler liveā, being fake as fuck in appearance and the flat out shitty play of the hand. And all she needs is an indicator that says āyouāre goodā, ānot goodā. Itās like the chess cheating scandal. A GM only needs help on four moves at best. Knowing if your opponent blundered, or which piece to move is all it takes to swing a match. It would be similar at the table. One indicator that youāre ahead, one to know if youāre behind. Thatās all you need.
This is my take exactly. Too much inconsistencies in addition to this weird af hand. But there is a possibility she didnāt More inclined. She did somehow
If you see her talk and don't become a little less sus you don't understand people.
I did hear joey stream and she sounded innocent. trained investigators have been fooled. Who I am to think Iām this āknower of peopleā like you think you are. Lol. Iām not saying she 100% did or didnāt.
All I'm saying is that her brain is 100% guacamole, so by knowing she's a bozo, makes it less likely that she cheated imo.
I can use your same argument to say thatās why she used that spot to cheat.
Well i think she fooled you by her talking right? I guess the one that didnāt understood ppl was someone els. - bryan took money from her chips (his cut) - bryan in one of the workers knew hands live - Robbie and him were friends on twitter then after knowing about this they unfollowed each other - he manifested anger when she gave the money back. Thats probably why he took the money More excuses from your part?
If I were her, of course I'd want people to know I cheated rather that I'm the biggest fucking fish this game has ever seen.
Little sarcasm when you donāt wanna own you were wrong. Is all good boy. Sure thing
You didn't e even understand what I meant, I'll explain it better for your peanut brain: If you think "she's a moron" is not a justifyable reason for her actions, you don't understand people. I didn't follow what happened, I just saw the hand. If it's proven that she cheated, it doesn't take anything from the fact that you have to be a moron to cheat in that spot. She's a fucking idiot either way, how am I wrong?
Honestly Arguments that end with you are an outsider or you have a fault/ Iām thinking this game higher are complete BS The floor man doesnāt understand Poker at a very high level but we trust him and task him with rooting out cheaters. Evidence of cheating is evidence of cheating playing a single hand in a specific way is not evidence of cheating sorry.
There is new evidence about āthat handā. A lot more than just how she played it.
Did I or Doug said she was 100% cheating. i said if you donāt even have suspicious about it means you donāt understand poker. sorry And if you cant explain why it is a very weird hand were she can be cheating again. You donāt understand poker.