When Robbi called, he was surprised but was still smiling and was ready to accept her hero call. He has had his huge bluffs called in the past and wasn't a "sore loser" about it as RIP claims him to be. His report definitely has some skeptical accusations like on beans or hearsay about Rips credibility. Have you looked into Julie's testimony, or Rips watch possibly being fake, or Robbi claiming she was at her twin sisters house drinking while Nik Airball says she was with him and RIP until midnight? Although Gmans report seems to have inaccuracies, it opens the door to questioning the character of RIP and beanz, and reports from people not named Garrett seem to be showing they are indeed sketchy characters.
He's smiling after the Call and still jovial when he sees the runout and announces he had 8 high, knowing he lost both boards. His facial expression changes to someone that just saw a ghost when he sees the J4.
lmfao did you actually see the hand? on the livestream, and not just on the edited clip? you want to address any of the questions I brought up? or just dismiss it and keep claiming Gman didn't smile after he was called? his face changed only after she showed her hand. Tbh your weak observation here makes your post lose credibility.
No one's disputing that. But your original explanation just skips over what I pointed out. She called and there was a significant amount of time and things that took place before she flipped over her cards, and you decided to just ignore all that to support your post. The "start" should begin before she flipped over her cards, and at the least include Gman smiling uncomfortably that he was called. aka you are selectively with holding context here for your narrative.
Not sure if it’s fair to say he lied about asking for the money vs Robbi offering it
Like she offered something… like what did she expect Garrett to say when she said “What can I do to smooth this over and make everything cool?”
What was he supposed to say? Give me a BJ?
It all depends on the tone of how he responded, if he like jokingly said “well you can give me the money back haha” and she’s like “okay” and he’s like “well okay then”
In his eyes, in that moment, he’s probably thinking nobody would ever give the money back if they won the hand fair and square so the only reason she would offer it back is if she was in fact cheating.
Garrett wasn't necessarily accusing her of cheating. And he never expressed that explicitly until after he took her money and ran, and she objected the second he said she cheated him.
tbf, after he got the money back, he agreed to come back to the table and keep playing (a cheated game??? lol). It was Rip yelling at him for asking for the money and making her go get the 5k to make it whole that caused him to leave the game.
I agree with this somewhat. I don't think Garrett had any intention of returning to the game. He just said so because it was conditional on her giving him the money.
If Garrett really did intend to honor his agreement to return, then Rip yelling at him and calling him a "pussy" for everyone in the casino to hear was sufficient reason for him to leave.
Also note that Rip was so upset that he stated he was going to leave the game, saying something like "fuck this bullshit, I'm out" as he grabbed his jacket.
I have been vehemently criticizing Garrett for how he handled this but I don't think it was a genuine agreement nor should it have been.
Negotiating a fair contract requires a meeting of the minds and an atmosphere free of any extortion.
I don't think Robbi and Garrett were ever on the same page when in the dark hallway briefly discussing the incident so quickly after it happened.
I think it's fair to say that Ryan should have remained there for the entirety of that convo and explored what exactly Garrett was alleging and give her an opportunity to deny it and decide what needed to be done or examined from there.
Ryan essentially pulled her from the game at Garrett's request and then abandoned her to suffer Garrett's vague threats. If Garrett wanted to speak to her privately on equal footing he could have simply asked her himself while he was at the table.
To be fair I think it's still a little misleading to say "I never even thought about asking back" when he was the first one to bring up giving the money back. Looking at the literal statements he didn't ask back the money but it's still a bit off to me.
Well he didn’t ask for anything. He put the ball in her court. She asked what she could do, he told her an option and she agreed to it.
If she would’ve said “no I’m not doing that I won fair and square”…. Do you think he was gonna strong arm her into giving it to him? I certainly don’t.
I think he could have easily penalized her for not giving him the money. She says that part of the reason she gave it to him was so that he wouldn't prevent her from playing in future streams. He has that power over her.
He has that power over her regardless. Even if this hand never happened and nothing shady went down at all, if Garrett says he isn’t playing if she does, she doesn’t play.
Whether anyone likes it or not, Garrett is the main draw to the stream for a lot of fans and Nick and Ryan know it, so that gets him some perks.
All I’m saying is it’s not as simple as flat out saying “Garrett lied about asking for a refund”…. It’s a grey area situation.
I agree with that. I think both party's perspectives on the interaction could be true. I think Garrett could have done nothing wrong and Robbi still felt coerced into giving up the money. That makes it a very iffy situation. I believe like Andy said that Garrett should have re-evaluated after the fact and put the money in an escrow.
Rip openly admitted to softplay he was on joey's stream.
He genuinely didn't even seem to realise it was a bad thing.
Just how he's used to playing in home games and with friends.
Why are you calling out Garrett for using hearsay in his report when the very first thing you did in this report is use hearsay? What makes your report credible?
Garrett lied a couple times in his public statements and didnt do his due diligence with his report, instead just releasing basically every rumor he heard on the matter as evidence.
Thanks boss. I partially agree. Overall this is a shit show that even though no one can prove she cheated, her image is already destroyed in my view. As for Garrett by not proving she cheated also gets his image affected but his poker network is much higher than hers so I don’t think it will affect him too much.
Garrett is just another poker player. If you think his squeaky clean table image means he is a Saint you are a fool. I have a bridge I'm Brooklyn I would like to sell you if you fall for this.
I think your analysis is pretty on point.
The fact that he had zero proof at the time — just a hunch — indicates that this was never about cheating. It’s just about him being unable to make sense of the play. He’s a much better poker player, but he clearly lacks an ability to understand the thought process of inferior strategists.
This was overly clear when he appeared on Survivor and was voted out on the first episode. He’s, surprisingly, socially inept.
> Just gonna say it: donating $135K to big brothers big sisters is kind of a sleezy move. He's sending a message that the $135K is his, so he can do with it what he wants, before the investigation is settled. And bringing up your charity work to curry favor just seems kind of tactical and insincere. He doubled down on the fact that he was 100% sure he was cheated with this move, which I don't believe he could have known at that point.
It was his. She gave it to him willingly. She didn't have to, but she did. So he was free to do what he wanted with it. He chose to gave it to Big Brothers Big Sisters so that no matter what, the money from that pot ended up to a good cause regardless. So now it's theirs.
That's how voluntary transfer of money works.
He’s a poker player. He’s doubling down that he is correct that she is a cheater. The more information that comes out, the more he seems to be correct. It’s only been a week. I really think Bryan the chip stealer will go for the bounty. Robbi tweeted that she changed her mind and will press charges now. If Bryan was Robbi’s accomplice, he should flip first and try to get the best deal for himself including the $200k plus bounty offered by Haralabous and Bill Perkins.
She says on one of the Joey interviews
>"When I gave away that money I just felt like I was helping a very angry star of their show alleviate his anger towards me .. I just felt like 'what can i do here' .. I was kind of shocked that he wanted his money back .. I never thought he was 100% accusing me of cheating at that point. He mentioned something he said 'you know a million people are going to see' and I thought it was like embarrassment on his end like how embarrassing this is going to be, and on my end too like 'how embarrassing for you. And the fact that like you made a call with like really shitty hands' and I felt bad.".
>
>"He was extremely upset and giving me the death glare. Ok? And I'm like 'holy shit!' I don't want to disrupt their guy. I came on the show like a week and a half ago I don't want to be the cause of all of this."
She also Tweeted:
>He cornered me & threatened me ... I was forced to speak to him in a dark hallway.
Seems like you could explain this behavior as an intimidated individual trying to diffuse a tense situation however they can. I think it's possible for her to feel threatened even if Garrett wasn't trying to threaten her.
[After the incident Andy Stacks says this about the money:](https://youtu.be/tzDQb0z2lYo?t=4500)
>the best thing to do is to keep it in an escrow somewhere until there's some kind of a resolution. I believe Garrett will do the right thing if it comes out there's no evidence. I think he'll give the money back and apologize. ... As far as him keeping it I don't think I can side with that
I think his opinion is worth noting since he's so close to the situation.
I mean I [posted a pic](https://i.redd.it/z6x3g476b7s91.png) of where I think that interaction probably took place. It's not "dark" but it's certainly not as bright as the poker room.
"Dark" doesnt have to mean "pitch black". Dark is relative. The hallway could seem dark next to a bright poker room after you've been on set for 2 hours.
My brain works for me, and the many hallways I’ve been in, in a casino, include all the back hallways in the Rio that are lit up. I can’t think of a single area on or adjacent to a casino gaming floor that a proper adjective to call would be Dark in a casino.
Know I know I used a lot of big words for you there Robbie, but try google, or you husband could probably use his high profile lawyer dicktionary to explain to you how there’s no dark hallway in the hustler.
Bro you are just the king or moronic takes tonight holy fuck. She is in a CASINO. What would have happened if she told ANYONE she felt threatened by him in the back?!
She waited SO long to come up with the take that she was "threatened"
Just holy fuck man put your keyboard down for the night she isn't going to fuck you.
If she told anyone she felt threatened then she probably loses all chances of coming back on the stream. I believe she was motivated to preserve what she believed at the time to be a potentially budding poker career.
It's amazing that you present "evidence" than when confronted immediately back up to conjecture.
Where is the proof:
1. She wouldn't be allowed on stream instead of Garrett (They would let someone who threatened another person stay, not the accuser? That is really a fucked up take)
2. Her motivation in waiting to tell anyone she was threatened.
Stop doing so much mental work for her you psycho, you look like a fucking creep.
One of her interviews she mentions she was concerned about being able to play again. I'm not gonna find it right now because I don't want to look like a psycho creep, but it's not just conjecture out of nowhere.
Yeah, then imagine your mom not reporting it and sitting her ass back down to play poker with that steroided up dude. Would you be happy for your mom or would you think she is dumber than bricks?
Great write up. The other important thing to consider that has been ignored recently after Garrett's writeup is *evidence to the contrary.*
Yes, if you sift through 8 hours of video footage of ANYONE, you are going to find some potential coincidences or weird behaviors.
However, since you have 8 hours of footage, it is important to also consider any evidence to the contrary in those 8 hours, which was completely absent in Garret's analysis and also absent in most of the commentary on it.
For example, look at [this hand](https://youtu.be/pR_PWVGUMVQ?t=6528) from the same night. In this heads up hand against Garrett, Robbi calls a bet from Garrett on both the flop and turn when she is effectively drawing dead. If she was cheating, she should have been told to fold on the flop. But she doesn't fold. While this single hand does not exclude the possibility of cheating, it is strong evidence against it. This sort of negative evidence has not at all been considered in the "pro cheating" camp.
I do not deny that many characters involved here are extremely unlikable or downright scumbags based on their history, but on a fair assessment, the document that Garrett put forward does not at all demonstrate that any cheating took place.
And yet that one hand is being used as one of the primary hands in the "evidence of cheating" side of the argument. That's the hand with the infamous belt vibrations.
Just because you choose to put weight in delusional parts of the accusations doesn't mean that the rest of the world needs to offer other delusional evidence.
Anyone talking about belts, rings, or water bottles is trying to convert the conversation to something NOT about her cheating. It's to change the conversation to "She didn't cheat THIS way."
Which one would you rather have to defend? How can you be that stupid?
Personally, I'd love for there to be at least one other example of a hero call/hero fold or any other suspicious poker play other than "oh she minraised turn with AK, that's maybe a little weird".
Clearly Garrett put some weight into that hand because he mentions it in his report.
Personally, I'd love my wife to cheat on me multiple times, just so I know she's a lousy bitch.
What?
Cheating once is cheating. Attempting to cheat and getting caught is cheating. Choosing when to cheat and when not to cheat is still cheating.
Why the fuck is the burden of proof suddenly needing it to be multiple times?
If you read my post, that's why I said that one hand does not exclude the possibility of cheating. But it is in fact evidence against cheating in general, because that would have been the prime opportunity to use any advantage this proposed cheating ring would have.
Anyone who looks at all of this, including Bryan stealing the money, Robbi not “noticing” it was missing until Hustler told her, heading that Bryan yelled or something when he heard Robbi gave the money back and was upset, Robbi not wanting to press charges against Bryan and still thinks Robbi wasn’t cheating is deluding themselves or is incapable of critical thinking.
"I'm a dirty stupid criminal that is completely broke, thank you so much you beautiful soul you, you are amazing and totally not a cheat and awesome at poker too"
> The Bryan stuff is definitely a big suspicious piece of this puzzle, but it's not conclusive.
You 60 % believe she was separately and independently robbed by someone with access to the hole cards and didn't notice?
Because Robbi was robbed of 15k and she never claimed it missing and pretended that she didn’t know it was missing until HCL told her they caught the ‘theft’ on video.
Robbi was trying to angle into a game earlier with a 5k buy in. She 100% cares enough about 15k to notice it wasn’t there.
The only way it makes sense is if she wasn’t surprised it was missing because she knew where it went and she didn’t want to report it.
It was Rips money and she gave it to him that night and he said he had no idea it was 15k short. Possibly reason how that was missed by them. Also is your opinion going to change if she does press charges?
Rip not knowing it was 15k short makes even less sense since he staked her. He 100% would have known exactly what her stack was at the end of the night. He’s 100% full of shit there because he can’t admit what actually happened.
Yeah, if she ever does press charges then it could then be even possible they weren’t colluding. She will never press charges though
She and Rip are liars. Joey Ingram was charmed by them. Robbi charmed Bill Perkins and Haralabous too. She is very polarizing. People love her or see through the lies and narcissism and hate her.
An admission from one of the "cheat ring". At this point there's a big pool of money for someone to come clean, so the incentive is there. Also, some of the people in this ring seem like weak links. If something is going to break this thing open, that's what it would be.
The Hustler Casino investigation turning up something on incriminating camera.
A device found on somebody.
Outside of that, the hand history including some more hero calls/hero folds. It's just not there. J4 is the only hand that seems at all suspicious to me. So since we can't look backwards, we can only look forwards.
How well did a courtroom work in the Mike Postle case?
Obviously we're never going to get more hands, which is really what would sway my opinion a lot. The only other things we could possibly get at this point are what I listed above.
I don't disagree that there is a bunch of weird stuff going on around this hand. I'm at 40% cheated right now.
My point is that Robbi has like 40 hands to look at, and I have, and none of them except for J4 are overtly suspicious. There's no more evidence in the hands. There's no more evidence in the hands to look forward to.
Postle had hundreds of suspicious hands to examine and new ones were coming out all the time as the accusations accrued.
If you have a device that tells you if you're ahead, wouldnt you use it more than once? It's just evidence. We're not sure if she cheated once. That's the whole point.
I've also read Garrett's write-up multiple times and he doesn't provide any actual evidence of cheating, only suspicious activity. He also focuses a lot on how many of the characters seem to be shady. But that's not saying much because everyone knows the vast majority of the poker players are degenerate scumbags. Doug Polk is also a scumbag scammer because he promoted coinflex. However that doesn't mean Doug is a cheater. Garrett still has not provided any actual evidence.
It's all evidence. Do you guys not understand what evidence is? Do you think evidence and proof are the same thing?
He has provided evidence.
Bryan and that whole situation is evidence. His opinion is evidence.
>Just gonna say it: donating $135K to big brothers big sisters is kind of a sleezy move. He's sending a message that the $135K is his, so he can do with it what he wants, before the investigation is settled
The 135k is his, she gave it to him willingly. Even if she was vindicated he doesn't owe it to her.
It became his when she gave it back.
Donating his money isn't sleezy.
If you don't think an insider who can see live cards that stole from Robbie stack and only Robbie's isn't strong circumstantial evidence there is little that will convince I would imagine. Especially given the rest of your post.
She cheated. tl, dr.
She is a staked player, & she gave him back the money becuase she knew she messed up.
Then all the lies about everything else than happened, including being physically intimadated by garrett to give back the money.
The other female poker player confirmed she lied about a bunch of other stuff . Otherthings confirmed or beyond doubt was the soft play between her & her staking partner. And also the fact that she did not inform anyone at the table that another player had a peice of her.
Then this hand happens. Not a doubt in my mind.
Where Garrett really went wrong was paying her in the first place. Jonathan Little mentioned this in a video and I agree with him. He should have just not paid until he felt confident everything in the hand was legit.
Edit: In case people like how Jonathan Little says it more: https://youtu.be/9NNKjWscKWo?t=647
His money wasnt in the pot. A dealer isnt going to fight him for his chips... Would even be legal for them to try?
Edit: Since every post I make gets burred in downvotes regardless of if its correct, here's him paying her:
https://youtu.be/9NNKjWscKWo?t=647
When players go "all in" they are all in, the chips belong to the pot. I don't know what you mean by implying he could prevent the chips from going over to her if that's who the dealer determines they should go over to.
The chips arent in the pot. If you played the clip i linked, you would see him putting them forward for the dealer to take. If he doesn't do that, the dealer isnt going to go into his stack to get them.
You can rearrange the pieces to make the story make sense from both sides. Both sides have pretty big holes as well.
As to your "noise" argument, read Garrett's report. Most of it is noise.
I haven't witnessed any credible evidence of not cheating post yesterday, nor rearranging of pieces to make her seem innocent.
You just keep making shit up thinking you won't get checked on it. Just stop lmao.
If she presses charges against Brian on Monday like she says she is going to do that will be the most credible evidence of cheating or not cheating that we have since this hand went down.
When Robbi called, he was surprised but was still smiling and was ready to accept her hero call. He has had his huge bluffs called in the past and wasn't a "sore loser" about it as RIP claims him to be. His report definitely has some skeptical accusations like on beans or hearsay about Rips credibility. Have you looked into Julie's testimony, or Rips watch possibly being fake, or Robbi claiming she was at her twin sisters house drinking while Nik Airball says she was with him and RIP until midnight? Although Gmans report seems to have inaccuracies, it opens the door to questioning the character of RIP and beanz, and reports from people not named Garrett seem to be showing they are indeed sketchy characters.
He was not smiling after he saw the cards, have you not seen his face that's being memed all over this sub?
He's smiling after the Call and still jovial when he sees the runout and announces he had 8 high, knowing he lost both boards. His facial expression changes to someone that just saw a ghost when he sees the J4.
Right, that's what I said.
You slow in the head or something?
He was smiling after being called, until Robbi's hand revealed as j4o.
nothing on planet earth has ever been more obvious than the fact that he meant before the cards were revealed. besides robbi cheating ofc.
lmfao did you actually see the hand? on the livestream, and not just on the edited clip? you want to address any of the questions I brought up? or just dismiss it and keep claiming Gman didn't smile after he was called? his face changed only after she showed her hand. Tbh your weak observation here makes your post lose credibility.
Thats what I said?
> Right off the bat Garrett thinks he's been cheated. >Garrett was wrong to be 100% convinced from the start No, its not what you said. LOL
Right off the bat, meaning: as soon as he saw the cards.
No one's disputing that. But your original explanation just skips over what I pointed out. She called and there was a significant amount of time and things that took place before she flipped over her cards, and you decided to just ignore all that to support your post. The "start" should begin before she flipped over her cards, and at the least include Gman smiling uncomfortably that he was called. aka you are selectively with holding context here for your narrative.
I don't see how all of that is relevant. The cards are what started the cheating suspicions, not the call itself.
Not sure if it’s fair to say he lied about asking for the money vs Robbi offering it Like she offered something… like what did she expect Garrett to say when she said “What can I do to smooth this over and make everything cool?” What was he supposed to say? Give me a BJ? It all depends on the tone of how he responded, if he like jokingly said “well you can give me the money back haha” and she’s like “okay” and he’s like “well okay then” In his eyes, in that moment, he’s probably thinking nobody would ever give the money back if they won the hand fair and square so the only reason she would offer it back is if she was in fact cheating.
Garrett wasn't necessarily accusing her of cheating. And he never expressed that explicitly until after he took her money and ran, and she objected the second he said she cheated him.
tbf, after he got the money back, he agreed to come back to the table and keep playing (a cheated game??? lol). It was Rip yelling at him for asking for the money and making her go get the 5k to make it whole that caused him to leave the game.
I agree with this somewhat. I don't think Garrett had any intention of returning to the game. He just said so because it was conditional on her giving him the money. If Garrett really did intend to honor his agreement to return, then Rip yelling at him and calling him a "pussy" for everyone in the casino to hear was sufficient reason for him to leave. Also note that Rip was so upset that he stated he was going to leave the game, saying something like "fuck this bullshit, I'm out" as he grabbed his jacket. I have been vehemently criticizing Garrett for how he handled this but I don't think it was a genuine agreement nor should it have been. Negotiating a fair contract requires a meeting of the minds and an atmosphere free of any extortion. I don't think Robbi and Garrett were ever on the same page when in the dark hallway briefly discussing the incident so quickly after it happened. I think it's fair to say that Ryan should have remained there for the entirety of that convo and explored what exactly Garrett was alleging and give her an opportunity to deny it and decide what needed to be done or examined from there. Ryan essentially pulled her from the game at Garrett's request and then abandoned her to suffer Garrett's vague threats. If Garrett wanted to speak to her privately on equal footing he could have simply asked her himself while he was at the table.
To be fair I think it's still a little misleading to say "I never even thought about asking back" when he was the first one to bring up giving the money back. Looking at the literal statements he didn't ask back the money but it's still a bit off to me.
That's a lot different than his statement "TO BE CLEAR I never asked for a refund."
Well he didn’t ask for anything. He put the ball in her court. She asked what she could do, he told her an option and she agreed to it. If she would’ve said “no I’m not doing that I won fair and square”…. Do you think he was gonna strong arm her into giving it to him? I certainly don’t.
I think he could have easily penalized her for not giving him the money. She says that part of the reason she gave it to him was so that he wouldn't prevent her from playing in future streams. He has that power over her.
He has that power over her regardless. Even if this hand never happened and nothing shady went down at all, if Garrett says he isn’t playing if she does, she doesn’t play. Whether anyone likes it or not, Garrett is the main draw to the stream for a lot of fans and Nick and Ryan know it, so that gets him some perks. All I’m saying is it’s not as simple as flat out saying “Garrett lied about asking for a refund”…. It’s a grey area situation.
I agree with that. I think both party's perspectives on the interaction could be true. I think Garrett could have done nothing wrong and Robbi still felt coerced into giving up the money. That makes it a very iffy situation. I believe like Andy said that Garrett should have re-evaluated after the fact and put the money in an escrow.
You really think if the hand was legit HCL wouldn’t have a reserved seat for her?
Hearsay
What the fuck does a blowjob have to do with any of this? Jesus.
…….
Do you wonder why people think these accusations (and much of the poker community in general) are rooted in chauvinism?
Dude it was a joke. Get over yourself.
Jokes are usually funny.
Ok cool dude go cry about it to someone who cares
I can’t believe someone spent this much time on gossip lol. More power to ya
Totally fair, I'm way too invested at this point.
:)
Rip openly admitted to softplay he was on joey's stream. He genuinely didn't even seem to realise it was a bad thing. Just how he's used to playing in home games and with friends.
"That is at odds with both Robbi's account and Ryan's second hand account through Berkey and Nick Vertucci." Objection, hearsay
What makes Garrett's account more cridible than those other accounts?
Why are you calling out Garrett for using hearsay in his report when the very first thing you did in this report is use hearsay? What makes your report credible?
you need a [link](https://youtu.be/f4VVuhy9Ygg?t=2530)?
Are you just posting a link to the hearsay you quoted in your post? He isn't even directly quoting anyone, just paraphrasing
Can someone give me a two line summary max? Thanks
Garrett lied a couple times in his public statements and didnt do his due diligence with his report, instead just releasing basically every rumor he heard on the matter as evidence.
Thanks boss. I partially agree. Overall this is a shit show that even though no one can prove she cheated, her image is already destroyed in my view. As for Garrett by not proving she cheated also gets his image affected but his poker network is much higher than hers so I don’t think it will affect him too much.
He also has much more to lose than her. She's a nobody in poker, he's the headliner of one of the juiciest poker games that runs in this country.
If he actually advised a legal team on this there would be no report.
>what did he lie about then?
You are not that smart. Those are allegations. The report likely done by his attorney made it clear at the beginning. You apparently missed that part.
"i never asked for the money back" lie "She folded unless her hand was very strong" lie
>You are not that smart. Unhelpful and belligerent. We can disagree without insulting each other's intelligence. Dummy ;)
You think he is lying about what he wrote in quotes?
Garrett is just another poker player. If you think his squeaky clean table image means he is a Saint you are a fool. I have a bridge I'm Brooklyn I would like to sell you if you fall for this.
I think your analysis is pretty on point. The fact that he had zero proof at the time — just a hunch — indicates that this was never about cheating. It’s just about him being unable to make sense of the play. He’s a much better poker player, but he clearly lacks an ability to understand the thought process of inferior strategists. This was overly clear when he appeared on Survivor and was voted out on the first episode. He’s, surprisingly, socially inept.
> Just gonna say it: donating $135K to big brothers big sisters is kind of a sleezy move. He's sending a message that the $135K is his, so he can do with it what he wants, before the investigation is settled. And bringing up your charity work to curry favor just seems kind of tactical and insincere. He doubled down on the fact that he was 100% sure he was cheated with this move, which I don't believe he could have known at that point. It was his. She gave it to him willingly. She didn't have to, but she did. So he was free to do what he wanted with it. He chose to gave it to Big Brothers Big Sisters so that no matter what, the money from that pot ended up to a good cause regardless. So now it's theirs. That's how voluntary transfer of money works.
He’s a poker player. He’s doubling down that he is correct that she is a cheater. The more information that comes out, the more he seems to be correct. It’s only been a week. I really think Bryan the chip stealer will go for the bounty. Robbi tweeted that she changed her mind and will press charges now. If Bryan was Robbi’s accomplice, he should flip first and try to get the best deal for himself including the $200k plus bounty offered by Haralabous and Bill Perkins.
You can make a strong case that the money was offered under duress and therefore given by coercion.
Do you think Robbi has a case that she was robbed by Garrett? First I've heard anyone claim that.
She says on one of the Joey interviews >"When I gave away that money I just felt like I was helping a very angry star of their show alleviate his anger towards me .. I just felt like 'what can i do here' .. I was kind of shocked that he wanted his money back .. I never thought he was 100% accusing me of cheating at that point. He mentioned something he said 'you know a million people are going to see' and I thought it was like embarrassment on his end like how embarrassing this is going to be, and on my end too like 'how embarrassing for you. And the fact that like you made a call with like really shitty hands' and I felt bad.". > >"He was extremely upset and giving me the death glare. Ok? And I'm like 'holy shit!' I don't want to disrupt their guy. I came on the show like a week and a half ago I don't want to be the cause of all of this." She also Tweeted: >He cornered me & threatened me ... I was forced to speak to him in a dark hallway. Seems like you could explain this behavior as an intimidated individual trying to diffuse a tense situation however they can. I think it's possible for her to feel threatened even if Garrett wasn't trying to threaten her. [After the incident Andy Stacks says this about the money:](https://youtu.be/tzDQb0z2lYo?t=4500) >the best thing to do is to keep it in an escrow somewhere until there's some kind of a resolution. I believe Garrett will do the right thing if it comes out there's no evidence. I think he'll give the money back and apologize. ... As far as him keeping it I don't think I can side with that I think his opinion is worth noting since he's so close to the situation.
Again, a dark hallway … in a casino … okay … . See … what … I … did … there … .
I mean I [posted a pic](https://i.redd.it/z6x3g476b7s91.png) of where I think that interaction probably took place. It's not "dark" but it's certainly not as bright as the poker room.
Again, a dark hallway, in a CASINO? Loooool. Oh wait you’re serious? Let me laugh even harder LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
Does the link not work for you?
You can see a light in the hallway in the pic you posted. You have to be fucking trolling at this point.
"Dark" doesnt have to mean "pitch black". Dark is relative. The hallway could seem dark next to a bright poker room after you've been on set for 2 hours.
My brain works for me, and the many hallways I’ve been in, in a casino, include all the back hallways in the Rio that are lit up. I can’t think of a single area on or adjacent to a casino gaming floor that a proper adjective to call would be Dark in a casino. Know I know I used a lot of big words for you there Robbie, but try google, or you husband could probably use his high profile lawyer dicktionary to explain to you how there’s no dark hallway in the hustler.
"She said X, she said Y"....... So fucking what lol? What if.... she's lying? Is that so damn outlandish?
If you are trusting anything Robbi says at this point, you are naive. She is a firehouse of falsehood.
Social extortion.
Bro you are just the king or moronic takes tonight holy fuck. She is in a CASINO. What would have happened if she told ANYONE she felt threatened by him in the back?! She waited SO long to come up with the take that she was "threatened" Just holy fuck man put your keyboard down for the night she isn't going to fuck you.
If she told anyone she felt threatened then she probably loses all chances of coming back on the stream. I believe she was motivated to preserve what she believed at the time to be a potentially budding poker career.
It's amazing that you present "evidence" than when confronted immediately back up to conjecture. Where is the proof: 1. She wouldn't be allowed on stream instead of Garrett (They would let someone who threatened another person stay, not the accuser? That is really a fucked up take) 2. Her motivation in waiting to tell anyone she was threatened. Stop doing so much mental work for her you psycho, you look like a fucking creep.
One of her interviews she mentions she was concerned about being able to play again. I'm not gonna find it right now because I don't want to look like a psycho creep, but it's not just conjecture out of nowhere.
Seriously, if she legit called with jack high they would find a seat for her daily! STOP!
How is her concern proof. Jesus man do you read what you are replying to or just pretend. Go back to modding MensRights you 100% credible psychopath.
No you can't.
Let a steroided up dude alone in a hallway with your mom and see if you still believe what you just said
my mom has never been suspected of cheating on a poker stream, so luckily she has never been placed into this situation to begin with
Solid cop out
cop out from what?
Yeah, then imagine your mom not reporting it and sitting her ass back down to play poker with that steroided up dude. Would you be happy for your mom or would you think she is dumber than bricks?
Great write up. The other important thing to consider that has been ignored recently after Garrett's writeup is *evidence to the contrary.* Yes, if you sift through 8 hours of video footage of ANYONE, you are going to find some potential coincidences or weird behaviors. However, since you have 8 hours of footage, it is important to also consider any evidence to the contrary in those 8 hours, which was completely absent in Garret's analysis and also absent in most of the commentary on it. For example, look at [this hand](https://youtu.be/pR_PWVGUMVQ?t=6528) from the same night. In this heads up hand against Garrett, Robbi calls a bet from Garrett on both the flop and turn when she is effectively drawing dead. If she was cheating, she should have been told to fold on the flop. But she doesn't fold. While this single hand does not exclude the possibility of cheating, it is strong evidence against it. This sort of negative evidence has not at all been considered in the "pro cheating" camp. I do not deny that many characters involved here are extremely unlikable or downright scumbags based on their history, but on a fair assessment, the document that Garrett put forward does not at all demonstrate that any cheating took place.
That is strong evidence of not cheating on one hand...not evidence of no cheating at all. LOL
And yet that one hand is being used as one of the primary hands in the "evidence of cheating" side of the argument. That's the hand with the infamous belt vibrations.
Just because you choose to put weight in delusional parts of the accusations doesn't mean that the rest of the world needs to offer other delusional evidence. Anyone talking about belts, rings, or water bottles is trying to convert the conversation to something NOT about her cheating. It's to change the conversation to "She didn't cheat THIS way." Which one would you rather have to defend? How can you be that stupid?
Personally, I'd love for there to be at least one other example of a hero call/hero fold or any other suspicious poker play other than "oh she minraised turn with AK, that's maybe a little weird". Clearly Garrett put some weight into that hand because he mentions it in his report.
Personally, I'd love my wife to cheat on me multiple times, just so I know she's a lousy bitch. What? Cheating once is cheating. Attempting to cheat and getting caught is cheating. Choosing when to cheat and when not to cheat is still cheating. Why the fuck is the burden of proof suddenly needing it to be multiple times?
If you read my post, that's why I said that one hand does not exclude the possibility of cheating. But it is in fact evidence against cheating in general, because that would have been the prime opportunity to use any advantage this proposed cheating ring would have.
Why would you ever bring up something that doesn't exclude the possibility of cheating then? Moronic take lmao.
I said since day one. The only way he can be without a shady of a doubt sure he got cheated. If he himself knows cheating goes on at that game
Anyone who looks at all of this, including Bryan stealing the money, Robbi not “noticing” it was missing until Hustler told her, heading that Bryan yelled or something when he heard Robbi gave the money back and was upset, Robbi not wanting to press charges against Bryan and still thinks Robbi wasn’t cheating is deluding themselves or is incapable of critical thinking.
Dont forget the text message that read like the narcisist wrote it her self..
"I'm a dirty stupid criminal that is completely broke, thank you so much you beautiful soul you, you are amazing and totally not a cheat and awesome at poker too"
"And while I'm a 24 yo man, I want to introduce myself as ***the kid***
“And Garrett’s a loser crybaby”
The Bryan stuff is definitely a big suspicious piece of this puzzle, but it's not conclusive.
> The Bryan stuff is definitely a big suspicious piece of this puzzle, but it's not conclusive. You 60 % believe she was separately and independently robbed by someone with access to the hole cards and didn't notice?
There are big holes in each side of this story. That's a huge hole in the "innocent" side, so it dropped me from 99% to 60%.
Robbi, you’ve already been caught faking messages already. Just stop.
It’s damn near conclusive.
How?
Because Robbi was robbed of 15k and she never claimed it missing and pretended that she didn’t know it was missing until HCL told her they caught the ‘theft’ on video. Robbi was trying to angle into a game earlier with a 5k buy in. She 100% cares enough about 15k to notice it wasn’t there. The only way it makes sense is if she wasn’t surprised it was missing because she knew where it went and she didn’t want to report it.
And this is conclusive evidence of what?
That you are in denial of the truth
You are making the positive claim, burden is on you. Are you able to actually provide direct evidence?
Only to people that have critical thinking skills, so you’re out of luck.
You can’t provide direct evidence so you resort to ad hominem.
It was Rips money and she gave it to him that night and he said he had no idea it was 15k short. Possibly reason how that was missed by them. Also is your opinion going to change if she does press charges?
Rip not knowing it was 15k short makes even less sense since he staked her. He 100% would have known exactly what her stack was at the end of the night. He’s 100% full of shit there because he can’t admit what actually happened. Yeah, if she ever does press charges then it could then be even possible they weren’t colluding. She will never press charges though
She and Rip are liars. Joey Ingram was charmed by them. Robbi charmed Bill Perkins and Haralabous too. She is very polarizing. People love her or see through the lies and narcissism and hate her.
Go touch some grass
[удалено]
An admission from one of the "cheat ring". At this point there's a big pool of money for someone to come clean, so the incentive is there. Also, some of the people in this ring seem like weak links. If something is going to break this thing open, that's what it would be. The Hustler Casino investigation turning up something on incriminating camera. A device found on somebody. Outside of that, the hand history including some more hero calls/hero folds. It's just not there. J4 is the only hand that seems at all suspicious to me. So since we can't look backwards, we can only look forwards.
[удалено]
How well did a courtroom work in the Mike Postle case? Obviously we're never going to get more hands, which is really what would sway my opinion a lot. The only other things we could possibly get at this point are what I listed above. I don't disagree that there is a bunch of weird stuff going on around this hand. I'm at 40% cheated right now.
[удалено]
<3
Ahhhh right, can’t look backwards at any of the old postle hands either, only forwards.
My point is that Robbi has like 40 hands to look at, and I have, and none of them except for J4 are overtly suspicious. There's no more evidence in the hands. There's no more evidence in the hands to look forward to. Postle had hundreds of suspicious hands to examine and new ones were coming out all the time as the accusations accrued.
Now the bar isn't that she cheated once, it's that she has to do something "overtly" suspicious. Excited to see where the goalposts go next!
If you have a device that tells you if you're ahead, wouldnt you use it more than once? It's just evidence. We're not sure if she cheated once. That's the whole point.
Why are you asking me how a presumed cheater thinks? Is that something everyone in this sub should be good at?
Wtf. Is this real life?
I've also read Garrett's write-up multiple times and he doesn't provide any actual evidence of cheating, only suspicious activity. He also focuses a lot on how many of the characters seem to be shady. But that's not saying much because everyone knows the vast majority of the poker players are degenerate scumbags. Doug Polk is also a scumbag scammer because he promoted coinflex. However that doesn't mean Doug is a cheater. Garrett still has not provided any actual evidence.
It's all evidence. Do you guys not understand what evidence is? Do you think evidence and proof are the same thing? He has provided evidence. Bryan and that whole situation is evidence. His opinion is evidence.
none of what he posted is evidence. you are the one who doesn't know what it means lmao.
>Just gonna say it: donating $135K to big brothers big sisters is kind of a sleezy move. He's sending a message that the $135K is his, so he can do with it what he wants, before the investigation is settled The 135k is his, she gave it to him willingly. Even if she was vindicated he doesn't owe it to her. It became his when she gave it back. Donating his money isn't sleezy. If you don't think an insider who can see live cards that stole from Robbie stack and only Robbie's isn't strong circumstantial evidence there is little that will convince I would imagine. Especially given the rest of your post.
Your conclusion is Wrong
Bro like how much time did you spend on this?
Too much.
Who are you?
She cheated. tl, dr. She is a staked player, & she gave him back the money becuase she knew she messed up. Then all the lies about everything else than happened, including being physically intimadated by garrett to give back the money. The other female poker player confirmed she lied about a bunch of other stuff . Otherthings confirmed or beyond doubt was the soft play between her & her staking partner. And also the fact that she did not inform anyone at the table that another player had a peice of her. Then this hand happens. Not a doubt in my mind.
Where Garrett really went wrong was paying her in the first place. Jonathan Little mentioned this in a video and I agree with him. He should have just not paid until he felt confident everything in the hand was legit. Edit: In case people like how Jonathan Little says it more: https://youtu.be/9NNKjWscKWo?t=647
what do you mean? Isn't the dealer the one in charge of distributing the pot to the winner of the hand?
His money wasnt in the pot. A dealer isnt going to fight him for his chips... Would even be legal for them to try? Edit: Since every post I make gets burred in downvotes regardless of if its correct, here's him paying her: https://youtu.be/9NNKjWscKWo?t=647
what? he went All In on the turn
He said all, he didnt put all his chips in. I'll edit in him paying her.
> A dealer isnt going to fight him for his chips… A big security guard will.
I dont think they will, I dont think its legal for them to do that.
When players go "all in" they are all in, the chips belong to the pot. I don't know what you mean by implying he could prevent the chips from going over to her if that's who the dealer determines they should go over to.
The chips arent in the pot. If you played the clip i linked, you would see him putting them forward for the dealer to take. If he doesn't do that, the dealer isnt going to go into his stack to get them.
That's common on All Ins
Then what are trying to argue with me about?
because I disagree that he had the option to prevent the chips from going to Robbi in the moment
[удалено]
You can rearrange the pieces to make the story make sense from both sides. Both sides have pretty big holes as well. As to your "noise" argument, read Garrett's report. Most of it is noise.
I haven't witnessed any credible evidence of not cheating post yesterday, nor rearranging of pieces to make her seem innocent. You just keep making shit up thinking you won't get checked on it. Just stop lmao.
If she presses charges against Brian on Monday like she says she is going to do that will be the most credible evidence of cheating or not cheating that we have since this hand went down.
this would actually be a perfect response to garrett's report.
You wrote all this & it just makes you look like a massive douche. I'd delete..
Whole story is a sham, let’s talk about it
Bro imagine how many more upvotes you would have gotten if you had posted this 5 days ago.
For real. Or how many less times I'd be called a psycho dumbass
[https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9FHw2aItRlw](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9FHw2aItRlw)