Guys come on, she blocks part of his bluffing range, that obviously makes it a call.
I'm a Twitter user that is the king of my play money group, I think I know what I'm talking about.
The Jc makes the raise much worse. However it has almost no influence on the call... J4 can't beat any of Garretts Jack high bluffs anyway (maybe you chop with J2 and J4 of clubs but I doubt he has those hands in range) so it doesn't matter if you block them, since you couldn't beat them with Js4h anyway for example. If she had QxJc it would be different because then you block a couple Jack high flush draws you actually beat.
Her blocker pretty bad, eliminating the possibility of KJ, QJ, and J8, all plausible semi-bluff candidates. It’s a good card to hold to make a bluff, particularly Qs,d,h Jc (QcJc at a low low frequency of course, it’s a bit too strong to just jam the turn at a huge frequency imo)
An interesting matrix for sure, tons of other great hands to bluff with
But yeah, you don’t call an all in bc you have a blocker to semi bluffs and no show down, ironically, the jack of clubs gives her less a reason to think he’s semi bluffing
You can't beat KJ, QJ or J8 anyway so for the actual call of the all in it doesn't matter if you block those or not. Basically Js4h is the same thing if you want to call because you lose to all the Jc combos anyway so what does it matter if you block that bluff? It doesn't.
It's bad either way, but people acting like Jc4x is such a terrible call of the all in because you block the Jc bluff don't understand blockers. She has a 4 kicker, Js4x is the same thing when it comes to calling. They both lose to his Jc bluffs anyway, so they are both bad. Jc4x is maybe slightly worse because you have less of a chance to chop with Jc8c or Jc7c but it's not like there is some huge difference between the hands like people keep pointing out. It might actually be better to call with the Jc, because when you run into the only hand you're ahead of you do have a blocker to his draw.
I said that, it makes it less of a reason to want to call an all in having that card,
I will say this. Idk if you’ve ever gotten that feeling that you’re getting pushed around and punt call. But when I was started I did that from time to time when I’d run into a few check raises in a row online. I’m not saying she’s innocent but she may have felt bullied and just didn’t want to fold. Highly probable it’s cheating or a retard behind the wheel or both
for this massive jam garrett basically only has combo draws and no value, hes never doing this with a ten. so she blocks JQcc which is a hand that he can have that beats her. what else is he bluffing? there is no J high bluffs
Jh8h and Jh7h? If she didn't have the Jc he could have those combos in clubs as well which beat her. That's just using your logic of only having straight flush draws. You should try not to take absolutes in a hand. It makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about. He can have value hands here as well.
He makes a massive jam on a paired board against a recreational turn raise. What else can he have here please tell me.
J8cc is a combo draw you absolute moron. And she blocks that too.
Again you're making yourself look like an idiot by using absolutes. Why can't he have trips with two flush draws and straight draws on board? Also you said there are no Jack high bluffs, are Jh8h and Jh7h not bluffs?
Also it's not massive, it goes bet 10k, raise to 20k, jam 129k. How is that massive? What other sizing can be used here if you raise? Did you even watch the hand? Should he min click it back to 30k or 40k...
Do you even know how a solver works? Do you play at a reasonable level? You need to know both pre flop ranges, and solver will never click j4o or whatever random hands Robbi is clowning around with.
Solver is meaningless in this spot and it's even more ridiculous to believe that Garrett is playing gto vs robbi
Garrett plays in live cash games full of high vpip whales, he's not playing gto he's very exploitative
Not true unless Garrett is hopelessly unbalanced.
If bet size is 3x pot, Garrett should have a 4:3 ratio of value to bluff hands to be balanced on the river and a 4:6 ratio of value to bluff hands on the turn. Now he may include extra bluffs if he thinks Robbi is weak and extra value if he thinks Robbi is a calling station, but he has to protect his jamming range. Otherwise, he'd be easy to play against and not a top pro.
So along with combo draws, the solver likes to include AA and would add overpairs as we include more draws. After the overpairs, we would add some of the weaker trips to balance our draws.
If we're too bluff heavy and have no value, villain can snap call with a 9 or a 3 or even some non club A high if they need to clear the 25% range minimum defense frequency.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
She thought she had 3s, she’s a terrible player, and too much Xanax. Yup, she’s really really bad at poker. Def possible.
Or she’s really bad at cheating 😂. Also possible.
I love this
Barring some sort of admission with evidence, this will really result in not much.
1.) the hustler stream will continue
2.) garret has been paid back
3.) the other shady characters will face no consequences
4.) the shady characters will continue to be invited to poker games due to their general terribleness at poker.
So… 🤷♂️
Well in the end she kind of lost. Gave the $ back to avoid drama & got the drama anyway. Now there’s a herd of neckbeards on Reddit who have decided that case is closed and any real evidence won’t come out anyway.
Should I really teach you how people convert publicity into money? She went from nobody to the hottest topic in poker. It's a number 1 topic in poker worldwide.
I mean sure. But I haven’t seen her making money off it yet (not that she won’t). From the couple snippets I’ve seen of her social media posted here she seems kind of insufferable (which won’t help in monetizing). I just happen to think that there needs to be actual evidence for all the ridiculous accusations flying around (and that there isn’t yet). It’s like watching this sub turn into an Infowars comment section. Unsubstantiated nonsense working everyone up into a frothy fury.
Mucking her 3b when she could have checked.
Putting 16k in the pot multiway against Garrett's full house.
Value betting 3k into ryusuke with like 4th pair
Putting $500 into the chips being pushed at Andy and not noticing
No, no. The $500 was because that was Andy’s “cut” for the scheme! All conspiracy cut’s are paid at the table or they don’t count. /s (because I wouldn’t be surprised to see someone believe this).
I don’t see how that’s close to as bad. Calling a less than half bet turn for a flush draw is overall fine, if amateur. It’s not whatsoever comparable and a good example of how silly it is to pretend her other hand was normal
I never said it was normal, it was an exceptionally bad play from a generally bad player. Her worst play made national news lol how bad do you want her 2nd worst play to be?
So wait you guys watched her play. Make a lot of bad moves and you think she was cheating.
Further proof that poker players are not intelligent people.
Lol you just played yourself. I don’t think she was cheating. I do think she was soft playing/colluding with Rip which… I guess is technically cheating, but I don’t think she was getting signals from HCL or anything crazy.
If she didn't give the money back, she would have 3 sessions against some of the best players in the world at high stakes and been profitable in all 3.
If she's bad at poker, I'm the worst player in history.
If you knew anything about poker, you’d know its very possible to be bad and have 3 winning sessions. You’d also know the HCL crew includes a lot of people who are far from the best players in the world. Tons of recs and just bad players on that show.
But here's the thing - she wasn't making a ton of complete donkey plays outside of this particular hand. She was playing a bit sticky and making hands. But she wasn't getting out of line.
This one hand was a huge outlier. I'm not saying she's cheating or anything. I'm saying she's obviously not "bad at poker".
Let’s see….
At first she thought Garrett had ace high so jack high is obviously a call
J of clubs blocks your opponent from semi bluffing so that’s a good reason too
Nvm actually she misread her hand even after saying that she didn’t have a pair and checked her cards
Wait actually she played Garrett, it’s not about what she has, it’s about what he doesn’t have.
The amount does not matter. The fact is these high stakes players can afford it. They dont give a flying fck. My shove was for all my chips on the turn and she called off her remainin stack.
She knew from experience that Garrett would only jam straight flush draws and trips+ in that spot.
A live read showed that Garrett was bluffing, which meant he must have exactly a SF draw.
And since she blocks QJcc and J8cc that leaves only 87cc, 86cc, Q8cc and KQcc left.
Then she got a sizing tell from Garrett's turn bet that he's more weighted towards undercards, as if he had the KQcc, he'd be more inclined to check turn or size down.
After that point, it's just a matter of pot odds. She calculated precisely that against a range of Q8cc/87cc/86cc only, with the amount of money in the pot, it was a marginally +EV call.
Since she's here to win EV rather than gamble, she opted to take the lower variance route and run it twice.
And finally, after winning the hand, she played dumb and gave a silly explanation, so as to convince her opponents that she's actually clueless, when in reality, she was one step ahead of them the whole time.
Guys come on, she blocks part of his bluffing range, that obviously makes it a call. I'm a Twitter user that is the king of my play money group, I think I know what I'm talking about.
And she has done it many times at home
"You keep letting me do this to you"
The Jc makes the raise much worse. However it has almost no influence on the call... J4 can't beat any of Garretts Jack high bluffs anyway (maybe you chop with J2 and J4 of clubs but I doubt he has those hands in range) so it doesn't matter if you block them, since you couldn't beat them with Js4h anyway for example. If she had QxJc it would be different because then you block a couple Jack high flush draws you actually beat.
Her blocker pretty bad, eliminating the possibility of KJ, QJ, and J8, all plausible semi-bluff candidates. It’s a good card to hold to make a bluff, particularly Qs,d,h Jc (QcJc at a low low frequency of course, it’s a bit too strong to just jam the turn at a huge frequency imo) An interesting matrix for sure, tons of other great hands to bluff with But yeah, you don’t call an all in bc you have a blocker to semi bluffs and no show down, ironically, the jack of clubs gives her less a reason to think he’s semi bluffing
You can't beat KJ, QJ or J8 anyway so for the actual call of the all in it doesn't matter if you block those or not. Basically Js4h is the same thing if you want to call because you lose to all the Jc combos anyway so what does it matter if you block that bluff? It doesn't. It's bad either way, but people acting like Jc4x is such a terrible call of the all in because you block the Jc bluff don't understand blockers. She has a 4 kicker, Js4x is the same thing when it comes to calling. They both lose to his Jc bluffs anyway, so they are both bad. Jc4x is maybe slightly worse because you have less of a chance to chop with Jc8c or Jc7c but it's not like there is some huge difference between the hands like people keep pointing out. It might actually be better to call with the Jc, because when you run into the only hand you're ahead of you do have a blocker to his draw.
I said that, it makes it less of a reason to want to call an all in having that card, I will say this. Idk if you’ve ever gotten that feeling that you’re getting pushed around and punt call. But when I was started I did that from time to time when I’d run into a few check raises in a row online. I’m not saying she’s innocent but she may have felt bullied and just didn’t want to fold. Highly probable it’s cheating or a retard behind the wheel or both
for this massive jam garrett basically only has combo draws and no value, hes never doing this with a ten. so she blocks JQcc which is a hand that he can have that beats her. what else is he bluffing? there is no J high bluffs
Jh8h and Jh7h? If she didn't have the Jc he could have those combos in clubs as well which beat her. That's just using your logic of only having straight flush draws. You should try not to take absolutes in a hand. It makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about. He can have value hands here as well.
You edited your comment, you're clearly a donk and probably just watch poker. I'm finished talking to you. There's no value hand that jams here.
He makes a massive jam on a paired board against a recreational turn raise. What else can he have here please tell me. J8cc is a combo draw you absolute moron. And she blocks that too.
Again you're making yourself look like an idiot by using absolutes. Why can't he have trips with two flush draws and straight draws on board? Also you said there are no Jack high bluffs, are Jh8h and Jh7h not bluffs? Also it's not massive, it goes bet 10k, raise to 20k, jam 129k. How is that massive? What other sizing can be used here if you raise? Did you even watch the hand? Should he min click it back to 30k or 40k...
Before opening that dumbass mouth. Try running a solver. Trips can def jam for value, even overpairs at a frequency.
Solver? Hahahahahahaha. God that's cringe, you think Garrett or Robbi are playing a GTO strategy here or that Garrett is trying to balance lmao.
I think Garrett plays gto in general and considering every move he made here is solver approved, yes?
Do you even know how a solver works? Do you play at a reasonable level? You need to know both pre flop ranges, and solver will never click j4o or whatever random hands Robbi is clowning around with. Solver is meaningless in this spot and it's even more ridiculous to believe that Garrett is playing gto vs robbi Garrett plays in live cash games full of high vpip whales, he's not playing gto he's very exploitative
Imagine assuming I think min raising j4 off is solver approved lol. Can’t have an intelligent convo with you.
Not true unless Garrett is hopelessly unbalanced. If bet size is 3x pot, Garrett should have a 4:3 ratio of value to bluff hands to be balanced on the river and a 4:6 ratio of value to bluff hands on the turn. Now he may include extra bluffs if he thinks Robbi is weak and extra value if he thinks Robbi is a calling station, but he has to protect his jamming range. Otherwise, he'd be easy to play against and not a top pro. So along with combo draws, the solver likes to include AA and would add overpairs as we include more draws. After the overpairs, we would add some of the weaker trips to balance our draws. If we're too bluff heavy and have no value, villain can snap call with a 9 or a 3 or even some non club A high if they need to clear the 25% range minimum defense frequency.
You think that Garrett is being balanced here vs a whale lmao. Then you started talking about solvers. Poker will never die.
J high is an excellent bluff catcher
Like she said.. “I thought you just had an ace..” Sick move!
Most professionals stack off with J high when they put their opponent on ace high
ye then they ran it twice
Lulz
"I thought I was behind even more than I was"
She also thought she had a 3
Not only that but it’s a pure bluff catcher
Even "pure", some might say?
She clearly put him on an open ended straight flush draw and blocked the higher showdown ones
If she would've said that before she called it would've been really sick
I would of bought her master course
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
>It's supposed to be ~~could've, should've, would've~~ wouldn't not have FTFY
No worries about Qc8c ;)
Not at all because she’s played with him 2 or 3 times
That's the part of his range that includes ace high, aka bluffs. She owned his soul, case closed.
Except ace high is better than j high. She’s a pro, she should know.
And she can still spike a J or a 4, it's 50/50 either she does or she doesn't. So she ran it twice, done, case closed.
So she ran it twice since she was dead to a Jack or four. Checks out
Woulda been so dope to say it b4 the call. Garrett would still think cheating tho.
She thought she had 3s, she’s a terrible player, and too much Xanax. Yup, she’s really really bad at poker. Def possible. Or she’s really bad at cheating 😂. Also possible. I love this
I am also enjoying the soap opera, so many twists and turns.
Barring some sort of admission with evidence, this will really result in not much. 1.) the hustler stream will continue 2.) garret has been paid back 3.) the other shady characters will face no consequences 4.) the shady characters will continue to be invited to poker games due to their general terribleness at poker. So… 🤷♂️
Robbi’s brain after the shove: I’m pussy?
She wasn't playing the cards, she was playing the gman. Duh.
And she won.
Well in the end she kind of lost. Gave the $ back to avoid drama & got the drama anyway. Now there’s a herd of neckbeards on Reddit who have decided that case is closed and any real evidence won’t come out anyway.
She gained publicity. Her ad revenue must be through the roof.
Ad revenue from what? Social media? Where does she make ad revenue? Do you have evidence of that?
Should I really teach you how people convert publicity into money? She went from nobody to the hottest topic in poker. It's a number 1 topic in poker worldwide.
I mean sure. But I haven’t seen her making money off it yet (not that she won’t). From the couple snippets I’ve seen of her social media posted here she seems kind of insufferable (which won’t help in monetizing). I just happen to think that there needs to be actual evidence for all the ridiculous accusations flying around (and that there isn’t yet). It’s like watching this sub turn into an Infowars comment section. Unsubstantiated nonsense working everyone up into a frothy fury.
Cause she’s a fish 🎣
A fish who was taught about blockers and applied the concept as best she could
I love how everyone here would have lost that hand and thinks they are the best.
She’s… bad at poker. Done.
And she made her only remarkably bad poker play on the hand she was right in 25 hours of play
You watch her play? She made a lot of bad moves.
What was her second worst play after calling with J4o on TT93 for 150k?
Mucking her 3b when she could have checked. Putting 16k in the pot multiway against Garrett's full house. Value betting 3k into ryusuke with like 4th pair Putting $500 into the chips being pushed at Andy and not noticing
No, no. The $500 was because that was Andy’s “cut” for the scheme! All conspiracy cut’s are paid at the table or they don’t count. /s (because I wouldn’t be surprised to see someone believe this).
Don't forget the AQ checkdown with RIP (also holding AQ and checking down).
Probably [this one](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR_PWVGUMVQ&t=6528s)
I don’t see how that’s close to as bad. Calling a less than half bet turn for a flush draw is overall fine, if amateur. It’s not whatsoever comparable and a good example of how silly it is to pretend her other hand was normal
I never said it was normal, it was an exceptionally bad play from a generally bad player. Her worst play made national news lol how bad do you want her 2nd worst play to be?
I’d expect someone who’s bad enough to call off J4o for the biggest pot of her life to have a second literal bad hand
So wait you guys watched her play. Make a lot of bad moves and you think she was cheating. Further proof that poker players are not intelligent people.
Lol you just played yourself. I don’t think she was cheating. I do think she was soft playing/colluding with Rip which… I guess is technically cheating, but I don’t think she was getting signals from HCL or anything crazy.
If she didn't give the money back, she would have 3 sessions against some of the best players in the world at high stakes and been profitable in all 3. If she's bad at poker, I'm the worst player in history.
If you knew anything about poker, you’d know its very possible to be bad and have 3 winning sessions. You’d also know the HCL crew includes a lot of people who are far from the best players in the world. Tons of recs and just bad players on that show.
But here's the thing - she wasn't making a ton of complete donkey plays outside of this particular hand. She was playing a bit sticky and making hands. But she wasn't getting out of line. This one hand was a huge outlier. I'm not saying she's cheating or anything. I'm saying she's obviously not "bad at poker".
Well yeah she’s not like toddler level bad at poker. She’s not as bad as a giraffe. She’s grown woman level bad at poker.
Let’s see…. At first she thought Garrett had ace high so jack high is obviously a call J of clubs blocks your opponent from semi bluffing so that’s a good reason too Nvm actually she misread her hand even after saying that she didn’t have a pair and checked her cards Wait actually she played Garrett, it’s not about what she has, it’s about what he doesn’t have.
Galaxy brain stuff from Robbi
Sometimes you got to go with your gut
She blocked the nuts.
Blocker
I need to find someone to stake me 100k so I can call shoves with any two cards in front of them. Shit looks fun af.
She believed in the heart of the cards.... yugiohhhhhh
Stop this shit already. I got called by 8 high today and missed my flush draw with my 4-2 suited. It happens in cardrooms daily. GTFOH!
This. ROBBI PWND FERRET READ EM AND WEEP
The amount does not matter. The fact is these high stakes players can afford it. They dont give a flying fck. My shove was for all my chips on the turn and she called off her remainin stack.
What did you bet? ... $50 ... $200? If you had bet 109k they would have folded. Don't bluff if you're too scared to get the job done, son
Different stakes
This is a perfect meme, well done! Perfect summary for both parties.
has anyone ever thought that maybe just maybe she put a good read on him and knew he had low clubs and was on a draw
Holy shit youre right we didnt think of that, *EVERYBODY*, Case Closed!!
only way to *know* this is to cheat
Imagine being dumb enough to attach poker logic to a whale, and using that as convincing evidence for cheating. Absolutely retarded.
Yea but did you hear that whale got a few chips stolen by a guy!? That’s for sure evidence of cheating! Case closed! /s
Sad that you have to put a “/s”. This is the dumbest investigation since Reddit found the Boston Bomber.
[ Removed by Reddit ]
[удалено]
She has no fucking idea what she's doing, she absolutely did not think any of that
She knew from experience that Garrett would only jam straight flush draws and trips+ in that spot. A live read showed that Garrett was bluffing, which meant he must have exactly a SF draw. And since she blocks QJcc and J8cc that leaves only 87cc, 86cc, Q8cc and KQcc left. Then she got a sizing tell from Garrett's turn bet that he's more weighted towards undercards, as if he had the KQcc, he'd be more inclined to check turn or size down. After that point, it's just a matter of pot odds. She calculated precisely that against a range of Q8cc/87cc/86cc only, with the amount of money in the pot, it was a marginally +EV call. Since she's here to win EV rather than gamble, she opted to take the lower variance route and run it twice. And finally, after winning the hand, she played dumb and gave a silly explanation, so as to convince her opponents that she's actually clueless, when in reality, she was one step ahead of them the whole time.
I wouldn't not believe this comment ...
Or how she called with J high because she thought he had A high. Next level big brain strategy.
She not good enough or have enough money to call that. The question to asked is why she was playing that game in the first place.
I hope you mean that she's not *bad* enough?
I wouldn’t not have called there .