And Running it twice "cheating" for a 50 50 flip?
And Running it twice "cheating" for a 50 50 flip?
I admit garetts explanation makes some sense to me about someone who has been brought in to cheat and is too stupid to actually understand how to do it. But is there really any evidence outside of this hand? I haven;t reviewed her play in other hands and don;t have the time. But Garett makes it sound like outside of this hand she plays fine, and well find that hard to believe.
I will say what is damning is her offering to give the money back. She is either cheating or there is really some horrible pressure on her and an innocent person has been screwed out of money. Either way is pretty terrible.
I'm still on the side that she wasn;t cheating though. Feel pretty horrible for her if that is the case
Looked her up and the interesting thing is she comes across as very knowledgeable smart girl.
Make your own judgements from this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54R9WVnkYMM
Here is the guy who apparently taught her and her coach.
He has been silent since the incident.
https://twitter.com/FarazJaka
I saw this tweet by robbi and if she’s telling the truth then this is a shit looking for HCL and especially Nick and Ryan. Essentially backrooming/backhallwaying her is shady as fuck. I don’t think she was cheating. Having watched enough of Adelstein play he’s been randomly monkeytilting and bluffing and getting nailed for it right and left by some of the others the fact he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar with Robbi is what’s got him pissed off.Quote:
Originally Posted by BetCheckBet
That being said there was some random rumor that she was in cohoots with RIP the dude in the cowboy hat but not sure how or if that’s even possible. People trying to turn this into Postle 2.0 are grasping at straws.
People are underestimating how easily women are intimidated and try to avoid conflict.
Garrett is a big guy that likes taking pictures with his shirt off.
Most men would have told him to F off.
Wise men would have suggested they settle the dispute after the producers reviewed the film/security.
This is far more egregious than what got Armenian Mike thrown off LATB.
The other thing to remember is that also Garrett is good friends with producers of show. He can get you banned from the game very easily. To be honest there is a pretty big conflict of interest and there is good reason why Garrett is one of the only pros who is regularly there.Quote:
Originally Posted by turdzilla
Ivey will not be back.
It will be interesting to see if the woke feminist that does the podcast with Nick suggests that G be banned and women boycott the show until done.
Have to be dumb as shit to be cheating here, would be the worst imaginable spot.
She seems like a moron but tough to think her theoretical partner would pull the trigger on this hand.
Anyone who’s ever watched Celebrity Poker Showdown from back in the day has seen plays like this. She seems to be some rich, spacey chick whose lip injections blocked the oxygen going to her brain for that hand. I get how Garrett reacted in the moment. I also get how RIP acted in the moment. How can you continue a game where the big time crusher just got a 135K refund? What are the whales supposed to think about that?
It would of been fascinating to see if RIPs outburst didn’t happen and Garrett sat with that money how the game would have proceeded. This chick has changed her story so many times but so did Amanda Knox. It doesn’t really mean anything. The whole thought process around the fact she most likely didn’t cheat is somewhat centered around her being unaware of basic poker concepts.
I will say that if someone who was involved in the manufacture or creation of the software HLC utilizes and has the ability to get the hole card information all of a sudden wanted to pull this type of thing, then Robbi would be the archetype they would use to get into the highest stakes game tout de suite. I did see the video of her appearing to vibrate during the tank before calling off. Last night I thought 0% chance…today I’m still close to 0, but feel there is the smallest of chances.
There is also some conflicting information about her situation. Reports she is married to some big shot lawyer and then Berkey says on his podcast she’s dating RIP (Jacob). Which both could be correct (divorce/open marriage etc). But she seems pretty well off to me returning 135K because “She doesn’t like drama”. Really bizarre stuff.
She is also really leaning in to the woman card. Which definitely played a role in the dynamic of her returning her money to Garrett, but that’s it. She really has communicated very poorly. Maybe she is just like that all the time.
For instance she is still saying she had a read on Garrett or whatever. She would be well served to say I won because I suck. But then I guess that bruises her ego and makes “Jaka Coaching” look bad. But JFC, it would of diffused a lot of this to just say “I got nervous, my brain short circuited, my game needs work, I realize I cant call with this hand even if I suspect bluffing etc”. She needs to really communicate better if she’s innocent and much much much better if she’s guilty.
I want to know more about her financial situation. Rich people can steal, but if she really is financially secure it would also go a long way to diffusing this.
The other two possibilities other than being signaled are marked cards (Stu Ungar glasses) or being able to see Garrett’s cards b/c the dealer is pitching them too high or Garret wasn’t protecting his hand. These seem less likely but not out of the realm of possibility. Video should clear the pitch/hole carding possibility up rather quickly. Would of been nice for them to have checked her sunglasses/deck last night, but it’s too late for that now.
Finally a post that satisfies my curiosity.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDime
She’s fairly well off. She isn’t a subsistence gambler like Postle to use a shopworn example. Perhaps she was archetype until the lack of motivation to cheat. She gave the damn money to Garrett - who is more similar to Postle of the two players involved. Garrett kept the money cause that is exactly what Postle would do too - amuses me.
She is tough to look at and read with all the work done to her. She’s obviously more the modern day shallow attention seeker than the stealth poker cheat.
If Garrett is tight with the HLC outfit you’d think fanning the cheating claim would be the last thing he’d want to do unless he’s not that sophisticated. He’s likely not that bright and HCL is squirming. I don’t understand anything Garrett has done from showdown on.
Garrett fucked himself and is doubling down.
Wrestling had their bad guys and Garrett better warm up to being public enemy number one on that show
We move on.
Garrett is obviously a closeted homosexual but there is nothing wrong with that
It is funny that people question a gambler's motivation.
There are self-proclaimed professional roulette and baccarat players.
Really?
Ask Garrett why he shoved $100,000+ with a crappy hand hoping to get a fold.
Her cosmetic procedures - lips, nose, teeth, cheeks, breasts, heavy makeup, vaginal rejuvenation, butt implants, and rib removal may have clouded her judgment.
The Twitter mob turning on Garrett was not surprising but pretty fascinating to see. “You either die the hero, or live long enough to become the villain”. I think it’s always been human nature, but we just see the enjoyment in tearing people down much easier in the age of social media.
Garrett totally lost it. He felt robbed and he saw the chance to get his money back and took it. His mind was in no shape to realize that it would likely be impossible to sit in that game after getting the 135K back. We will never know what would of happened if RIP didn’t lose his shit, but my guess is Garrett sticks around an orbit & says he needs to get out of there.
At this point it seems he has that money. Which we know gives him all the leverage here. Right or wrong he is holding all the cards at this point. Whatever the investigation concludes, it will probably be impossible to totally exonerate Robbi. You probably can get closer to prove absolute guilt, than you can total innocence. So there always can be the smallest seed of doubt.
It will be pretty interesting to see the butterfly effect last night has on the poker world, Hustler Casino Live, streaming, Garrett, etc. This is not the poker story of the week. This will stick around for a while.
If I put myself in her place and I’m accused of cheating & know I’m innocent, I am yelling it until the cows come home. I’m emptying my pockets. If I have glasses on I am going to give them to production & the other players to inspect. I would defend myself for the duration of that stream until I am blue in the face. Frisk me all you want boys!
But again, the whole defense conjured up for Robbi is she just doesn’t get it. She doesn’t understand the gravity of that accusation. Her brain is fucking alien to us. She just doesn’t fucking get it. So the fact she didn’t defend herself like i think most of us would have, just makes the whole thing even more confounding.
Nothing but crickets from Vertucci so far. Empty promises all around. Robbi promised more info on getting hallwayed also to deal with Gman apparently by Ryan or Nick and nothing. This is turning into a steaming pile of crap. And also lets be realistic she ran it twice that kinda eliminates any chance she was being shady.. Nobody who thinks they have an advantage in the hand wants twice unless theyre hoping to split the pot at best. She lucksacked end of story it was a donkey play but then again Garrett having watched a ton of HCL last few weeks has been shown to be full of shit on a regular basis and being a bully with his stack. She likely did as Ive done at the tables sometimes and just took a stand to put up or shut up with Garrett trying to keep him honest. Sometimes a player just pisses you off and you have to make them prove they actually have it even if its -EV to show you can and will call down with a marginal bluff catcher. (which Im not even sure thats what she had would qualify as). He forgets this shit is taped and even on delay people can go back and watch his play and actions at the table its like game film on a sports figure. Having tape on somebody is priceless at times and theres plenty on him in existence, he needs to remember that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Hell tell him to fuck off. Eric Persson wouldve go into the hallway and beat his ass down likely. roflmao.. I like Persson he doesnt take shit from nobody and yeah the looks on his face when he gets smashed are priceless.. Hes good for poker. He was just laughing his ass off at Garrett last night and enjoying every minute of it. Persson is like a cross between Mike Dentale and that annoying turd kassouf because hes got speech play down to a level beyond Kassouf and hes got that look of dont fuck with me or ill remove your head from your shoulders type even though the guy is close to 50 (hes like a few months younger then me I believe and looks a shit ton more bad ass then his old Linked In photos from a few yrs ago).Quote:
Originally Posted by turdzilla
Few possibilities on Robbi's actions and defenseQuote:
Originally Posted by JeffDime
1. Shes a chick and her bankroll is essentially F You money and as she said she doesnt care hence giving it back shes not worried about getting it back
2. The likelyhood she was on some mind altering substance is pretty suspect here. I dont think she was drunk I think it was clearly something like Xanax or similar as she kinda talked circles on herself which as ChicagoJoey pointed out on his show last night reviewing things is very common in high stakes be it downers or even some folks popping Poker PEDs like Adderall and such to keep them mentally sharp.
3. In addition I believe theres a lot of substance useage in poker to keep folks from having tells. Shit my one med Im on could be considered a PED as its a Beta Blocker akin to Propanolol which was and has been used for years as a downer for some folks related to anxiety/stage fright type issues but is more normally used for tachycardia such in my case as I have an errant pacer in my heart that occasionally decides ot try and hijack shit and make my heart race but the taking the long acting med once a day I have no issues (but damn if Im late shit starts up like clockwork). (in the case of Poker it would potentially keep down tells such as a pulsing neck vein if somebody had a pulse tell).
4. Robbi was telling the truth that GMan has shown a propensity of being almost overly aggressive when hes bluffing and thats a pattern tell on his part havent seen a timing issue with him per se but would shock me if one were to go back sometimes he either bets faster or deliberately slower hollywooding when hes bluffing. If so hes going to have to go back to the drawing board on some of his play.
In my own case I try to bet size evenly preflop to disguise my hand and occasionally will trap call to look weak but then again sometimes I am kinda just trying to see a bluff cheap. The key obviously is never show patterns in your betting unless its dead identical so nobody can pick up a bet sizing tell. I think Garretts just gotten either complacent some or people finally have enough film now to tell that something is off in his actions that gives away his weakness and bluffs.
I am almost certain that Nick was talking about the footage of her seemingly vibrating that Berkey showed earlier. Nick said it was going to come out, but not from him. So I think that’s it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ftpjesusNothing but crickets from Vertucci so far. Empty promises all around. Robbi promised more info on getting hallwayed also to deal with Gman apparently by Ryan or Nick and nothing. This is turning into a steaming pile of crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
The needle is slowly moving here that it is more possible this may have happened. No phones allowed after Postle. So the vibrating device theory makes sense. The communication also would be far simpler (Ahead or Behind) & also more likely for shit like this to happen. Her hand was always ahead of Garrett’s technically.
The poor communication by her, the lack of a more stern response and the fact that Garrett has the money all really stir the pot here. The internet may have turned on Garrett because he got that 135K, but he may have the last laugh. This allows him the freedom to play offense without holding back, on the off chance he could still recover the money. He would have to tread much more lightly. Now he can just go guns blazing.
I don't believe she cheated.
Some random thoughts:
I think her financial situation would play a big factor in the situation, both for and against cheating. If you look at her Hendon Mob results she started playing tournaments in 2015. She has about 40 results. The majority of these tournaments are low buy in's - averaging a couple hundred bucks, one as low as $65. It wasn't until last year that she mixed in some higher buy-in tourneys, several for 1k.
I heard Polk or Ingram say that her boyfriend is banking her. Like JD said, a guy like Garrett just can not fathom someone making that move against him with Jack high while he is playing his GTO. He automatically assumes they must be cheating. Absolutely crazy hand, but my mind does not immediately go to cheating.
There are many Social media influencers that make HUGE money. The top Only Fans sluts ooops... models, are making well into the 7 Figures PER MONTH. I'm not saying she is into something like this, but the easier and faster the money comes to someome the greater chance they will take greater risk.
If the BF is banking her, I do not think she would just give the money back to Garrett so easy without consulting with him.
Also, If she WAS cheating I DON'T think she would have given back the money. At that point it would not change the consequences all that much other than law enforcement possibly getting involved.
If she gives the money back they will investigate.
If she keeps the money, they will investigate.
If she did cheat and gives the money back, her reputation is done. If she did cheat and keeps the money, they would have to prove it, which can be difficult.
I have seen enough from Garrett to where I believe if they conclude that she did not cheat, he will give her the money back.
If she is playing with her own money at that level she obviously would have deep pockets. Hypothetically, if that is the case I do not see her taking the chance at cheating and potentially catching a FELONY and ruin your rep. Yes, it is true that law enforcement usually won't prosecute crimes as if it were a regular casino. The dollar amount of the crime would be a factor as well and in this case 6 figures may be prison time not probation. Small gain for Massive risk.
If she was cheating I think there would be another person as the "brains" behind it. In that situation you can take your picks where you want to cheat. Unlike the Postle situation she could implement the cheating into just 2 or 3
significant hands per 6 hour session. You can "print money" if done properly. Get into 3 games per month and reasonably cheat em for $100k - 200k per game.
Just some thoughts
I think overall there is less than a 1% chance she cheated.
Chicago Joey showed what was claimed to be the seat vibrating during his emergncy podcast episode last night. It appears she was shaking her leg nervously as some people do subconciously. Hell Ive done it at times out of the fact I have painful nerve issues in my left leg related to my previous back surgery in April 2012. Obviously Im sure she doesnt but some people do have nervous leg shakes sometimes and dont even realize it when theyre trying to make a decision.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDimeI am almost certain that Nick was talking about the footage of her seemingly vibrating that Berkey showed earlier. Nick said it was going to come out, but not from him. So I think that’s it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ftpjesus
The needle is slowly moving here that it is more possible this may have happened. No phones allowed after Postle. So the vibrating device theory makes sense. The communication also would be far simpler (Ahead or Behind) & also more likely for shit like this to happen. Her hand was always ahead of Garrett’s technically.
The poor communication by her, the lack of a more stern response and the fact that Garrett has the money all really stir the pot here. The internet may have turned on Garrett because he got that 135K, but he may have the last laugh. This allows him the freedom to play offense without holding back, on the off chance he could still recover the money. He would have to tread much more lightly. Now he can just go guns blazing.
The only suspect as an accomplice of hers to any cheating which I agree is not likely at all anyway is Cowboy Rip.. Many have pointed to him as the possible 2nd party but even the RFID issue as some went after as a theory just doesnt hold water.Quote:
Originally Posted by PositiveVariance
Some good points being raised here.
Regarding the "vibrating", I am just riffing here, but I think people might be incorrectly assuming that cheating would mean they had access to EVERYONE'S hands. That's not necessarily true.
In a hypothetical scenario, it's possible that this was a card-marking thing, and only certain cards were marked, while others weren't. This might have resulted in partial info (buzzing when the player is ahead, but not necessarily instructing specific action). The action is the decision of the player, who decides what to do when knowing they're ahead/behind.
These are just guesses. I'm still torn on this one. I'm not convinced that she cheated, and I'm not convinced that she didn't cheat. Really tough to figure this one out.
Even if cheating and she knew his cards, why in the hell would you pick that spot to call an all in? At best you are hoping to win one of the two boards. Would be stupid to put it all at risk with that meager edge.
They have both looked bad ever since.
Also, Garrett wanted to "run it once". Then told Robbi but "It's up to you" and she wanted to run it twice. As we know running it twice reduces variance.
Typically with cheating, just the hole cards are known.
But let's say, If she was cheating and knew the FIRST River card - why would she want to run it TWICE? This would do 3 things. First, it would go against what Garrett wanted ( not that this matters that much). Second, it makes the hand more agregious as well as draws attention by swooping up both with Jack high. Third, it's the ultimate "Fuck You" to Garrett. Running it once in that situation (if cheating) would be the optimal move.
To know the River cards this would be cheating on another level since the cards are hand shuffled. Shuffled by a machine there are many ways to cheat, but hand shuffled it's difficult. Even if the cards were marked, they take a burn card. Unless the corners were slightly bent and she could see the card raise up slightly being the second card from the top (burn card on top). I really don't see her doing any shit like this.
I may be wrong, but I thought Ingram said that Garrett was slightly ahead when he was sitting on his combo draw. If she knew this but did not know what the River cards were (Only hole cards), running it twice hoping for a chop makes sense.
To be honest, I'm surprised this doesnt happen more often. If done properly with the right people and a good strategy and strategic planning alot of money can be made with little risk.
If someone were to find access to hole cards they could easily take them for $1 to $2 million over a few months without being noticed IF done properly. Make the money then get out.
Let's say you have a 75% chance of getting away with it.
Even with the other 25%, let's say 20% they know you did it but can't prove it (like Postle).
5% you get caught with proof - you work a deal and give money back to avoid prosecution. Play in a California card room and your odds of not getting prosecuted are good.
A great potential with minimal risk.
However, I am glad that there aren't more cases (at least that we know of) because I HATE Cheaters/Scammers.
Maybe it does happen and nobody knows about it. I think cheating happens in small stakes all the time, and I mean in sophisticated ways where the house is in on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PositiveVariance
Lots of activity tonight. I couldn't do the show because a cold I had on Saturday (which delayed my archiving of the last radio show) somehow strengthened again today, after being almost gone yesterday. Not sure how that happened, but whatever. I have a persistent cough and am fairly low energy right now, so I can't do the show at the moment. Hopefully I can tonight (Saturday).
Robbi's husband, Charles Lew, came onto Chicago Joey's show and spoke for awhile. The guy was actually fairly likable, and raised some good points. However, he repeated several times that it's too late for apologies, and strongly implied that he's going to be suing Garrett, and perhaps also Hustler Casino Live. He stopped short of implying that he would do a Mike Postle style lawsuit against people on social media who made allegations. It especially seems like he wants a pound of flesh from Garrett.
Charles Lew is a "boutique attorney" specializing in crypto. I have not researched him, but others I know have, and they tell me he's worth a lot of money. So he definitely has the resources to launch a lawsuit against Garrett and/or HCL, but this also might just be blowing smoke in order to get Garrett to return the $135k and retract his statements.
Charles also seems to be taking major issue with people calling his wife "dumb", and he repeated this several times when on Joey's show. He seems particularly miffed at Doug Polk for both referring to Robbi as dumb AND for spreading the rumor that she's having an affair with her friend Rip/Jacob, who also was in the game, and whom she later confirmed is "staking her 50%". Charles said that he is not aware of any affair, and "am not a willing participant in any open relationship". But that's a weird way to phrase it, right? Couldn't he simply say that he's certain that Robbi and Rip are just friends?
He claimed that he got the bill for the Fendi sunglasses she was wearing (meaning they're not cheating sunglasses), that her ring is a piece of jewelry he bought her (and therefore is not some kind of signaling device), and that her pants were far too tight to conceal any kind of device to vibrate when she has the best hand.
He repeatedly stated that Robbi was "sequestered" by Ryan Feldman, and told to go into the hallway with Garrett, at which point Garrett allegedly told her that "millions of people will be seeing this", in order to scare her into giving the money back.
Charles was also angry that Nick Vertucci said that something big/interesting would be coming out today, and he said that implied something would be released showing Robbi's guilt. I said the same thing when I heard it -- that anything "big" coming out would have to be negative against her, as there's no way something big could come out so fast which would prove she WASN'T cheating. He claimed he threatened Hustler that there will be legal consequences if they make such a "big news" statement again, unless "there really is big news".
Right afterwards, HCL co-owner came onto Joey's show right after Charles, and said he spoke to him "4 times" today. He said he originally tried to get Charles to mediate between him and Robbi, who supposedly was texting him "aggressively". Nick claimed he and Charles had good conversations, and was surprised to hear Charles make these legal threats against HCL. He also took Charles to task for complaining that HCL didn't ask Robbi to give up her stuff for them to examine. Nick said that HCL didn't do this because they didn't want to look accusatory, and claimed that Charles agreed with that decision earlier today. Good points on Nick's part. He also said he's not going to respond to Robbi's texts anymore.
I still want to know if HCL took that deck and examined it. If not, why? Huge omission in the investigation if they don't do that.
Nick also said the casino is going to pull the footage of "everything that night", and claims he's going to have an independent company analyze all of it.
:popcorn
The problem is that Stones did something similar. For this to be effective and trustworthy, the independent company needs to answer to a neutral third party, not to the company hiring them.
Nick claims he will expose "anyone" who was cheating, even an employee, because he will be furious that someone is harming his business this way.
Nick also said that Ryan told him he heard this in the conversation between Robbi and Garrett:
Robbi: What can I do to make this situation better?
Garrett: Well, you could give me my money back.
Ryan has told both Nick and Matt Berkey that he heard this. This makes Garrett look a lot worse here, as it places him actually ASKING for the money back, rather than just receiving it when offered.
Garrett, who had a squeaky-clean (almost too clean) persona in poker for years, is really taking a beating in this one. He may never come back on streams again. He's been called a whiner, a crybaby, a sore loser, and a bullier of women. Keep in mind that Garrett left the game for most of the second half of 2021 due to "depression", and I could easily see this decline in his reputation bringing the depression right back.
Honestly Garrett made a huge mistake taking that money BACK. He didn't need it, and it just makes him look like an asshole at best, and an exploiter of women at worst. He should have either declined it, or asked for her to give it to Hustler Casino Live to hold in escrow until an investigation is done. Taking it (and then defending having taken it) makes him look like a complete dick.
We need an eric bensamokin segment regarding defamation. Pretty sure Garrett can be liable by saying she cheated 100% without saying there is a Chance he could be wrong. Maybe the standard is higher if she is considered a “public figure” but no clue on the law.
Having been sued by Postle for exactly this, I can tell you that such a lawsuit will be tough to win.Quote:
Originally Posted by Erin Micunt
First off, there is a process called Anti-SLAPP where you can get defamation lawsuits dismissed early (and you win your attorney's fees, which would be collectible in this case), if it's determined that the defamation lawsuit was frivolous. The basic test used is, "If the defendant really did say what they did, would this be protected speech under California law?" If the answer is YES, then the Anti-SLAPP motion is granted, the case is dismissed, and attorneys fees are owed to the defendant.
One major hurdle to clear is the "limited purpose public figure" argument. A limited purpose pubic figure is someone who knowingly thrusts themselves into public notoriety or a high profile situation. When someone is deemed a limited purpose public figure, almost all speech against them (even defamatory speech) is protected within that particular subject matter, unless the person making the statement KNEW they were saying something false when they said it (which obviously is very hard to prove).
It could be argued that Robbi is a limited purpose public figure in poker, in her willing appearance on the most highly watched poker cash game stream in the world. If ruled that way, it would entitle pahticipants in the game AND viewers to make comments about her which pertain to her poker play, even if defamatory and ultimately proven untrue (again, provided the person saying it didn't knowingly tell what they knew were lies). Since it's highly likely that Garrett DOES believe she cheated (even if he's totally wrong), any defamation lawsuit against him would fail, if Robbi were to be considered a limited purpose public figure in poker.
However, it is possible that Garrett could be sued for the $135k thing. It could be claimed that Garrett was threatening to ruin Robbi's rep in front of "millions of viewers" unless she refunded the money she actually rightfully won. Not only could they sue for the $135k back, but they could also sue for punitive damages. They could also sue Hustler and Hustler Casino Live for allowing this to take place, especially within earshot of HCL co-owner Ryan Feldman. So I think that's what Charles is alluding to here, rather than just defamation.
I'll give you a good limited purpose public figure example.
Let's say the Dodgers had a player on their 2022 roster named David Johnson, a relief pitcher. David Johnson isn't a real pitcher -- I just made him up for this example. But in this example, assume David Johnson to be a middle reliever. He's not known to people who aren't baseball fans, so he's not a public figure. However, being a pitcher on a Major League Baseball team, he's definitely a limited purpose public figure for baseball.
Now let's say the Dodgers face the Yankees in the 2022 World Series, and are up 3 games to 2. In Game 6, David Johnson comes in and blows the game, tying the series 3-3, and sending it to a deciding game 7.
Then, in Game 7, David Johnson blows it again, and the Yankees finish as the World Champions of baseball.
As a frustrated Dodgers fan, I post, "David Johnson is a piece of shit. He was on the Yankees in 2021, and suddenly they don't sign him and he joins the Dodgers. 100% he took a payoff to join the Dodgers, the best team in the National League, so he can throw games if they face the Yankees in the World Series. That's why the Yankees didn't sign him for 2022. They paid him under the table to purposely lose when he faces them!"
Could David Johnson sue me for that? No. As a baseball fan, I have a right to post wild conspiracy theories about players who blow games, even if they're incorrect.
However, what if instead of posting the above, I posted, "Dodgers pitcher David Johnson molests little boys in the offseason. I have that on good authority."
Unless I had proof of this, he COULD sue me for defamation, as damaging personal allegations like this have nothing to do with baseball, so him being a limited purpose public figure in baseball wouldn't protect my defamatory speech there.
Thank you for taking the time to read this legal lesson from a non-attorney. Real attorneys are welcome to chime in and correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this is accurate.
Rip/Jacob admitted that he has a buddy "Luis who works for HCL", whom he spoke to about the matter after it occurred.
So now this confirms that Rip (who staked Robbi) has a buddy for works for Hustler Casino Live! Uh oh!
Of course, he says this very matter of factly like it doesn't matter. That would actually indicate innocence. If Rip really had a guy on the inside helping him, would he openly state he has a buddy working on the show, while on a highly viewed show like Joey's? Probably not.
BTW, he claimed that there is no romantic/sexual relationship between him and Robbi, and that he has a wife with a newborn baby.
Wouldn’t a more apples to apples comparison for the fictitious player be though if say the Dodgers manager accused him of that? (The throwing the game part) that wouldn’t be from a random fan just like Garrett isn’t a random person commenting.
I’m pretty sure if/when she is cleared of wrong doing people won’t mind playing with her. But if she never gets to play again on hustler because of this there could be damages.
Okay one last thought for now...
When Charles was on Joey's show, he seemed a little confused by exactly what role Rip had in staking his own wife. He said something like, "I think it was 50%... yeah, if she said that, it was probably that." This brings up a good question:
If Charles has a lot of money, why was his wife playing low stakes until early 2022, and suddenly rose in stakes after that? And why are other men backing her? And was the rise in stakes directly related to Rip suddenly backing her?
It is possible that Charles did not have faith in his wife's poker play, and while he was willing to indulge in her hobby by giving her buyins for 3-figure tournaments, he didn't want her to spend big money on buyins until he was fairly certain that she was +EV in the games.
Then along came Rip, who offered to back Robbi to play bigger. At this point, Charles was okay with it, as long as he didn't have to put up his own money.
So it's possible that Charles mostly disconnected from any kind of active involvement (or even observation) of Robbi's poker "career", until this whole nightmare occurred. Then Robbi called up Charles and told him what happened, swore up and down that she wasn't cheating, and Charles was understandably furious at Garrett, and drove down there.
In such a scenario, Charles would honestly believe there was no poker cheating (whether or not there actually was), and would jump to the defense of his wife, especially given Garrett's assholish behavior with asking for (and taking) the money back.
The above is possibly what's going on here. Charles may just be the angry husband defending his wife's honor, who is operating from the position of trusting her word, and feeling like she was wronged by both Garrett and HCL.
This could also answer the "she doesn't need the money" argument, as it's possible her poker bankroll was fairly low, even if her (married) net worth was high.
However, this also does not prove or even suggest cheating occurred. It just gives a possible motive. Someone on Twitter suggested that perhaps this whole thing was an orchestrated attention grabber by Rip, where they had pre-planned to pull some kind of big move on Garrett, in order to increase her notoriety in poker. That is, nobody cheated, but rather they had just planned that at some point Robbi would make a move on Garrett when she thought he was bluffing, even if it ultimately turned out to be a money punt. Well, if that was the plan, it kind of succeeded. Now everyone knows who Robbi Lew is, whereas almost nobody did a week ago.
The manager example isn't a good one, because he would be a fellow team employee. A better example would be a player from another team saying that, when interviewed. But yeah, it still couldn't result in a successful defamation suit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Erin Micunt
I don't believe she could claim damages by not being able to go on HCL. Nobody has an inherent right to appear on HCL. It's a privately-owned stream and game, where they pick the lineup due to their own subjective biases.
I do think it's possible she could get punitive damages from Garrett and HCL for the $135k thing, claiming it was blackmail or coercion. But it's by no means a slam dunk case, for sure.
From May 2:
https://twitter.com/GmanPoker/status...30623570333697
:what