Stones livestream player Mike Postle accused of "live superusing"

Guy on Reddit made a long post with this video that could show when the cheating first started (July 18, 2018) https://youtu.be/2aGD4FYX9NA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrSayre

Guy on Reddit made a long post with this video that could show when the cheating first started (July 18, 2018) https://youtu.be/2aGD4FYX9NA

---

Best video yet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6AGzJWaYxU

Go to 1:48:18

Wow. Look how he gets off so cheap on trips, by checking the flop, firing small on turn (hoping to fold to a raise, presumably), and then folding to a bet on the river.

---

He bet the flop (2x pot) - pot size bet on the turn and then folded when the guy donk bet the river for more than pot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MumblesBadly

While I'm convinced that Postle cheated in these games, I will defend his play on this particular hand as not unusual for a non-cheating player with a lot of live play experience at lower NLHE stakes. Here's why: The exaggerated physical check on the flop by the guy with A4 is a dead giveaway by most small stakes rec players as showing-weakness-to-hide-strength. Can't tell you how many times I saw this playing at that level back in AC. A lot of rec players at the level just can't control themselves in hands that like with that tell. After I learned this the hard way, I saved myself a lot of money with seemingly appealing second-best hands like Postle's in such situations. Meaning, i would have most likely played the hand the same way as Postle right down to folding on the river absent superuser knowledge of my opponents hand, especially with so many preflop callers in the hand.

---

Yeah, he got pretty lucky that guy decided to donk the river (which was dumb). Not that tough of a fold depending on the player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duped_samaritan

He bet the flop (2x pot) - pot size bet on the turn and then folded when the guy donk bet the river for more than pot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MumblesBadly

While I'm convinced that Postle cheated in these games, I will defend his play on this particular hand as not unusual for a non-cheating player with a lot of live play experience at lower NLHE stakes. Here's why: The exaggerated physical check on the flop by the guy with A4 is a dead giveaway by most small stakes rec players as showing-weakness-to-hide-strength. Can't tell you how many times I saw this playing at that level back in AC. A lot of rec players at the level just can't control themselves in hands that like with that tell. After I learned this the hard way, I saved myself a lot of money with seemingly appealing second-best hands like Postle's in such situations. Meaning, i would have most likely played the hand the same way as Postle right down to folding on the river absent superuser knowledge of my opponents hand, especially with so many preflop callers in the hand.

---

Yeah, he got pretty lucky that guy decided to donk the river (which was dumb). Not that tough of a fold depending on the player.

---

It would have been interesting to see what Postle would have done if A4 had checked the river. To feign not being a superuser, Postle would have had to bet something, but would he have been smart enough to do so? Or even bet a reasonable amount for a river value bet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MumblesBadly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duped_samaritan

He bet the flop (2x pot) - pot size bet on the turn and then folded when the guy donk bet the river for more than pot.






Yeah, he got pretty lucky that guy decided to donk the river (which was dumb). Not that tough of a fold depending on the player.

---

It would have been interesting to see what Postle would have done if A4 had checked the river. To feign not being a superuser, Postle would have had to bet something, but would he have been smart enough to do so? Or even bet a reasonable amount for a river value bet?

---

He would have bet small and then folded to any sizable raise. He was actually pretty good at betting-to-fold in spots where he couldn't check/fold without looking ridiculous.

Anyone, there's no way to lay down 42o there. Your opponent is much more likely to have a Q than a 4 for two reasons (a Q is more likely to be played pre, and there's only one unseen 4 left in the deck). The way everything played out, it was much more likely that Postle's opponent had a Q or a non-full-house pocket pair than a 4 or a boat. You simply can't fold to that overbet, unless it's really huge (which it wasn't.)

If you're folding to that bet with trip 4s, you're going to get bluffed a shitload of times.

And if you have a tell, you had better be certain it's a great tell.

BTW, I actually had a similar spot in the WSOP Main versus a good player (Jerod Smith, who also ended up cashing $59k like I did.)

It was on Day 2, and everyone was really really focusing upon getting to the bathroom quickly, given the massive crowds and wait times. A hand was dealt right before the break started, and I could see everyone couldn't wait to pop up. I had Q8 suited in middle position, and open-raised it, hoping to steal (also the hand wasn't bad, obviously).

Smith flatted me from the button. I asked, "Can't you just let me steal the blinds when everyone wants to go to the bathroom?", and he responded, "I've got to try and flop something."

Flop came QQx with two diamonds. I bet flop, he called. I wasn't happy about that. I hated my kicker, and didn't want to shoot off a ton of chips on this in the very slow moving Main, so I actually check/called both the turn and river (both blanks) -- with the river call being a tank because he bet fairly big. Turned out he had 96 suited and missed his flush draw, so we were both telling the truth. I was trying to steal during the bathroom break, and he was trying to flop something, knowing I probably was trying to steal!

Anyway, when it was all said and done, I couldn't lay down the trips/bad-kicker, even at the very slow moving Main Event. In a cash game, it's very hard to get people off trips, unless you really rip in a monster bet.

On a side note, Smith has been actively following and analyzing this entire matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Anyone, there's no way to lay down 42o there. Your opponent is much more likely to have a Q than a 4 for two reasons (a Q is more likely to be played pre, and there's only one unseen 4 left in the deck). The way everything played out, it was much more likely that Postle's opponent had a Q or a non-full-house pocket pair than a 4 or a boat. You simply can't fold to that overbet, unless it's really huge (which it wasn't.)

If you're folding to that bet with trip 4s, you're going to get bluffed a shitload of times.

---

There are definitely bluffs in his range, just not very many. 42 is just a bluff catcher at that point and you're facing a bigger than pot size bet. It's a pretty easy fold against most players.

Embedded Tweet

Embedded Tweet

Matusow was good on NWP radio many years ago (if the pussy tastes good, I'll eat it) but that 2 part podcast was terrible.

Might listen again onc Postle is found hella guilty to see if Matusow backtracks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duped_samaritan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Anyone, there's no way to lay down 42o there. Your opponent is much more likely to have a Q than a 4 for two reasons (a Q is more likely to be played pre, and there's only one unseen 4 left in the deck). The way everything played out, it was much more likely that Postle's opponent had a Q or a non-full-house pocket pair than a 4 or a boat. You simply can't fold to that overbet, unless it's really huge (which it wasn't.)

If you're folding to that bet with trip 4s, you're going to get bluffed a shitload of times.

---

There are definitely bluffs in his range, just not very many. 42 is just a bluff catcher at that point and you're facing a bigger than pot size bet. It's a pretty easy fold against most players.

---

Betting with a Q isn't a bluff. It's a value bet. Even a decent pocket pair is a value bet, as it will often be called by lower pocket pairs.

42 is not at all a bluff catcher at that point. It's not like the board is 4-flushed or 4-straighted.

If you fold trip 4s to a mild overbet in that spot, you probably aren't a winning player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zealanddonk

Matusow was good on NWP radio many years ago (if the pussy tastes good, I'll eat it) but that 2 part podcast was terrible.

Might listen again onc Postle is found hella guilty to see if Matusow backtracks.

---

When Matusow was on with Joey shortly after the podcast's release, he was already implying that he didn't believe Postle, and that he would "reveal his true feelings in 3 weeks".

As time has passed, I have become more of the belief that Matusow probably did the right thing by just letting Postle ramble like an idiot, rather than piss him off and drive him off.

Emergency Deep Dive! Matt Berkey and Christian Soto react to the fallout with Stone's Casino and discuss how Mike Postle may have used RFID technology to activate God-mode.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-tn_g2wcRc

Embedded Tweet

:lol3

ABC 10 in Sacramento covered this, also as a result of my friend contacting them.

They didn't do a very good job, though:

https://www.abc10.com/article/news/l...c-ea75ee760a27

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duped_samaritan

There are definitely bluffs in his range, just not very many. 42 is just a bluff catcher at that point and you're facing a bigger than pot size bet. It's a pretty easy fold against most players.

---

Betting with a Q isn't a bluff. It's a value bet. Even a decent pocket pair is a value bet, as it will often be called by lower pocket pairs.

42 is not at all a bluff catcher at that point. It's not like the board is 4-flushed or 4-straighted.

If you fold trip 4s to a mild overbet in that spot, you probably aren't a winning player.

---

At higher stakes games, your analysis here makes sense. But at the low stakes in this game, not so much. Especially when your opponent makes the exaggerated check on the flop. When combined with the donk bet on the river, it’s a classic trap tell by lower stake rec player that would not see in almost any higher stake game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MumblesBadly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Betting with a Q isn't a bluff. It's a value bet. Even a decent pocket pair is a value bet, as it will often be called by lower pocket pairs.

42 is not at all a bluff catcher at that point. It's not like the board is 4-flushed or 4-straighted.

If you fold trip 4s to a mild overbet in that spot, you probably aren't a winning player.

---

At higher stakes games, your analysis here makes sense. But at the low stakes in this game, not so much. Especially when your opponent makes the exaggerated check on the flop. When combined with the donk bet on the river, it’s a classic trap tell by lower stake rec player that would not see in almost any higher stake game.

---

At low stakes games, you are also more likely to run into idiotic plays which don't make sense.

Hence, you can't lay down trips on a board like this for a bet that's only a little more than pot.

Embedded Tweet

if veronica bad mouths the ownership of stones and employees, i wonder if they decide to ban her from playing? although she probably would rather play elsewhere anyway if she cannot trust the integrity of the games there now. i feel like she did the right thing, i wonder if stones will retaliate

Veronika on joeys podcast too. PFA reduced to third place.

Great thread here

Embedded Tweet

I have been given some information from a source.

At this point you should take the information as a "rumor", as even the source said it is not confirmed.

Basically, the source said that Stones has been in a panic about this, because they cannot admit to the cheating or it will bring forth a ton of legal and regulatory repercussions. At the same time, they cannot deny the cheating, because the poker community has basically proven it, and Stones/Postle has already been convicted in the court of public opinion.

They already tried once to claim that they "investigated the allegations" and that they were false, but that went over like a lead balloon.

The last we heard, they hired an "independent" chief investigator to put together a "team" to look into everything fully. Of course this "independent" investigator happens to be an attorney who has worked for the casino owners in the past, so obviously the goal here isn't to dig for and reveal the truth. The goal is to worm out of this with as little monetary and reputational damage as possible.

And that ain't going to be easy.

Anyway, the source said that a preliminary strategy has already been discussed, though it hasn't been fully decided upon yet. The strategy involves the following:

1) Claim that an exhaustive investigation by experts did not find proof of any cheating, but at the same time, they can understand how a lot of the hands in question look suspect.

2) Fire Justin Kuraitis, Taylor Smith, and Lance Hudspeth -- the three prime suspects regarding the identities of the possible accomplices to Postle. The firings will be justified as an oilve brach to the public -- basically replacing the tournament director and the main two people involved with the stream, and hiring outsiders who will take over and beef up stream security.

3) Ban Mike Postle, while not admitting he cheated. Again, this will be justified as being done in order to make the poker public feel more secure playing at Stones.

4) Put out a public statement regarding the experts they consulted regarding stream security, and all of the extra precautions they will be taking going forward.

5) Slowly bring the live stream back online, and attempt to rebuild its reputation.

So basically, the plan is to clear out the suspicious characters, claim they've overhauled stream security, and then hope that the public will eventually forget about this, and perhaps it will be mostly forgotten over time.

Privately, Justin will be told he's being let go because he let this blow up into a huge scandal instead of addressing it earlier when brought up privately, and Taylor/Lance will be told they're being let go because they failed to engage in proper security protocols.

Again, this is all rumor at this point, and may not come to pass. But that's what the source told me is being considered at the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I have been given some information from a source.

At this point you should take the information as a "rumor", as even the source said it is not confirmed.

Basically, the source said that Stones has been in a panic about this, because they cannot admit to the cheating or it will bring forth a ton of legal and regulatory repercussions. At the same time, they cannot deny the cheating, because the poker community has basically proven it, and Stones/Postle has already been convicted in the court of public opinion.

They already tried once to claim that they "investigated the allegations" and that they were false, but that went over like a lead balloon.

The last we heard, they hired an "independent" chief investigator to put together a "team" to look into everything fully. Of course this "independent" investigator happens to be an attorney who has worked for the casino owners in the past, so obviously the goal here isn't to dig for and reveal the truth. The goal is to worm out of this with as little monetary and reputational damage as possible.

And that ain't going to be easy.

Anyway, the source said that a preliminary strategy has already been discussed, though it hasn't been fully decided upon yet. The strategy involves the following:

:boom wait it's an indian Casino we have no rights!

1) Claim that an exhaustive investigation by experts did not find proof of any cheating, but at the same time, they can understand how a lot of the hands in question look suspect.

2) Fire Justin Kuraitis, Taylor Smith, and Lance Hudspeth -- the three prime suspects regarding the identities of the possible accomplices to Postle. The firings will be justified as an oilve brach to the public -- basically replacing the tournament director and the main two people involved with the stream, and hiring outsiders who will take over and beef up stream security.

3) Ban Mike Postle, while not admitting he cheated. Again, this will be justified as being done in order to make the poker public feel more secure playing at Stones.

4) Put out a public statement regarding the experts they consulted regarding stream security, and all of the extra precautions they will be taking going forward.

5) Slowly bring the live stream back online, and attempt to rebuild its reputation.

So basically, the plan is to clear out the suspicious characters, claim they've overhauled stream security, and then hope that the public will eventually forget about this, and perhaps it will be mostly forgotten over time.

Privately, Justin will be told he's being let go because he let this blow up into a huge scandal instead of addressing it earlier when brought up privately, and Taylor/Lance will be told they're being let go because they failed to engage in proper security protocols.

Again, this is all rumor at this point, and may not come to pass. But that's what the source told me is being considered at the moment.

---

:facepalm3:facepalm2:facepalm

Unbelievable another scammer lives on!

Druff.. take the show on the road Go to Stones and play on the stream! expose the :snake

Wait I forgot it's an Indian Casino. We have no rights!

It's not an Indian casino, actually.

It's just a California card room, similar to Commerce or The Bike, but much smaller.

That’s just the thing snowtracks. Druff shouldn’t go there. No one should.

But there is no such thing as “bad publicity”.

Stones will attract the curious and bicurious. There will be record numbers and t-shirt sales.

The Twitch stream viewership will explode.

Gaming has already renewed their license. They just need to lick the stamp.

Except for a very few this is more a curiousity than a moral crusade.

California gaming is fucking joke ... shows exactly what regulation does

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duped_samaritan

There are definitely bluffs in his range, just not very many. 42 is just a bluff catcher at that point and you're facing a bigger than pot size bet. It's a pretty easy fold against most players.

---

Betting with a Q isn't a bluff. It's a value bet. Even a decent pocket pair is a value bet, as it will often be called by lower pocket pairs.

42 is not at all a bluff catcher at that point. It's not like the board is 4-flushed or 4-straighted.

If you fold trip 4s to a mild overbet in that spot, you probably aren't a winning player.

---

I think you must still be thinking the hand played out like this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Wow. Look how he gets off so cheap on trips, by checking the flop, firing small on turn (hoping to fold to a raise, presumably), and then folding to a bet on the river.

---

It didn't. He bet 2x the pot on flop and a little over pot on turn.

Why doesn't POStle know how much he actually won? Don't pros with no source of income other than poker and a daughter to keep custody of tend to keep records of wins/losses? I mean he probably would have had to furnish such info + tax returns to the courts to gain custody of the kid, no? Why are you claiming to have pretty much no clue how much you actually won, POStle?

Are any of POStle's tax returns, custody trials/hearings public record? Is the pro poker player required to provide proof of ongoing winnings/income to the courts who forbid him from leaving NorCal? hmmm...

Check this out....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cerveza Fria

Check this out....

---

Well that happened faster then I actually expected. Anybody notice who one of the lead attys is. One Kelly Minkin. This just got interesting when you have a well know poker player as a lawyer for the Plaintiffs

Joey was doing a decent job but seriously this shit he put out today isn't tolerable. It's not a funny troll/meme it's an overly used expression that nobody wants to hear hundreds of times in a video "my client" ,etc...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mepkBjWyYxk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ftpjesus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cerveza Fria

Check this out....

---

Well that happened faster then I actually expected. Anybody notice who one of the lead attys is. One Kelly Minkin. This just got interesting when you have a well know poker player as a lawyer for the Plaintiffs

---

Actually, a smart move. Let's the casino know they can't do a b.s. investigation. Also, wouldn't be surprised if there isn't a criminal investigation already underway. Postle is now going to disappear. Whether it is his own choice, or not, remains to be seen.

Didn't Stones have a tournament with a huge guarantee this weekend? Did it end up having an overlay?

Another smoking gun hand:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUd8tlRVcFo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cerveza Fria

Check this out....

---

Did they mean to list FRAUD as cause #2 and #8 on first page? Not sure if that's something normal. Pretty sloppy for page one if not though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sah_24

California gaming is fucking joke ... shows exactly what regulation does

---

You’re right.

Gaming commissions are trade organizations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duped_samaritan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cerveza Fria

Check this out....

---

Did they mean to list FRAUD as cause #2 and #8 on first page? Not sure if that's something normal. Pretty sloppy for page one if not though.

---

I don't take issue with the first draft. The complaint will be amended as more information comes to light. I think they just wanted to get this out there and get people served. Watch for the cockroaches to scatter to avoid service. Postle will disappear for awhile. Who knows, maybe permanently. He obviously had accomplices (more than one IMHO), and eventually it will be a race to see who can cut the best deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shizzmoney

Another smoking gun hand:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUd8tlRVcFo

---

This is crazy & really damning to Mike.
Why would he be trying to re-scan his cards?
Why would he even think he would need to?
Obviously, we know the answer to those questions.

Honestly I'm surprised Verstandig posted this publicly on the day he filed, rather than waiting for the parties to get served, which is common practice. Otherwise they can avoid service.

Now, I will say that Verstandig already announced there will be a lawsuit, but there's a difference between hearing about a potential one and seeing one was actually filed against you.

Stones obviously can't avoid service, and perhaps Kuraitis can't either, if he still works there. But Postle can run off, avoid service, and possibly even leave the state, provided he was lying about not being able to leave the state with his kid. (He has full custody, so it's possible he can. Depends what was ordered by the court.)

I'm going to do a show this week (Thursday or Friday), and we will have attorney Eric Bensamochan on to explain everything.

Had mixed opinions about Berkey prior to this whole debacle, but I've thought much more highly of him since watching his attempts to come up with evidence against Postle.

Here's an interesting video where he shows what might have been Postle's "phone in the crotch" cheating method:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qar90n6teQ

He didn't even realize at the time that someone on 2+2 had previously posted a pic of Mike's phone having a blue screen, which makes more sense now.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EGZBKKrU...g&name=360x360