Mike Postle and his lawyer are gearing up to face the accusations

Mike Postle might already have a defense against cheating.

Given the contents of the article, what do you make of the possible defense?

Lawyer for Mike Postle Sets Up Potential Legal Defense Strategy

Not sure what his defense is going to be, but its going to be pretty hard to explain why he called 2 allins preflop with 45o.

The hot streak is an incredible explanation.
Based on Portanova’s statement, it’s clear his goal is to convince the jury that if a gambler can hit a cold streak, they can also go on a hot streak.

TeUnit said:

Not sure what his defense is going to be, but its going to be pretty hard to explain why he called 2 allins preflop with 45o.

Click to expand...

When you state it that way, 45o all in pre with 2 others is um...

I'm not proficient in poker but I don't think it takes a genius to know that's just stupid play, right?

I'm trying really hard to be neutral but some things just really need some explanation.

In my opinion, it is a very good defense. The burden of proof should be on the accusers' shoulders. They need to prove that there were headphones under the hat and that he was receiving real time information about the opponents' hands. Anyone should be considered innocent until proven guilty.

They might have started with the lawsuit too early, and end up paying for Postle's defense instead of recovering anything. Postle cheating or not is actually irrelevant in a lawsuit, the only thing that counts is the evidence being beyond any reasonable doubt or not.

Honestly, even if he wins this and somehow gets away with it, it’ll be impossible for him to continue his “poker career”. His reputation is ****ed. His poker career is already over.

zinzir said:

Postle cheating or not is actually irrelevant in a lawsuit, the only thing that counts is the evidence being beyond any reasonable doubt or not.

Click to expand...

In a criminal case if its down to something like a one in a billion chance, the accused is not quilty, that is considered way beyond reasonable doubt. The same therefore should be the case in a situation like this, which mean, his winrate alone should be evidence enough for a conviction, since it really is that astronomically unlikely.

In a rape case for instance, if a DNA test point to the accused, its not a requirement, that there is also a film showing him doing the raping. The mathematical improbability of the DNA belonging to someone else is enough.

However most people are completely ignorant about poker as well as math and statistics. Some also consider poker an illegitimate activity, so they might have the opinion, that the victims more or less got, what they deserved.

So personally I think, the evidence against Mike Postle and Stones is more than enough, that they should be convicted, but I am not so sure, the legal system in the US is going to work this time.

I wasnt the first one to think this is another possibility- he could be a time traveling wizard.

Vallet said:

The hot streak is an incredible explanation.
Based on Portanova’s statement, it’s clear his goal is to convince the jury that if a gambler can hit a cold streak, they can also go on a hot streak.

Click to expand...

as I posted in news section JMO


that’s 100% true but what he didn’t say is those long good luck streaks, are about getting good cards often and having the skill to take advantage. I don’t think it would ever be from playing trash cards over and over and getting lucky over and over for 1 year sustained period of time like postle did.
hopefully, we will find the smoking gun and convict all the guilty parties but the silver lining is this will bring much greater awareness to the possibilities and result in added security measures for all streaming.

fundiver199 said:

In a criminal case if its down to something like a one in a billion chance, the accused is not quilty, that is considered way beyond reasonable doubt. The same therefore should be the case in a situation like this, which mean, his winrate alone should be evidence enough for a conviction, since it really is that astronomically unlikely.

Click to expand...

By the same token, people with astronomical loss rates, and there are plenty of them out there, should be able to sue casinos and opponents, I mean if the loss rate alone would be usable as evidence of being cheated out of their money

jaymfc said:

as I posted in news section JMO



hopefully, we will find the smoking gun and convict all the guilty parties but the silver lining is this will bring much greater awareness to the possibilities and result in added security measures for all streaming.

Click to expand...

I believe that would be the ideal outcome of the situation, where hard evidence is found and the cheaters receive the well deserved punishment. But I would rather see Postle get away with it than being convicted based on the win rate and hypothetical cheating scenarios.

zinzir said:

By the same token, people with astronomical loss rates, and there are plenty of them out there, should be able to sue casinos and opponents, I mean if the loss rate alone would be usable as evidence of being cheated out of their money

Click to expand...

There is not an upper limit to, how fast you can lose money in poker, because there is no limit to, how bad you can play. There is however an upper limit to, how fast you can win, because you cant play better than perfect. When you literally never make a mistake, then the rest is variance, and at some point variance become a statistic improbability.

zinzir said:

I believe that would be the ideal outcome of the situation, where hard evidence is found and the cheaters receive the well deserved punishment. But I would rather see Postle get away with it than being convicted based on the win rate and hypothetical cheating scenarios.

Click to expand...

the proof is coming I get what you're saying but along with the win rate the other circumstantial evidence is strong. it may not be enough in a court of law but I watched the many many vids and if I saw someone slap my momma I wouldn't need to find the mark on her

zinzir said:

In my opinion, it is a very good defense. The burden of proof should be on the accusers' shoulders. They need to prove that there were headphones under the hat and that he was receiving real time information about the opponents' hands. Anyone should be considered innocent until proven guilty.

They might have started with the lawsuit too early, and end up paying for Postle's defense instead of recovering anything. Postle cheating or not is actually irrelevant in a lawsuit, the only thing that counts is the evidence being beyond any reasonable doubt or not.

Click to expand...

I don't see how you think there is no Evidence in this case, really have you not seen all the STREAM breakdowns that have been done, the countless times where plays were made that have been off the reservation to say the least. The only thing I will agree with you is that we are all innocent until proven guilty, Patterns that we use show a course of action, this action SCREAMS CHEATER....

zinzir said:

In my opinion, it is a very good defense. The burden of proof should be on the accusers' shoulders. They need to prove that there were headphones under the hat and that he was receiving real time information about the opponents' hands. Anyone should be considered innocent until proven guilty.

They might have started with the lawsuit too early, and end up paying for Postle's defense instead of recovering anything. Postle cheating or not is actually irrelevant in a lawsuit, the only thing that counts is the evidence being beyond any reasonable doubt or not.

Click to expand...

Absolutely correct Zinzir.

First, there is a good chance the jury can understand the 'odds' one way or another. Its not rocket science. However, that is not the point - having no physical evidence remains an enormous problem.

As this is a civil lawsuit I am unsure of the latitude afforded investigations so I would be interested to learn of the scope they are given. Common sense dictates they look into the bank accounts of various parties. But if they were smart enough to keep the cash off the books but for Postle's own accounts (where he could claim legitimate 'wins') then that will be another dead end. As for any communication devices, I am sure they were binned a long time ago.

One of the only ways this case will turn is if they can pressure someone involved to turn. If Postle and accomplice(s) keep 'shtum', I think it will be an uphill task. And then, to be frank even if they receive an award via the court, it will be open to appeal.

The one good thing is Mike Postle, and possible one or two others, are never going to taken seriously again.

DS3 said:

However, that is not the point - having no physical evidence remains an enormous problem.

Click to expand...

There is plenty of physical evidence, because it was all recorded on camera.

* Something visible under his hat, presumably bone conductor earphones
* Him pressing on his hat presumably to improve the function of above
* Him looking down at his lap during critical points in the hands, presumable to read information on his cellphone, which he kept there
* A blue screen seen on his phone, which could be a relay of the RFID data
* His reactions to certain situations for instance raising his arms in "surprice" after getting caught bluffing, before he officially knew his opponents cards

I honestly dont think, 99% of crime cases have better evidence than this. And I am a bit tired of hearing this nonsense about "innocent until proven guilty". That is not, how the legal system in any country including the US actually work.

If for instance your car was seen by witnesses near a murder scene, and you spoke to the victim on her cellphone shortly before the crime took place, then you need to come up with some plausible explainations. You cant just lean back like Mike Postle and say "there is no psycical evidence against me, and I am guilty until proven innocent".

Fundiver199

That is not the point I, or I believe Zinzar before me was making (I make no attempt to speak on his behalf).

The points you make are valid but not evidence- rather they are opinion. Evidence would be if they had a communication device in hand. As for his behavior (which for the record I believe has him bang to rights) his attorney will argue it all speculative, circumstantial. Yes, a jury could award damages as this is a civil case but the point I then made is if a decision is little more than opinion, the case will be open to appeal.

Further, regarding Postle's behavior the best video breakdown in my opinion is not Polk's or Ingram's but by a gamer and poker player called Gumpnstein who was smart enough to see if he could pinpoint when Postle (allegedly) began to cheat.

He zeroes in to a specific date about 6 months into the Stones live streams. Prior to this date his phone was always on top of the table, visible, like other players. He also shows him losing some big pots.Overnight his phone disappears and is always under the table in his lap. Gumpnstein notes how his behavior changed, how he started playing more frequently with his win rate rocketing etc. etc.

I have a definite personal opinion on Mike Postle, however this has little to do with whether I think this is going to be a slam dunk or not for those filing the suit.

DS3 said:

The points you make are valid but not evidence- rather they are opinion.

Click to expand...

I think, we are going a bit in circles now, but the fact, you can see something under Postles hat, is certainly not an "opinion". It is a fact caught on video, and therefore its evidence. Of course if Mike can explain, what was under his hat, that was not bone conductor earphones, fine.

This is just the same as someone might being able to explain, why his car was parked near the place, where a murder took place, other than he is the killer. Maybe he visited a dentist, and the dentist can confirm this. That is how, crime cases are being solved. The person accused need to explain the things, that look suspicious, and if he is unable to do that, he is usually convicted.

fundiver199 said:

If for instance your car was seen by witnesses near a murder scene, and you spoke to the victim on her cellphone shortly before the crime took place, then you need to come up with some plausible explainations. You cant just lean back like Mike Postle and say "there is no psycical evidence against me, and I am guilty until proven innocent".

Click to expand...

Why not? That is exactly your right! Your guilt must be proven beyond doubt.

The only reason to give an explanation is to get rid of the police as soon as possible, as they will continue to investigate you if you don't. But they would never take the case to court based on that evidence. It makes you a suspect and nothing more. I would thing that quit a number of cars are parked near almost any murder scene... Just pick one until you find someone with no good explanation why his car was there and he's guilty?

DS3 said:

I have a definite personal opinion on Mike Postle, however this has little to do with whether I think this is going to be a slam dunk or not for those filing the suit.

Click to expand...

I am not saying, this will be a slam dunk easy case for those suing Mike Postle and Stones either. However I will say, that if the court clear the accused without strong evidence, we have not yet seen, then the legal system in the US is very flawed. This is not a weak case with little evidence, and basically this is just the point, I have been trying to make

You mention yourself, that there is a certain point, where Mike Postle start to always keep his phone on his lap rather than on the rail like everyone else. This is already very strange and need to be explained by Mike in front of the jury.

fundiver199 said:

You mention yourself, that there is a certain point, where Mike Postle start to always keep his phone on his lap rather than on the rail like everyone else. This is already very strange and need to be explained by Mike in front of the jury.

Click to expand...

You would have to PROOF that he had a RFID reader on his phone first. No law requires you to keep your phone visible to the public, so there is nothing he has to explain and there is no reason to take him in front of a jury. Same for the bone consuctor headset. Where is the proof he ever owned one ? That's the kind of evidence you need for a law suit.

I also doubt that the RFIDs used in the cards can be read out over the distances in which they are from you at a poker table, so i think it is impossible to know everyones cards by using such an approach. If that was possible then phones would probably be banned from RFID tables

Fundiver199

Appreciate the feedback. I think we are closer on this than we might have first thought, to be honest.

Yes, if a jury was inclined to accept all the dubious behavior as proof, the lawsuit could be won. However, if a jury is inclined to demand physical evidence and there is none to present then things could fall apart. Speculating whether it was a communications device under his cap is no guarantee of anything. He could argue he always kept a joint wrapped in tissue under his cap as he liked to take a 'smoke' break once in a while.

One could argue the running commentary (hundreds of hours) does no one any favors either. The entire crew has been called out for their stupid fawning and endless bigging up of Mike Postle's play. I believe on a subconscious level they felt increasing uncomfortable with the preposterous play, but on a conscious level they had to convince themselves as well as the stream's audience otherwise, that Postle was a poker god. Its cringeworthy to listen to.

But, the fact remains now on record are an endless string of complimentary comments, session after session, on Postle's next level play by the commentators sat in the same room.

That alone is going to be hard to walk back.

TeUnit said:

Not sure what his defense is going to be, but its going to be pretty hard to explain why he called 2 allins preflop with 45o.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Hard to explain calling off with 45, unless your aware of the cards coming your way. I’m surprised he would be so blatantly obvious. Not sure why someone would be so naive to think he wouldn’t draw suspicion sooner or later playing so far above expectation with ridiculous calls. If he wasn’t so stupid and greedy about it he likely would’ve been able to continue the thievery for a long time. Sprinkle in a few losing or break even sessions and be wrong in a couple big hands too. How in the world could his insanely maniacal play continue to yield success unless there was something nefarious occurring. Thankfully many criminals and thieves are too stupid and greedy. Hopefully this is a wake up call and poker production companies are much more strict with the technology.

MikeCarasone said:

Exactly. Hard to explain calling off with 45, unless your aware of the cards coming your way.

Click to expand...

No evidence has been presented, that Mike knew, what community cards were coming. However calling off with 54 is completely rational, if its 3-ways, and you know, both your opponents have AK. You have around 43% equity, and 3-ways you only need to have 33% to break even. So in "god mode" this is clearly a +EV call, even you will lose 57% of the time.

fundiver199 said:

There is plenty of physical evidence, because it was all recorded on camera.

* Something visible under his hat, presumably bone conductor earphones
* Him pressing on his hat presumably to improve the function of above
* Him looking down at his lap during critical points in the hands, presumable to read information on his cellphone, which he kept there
* A blue screen seen on his phone, which could be a relay of the RFID data
* His reactions to certain situations for instance raising his arms in "surprice" after getting caught bluffing, before he officially knew his opponents cards

I honestly dont think, 99% of crime cases have better evidence than this. And I am a bit tired of hearing this nonsense about "innocent until proven guilty". That is not, how the legal system in any country including the US actually work.

If for instance your car was seen by witnesses near a murder scene, and you spoke to the victim on her cellphone shortly before the crime took place, then you need to come up with some plausible explainations. You cant just lean back like Mike Postle and say "there is no psycical evidence against me, and I am guilty until proven innocent".

Click to expand...

fundiver199 said:

I am not saying, this will be a slam dunk easy case for those suing Mike Postle and Stones either. However I will say, that if the court clear the accused without strong evidence, we have not yet seen, then the legal system in the US is very flawed. This is not a weak case with little evidence, and basically this is just the point, I have been trying to make

You mention yourself, that there is a certain point, where Mike Postle start to always keep his phone on his lap rather than on the rail like everyone else. This is already very strange and need to be explained by Mike in front of the jury.

Click to expand...

This is great discussion!


Your points are very valid and totally understand how any poker player who knows mannerisms etc can deduce this guy is 100% cheating. He still could be 100% cheating however, if facing a jury with little to no poker experience, they may not see this as concrete evidence.

It was mentioned his movements etc were very questionable - if somehow the 'bone conductor earphones' were presented, that would be hard evidence but only if it can be traced back to something else in association with the possible cheating process. Also, the phone...ah yes, the phone. Given I am not a live poker player, I would probably never have really noticed the differences in the use of his phone (on the table for weeks, months before then suddenly on his lap/chair?) unless Joey Ingram (among others) had pointed it out. I like Joey, so he is usually my go-to when there is something up in the poker world . I realize all of the evidence could be wiped from the earpieces and cellphones but again, it is still evidence. The video will back it up, in my opinion.

Basically, the case would be closed a lot sooner if there was/is concrete evidence. However, the fact there are so many people listed in the lawsuit, these proceedings will likely go on for some time. Either way, the outcome will be a huge learning curve for those who play live poker.

A little off topic...why are phones not always visible by all players, dealers, floor people while sitting at a table? That seems like a no brainer to me.