"I'm calling you. What have you got?" "Ace of diamonds, jack of spades, nine of hearts, four of clubs and two of diamonds." "Take it. I thought you were bluffing." - Dialogue from Funny Girl
This is why you shouldn't take that kind of risks lol, especially in lower or micro stakes you got a lot of gamblers or "calling stations" that will shove with anything, so even if you pretend to have a superstrong hand it's never a guarantee it will kick your opponent out of the hand, not even if he has nothing.
I always notice with the charts where they explain this guy as cheating they compare it to average high stakes players instead of players overall, esp players at the same stakes I've also seen charts saying anything from 124bb-1000+bb/100h ..so who knows Also we have to PROVE he's cheating, not just suspect it. The first way to prove it is no phones at the table (a rule been in place in socal for decades)
@@jonslg240 GREAT idea, they should have said mike you've been accused of cheating and you of course deny it , how about this ?, everyone plays without phones?
Actually he has a very balanced cheating range; I've been editing footage of him all day. He has: 1) hands that are pretty normal that he plays pretty normally. 2) Hands where he has a very weak holding that just happens to be good where he extracts amazing value from the hand that's second best. 3) Hands like this one where his opponent has him beat but on a scary board where opponent must call an enormous river bet with a hand that should never be good. 4) Hands where he has an extremely weak holding that has enough equity against his opponent's exact hand in order to continue profitably, that will then extract value perfectly once made and 5) hands where he has an extremely strong holding that nonetheless always bets more or less exactly what opponent should be willing to call with their own holding on that particular street. This is a very balanced strategy that allows him to make +EV decisions on every street of every hand except in those spots where the implied odds of moves he could make on later streets outweight the -EV of the decision he's making on the current street. It seems that unfortunately Mike has given off some strange tells in various hands, not only this one but also in other hands. Of great interest at the moment specifically are the hands where the RFID system either cannot see Mike's cards or mislabels Mike's cards until it becomes clear that Mike might have to show a different hand than the one the graphic says that he has. These hands in my view will reveal the specific mechanism by which Mike gets the information to make these plays, because they represent moments when the show did not go as planned and had to be altered during the broadcast in order to make sense.
@@RaulGroom By a "balanced cheating range" one might also include losing a few hands on purpose, and making purposefully bad river decisions, so that your results aren't quite so massive a statistical anomaly. This is how it's evident he's cheating without seeing the exact mechanism by which he's doing it. His results are SO improbable, especially given his play style, that cheating is actually much more probable than a heater.
He could do a middle-of-the-road cheat, but I'd also recommend he balance his strategy by working in some swindling or even some blackmail from time to time.
When you have poker instincts that have truly never been seen before, you don't need to think about ranges, because your post-flop edge is so massive that you can play any 2 cards profitably.
Not really, if you believe your opponent already knows your hole cards you can deduce he's trying to get you to fold based off his actions in this hand.
@@WhitePillMan If he had you beat. He'd be making small value bets to get you to call. The only reason in this hand to bet big when he has it. Is when he thinks you know he's cheating.
Bro the commentator just said at 7:00 goes to the livestream and says " Andrew postle is voting for postle" are they not the same person haha or am I tripping
"If your opponent knows your hand, then your range is just that one hand. And you have to sometimes call and sometimes fold to keep your opponent guessing." I really like this thought.
True but he also knows as soon as he gets called he's behind. Plus since he took so long to call with jj he never has an ace or boat.. So it's still surprising to see a call. That being said I do think the dude cheated.
That's the thing, if you're holding essentially the nut low, you don't care what he calls with, so you don't act the way he did when you get called, you just feel disappointed your bluff didn't work, not entirely shocked and exasperated it didn't. He was shocked he called because opponent has a hand he is basically never supposed to be able to find a call with. The reaction is what makes the difference between being owned like Doug and beaten while trying to cheat like this. Sometimes you run a bluff and it fails. You don't need to know what hand the guy had when it was a stone bluff. You know that as soon as he says call, you lose, and think what went wrong. Maybe you get shocked by what he called with, but not until you see the hand...
Agree with Brennan's comment. You know you're behind and it sucks, but you don't throw your hands up Hellmuth-style unless you already know they called you super light. People would see what they got called with before getting surprised by the call... unless they already know what they got called with...
I don't know if they are involved in the cheating itself but they are involved in talking him up so that no viewer should be suspicious that he wins or makes ridiculous plays. Might be under some order from Justin to talk him up yet not know why besides "we need a hero".
@@gjchawks17 I haven't ruled out complicity beyond just the one confederate but I do not yet see any evidence that anyone else NECESSARILY knows for certain what is going on. My guess is that this was pitched to the commentators as "we know this guy who always wins, it's crazy, we're going to make a stream about him it'll be great fun" and they went along with it. I think there is evidence that at least some of the people involved suspected Mike was cheating at the very least, but I would not be too surprised at this point to learn that Mike had only one confederate. It is certainly technically possible that it could have been done with one confederate, and I don't see why you would tell anyone besides the people directly involved.
@@RaulGroom Hey I'm all for catching everyone that was a part of it and even just heard whispers and didn't say anything. I just know that the less people involved the better chance of not getting caught. So in my eyes the commentators aren't in on the cheating itself, just they chose to make the streams always about him. Which makes some of this more sickening. That only one of them ever brought it up and none of them (to my knowledge) have said anything yet.
nah i watched joey's 5 hour stream, and all the announcers reactions make it sound as if they're not in on it. you would never mouth off on a suspicion like that, it's a massive accusation that would blow up the community (as it is now). you'd be fired at best and sued for libel at worst. if you were ACTUALLY in on it, you would justify the plays as strategically smart and not sit there in incredulity saying things like "omg how does he get that read, etc".
Raul Groom Why do you keep using the word confederate? Wtf does any of this have to do with which side of the civil war these guys would have fought for? Ya dummy. 🤣🤣🤣 #NotAsSmartAsWeThinkWeAre
Really? Does he? Because If he understood these things, maybe he wouldn't be getting called down by pocket jacks on a AAQ rainbow flop lolololol The only thing he understands is losing via bluff, and winning via text.
If he should get an Emmy, then Joey Ingram deserves a Nobel prize. Doug's... sorry, Vanessa's analyses are great, and I applaud him for doing this, but Joey is the real GOAT investigator.
@@mikehattar8372 yeah he studied on postler and he overbluffs just anyone who appears to have a bluffcatcher. So he fucking reversed on him and called the mofo
Notice how he’s always on seat 2. Builds his stack to his left, like building a wall from left side visual towards him. Only has to worry about seat 1, which already has his attention towards the right as all the players and cards are towards that way.
Thomas Newton idk so you think these commentators who are earning reasonable money would sell their reputation and dignity for 5%(random number) of his winnings? If they only get paid on the night they commentate that would be like max $5k. Hardly seems worth. Especially since it was one of the commentators who first brought the allegations to light.
Really subtle but good point regarding the “pre-reaction” to the light call on the river. When I’m in those spots and get looked up, it takes me a min to realize what happened with the hand.
I just feel like the commentators know what he's doing here. With their talk an eye brow raise in certain situations they also seem suspect. Just burn the place down.
Almost seem suspect?? They are totally in on it. Just watch the Veronika video on her channel where she says it's all strange what Postle does and this other commentator screaming over her that he is just playing good, super angry with her drawing attention to things wrong with Postle's play.
0:42 "Since he is up against Jacks that may not be terribly hard(to bluff oppo)". This commentator is in on it. He is commentating with the presumption that Postle Knows oppo has JJ..
well basically the commentators have been witnessing this nonsense for the last year straight. It just took time for the rest of the world to get interested.
The video stats say it's 12db under RUclips's normalisation target (approx -14 LUFS). So the original audio would have been mastered at around -26 LUFS which is ridiculously quiet.
Honestly the best evidence for cheating so far, good eye! Beyond that, your reaction to the dirty angle shooter calling was genuine, his was in every way contrived and you just made a believer out of me.
Postle is the GOAT, how does he just always know?? What incredible poker instincts! You can tell he's also only capable of doing this when feeling the pressure on the big stage, when he's being watched by dozens of fans from home. That's why his results off of the live stream are non-existant. We are witnessing true greatness before our very eyes! In all seriousness, I love it and find it absolutely hilarious when he gets heroes by super weak hands that have no business calling. My favourite is the A9 vs A3 hand (a must-watch if you haven't seen it yet.)
As if they even care if someone has a problem gambling. The only thing that dumbass egotistical Justin cares about is showing off in his Tesla that he doesn’t even deserve.
The commentators are true GTO gods as well: „he called the flop so surely on this card he calls the turn“ or „doesn’t want to bet too big, too big of a bet shows weakness“ ???
This was one of the hands where I feel like his opponent seemed to know exactly what Postle was doing. And by that, I think he may have known Postle was cheating.
@@TaylorWCarroll Hey are you the Taylor Carroll who made that call? Really great call if it was you. And I hope Mike Postle faces jail time, he is a piece of shit
I hadn’t heard that explanation before. You nailed it. It absolutely takes two seconds at least to process everything. Spot on Doug. Keep up the awesome content
This is pretty much it. He’s definitely cheating. Even if he saw one Jack as it’s being flipped over, it could be JK for straight. Since K and J are both paints, how was he able to tell the other card is a J and not K so quickly?
Chris i mean he is cheating... idk how, but he does.. i dont understand how the rest of plyer keep playing .. for me is ok when i see one rare hand on the table. Anyway in thiscase i dnt care if he surprised on this way because the opponent said “ pocket jj” before he showed them...
100% he has sick of postle's shit. At a minimum he recognized he must just be bluffing his ass of constantly whether he thinks he's cheating or not. Nobody wins every hand without a showdown.
The thing is, this was a decent call just because Postle's line made no sense. He is basically repping AQ at the worst or pocket queens. Those hands probably dont take that line. He bet way too big on the flop, when he would have had the board crushed and then the river jam just screams please fold.
Brandon Dorsey I was actually thinking the same thing the call doug showed vs him by alec is much tougher because there’s only one ace on board. ive made this exact call before vs spewy opponents.
Agreed, the river jam is essentially saying "I have AQ or QQ and think you have an ace and will call any bet." But those hands shouldn't bet so big on the flop! That being said, very few, if any hands should be betting that big on the flop. If you do bet big on the flop though, that means you can't bluff as often, meaning you have to have a bigger check-range, which also has to include some traps. AA and AQ would be mandatory traps in that case, and QQ should trap sometimes too. That said, we're just talking nonsense. When it comes to Mike Postle, the greatest we've ever seen, ranges don't matter. This guy has the best poker instincts of all time, and it's not close. He's able to look right through your soul (through his cock of course) and know what you have. His postflop edge is so massive, he can just make exploitative play after exploitative play and it'll all be +EV.
Pretty sure Taylor knew that Postle was cheating somehow. If you know your opponent is cheating, and he's not very smart (like Postle), then you're pretty sure he wouldn't bet like this with a boat, trips or a queen here. He'd bet smaller to get you to call. We've seen Postle do this numerous times, betting very small for the thinnest value bets, and overbet-shoving to fold out a split or a weaker holding.
Don't know if you caught that reaction, or someone from 2+2 in a post but that is a great catch. Well done to you or whomever and way to include it in the video.
@@gjchawks17 - ty - I've watched so much concerning this that I didn't watch all of this one when I asked for a time stamp - if I had, I would have easily been able to locate it, thanks.
@joeingram1 you, like the rest of us, are just jealous of the natural talents of the greatest poker player we've ever witnessed. This man can soulread every opponent and know exactly what their cards are, simply by staring into his cock. He is just the best ever. There's no proof of him cheating! He just always KNOWS!
I think he's cheating..watch Bart Hanson as the commentators are talking at 6:40 his hod nod and laugh seem so in time as if hes reacting to what the commentator is saying..
He's just took David Sklansky's poker theory a little too literally. That says every time you play your hand the way you would if you could see your opponents' cards, you gain.
I normally agree with just about all of your opinions. And I DO believe this guy is most likely in a contract with Stones as they could very reasonably be using him as a marketing ploy. This is done with slot channels; i.e. Brian Christopher. However, this example lacks one reasoning... In the event you bluff knowing its damn near impossible to beat ANYTHING (WTF could 72 actually beat) you could reasonably react to the fact your opponent calls rather than the cards in their hand. Think about it. How many times have you said I'm going to bluff the next one no matter the cards and played range against range and the board was in your favor, plus your betting didn't fuck up your perceivable range. In these cases, you react to the action and not the cards. Still love the videos bro...friendly opinion in a conversation. I do believe he's employed by Stones!
Easier said..........he knows it is a shitty hand, if his opponent takes such a long time to call, it is clearly not an Ace, a street or a boat...........so he knows it is most mainly a Qx or some other shit.......and obviously his bluff is beat. I think Doug and all the people here interpret way 2much into this situation.
LOL!! "BUT, if your range is just your hand because your opponent can see your cards, well then you have to call some of the times - and this is where you really have to mix up that strategy - if your opponent knows your exact holding, you're going to have to sometimes be willing to call and sometimes be willing to fold, because your range is really just that one hand... and you really have to keep your opponent (who is a GOD, and knows your hand) guessing, it's a really important part of your strategy."
He called because he knows Postle is cheating. He knowns Postle knows his hand. So he knows that Postle knows that it's really hard to call a bet. So he knows the bet is designed to make him fold. So he known Postle has nothing. So he calls.
Pulling off this play in an isolated spot is very hard. Doing it on a consistent basis like Mike Postle is nearly impossible, unless you know the cards.
The attorney guy that's investigating this matter should let this footage be analyzed by some behavioral experts or something. Might actually be defining evidence of him cheating.
For instance body language? I do not think that that is considered direct evidence in courts. I would be surprised if behavioural expertise is allowed as evidence in court. Its kind of a pseudo science. It can be explained in to to many actions or intent. The point dougie is making here is however strong in light of the rest of what we have seen. So a lot of circumstantial evidence makes a bigger pictures. Murderers have been sentenced on it. If this was a stand alone situation the arms could be thrown because 72 is never gonna win on that board whatever the opponent has. But dougie is right in saying if it was AQ he would not have thrown his hands up so it s again very very suspicious. I am happy for the cheating of Postle, it brings good entertainment. And we can all bash someone for being a dick, always cool to do. Makes me feel better about myself. Whoohoo lets bash him. Cant wait for the disclosure on who else is involved, more bashing coming.
u said it Doug; the river overbet polarizes his hand and removes his most likely range (Ace) and leaves bluffing as a larger than normal possibily. coupled with the idea to "tame the table bully" to deal with Poser plus textbook physical tells lead to this being an upper level call. Also, love the actual analysis as if Poser were playing honestly.
Taylor Carroll sick calldown in that hand man. Is that dbag really FOS there like 40%? Probably if he has 72o and is just trying to exploit his information edge, huh?
beating a guy who knows exactly what you have, what a beast
"I'm calling you. What have you got?"
"Ace of diamonds, jack of spades, nine of hearts, four of clubs and two of diamonds."
"Take it. I thought you were bluffing."
- Dialogue from Funny Girl
This is why you shouldn't take that kind of risks lol, especially in lower or micro stakes you got a lot of gamblers or "calling stations" that will shove with anything, so even if you pretend to have a superstrong hand it's never a guarantee it will kick your opponent out of the hand, not even if he has nothing.
next level tech
I always notice with the charts where they explain this guy as cheating they compare it to average high stakes players instead of players overall, esp players at the same stakes
I've also seen charts saying anything from 124bb-1000+bb/100h ..so who knows
Also we have to PROVE he's cheating, not just suspect it.
The first way to prove it is no phones at the table (a rule been in place in socal for decades)
@@jonslg240 GREAT idea, they should have said mike you've been accused of cheating and you of course deny it , how about this ?, everyone plays without phones?
He needs to balance his cheating range.
Lol
Actually he has a very balanced cheating range; I've been editing footage of him all day. He has: 1) hands that are pretty normal that he plays pretty normally. 2) Hands where he has a very weak holding that just happens to be good where he extracts amazing value from the hand that's second best. 3) Hands like this one where his opponent has him beat but on a scary board where opponent must call an enormous river bet with a hand that should never be good. 4) Hands where he has an extremely weak holding that has enough equity against his opponent's exact hand in order to continue profitably, that will then extract value perfectly once made and 5) hands where he has an extremely strong holding that nonetheless always bets more or less exactly what opponent should be willing to call with their own holding on that particular street.
This is a very balanced strategy that allows him to make +EV decisions on every street of every hand except in those spots where the implied odds of moves he could make on later streets outweight the -EV of the decision he's making on the current street.
It seems that unfortunately Mike has given off some strange tells in various hands, not only this one but also in other hands. Of great interest at the moment specifically are the hands where the RFID system either cannot see Mike's cards or mislabels Mike's cards until it becomes clear that Mike might have to show a different hand than the one the graphic says that he has. These hands in my view will reveal the specific mechanism by which Mike gets the information to make these plays, because they represent moments when the show did not go as planned and had to be altered during the broadcast in order to make sense.
@@RaulGroom By a "balanced cheating range" one might also include losing a few hands on purpose, and making purposefully bad river decisions, so that your results aren't quite so massive a statistical anomaly. This is how it's evident he's cheating without seeing the exact mechanism by which he's doing it. His results are SO improbable, especially given his play style, that cheating is actually much more probable than a heater.
He could do a middle-of-the-road cheat, but I'd also recommend he balance his strategy by working in some swindling or even some blackmail from time to time.
Hilarious
This is clearly the range of a guy who wins 90% of his sessions.
When you have poker instincts that have truly never been seen before, you don't need to think about ranges, because your post-flop edge is so massive that you can play any 2 cards profitably.
@@Joel-js2gk lol funny
Is this the greatest hero call of All-Time? Calling an all-in on a guy who can see your hand...LEGEND
Not really, if you believe your opponent already knows your hole cards you can deduce he's trying to get you to fold based off his actions in this hand.
@@Mitjitsu True, but he could also still have you beat a lot of the time
@@WhitePillMan If he had you beat. He'd be making small value bets to get you to call. The only reason in this hand to bet big when he has it. Is when he thinks you know he's cheating.
@@Mitjitsu Ok that makes sense. I still love the call
@@Mitjitsu another chat pro
6:37 "Do you think the stream adds an element to the decision"
Well it's definitely adding an element to SOMEONE's decisions.
and here I thought he said "do you think the cheating adds an element to the decision" ...
"Your range is just that one hand."
"the only reason he won is because he called the bet" CHECKMATE!!
Bro the commentator just said at 7:00 goes to the livestream and says " Andrew postle is voting for postle" are they not the same person haha or am I tripping
Andrew Postle is Mike Postle's brother?
@@chriscarlson516 I realised this after watching more of the video ahaha
This river call looks like a soul read, except that there's no soul to read.
brilliant
"If your opponent knows your hand, then your range is just that one hand. And you have to sometimes call and sometimes fold to keep your opponent guessing." I really like this thought.
honestly the motion of his hands before seeing the JJ is more than enough for me to form an opinion on this
Really good analysis on his arms going up before both cards got showed.
True but he also knows as soon as he gets called he's behind. Plus since he took so long to call with jj he never has an ace or boat.. So it's still surprising to see a call. That being said I do think the dude cheated.
Pretty sick to spot that. Well done
He kinda had 72. Any call he knows he is beat
That's the thing, if you're holding essentially the nut low, you don't care what he calls with, so you don't act the way he did when you get called, you just feel disappointed your bluff didn't work, not entirely shocked and exasperated it didn't. He was shocked he called because opponent has a hand he is basically never supposed to be able to find a call with. The reaction is what makes the difference between being owned like Doug and beaten while trying to cheat like this. Sometimes you run a bluff and it fails. You don't need to know what hand the guy had when it was a stone bluff. You know that as soon as he says call, you lose, and think what went wrong. Maybe you get shocked by what he called with, but not until you see the hand...
Agree with Brennan's comment. You know you're behind and it sucks, but you don't throw your hands up Hellmuth-style unless you already know they called you super light. People would see what they got called with before getting surprised by the call... unless they already know what they got called with...
Plot Twist: Alec Torreli had the RFID hack
The sickest part is that the commentators always try to justify what Postle(God) does
They are totally involved in this
I don't know if they are involved in the cheating itself but they are involved in talking him up so that no viewer should be suspicious that he wins or makes ridiculous plays. Might be under some order from Justin to talk him up yet not know why besides "we need a hero".
@@gjchawks17 I haven't ruled out complicity beyond just the one confederate but I do not yet see any evidence that anyone else NECESSARILY knows for certain what is going on. My guess is that this was pitched to the commentators as "we know this guy who always wins, it's crazy, we're going to make a stream about him it'll be great fun" and they went along with it. I think there is evidence that at least some of the people involved suspected Mike was cheating at the very least, but I would not be too surprised at this point to learn that Mike had only one confederate.
It is certainly technically possible that it could have been done with one confederate, and I don't see why you would tell anyone besides the people directly involved.
@@RaulGroom Hey I'm all for catching everyone that was a part of it and even just heard whispers and didn't say anything. I just know that the less people involved the better chance of not getting caught. So in my eyes the commentators aren't in on the cheating itself, just they chose to make the streams always about him. Which makes some of this more sickening. That only one of them ever brought it up and none of them (to my knowledge) have said anything yet.
nah i watched joey's 5 hour stream, and all the announcers reactions make it sound as if they're not in on it. you would never mouth off on a suspicion like that, it's a massive accusation that would blow up the community (as it is now). you'd be fired at best and sued for libel at worst. if you were ACTUALLY in on it, you would justify the plays as strategically smart and not sit there in incredulity saying things like "omg how does he get that read, etc".
Raul Groom Why do you keep using the word confederate? Wtf does any of this have to do with which side of the civil war these guys would have fought for? Ya dummy. 🤣🤣🤣 #NotAsSmartAsWeThinkWeAre
This shit is HILARIOUS 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣’if ur opponent can see ur hand you’re gonna have to call sometimes’ Doug LMAO 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
EastbrookGoat OKC it’s true tho. Very GTO call, some of the time.
well yeah because most of the time people dont have much so you know theyre going to be bluffing a lot
yeah, i heard that and snorted my chocolate milk
jack mack 😂😂😂😂😂
Postle understands that everything you do at the poker table conveys information.
But he hasn't mastered the finer points.
He's too loosey goosey. At least he isn't eating a sandwich
Really? Does he? Because If he understood these things, maybe he wouldn't be getting called down by pocket jacks on a AAQ rainbow flop lolololol The only thing he understands is losing via bluff, and winning via text.
lol, you a joker man, .... i hate people who cheat
Why don’t you call it “Postle hands”?
for fucks sake 😂
Cheating hands? Guess it’s the same thing
?
Because Apostle hands is way better.
Solid investigative work Vanessa. You should get an emmy
Yaaaasssss gurl, you gettem Nessa!
Two 'Vanessa's working together to take him down, outstanding
If he should get an Emmy, then Joey Ingram deserves a Nobel prize. Doug's... sorry, Vanessa's analyses are great, and I applaud him for doing this, but Joey is the real GOAT investigator.
@@emdiar6588 nobody is arguing joeys part in the investigation. but way to get butthurt about a comment
@@Josh-ye2kw Butt hurt?? Where did you get that impression. I'm saying Doug is great, but Joey has gone beyond the call of duty.
“Hart Banson” is actually Taylor Carroll, an awesome live reg, who regularly appears on LATB, Reddit, etc.
hi hart
Taylor swift?
Lol
@@mikehattar8372 yeah he studied on postler and he overbluffs just anyone who appears to have a bluffcatcher. So he fucking reversed on him and called the mofo
im really Glad he called here. Fuck Mike. what a piece of shit!
Notice how he’s always on seat 2. Builds his stack to his left, like building a wall from left side visual towards him. Only has to worry about seat 1, which already has his attention towards the right as all the players and cards are towards that way.
He sits in other seats in different streams.
"Maybe he was just surprised his opponent had a hand" lmfao
These commentators are so sure this guy will win every hand and no one questions why?
dumb people, like so often.
they are in on it, getting a small %
Thomas Newton idk so you think these commentators who are earning reasonable money would sell their reputation and dignity for 5%(random number) of his winnings? If they only get paid on the night they commentate that would be like max $5k. Hardly seems worth. Especially since it was one of the commentators who first brought the allegations to light.
I dint think most were in on it, but if they just listened to themselves they could’ve all determined he was cheating, as veronica DID!
I simply love your humor and digs.
Great video again polk
I think the graphics are wrong! He has Pocket Aces! ...oh, wait...
Lol
lmao
The Mike Postle drama has reinvigorated Doug's love of Poker RUclips
💯💯💯💯💯
Really subtle but good point regarding the “pre-reaction” to the light call on the river. When I’m in those spots and get looked up, it takes me a min to realize what happened with the hand.
I love how Doug is doing in depth analysis from the superusers perspective lmao
Hart Banson, homie. Totally diff guy.
Jart Danson
Wart Fanson
Can we just call him iPhone Mike, in a tribute of Iron Mike? He seems to be knocking out his opponents just like Tyson.
I just feel like the commentators know what he's doing here. With their talk an eye brow raise in certain situations they also seem suspect. Just burn the place down.
Almost seem suspect?? They are totally in on it. Just watch the Veronika video on her channel where she says it's all strange what Postle does and this other commentator screaming over her that he is just playing good, super angry with her drawing attention to things wrong with Postle's play.
0:42 "Since he is up against Jacks that may not be terribly hard(to bluff oppo)". This commentator is in on it. He is commentating with the presumption that Postle Knows oppo has JJ..
@@pahakuutti I definitely agree.
well basically the commentators have been witnessing this nonsense for the last year straight. It just took time for the rest of the world to get interested.
@@pahakuutti Wow nice catch.
The sound on your videos has been pretty low lately Doug. Been having to crank the volume to hear you.
Yes....please upvote this so @douppolk sees it. I thought my phone was fucked
Agreed. I watch on Huawei.
The video stats say it's 12db under RUclips's normalisation target (approx -14 LUFS). So the original audio would have been mastered at around -26 LUFS which is ridiculously quiet.
Honestly the best evidence for cheating so far, good eye! Beyond that, your reaction to the dirty angle shooter calling was genuine, his was in every way contrived and you just made a believer out of me.
Postle is the GOAT, how does he just always know?? What incredible poker instincts!
You can tell he's also only capable of doing this when feeling the pressure on the big stage, when he's being watched by dozens of fans from home. That's why his results off of the live stream are non-existant.
We are witnessing true greatness before our very eyes!
In all seriousness, I love it and find it absolutely hilarious when he gets heroes by super weak hands that have no business calling. My favourite is the A9 vs A3 hand (a must-watch if you haven't seen it yet.)
Joel link?
@@pokerqAK47 Can't find the clip to the original hand but here's JLittle's reaction
ruclips.net/video/-hPmOpd_wBs/видео.html
13:14 Hart Banson & Bart Hanson, surely this is game is a scam. Even the player names are made up.
It was just a typo in the graphics.
@@Antyvas no it wasnt- its a joke
@@GaryMillyz Did you know that my poker name is Fart Cranston?
@@Antyvas I know that I've seen your reply somewhere else on here. So, I guess, yes- yes I do.
@@GaryMillyz I'm trying to get on a Stones live stream with Hart and Bart.
Doug. That is Taylor Carol. He’s a great player from arizona. They call him the GOAT of the AZ!
At the very bottom of the screen stones has a "problem gambling?" Number.... Maybe they should add a "problem cheating?" Hotline
As if they even care if someone has a problem gambling. The only thing that dumbass egotistical Justin cares about is showing off in his Tesla that he doesn’t even deserve.
Have you thought about naming it Postler Hands?
Or poser hands*, the algorithms definitely rigged with this guy's gameplay
Impostler Hands
The commentators are true GTO gods as well: „he called the flop so surely on this card he calls the turn“ or „doesn’t want to bet too big, too big of a bet shows weakness“
???
Lol yea the JJ guy would be terrified of a 10% bet instead of an overbet in their weird world
This was one of the hands where I feel like his opponent seemed to know exactly what Postle was doing. And by that, I think he may have known Postle was cheating.
That's a solid explanation for the call indeed.
what else would you have meant by that
There’s a chance I did.
@@TaylorWCarroll Hey are you the Taylor Carroll who made that call? Really great call if it was you. And I hope Mike Postle faces jail time, he is a piece of shit
Brilliant stuff Doug. I am really enjoying these recent videos.
That hindsight 2020 shirt is fire
I hadn’t heard that explanation before. You nailed it. It absolutely takes two seconds at least to process everything. Spot on Doug. Keep up the awesome content
Very insightful video, Doug. I'm wondering if Postle is starting to believe he's really that good and has somehow forgotten that he is cheating.
Doug this is serious Sherlock level deductions
This is pretty much it. He’s definitely cheating. Even if he saw one Jack as it’s being flipped over, it could be JK for straight. Since K and J are both paints, how was he able to tell the other card is a J and not K so quickly?
Chris i mean he is cheating... idk how, but he does.. i dont understand how the rest of plyer keep playing .. for me is ok when i see one rare hand on the table. Anyway in thiscase i dnt care if he surprised on this way because the opponent said “ pocket jj” before he showed them...
“Pretty much it” was like 5 days ago but good comment
Thanks for creating such good content. It's been good becoming a fan - I'm entertained and educated by your work. Kudos and respect.
bart hanson and "hart banson" seating next to each other xD
Did you know that my poker name is Fart Cranston?
🤣🤣🤣🤣
''You called with JJ?!''
To be fair, he probably played like that thinking ''It's Apostle, if he shoves he has 42o or some shit''
100% he has sick of postle's shit. At a minimum he recognized he must just be bluffing his ass of constantly whether he thinks he's cheating or not. Nobody wins every hand without a showdown.
Maybe put him on 4♦️2♦️. Tuned a straight flush draw, and lost the fucking plot when he missed on the river.
the best part of my day presently is polker-postle hands.
We've reached peak Polk. These Postle videos are Doug's finest work.
But Doug, you were 16 beers deep. Postle is at peak physical awareness !!!
You need to send Postle a thank you card. This is a years worth of content.
The pre-emptive movement of his arms is for me definitive proof. Well spot Douglas
As if it was needed
That was an amazing analysis. Glad that you are pointing out things that nobody else seems to be noticing
Yes! Moar impostleably impostleable polker hands!
It says “Hart Banson” not “Bart Hanson”
Please excuse Doug, he is getting old and his eye sight is getting worse
Incorrect. Watch the video again.
Brett Sylvester exactly. It says both. So him saying it doesn’t say Bart Hanson is wrong
13:15 chip count shows Hart Banson and Bart Hanson at the top ?
Some are saying that is Taylor Carroll
Doug Polk Poker HEADS UP.......
MIKE THE MOUTH HAS A 2HR RECORDED INTERVIEW WITH MP TONIGHT!!!!!!!!
Mycroft Holmes whoa. really?
@@Stockhandle123 that what he said on his twitter.
That's why he didn't slag him off to get the interview.
@01:22, the graphics on the bottom left read "Hart Banson" and "Bart Hanson"
The thing is, this was a decent call just because Postle's line made no sense. He is basically repping AQ at the worst or pocket queens. Those hands probably dont take that line. He bet way too big on the flop, when he would have had the board crushed and then the river jam just screams please fold.
Brandon Dorsey I was actually thinking the same thing the call doug showed vs him by alec is much tougher because there’s only one ace on board. ive made this exact call before vs spewy opponents.
Agreed, the river jam is essentially saying "I have AQ or QQ and think you have an ace and will call any bet."
But those hands shouldn't bet so big on the flop! That being said, very few, if any hands should be betting that big on the flop. If you do bet big on the flop though, that means you can't bluff as often, meaning you have to have a bigger check-range, which also has to include some traps. AA and AQ would be mandatory traps in that case, and QQ should trap sometimes too.
That said, we're just talking nonsense. When it comes to Mike Postle, the greatest we've ever seen, ranges don't matter. This guy has the best poker instincts of all time, and it's not close. He's able to look right through your soul (through his cock of course) and know what you have. His postflop edge is so massive, he can just make exploitative play after exploitative play and it'll all be +EV.
Damn Detective Polk nice eye on that reaction, props to you for this find.. people don't realize how hard it is to find this kind of spots!
The evidence is clear. Throw this dude in jail already.
This is corroborated by the Stones Live management team. So they need to free up some space in the cells first...
2:03 looked at his lap
I’m sure Postle is spending some of those “winnings” on a good lawyer right about now
Pretty sure Taylor knew that Postle was cheating somehow. If you know your opponent is cheating, and he's not very smart (like Postle), then you're pretty sure he wouldn't bet like this with a boat, trips or a queen here. He'd bet smaller to get you to call. We've seen Postle do this numerous times, betting very small for the thinnest value bets, and overbet-shoving to fold out a split or a weaker holding.
How is this even Postle'ble!...I'll see my self out
Joke thief
I'll see myself out. That made me laugh
@@MmaSmarty87 Nope, Its just an obv joke, if it was commented before im not surprised at all.
i really enjoy watching bart hansons facial expressions in almost every hand
Don't know if you caught that reaction, or someone from 2+2 in a post but that is a great catch. Well done to you or whomever and way to include it in the video.
I haven't seen anyone mention it on 2+2, I think Doug caught it on his own actually. Pretty impressive
Time stamp?
@@biggawinnacrapsa3870 Let's say 11:00 though it started before that but that's right at the reaction.
@@gjchawks17 - ty - I've watched so much concerning this that I didn't watch all of this one when I asked for a time stamp - if I had, I would have easily been able to locate it, thanks.
@6:37 "Do you think the stream add an element to the decision?"
IS HE A GOD?
@joeingram1 you, like the rest of us, are just jealous of the natural talents of the greatest poker player we've ever witnessed. This man can soulread every opponent and know exactly what their cards are, simply by staring into his cock.
He is just the best ever. There's no proof of him cheating! He just always KNOWS!
Spot on takes Doug! These postle videos are hilarious
Are you saying Torelli is behind this?
Torelli isn't behind this,he's left-handed.
Could also be Charlie Carrel?
Fantastic analysis. Would have loved to see the JJ dude interviewed to explain the call.
I think he's cheating..watch Bart Hanson as the commentators are talking at 6:40 his hod nod and laugh seem so in time as if hes reacting to what the commentator is saying..
@@xXOblivionXx1I think you are thinking the wrong guy was cheating!
finaly someone who beast everyfing!
"If you're gonna start with a seven duce, ya gotta keep going.... I guess." 😂😂😂
Doug Polk This makes no difference but the JJ guy is Hart Banson. I can’t be sure but I don’t think that’s his real name.
He's just took David Sklansky's poker theory a little too literally. That says every time you play your hand the way you would if you could see your opponents' cards, you gain.
7:53 once again, jacks texted over to postle
Scott Wigglesby yes probably on vibrate 😀
I normally agree with just about all of your opinions. And I DO believe this guy is most likely in a contract with Stones as they could very reasonably be using him as a marketing ploy. This is done with slot channels; i.e. Brian Christopher. However, this example lacks one reasoning... In the event you bluff knowing its damn near impossible to beat ANYTHING (WTF could 72 actually beat) you could reasonably react to the fact your opponent calls rather than the cards in their hand. Think about it. How many times have you said I'm going to bluff the next one no matter the cards and played range against range and the board was in your favor, plus your betting didn't fuck up your perceivable range. In these cases, you react to the action and not the cards. Still love the videos bro...friendly opinion in a conversation. I do believe he's employed by Stones!
Easier said..........he knows it is a shitty hand, if his opponent takes such a long time to call, it is clearly not an Ace, a street or a boat...........so he knows it is most mainly a Qx or some other shit.......and obviously his bluff is beat.
I think Doug and all the people here interpret way 2much into this situation.
Greatest poker player of all time opens up with seven duce off suit
Wrong
LOL!! "BUT, if your range is just your hand because your opponent can see your cards, well then you have to call some of the times - and this is where you really have to mix up that strategy - if your opponent knows your exact holding, you're going to have to sometimes be willing to call and sometimes be willing to fold, because your range is really just that one hand... and you really have to keep your opponent (who is a GOD, and knows your hand) guessing, it's a really important part of your strategy."
13:15 nobody gonna talk about the epic rivalry between hart banson and bart hanson
Lmao when the commentor said " do you think the stream adds an element to the situation".
More than you know friend lol.
Doug the 🐐
He called because he knows Postle is cheating. He knowns Postle knows his hand. So he knows that Postle knows that it's really hard to call a bet. So he knows the bet is designed to make him fold. So he known Postle has nothing. So he calls.
Pulling off this play in an isolated spot is very hard. Doing it on a consistent basis like Mike Postle is nearly impossible, unless you know the cards.
Thank god. Doug is back into a tank top! The world is right again!!
Appears to be Taylor Carroll from O-Town/ AZ
Sick catch on the early reaction. Man the sleuths are working hard on this case and I love it!
11:28 Hmm, it's almost as if he knew his opponents cards...
Im here for the whole video, but i really appreciate those tips u give at the middle of the hands too. Thanks keep it up
I would be interested in Taylor Carol's perspective on this hand
Joseph Bohlen “Please be good, otherwise you’re gonna be a meme”
Taylor Carroll nice call. did you have an idea something was fishy with this guy well playing there.
@@Stockhandle123 Yeah I did. I made some comments on reddit and twitter about it.
Taylor Carroll I have never heard of your Taylor but you have to be a boss to be able to beat a rigged game so congrats on being you. ;)
@@TaylorWCarroll where is the link to these comments?
This is the first time I laughed out loud at a RUclips video title. Well done sir. You win the internet for the month of October.
I heard he watches rocky 3 before he plays poker
I think this is one of the best pieces of evidence of him cheating. He clearly reacts to the hand before it is visible. Great work!
Who are these commentators? They don’t know what they’re talking about
They DO know exactly what they’re talking about all too well.
Wow, video gets really good at 10:45. Nailed it.
“Hart Banson” sitting next to Bart Hanson... weird shit going on these days ....
What a coincidence! ;)
Brilliant analysis on Postle throwing his hands up in disgust "without even knowing" what his opponent's cards are...
The attorney guy that's investigating this matter should let this footage be analyzed by some behavioral experts or something.
Might actually be defining evidence of him cheating.
For instance body language? I do not think that that is considered direct evidence in courts. I would be surprised if behavioural expertise is allowed as evidence in court. Its kind of a pseudo science. It can be explained in to to many actions or intent.
The point dougie is making here is however strong in light of the rest of what we have seen. So a lot of circumstantial evidence makes a bigger pictures. Murderers have been sentenced on it.
If this was a stand alone situation the arms could be thrown because 72 is never gonna win on that board whatever the opponent has. But dougie is right in saying if it was AQ he would not have thrown his hands up so it s again very very suspicious.
I am happy for the cheating of Postle, it brings good entertainment. And we can all bash someone for being a dick, always cool to do. Makes me feel better about myself. Whoohoo lets bash him.
Cant wait for the disclosure on who else is involved, more bashing coming.
@@paulwevers2109 Interesting, I didn't know that.
u said it Doug; the river overbet polarizes his hand and removes his most likely range (Ace) and leaves bluffing as a larger than normal possibily. coupled with the idea to "tame the table bully" to deal with Poser plus textbook physical tells lead to this being an upper level call.
Also, love the actual analysis as if Poser were playing honestly.
Taylor is such a good player, love the kid! :-)
SupehSloth thanks!
Taylor Carroll sick calldown in that hand man. Is that dbag really FOS there like 40%? Probably if he has 72o and is just trying to exploit his information edge, huh?
@@TaylorWCarroll Sick call, man... Been following you from your reddit post about the Bike. Keep crushing!
@@lucdh9301 Thanks man!
this is just some content gold