No Limit Hold 'Em Poker Discussion

Thoughts on the Garrett Adelstein-Robbi Jade Lew thing?

I've seen a bit of Garrett (him getting slow rolled videos mainly) and from what I've seen he's always featuring in live streams. Haven't heard of Lew until this week.

The sketchiest thing for me is offering to pay the money back,
 
Thoughts on the Garrett Adelstein-Robbi Jade Lew thing?

I've seen a bit of Garrett (him getting slow rolled videos mainly) and from what I've seen he's always featuring in live streams. Haven't heard of Lew until this week.

The sketchiest thing for me is offering to pay the money back,

Hard to say. In my gut I think the guy that backed her saw Garrets cards or a card and signaled to
her somehow that Garrett was weak.

Idk, I’ve thinking about it on and off for the past few days.

What do you think?
 
Thoughts on the Garrett Adelstein-Robbi Jade Lew thing?

I've seen a bit of Garrett (him getting slow rolled videos mainly) and from what I've seen he's always featuring in live streams. Haven't heard of Lew until this week.

The sketchiest thing for me is offering to pay the money back,
The way she played that hand made zero sense. But no way in hell I’m paying someone back if I didn’t cheat.

also, can someone who knows more than me explain why they played 2 rivers on that hand?
 
The way she played that hand made zero sense. But no way in hell I’m paying someone back if I didn’t cheat.

also, can someone who knows more than me explain why they played 2 rivers on that hand?

You can agree to “run it twice” or even three times if you want.

Just adds some fun to the end of the hand, and if you think you’re weak, you may get lucky, although it doesn’t reeeeeally improve your chances if you are the dog.

The winner of each run out gets a portion of the pot based on agreed number of runs. 2 runs, half the pot to each winner, 3 runs, a third, and so on.
 
You can agree to “run it twice” or even three times if you want.

Just adds some fun to the end of the hand, and if you think you’re weak, you may get lucky, although it doesn’t reeeeeally improve your chances if you are the dog.

The winner of each run out gets a portion of the pot based on agreed number of runs. 2 runs, half the pot to each winner, 3 runs, a third, and so on.
Thanks. Based on that hand, seems like smart move by him since he’s chasing but would raise even more flags on how she played it since she’s going in with jack high on a table with straight draw, flush draw plus any damn pair that beats her jack high lol
 
Thanks. Based on that hand, seems like smart move by him since he’s chasing but would raise even more flags on how she played it since she’s going in with jack high on a table with straight draw, flush draw plus any damn pair that beats her jack high lol

I agree, it’s just a weird situation altogether and maybe she was thinking she caught him chasing a low draw..? I have no idea honestly. I’ve heard some people say that maybe she misread her hand and thought she was holding J3, as she asked if he can beat 3’s and she had J3 a hand or 2 before that pot.
 
Last edited:
The way she played that hand made zero sense. But no way in hell I’m paying someone back if I didn’t cheat.

also, can someone who knows more than me explain why they played 2 rivers on that hand?

I believe it's to cut a bit of the variability in cash games.
 
I agree, it’s just a weird situation altogether and maybe she was thinking she caught him chasing a low draw..? I have no idea honestly. I’ve heard some people say that maybe she misread her hand and thought she was holding J3, as she asked if he can beat 3’s and she had J3 a hand or 2 before that pot.

The problem with that theory is that she actually says that she doesn't have a 3 or a pair. And you see her repeatedly looking at her hand. Maybe, a big maybe, she eventually got confused but I also don't know. I am pretty sure watching the vids that she actually confirms/acknowledges she has no 3 while mulling over the decision so she contradicted herself later on.

She could just be a terrible player and just made a stupid movie but no one with an ounce of poker logic would make that call. You'd have to narrow Garrett's hand to a straight draw and flush draw no higher than 9. No AKQ clubs or hearts. Who da hell makes that call for that much money with J high? I've called and seen plenty of people call with A or K-high but J-high when AKQ for two suits aren't on the board...? Really bad play from a bad player or a cheater... I was (and still am) leaning heavily on cheating but i can't ignore the possibility that she's a bad player and made a bad play. Garrett is also known to be a super loose/active (but great) player.
 
The problem with that theory is that she actually says that she doesn't have a 3 or a pair. And you see her repeatedly looking at her hand. Maybe, a big maybe, she eventually got confused but I also don't know. I am pretty sure watching the vids that she actually confirms/acknowledges she has no 3 while mulling over the decision so she contradicted herself later on.

She could just be a terrible player and just made a stupid movie but no one with an ounce of poker logic would make that call. You'd have to narrow Garrett's hand to a straight draw and flush draw no higher than 9. No AKQ clubs or hearts. Who da hell makes that call for that much money with J high? I've called and seen plenty of people call with A or K-high but J-high when AKQ for two suits aren't on the board...? Really bad play from a bad player or a cheater... I was (and still am) leaning heavily on cheating but i can't ignore the possibility that she's a bad player and made a bad play. Garrett is also known to be a super loose/active (but great) player.

Well she’s a pretty expressive and chatty player from what it seems, and I’ve lied a million times before a showdown with another player. I don’t know what it’s proof of or not proof of, I’m still kind of leaning towards cheating but more in the way of her knowing a card or something like that. You figure if she had a device she would have been cheating more or she wouldn’t have agreed to run it twice.

And I’m on board with the idea of if she didn’t do anything wrong she shouldn’t have given the money back. Some people say she felt bullied to give the money back because she’s a woman, but I’m not buying it.
 
Actually thought she was a tranny.

She's either a terrible cheat or a terrible player.

All her the talk she's come out with since is just cringe. Pretending she "read him like a book" and all the crap is laughable.

Garrett's reaction is equally a cringe.

So many scumbags in poker, so who knows the truth. If I had to guess, I'd just say a poor/inexperienced player found herself in dark hole and ended up making a brain dead play.

I've definitely called down with J high before, but not for 130k, and rarely successful!
 
You do wonder what the reaction would be if it were Ivey who made the call (obviously he never ends up in that situation, but still).
 
Well she’s a pretty expressive and chatty player from what it seems, and I’ve lied a million times before a showdown with another player. I don’t know what it’s proof of or not proof of, I’m still kind of leaning towards cheating but more in the way of her knowing a card or something like that. You figure if she had a device she would have been cheating more or she wouldn’t have agreed to run it twice.

And I’m on board with the idea of if she didn’t do anything wrong she shouldn’t have given the money back. Some people say she felt bullied to give the money back because she’s a woman, but I’m not buying it.

If you didn't do anything wrong, you don't give the money back. I don't know, maybe she felt that she wouldn't make it home alive if she held it, who knows
 
If you didn't do anything wrong, you don't give the money back. I don't know, maybe she felt that she wouldn't make it home alive if she held it, who knows

Unlikely she'd give the money back if she didn't cheat. Impossible she'd give the money back if she did.

Hand itself was one of the most bizarre things I've seen in poker, but even that has been surpassed by the reaction too it. Literally 100s of hours of analysis about it on YouTube.

Nothing makes sense.
 
If you didn't do anything wrong, you don't give the money back. I don't know, maybe she felt that she wouldn't make it home alive if she held it, who knows

Unlikely she'd give the money back if she didn't cheat. Impossible she'd give the money back if she did.

Hand itself was one of the most bizarre things I've seen in poker, but even that has been surpassed by the reaction too it. Literally 100s of hours of analysis about it on YouTube.

Nothing makes sense.

1) Cheaters and thieves NEVER give money back. 0%. While there is at least a 1% chance that a nervous female noob being pressured outside the room by the most popular player and a stream employee would give money back to avoid conflict.

2) Every theory for how she cheated includes a vibrating device on her body(wearing skin tight yoga pants and a crop top) or visual signals from someone else in the room. Nobody would steal 100s of thousands of dollars on a live broadcast with 30k viewers with either of those methods.

3) She offered to be searched on the spot. And she continued to play in the game on stream for several hours. Meanwhile her backer, and alleged accomplice, made a huge scene of her giving the money back. Neither of those actions would be taken by anyone actually cheating the game.

4) Every pro sitting at the table with her says she did not cheat and continued playing with her for several hours.

5) The stream staff allowed her to continue playing on stream for several hours with no pause in action to investigate. They continue to host the stream every night with no cancellations or postponements to investigate or adjust security protocols.

This is all aside from the other aspects involving her actual play. IE: Never doing anything else suspicious, choosing this spot to cheat when she's 53%, running it twice.

Nobody who plays in the game other than the guy who lost believes she cheated. Nobody who runs the game believes she cheated. Nobody who has access to games with rich beginners believes she cheated.

The only people saying she cheated are nerds who never play live with people just having fun because they are afraid of socializing and guys trying to get clicks on Youtube.
 
The only people saying she cheated are nerds who never play live with people just having fun because they are afraid of socializing and guys trying to get clicks on Youtube.

Agree with most of what you say, but that is not true. Lots of experienced pros suggest she may have cheated to a certain %.

She played the hand so awfully that it is unbelievable......but her cheating is even more unbelievable.
 
Agree with most of what you say, but that is not true. Lots of experienced pros suggest she may have cheated to a certain %.

She played the hand so awfully that it is unbelievable......but her cheating is even more unbelievable.

Again, there is a massive distinction between "experienced pros" and "experienced pros with access to players like her".

The "experienced pros" saying she cheated are the antisocial nerds who are not invited to games with rich beginners. There couldn't be a clearer example of "why" than this whole ordeal.

Rich attractive female beginner gets lucky and 1 nerd takes the money back with the help of another nerd on the stream production staff, while all the other nerds accuse her of cheating and scrutinize every aspect of her life.

Meanwhile it behooves the stream staff and the casino to inflate the controversy as much as possible, create as much doubt as possible, and ultimately justify their role in stealing 135k from her. Because that is what they will be sued for. All the while knowing she did not cheat and continuing to run their game and stream.
 
Again, there is a massive distinction between "experienced pros" and "experienced pros with access to players like her".

The "experienced pros" saying she cheated are the antisocial nerds who are not invited to games with rich beginners. There couldn't be a clearer example of "why" than this whole ordeal.

Rich attractive female beginner gets lucky and 1 nerd takes the money back with the help of another nerd on the stream production staff, while all the other nerds accuse her of cheating and scrutinize every aspect of her life.

Meanwhile it behooves the stream staff and the casino to inflate the controversy as much as possible, create as much doubt as possible, and ultimately justify their role in stealing 135k from her. Because that is what they will be sued for. All the while knowing she did not cheat and continuing to run their game and stream.

Just not true.
 
Just not true.

Show me some examples of known pros with a shred of personality who are on team "cheated". I would honestly be interested because I haven't seen any.

The only one I've seen come close is Tom Dwan. And he was more defending Garrett's actions of taking the money back and accusing her online because he said there was reason enough for Garrett to believe he was cheated in the moment and to believe this would be his only chance to recoup stolen funds. And it should be noted that Tom occasionally plays on the Hustler Stream, and has a great personal interest in defending the actions of the star player and staff.

Meanwhile team "did not cheat" includes Phil Ivey and every other pro at the table, Daniel Negreanu, Phil Hellmuth, David Williams, Phil Galfond, Allen Kessler, Jean-Robert Bellande, Matt Glantz, and basically every other pro with charisma who gets invited to these games.
 
1) Cheaters and thieves NEVER give money back. 0%. While there is at least a 1% chance that a nervous female noob being pressured outside the room by the most popular player and a stream employee would give money back to avoid conflict.

2) Every theory for how she cheated includes a vibrating device on her body(wearing skin tight yoga pants and a crop top) or visual signals from someone else in the room. Nobody would steal 100s of thousands of dollars on a live broadcast with 30k viewers with either of those methods.

3) She offered to be searched on the spot. And she continued to play in the game on stream for several hours. Meanwhile her backer, and alleged accomplice, made a huge scene of her giving the money back. Neither of those actions would be taken by anyone actually cheating the game.

4) Every pro sitting at the table with her says she did not cheat and continued playing with her for several hours.

5) The stream staff allowed her to continue playing on stream for several hours with no pause in action to investigate. They continue to host the stream every night with no cancellations or postponements to investigate or adjust security protocols.

This is all aside from the other aspects involving her actual play. IE: Never doing anything else suspicious, choosing this spot to cheat when she's 53%, running it twice.

Nobody who plays in the game other than the guy who lost believes she cheated. Nobody who runs the game believes she cheated. Nobody who has access to games with rich beginners believes she cheated.

The only people saying she cheated are nerds who never play live with people just having fun because they are afraid of socializing and guys trying to get clicks on Youtube.

I haven't re-looked into it deeply and might be recollecting wrong.

On 2, I think that theory came about under the same rumour (that was alledgedly started by Elon Musk) on how Hans Niemann is alledged to have cheated against Magnus Carlsen.
 
Show me some examples of known pros with a shred of personality who are on team "cheated". I would honestly be interested because I haven't seen any.

The only one I've seen come close is Tom Dwan. And he was more defending Garrett's actions of taking the money back and accusing her online because he said there was reason enough for Garrett to believe he was cheated in the moment and to believe this would be his only chance to recoup stolen funds. And it should be noted that Tom occasionally plays on the Hustler Stream, and has a great personal interest in defending the actions of the star player and staff.

Meanwhile team "did not cheat" includes Phil Ivey and every other pro at the table, Daniel Negreanu, Phil Hellmuth, David Williams, Phil Galfond, Allen Kessler, Jean-Robert Bellande, Matt Glantz, and basically every other pro with charisma who gets invited to these games.

The consensus tends to be "I'm 90% she didn't cheat". Probably not, but not ruling out the possibility.
 
Back
Top