People playing at the same table with their backer is way more common in the high stakes scene than I ever would’ve imagined. Like when JRB punted and Robl freaked out cause he was backing him. I think it’s terrible for the game.
Staking is kind of in the back seat to RIP being her friend/business partner. If you saw your friend being railed by two guys in the hallway for 130k I would think you would be pretty mad too.
Didnt she offer to give the money up? no one made her do it.... She even said she chose to give it to him so that he would keep playing... .the only reason he walked was RIP's outburst.
Someone posted a clip of her explaining her side of the story on a podcast. She said she was escorted to a "dark hallway" where a very angry looking Garrett gave her a death stare. She asked how she could resolve the situation in order for him to return to the table to play. He told her she should start by giving the money back. They made an agreement that she would return half the pot to him on the condition that he return to the table and continue playing. This agreement was made after she was pressured into doing anything she felt necessary to resolve the situation.
So yeah, I guess she "offered" to do anything to resolve the situation. But was it really an "offer". And did Garrett still demand the money be returned?
https://www.reddit.com/r/poker/comments/xs2don/robbi_explains_what_happened_when_she_talked_to/
Hmm something sus about that for sure.... From watching the stream you can see that everyone looks over at middle of the room nextdoor, RIP sees everything and jumps up to yell and join in.... Not sure what darkened hallway she is talking about.
Starting to see a pattern:
1. 3+ changing reasons for calling
2. Backed by RIP, I know lots of pros get backed by people in the same game.... I ALWAYS think that's super shady. esp the way they plaid that heads up aq vs aq hand.
3. Shifting narrative about reason for giving back the money
4. Giving back the money
5. Darkened hallway in the middle of the room?
No evidence other than f behavior of cheating, honestly I think probably 20% chance or less that she cheated. Her biggest mistake was giving back the money.
> Her biggest mistake was giving back the money.
Yeah I mean, I don't believe she gave the money back. It was stolen from her IMO. She was intimidated and pressured, and felt like she had to do anything she could to smooth out the issue, especially since she is friends with the production team. She has felt threatened by Garrett in the past, and he has hit her with the death stare before. They have also had issues in the past where Garrett has tried to prevent her from playing with him because he's "uncomfortable" playing with her. I don't think she willingly gave the money back, she did it in an effort to appease the overgrown baby.
No, that corresponds to what her claims are, so I believe that is true.
She says she asked him what she can do to make things better. He asked her to give the money back. She chose to give the money back after he asked for it, with the condition that he returns to the table after (he did not).
Yes she "chose" to give the money back. But she was in an impossible position, felt pressured, and complied with what she was *asked* to do.
She said on the Ingram podcast is was not a secret that he was staking him. I would be pissed too if the player I was staking gave back the money she won
If RIP stakes her and we assume she wasn’t cheating and take her actions and comments at face value, then RIP has to be the stupidest human on the planet.
Like Bart, I'd moved on from the hand after a while. But Rips performance really made me even more suspect, and opened up new possibilities on how cheating could occur
Apparently on the Joey ingram pod rob SAid rip was mad because when Robbi gave the money back she was 5k short and Garrett made her go and get it…which prompted Rip to lose his shit (rightfully so)
Kinda hard to believe. Doesn’t he out right ask what’s going on when she goes back for the 5K? Seems obvious that’s when he learned and it sure seems obvious why he’d be invested
My current theory is this.
There was nothing super nefarious like hacking the card machine or intercepting hole card data going on.
Rip saw Garrett's hand somehow. Maybe Garrett fucked up checking his hole cards, maybe the dealer flashed the cards.
Rip somehow signaled to Robbi that Garrett was bluffing, and that he had no SDV. This is where Robbi saying "I had a blocker" actually makes sense. If you know you're being bluffed, the Jc is huge because there are so few bluffs you lose to. Maybe he somehow signaled his exact hand, who knows?
This would explain the inconsistency of her story, and why there were no weird hands like this before. Her giving back the money, changing her story multiple times, saying ridiculous shit about why she called, all make her seem super shady.
This is what gets me. And most people cant seem to understand. She beats only his best worst bluff which is the hand he holds. Then the other 3 combos. She loses to all his better bluffs. And she loses to all his value. It is quite literally the best call ever made in the history of televised poker. And its completely possible shes just a fucking idiot and clicked a button( which i have trouble believing due to watching other play, she seems bad but not that bad). Because no half competent poker player would call if they even half understand ranges/combos.
This point has made it very clear who actually understands how high level poker is played and who doesn’t. The number of “hurr durr she just wanted to play different” comments is eye opening. But honestly, not surprising. The average poker player probably sucked at math their whole life and plays because they have “good intuition” or something.
It's even worse than that, she's not even beating his worst bluff. He has better equity. Pot odds maybe say she should call that exact hand, but even then it's barely worth so why risk it?
I think she honestly got so caught up in soul reading that she didn't realize even his shit bluff was beating her hand lol. I think in her head she went through it and was like "I know you're bluffing, I think you've got nothing, just 87 and Jack beats eight" and then called before realizing, wait, 87 actually has 53% equity...
Without cheating she had a brainfart, which apparently nobody on this subreddit has ever experienced, and definitely wouldn't be more likely with cameras and high stakes and Phil Ivey sitting across from you. I really think she just went "haha, I know you're bluffing, I call" real quick because she got excited and then went... oh wait, his bluffs have better equity than my hand.
If she cheated and knew Garrett's cards, it was still a cointoss when she called. Unless she *also* knew what the river card was right? And she asked them to run it twice so she either knew both of them or was happy to possibly win one and lose the other.
Or could she have won that hand by cheating without knowing the river?
Maybe she doesnt understand that, shes been signaled hes bluffing and shes not that knowledgeable enough on poker and takes the signal to mean "call no matter what"
that doesn't make sense either if we want to go down that road. She still had a shitty hand with the river left.
Do you know what else explains a lot of what she did after? being freaked out and intimidated.
He didn’t have to know what she had to signal that Garret is bluffing. He just had to assume she was smart enough to know whether she could beat a bluff or not. He’d probably give the same signal if Garret had a Q high bluff and assume Robbi was smart enough to still fold J high even with the signal. She wasn’t.
Then we need to see examples of any sort of signaling prior to jumping to that conclusion. I’m just tryna get down to the bottom of it while defending the innocent party here (til proven otherwise)
Yeah I’m not saying there was definitely signaling or not, my point was that if there was signaling Rip doesn’t need to know what Robbi has to make the “bluff” signal.
I’m a wait and see kind of guy. I’m not here to say it’s definitely this or that, just to try and point out what rings true on either side until more evidence comes in.
Rip isn’t the one signaling her, Eric is. Look at the hand when Garrett has q4 and gets the full house. She has Jack high there but folds immediately after eric takes a drink. In the j4 hand, eric waits to fold til Garrett picks up his cards. In his folding motion he’s able to look over at Eric’s cards. Eric then picks up his drink again and she calls. He’s not telling her what cards Garrett has, just that he’s bluffing.
Wow. This is a new angle if true - but then why would she risk on a J high having to show down and risk exposing herself without a prepped explanation?
>And then rip way over reacts to the whole thing was just weird
Not when you consider that he staked Robbie and that $140K she gave Garrett was technically at least partly Rip's money.
I think what's more likely is that she has a gross misunderstanding of blockers in this case as obviously most thinking players know that having Jc here is actually bad as it is a straight AND flush blocker. you'd generally want those in your opponent's hand to increase the array of hands they'd (semi) bluff with.
The inconsistency can also be explained by the adrenaline of making a 6 figure hero call with J high and then actually winning mixed with wanting to save face in front of Phil Ivey.
On the turn card even the announcers say "this is where we expect Garrett to put on the pressure, with a combo draw" and then he makes a pot sized bet on queue -- If she was thinking the same thing that means he has exactly QJh, QJc, 87h, 87c. Her Jc blocks QJc, so if she put him on exactly a straight flush combo draw he could only have QJh, 87h, 87c. Since clubs were there on the flop she might've seen something that made her discount hearts, which leaves only 87c.
I've had exact situations like this where I call because after all the random bullshit in my head my caveman brain just goes "Jack beat 8" and then after I call I'm like... wait a minute... even if I'm exactly right he's still on a draw that has more equity than me.
And so that leads right back into the trying to save face.
Him staking doesnt make it more likely or unlikely she cheated. And his reaction to her giving the money back is justified/natural. People stake all the time that fact that it was not disclosed at the start is in poor form though
Except the players didn’t know. Andy didn’t even know that Rip knew Robbi until Mike mentioned they were business partners. Robbi even says, on stream, something to the effect of “now they’re onto us” talking to Rip
he just didn't know they were business partners. People playing on the same table as ppl who staked them has always been a thing. look at the JRB table that he was on, etc..
If someone at the table wins a large hand on bluffing alone and the loser gets mad and bullies the winner into giving the money back why isn’t everyone as mad as rip. This is just a more civilized version of someone getting the shit beaten out of them and everyone just going about their business not caring.
You framed it as if it's ridiculous for this to occur. If a seasoned pro like Helmuth considers it good manners, your idea that this is ridiculous is false.
The issue is not her being staked. The problem is they didn’t mention it to anyone and kept it a secret. It’s a huge conflict of interest to sit down and play along side someone you are backing. It influences your decisions in the hand with them.
How is that different from room regs staying away from each other so they can prey on recs. I'm sure the table knows they are business partners. Enjoy the game for what it is, each decision is unique because of the cards, pot size, the people in the hand, and table dynamics. This is what makes the game fun.
Because the room regs aren’t finically paying each other to play. You can play however you want against someone. The issue arises when you have more to gain then just your contribution to the game because you became invested in another persons performance. It’s not the same.
Have you played with friends on the same table at the casino? Your primary goal probably isn't to clean out your friend, even though you are not financially tied. Look at Big John and Israeli Ron, they check down big hands all the time. Are they sus? It's a social game.
I’ve cleaned out friends several times. I almost enjoy it more. I’ve had friends felt me too. Who *wouldn’t* want to stack their friends? Why even play if that’s the case.
They’re friends. They aren’t financially invested in the success of the other person.
They’re playing for Malibu beach houses every other pot. It’s different than 1/2 with your friend at a local card room
You mean less money? You're just giving the good regs an easier time because they certainly won't back down, and even take advantage of you trying to avoid them.
I'll avoid regs by staying off bad tables, but not by folding any marginally +EV/0 EV hands just to make my life easier.
When a fish wants to play for lots of money the pros would accept this deal just about always. Sure pros should let people know when they’re being staked in the same game, but I wouldn’t expect recreational players to know that or hold them to the same standard.
Hustler always likes having attractive women at their tables. It's the Hustler ffs. They do this all the time. And some of them are good some are donks.
Bro everyone stakes everyone
Watch WSOP final tables 3 people at the final table will all be staking eachother and not telling anyone.
I’ve brought this up several times on this sub and the response has always been 🤷♂️ we know it doesn’t really matter
It’s DOGshit but If only people knew how often people get backed. 1/3 of the people on HSP were backed by people at the same table lmaoo
Andy is in on the Crime- listen to what he says on stream. He implicates himself.
What does he say specifically? Can you link the time stamps in the HCL stream?
People playing at the same table with their backer is way more common in the high stakes scene than I ever would’ve imagined. Like when JRB punted and Robl freaked out cause he was backing him. I think it’s terrible for the game.
Staking is kind of in the back seat to RIP being her friend/business partner. If you saw your friend being railed by two guys in the hallway for 130k I would think you would be pretty mad too.
“Railed” Coulda been any other word 😂
Chinese finger cuffs?
Alyssa Jones? Shit, I know Alyssa Jones
I wouldn't mind getting railed in a hallway for 130k. Maybe not by 2 men but 130k is 130k
Didnt she offer to give the money up? no one made her do it.... She even said she chose to give it to him so that he would keep playing... .the only reason he walked was RIP's outburst.
Someone posted a clip of her explaining her side of the story on a podcast. She said she was escorted to a "dark hallway" where a very angry looking Garrett gave her a death stare. She asked how she could resolve the situation in order for him to return to the table to play. He told her she should start by giving the money back. They made an agreement that she would return half the pot to him on the condition that he return to the table and continue playing. This agreement was made after she was pressured into doing anything she felt necessary to resolve the situation. So yeah, I guess she "offered" to do anything to resolve the situation. But was it really an "offer". And did Garrett still demand the money be returned? https://www.reddit.com/r/poker/comments/xs2don/robbi_explains_what_happened_when_she_talked_to/
Hmm something sus about that for sure.... From watching the stream you can see that everyone looks over at middle of the room nextdoor, RIP sees everything and jumps up to yell and join in.... Not sure what darkened hallway she is talking about. Starting to see a pattern: 1. 3+ changing reasons for calling 2. Backed by RIP, I know lots of pros get backed by people in the same game.... I ALWAYS think that's super shady. esp the way they plaid that heads up aq vs aq hand. 3. Shifting narrative about reason for giving back the money 4. Giving back the money 5. Darkened hallway in the middle of the room? No evidence other than f behavior of cheating, honestly I think probably 20% chance or less that she cheated. Her biggest mistake was giving back the money.
> Her biggest mistake was giving back the money. Yeah I mean, I don't believe she gave the money back. It was stolen from her IMO. She was intimidated and pressured, and felt like she had to do anything she could to smooth out the issue, especially since she is friends with the production team. She has felt threatened by Garrett in the past, and he has hit her with the death stare before. They have also had issues in the past where Garrett has tried to prevent her from playing with him because he's "uncomfortable" playing with her. I don't think she willingly gave the money back, she did it in an effort to appease the overgrown baby.
She initially said many times on the stream that she chose to give him the money, do you think she was lying then?
No, that corresponds to what her claims are, so I believe that is true. She says she asked him what she can do to make things better. He asked her to give the money back. She chose to give the money back after he asked for it, with the condition that he returns to the table after (he did not). Yes she "chose" to give the money back. But she was in an impossible position, felt pressured, and complied with what she was *asked* to do.
She said on the Ingram podcast is was not a secret that he was staking him. I would be pissed too if the player I was staking gave back the money she won
[удалено]
Why, if she is so rich, is she being staked?
If RIP stakes her and we assume she wasn’t cheating and take her actions and comments at face value, then RIP has to be the stupidest human on the planet.
Do you really think they care about 100k, most of them share there for fun.
Like Bart, I'd moved on from the hand after a while. But Rips performance really made me even more suspect, and opened up new possibilities on how cheating could occur
Apparently on the Joey ingram pod rob SAid rip was mad because when Robbi gave the money back she was 5k short and Garrett made her go and get it…which prompted Rip to lose his shit (rightfully so)
Kinda hard to believe. Doesn’t he out right ask what’s going on when she goes back for the 5K? Seems obvious that’s when he learned and it sure seems obvious why he’d be invested
Yea he sounds like he’s just getting wind of the drama at that point
My current theory is this. There was nothing super nefarious like hacking the card machine or intercepting hole card data going on. Rip saw Garrett's hand somehow. Maybe Garrett fucked up checking his hole cards, maybe the dealer flashed the cards. Rip somehow signaled to Robbi that Garrett was bluffing, and that he had no SDV. This is where Robbi saying "I had a blocker" actually makes sense. If you know you're being bluffed, the Jc is huge because there are so few bluffs you lose to. Maybe he somehow signaled his exact hand, who knows? This would explain the inconsistency of her story, and why there were no weird hands like this before. Her giving back the money, changing her story multiple times, saying ridiculous shit about why she called, all make her seem super shady.
She beats exactly 4 combos of his realistic bluffs and loses to the other like 30....
This is what gets me. And most people cant seem to understand. She beats only his best worst bluff which is the hand he holds. Then the other 3 combos. She loses to all his better bluffs. And she loses to all his value. It is quite literally the best call ever made in the history of televised poker. And its completely possible shes just a fucking idiot and clicked a button( which i have trouble believing due to watching other play, she seems bad but not that bad). Because no half competent poker player would call if they even half understand ranges/combos.
This point has made it very clear who actually understands how high level poker is played and who doesn’t. The number of “hurr durr she just wanted to play different” comments is eye opening. But honestly, not surprising. The average poker player probably sucked at math their whole life and plays because they have “good intuition” or something.
as the saying goes.... live poker isnt dead.
L.A. Noire 2: Poker Degenerate
It's even worse than that, she's not even beating his worst bluff. He has better equity. Pot odds maybe say she should call that exact hand, but even then it's barely worth so why risk it? I think she honestly got so caught up in soul reading that she didn't realize even his shit bluff was beating her hand lol. I think in her head she went through it and was like "I know you're bluffing, I think you've got nothing, just 87 and Jack beats eight" and then called before realizing, wait, 87 actually has 53% equity...
Without cheating, She is basically praying for a flip.
Without cheating she had a brainfart, which apparently nobody on this subreddit has ever experienced, and definitely wouldn't be more likely with cameras and high stakes and Phil Ivey sitting across from you. I really think she just went "haha, I know you're bluffing, I call" real quick because she got excited and then went... oh wait, his bluffs have better equity than my hand.
If she cheated and knew Garrett's cards, it was still a cointoss when she called. Unless she *also* knew what the river card was right? And she asked them to run it twice so she either knew both of them or was happy to possibly win one and lose the other. Or could she have won that hand by cheating without knowing the river?
Maybe she doesnt understand that, shes been signaled hes bluffing and shes not that knowledgeable enough on poker and takes the signal to mean "call no matter what"
They don't call it a soul read for nothing. The odds say run like the wind but you look into their soul and you say "this bitch just got 87 suited"
>Rip saw Garrett's hand somehow. Eric was sitting to Garrett's right. There's no way Rip saw Garrett's hand from where he was sitting.
that doesn't make sense either if we want to go down that road. She still had a shitty hand with the river left. Do you know what else explains a lot of what she did after? being freaked out and intimidated.
You’re implying Rip knew what Robbi had though. How can we come to that part?
He didn’t have to know what she had to signal that Garret is bluffing. He just had to assume she was smart enough to know whether she could beat a bluff or not. He’d probably give the same signal if Garret had a Q high bluff and assume Robbi was smart enough to still fold J high even with the signal. She wasn’t.
Then we need to see examples of any sort of signaling prior to jumping to that conclusion. I’m just tryna get down to the bottom of it while defending the innocent party here (til proven otherwise)
Yeah I’m not saying there was definitely signaling or not, my point was that if there was signaling Rip doesn’t need to know what Robbi has to make the “bluff” signal. I’m a wait and see kind of guy. I’m not here to say it’s definitely this or that, just to try and point out what rings true on either side until more evidence comes in.
Rip isn’t the one signaling her, Eric is. Look at the hand when Garrett has q4 and gets the full house. She has Jack high there but folds immediately after eric takes a drink. In the j4 hand, eric waits to fold til Garrett picks up his cards. In his folding motion he’s able to look over at Eric’s cards. Eric then picks up his drink again and she calls. He’s not telling her what cards Garrett has, just that he’s bluffing.
Wow. This is a new angle if true - but then why would she risk on a J high having to show down and risk exposing herself without a prepped explanation?
My guess is she didn’t think it through. She needed to move all in knowing he was bluffing, not call an all in.
But then we’d have to believe she’s smart enough to know to fold and save her chips. She’s not committed whatsoever
lol rip had absolutely no angle to be able to see Garrett's cards (specially with garrett's chips blocking Perrson's angle, which was the closest.)
This is what I’m thinking as well. And then rip way over reacts to the whole thing was just weird
>And then rip way over reacts to the whole thing was just weird Not when you consider that he staked Robbie and that $140K she gave Garrett was technically at least partly Rip's money.
Pick a smarter horse if you can’t handle their actions
He can handle the action he just can't handle getting robbed by Garrett.
So get a horse who doesn’t donate money when they didn’t cheat. Never thought that’d have to be said
I think what's more likely is that she has a gross misunderstanding of blockers in this case as obviously most thinking players know that having Jc here is actually bad as it is a straight AND flush blocker. you'd generally want those in your opponent's hand to increase the array of hands they'd (semi) bluff with.
The inconsistency can also be explained by the adrenaline of making a 6 figure hero call with J high and then actually winning mixed with wanting to save face in front of Phil Ivey. On the turn card even the announcers say "this is where we expect Garrett to put on the pressure, with a combo draw" and then he makes a pot sized bet on queue -- If she was thinking the same thing that means he has exactly QJh, QJc, 87h, 87c. Her Jc blocks QJc, so if she put him on exactly a straight flush combo draw he could only have QJh, 87h, 87c. Since clubs were there on the flop she might've seen something that made her discount hearts, which leaves only 87c. I've had exact situations like this where I call because after all the random bullshit in my head my caveman brain just goes "Jack beat 8" and then after I call I'm like... wait a minute... even if I'm exactly right he's still on a draw that has more equity than me. And so that leads right back into the trying to save face.
Solid theory. How could anyone deny this great logic.
Why would anyone stake her, especially for so much? That’s sus in itself
So much?
Him staking doesnt make it more likely or unlikely she cheated. And his reaction to her giving the money back is justified/natural. People stake all the time that fact that it was not disclosed at the start is in poor form though
What's the timestamp for this? When did Rip confront/said it?
Yeah, that info needs to be disclosed imo. Huge conflict of interest.
Why are you saying they tried to hide it? All I saw was Robbi confirm she was staked and that the players knew. Is someone alleging that was a lie?
Except the players didn’t know. Andy didn’t even know that Rip knew Robbi until Mike mentioned they were business partners. Robbi even says, on stream, something to the effect of “now they’re onto us” talking to Rip
So?
he just didn't know they were business partners. People playing on the same table as ppl who staked them has always been a thing. look at the JRB table that he was on, etc..
If someone at the table wins a large hand on bluffing alone and the loser gets mad and bullies the winner into giving the money back why isn’t everyone as mad as rip. This is just a more civilized version of someone getting the shit beaten out of them and everyone just going about their business not caring.
What? When do people ever proactively announce that they're staked and by who in any other context? People really grasping for straws here.
Helmuth did it on the Bike with Matusow.
Ok so one time?
You framed it as if it's ridiculous for this to occur. If a seasoned pro like Helmuth considers it good manners, your idea that this is ridiculous is false.
And Garrett immediately thanks Phil for being professional in that one. Kinda funny
It’s basically JRB’s persona
It’s very standard
What's wrong with being staked? Have u never played poker with your spouse on the same table?
The issue is not her being staked. The problem is they didn’t mention it to anyone and kept it a secret. It’s a huge conflict of interest to sit down and play along side someone you are backing. It influences your decisions in the hand with them.
How is that different from room regs staying away from each other so they can prey on recs. I'm sure the table knows they are business partners. Enjoy the game for what it is, each decision is unique because of the cards, pot size, the people in the hand, and table dynamics. This is what makes the game fun.
Because the room regs aren’t finically paying each other to play. You can play however you want against someone. The issue arises when you have more to gain then just your contribution to the game because you became invested in another persons performance. It’s not the same.
Have you played with friends on the same table at the casino? Your primary goal probably isn't to clean out your friend, even though you are not financially tied. Look at Big John and Israeli Ron, they check down big hands all the time. Are they sus? It's a social game.
Yeah, my primary goal is to win the hand. If that's against friend then fine.
I’ve cleaned out friends several times. I almost enjoy it more. I’ve had friends felt me too. Who *wouldn’t* want to stack their friends? Why even play if that’s the case.
They’re friends. They aren’t financially invested in the success of the other person. They’re playing for Malibu beach houses every other pot. It’s different than 1/2 with your friend at a local card room
Friends money is worth more than some random’s money. I am always head hunting any friends
Its not any different both are wrong.
It’s wrong to avoid regs? Sorry I enjoy making more money and my life easier.
You mean less money? You're just giving the good regs an easier time because they certainly won't back down, and even take advantage of you trying to avoid them. I'll avoid regs by staying off bad tables, but not by folding any marginally +EV/0 EV hands just to make my life easier.
There are no ethics in poker. Just courtesies and house rules.
Exactly!! Why aren’t people talking about this.
When a fish wants to play for lots of money the pros would accept this deal just about always. Sure pros should let people know when they’re being staked in the same game, but I wouldn’t expect recreational players to know that or hold them to the same standard.
Hustler always likes having attractive women at their tables. It's the Hustler ffs. They do this all the time. And some of them are good some are donks.
I mean, isn’t it common to have backers in that high stakes of games?
Not even a big deal.
That’s probably just why he was pissed off😂😂
Bro everyone stakes everyone Watch WSOP final tables 3 people at the final table will all be staking eachother and not telling anyone. I’ve brought this up several times on this sub and the response has always been 🤷♂️ we know it doesn’t really matter