by Evert Caldwell | Staff
When Veronica Brill went public with cheating allegations against 16 year poker pro Mike Postle in September 2019, some big names in the poker world urged caution.
Although the hands she and others released were raising eyebrows, respected industry veterans Matt Berkey and Bart Hanson weren’t convinced.
Less than a day after Brill posted a string of “suspicious” hands on YouTube, Berkey stressed how imperative it was to wait for the data.
“As an objective onlooker I think Veronica making the suspicions public is a service to the community. I, however, agree w/Kasey (StonesLive commentator Kasey Mills) in the sense that messaging is off. Think of the optics if Postle is innocent. It’s why I harped on the circumstantial nature of the proof vs havin data.” (source) – Matt Berkey
Just prior to interviewing the two members of his ‘Crush Live Poker’ community credited with being the first to compile and release the much anticipated data, Hanson revealed he shared similar sentiments as Berkey and numerous other pros at the time the story originally broke;
“The hands aren’t enough.”
“I don’t know if there’s enough here, from Veronica just to implicate this guy, but if you guys go, and somebody goes and looks at the totals, I can almost bet that if he is doing something crazy, it’s going to be found in the math.” – Bart Hanson
“I don’t know if there’s enough here, from Veronica just to implicate this guy, but if you guys go, and somebody goes and looks at the totals, I can almost bet that if he is doing something crazy, it’s going to be found in the math.”
– Bart Hanson
After introducing John S. and Russ McGinley, who he referred to as “a couple of heroes” Hanson cut right to the chase.
“What was the total you guys came up with in just the straight no-limit games?
“What the two of us had was $253,000 over 277 hours, and then someone else found three no-limit streams that I missed which were actually another $25,000 total between those three streams for about another twelve hours. So it’s right about just under a thousand bucks an hour.” – John S.
Hanson delved further into the significance of the duo’s findings explaining, ”At $800 per hour I mean somebody said that like it could be as high as like ten standard deviations above the mean. Somebody put out that splash graph with POTRIPPER and Postle being even to the right of that.
“I mean mathematically if we’re in the ballpark for what an hourly is and get the variance down and the standard deviation per hour we’re talking about like the chances mathematically of someone having that winrate is like one in one hundred zeros like a googolplex like somebody said like more atoms like in the universe.”
Hanson wasn’t alone. Other experts like two time WSOP bracelet winner Doug Polk, who revealed he independently researched the data for “over an hour,” came to the same conclusion based on the absurd numbers;
“He’s 99.999% guilty.”
With the overwhelming data evidence, even the once measured Berkey said there was really no more need for debate, dismissing anyone still waiting for hard evidence.
He summed up his frustration with the holdouts many in the poker community were now referring to as “flat earthers” – “I’m tired of explaining why this is mathematically significant…he’s effectively guilty.”
After just four days an oft-divided poker community had come together. Postle was 99.999% guilty, and the proof, experts claimed, was in the data.
A statement from an anonymous source on the popular poker forum twoplustwo.com summed up the community’s underlying belief in just how clear-cut the “evidence” was.
Former poker pro Chase Bianchi included a screen shot of the statement with the caption:
“Not my work or my words but I present…Math:” (source)
“Alright ***wit I’ve had enough of you. You want your answer here it is. First of all I cannot put the calculations into Primedope variance calculator on the internet because it doesn’t go into 15 decimals percentage, So if we go off the scattergraph data that Postle is winning at 950bb/100 over roughly 8k hands (52 sessions x 30 hands per hours each session being five hours that’s 7800 hands). Now most standard deviations in a game are between 60-16-/100. But since they are so deep and spazz let’s ramp that up to 40bb/100. Guess how many standard deviations above the mean Postle is running assuming he is an absolute crushing 40bb/100 winner. It’s over 20 standard deviations. Potripper is 7.29 deviations which makes sense because he’s playing a tournament with less decision points, shallower stacks and it’s a smaller sample.
I couldn’t actually find a calculator that would give me the equivalent probability to the Z score so I actually had to ask a guy where I would be able to convert this Z score to a percentage chance of someone with this win rate running this high above eV. He gave me an wolfram alpha output at the odds of these parameters happening as a probability of 1 in 2.49^92. I cannot even begin to fathom how many times you would have to win Powerball in a row to get to this probability. Actually you know what fck you I’m gonna tell you, the odds of winning Powerball is 292million to 1. This guy to do this at a 40bb/100 win rate would be the same as winning the Powerball millions 11 times in a row, this is several orders of magnitude higher than the atoms in the universe. Now please go back to your cave you absolute loser.”
The epic takedown from a seemingly knowledgable data expert was shared, retweeted and liked by a list of who’s who in the poker world including top pro Seth Davies, who’s since been selected to serve on the Poker Integrity Council (PIC), an organization created by GGPoker in 2021 to “help put a stop to rampant cheating.”
The data evidence against Postle and his alleged co-conspirator Justin Kuraitis was so overwhelming another high-stakes pro Andrew Lichtenberger, also a PIC member, would go on to mock the besieged Kuraitis in a tweet, even after he was fully exonerated.
If Postle was holding out hope any high profile pros weighing in on the case were going to take a cautious approach and reserve judgement till he had a chance to sort through the damning data, it was all but lost when one of the most respected poker pros in the world, Jason Koon, now the face of the Poker Integrity Council, weighed in:
“I’m really good friends with a few of the people that were really into that investigation…there’s what, a 99.999% chance that he was cheating?” – Jason Koon
Bart Hanson reaffirmed the sentiment shared by himself and his powerfully positioned peers – the math compiled by online sleuths, proves without a shadow of a doubt, Postle cheated.
“It’s the way that that statistic works where it’s almost like the Richter scale like it goes exponentially higher and higher the more sort of standard deviations you get away from the mean the more sigma.”
With Postle’s guilt confirmed by data science, the community moved on to more pressing issues like which charities Plaintiffs were virtuously pledging proceeds they were all but certain to recover from the hastily filed lawsuit, and who would play Veronica Brill or “poker’s attorney” Mac VerStandig in the movie that was sure to become a block-buster hit. And why not?
Who wouldn’t be fascinated by a poker cheating scandal “solved by a bunch of internet sleuths” and a pretty blonde commentator belittled and sexually discriminated against by a casino that had to be in on it?
What a story !
It wasn’t until an article published on rounderlife.com on January 9, 2020, ‘New Numbers Cast Doubt On Postlegate’ that anyone seriously questioned the data despite the fact lead investigator Joe Ingram had stumbled upon major discrepancies himself.
After promising to go through “every single stream” to get to the bottom of the rumored “exaggerated” numbers, Ingram abruptly stopped investigating entirely after finding a $5,000 error in the first session he went though hand-by-hand.
“See, it’s so far off I mean it’s kind of disgusting right? It said that he won eight thousand dollars, when he really actually won five thousand dollars less.” – Joe Ingram
“See, it’s so far off I mean it’s kind of disgusting right? It said that he won eight thousand dollars, when he really actually won five thousand dollars less.”
Joe Ingram
Despite the embarrassment, the poker community reassured Ingram there was really no need to take the time to continue his research.
He had already proven Postle and Kuraitis were guilty, and an impressive list of famous poker pros had unequivocally staked their reputations on it.
With encouragement from his adoring fans, and famous poker pros, Ingram moved on, collected awards for his work and now sits as the undisputed king of poker scandal investigations.
After the lawsuit was dismissed against Postle, and a “nominal” settlement was reached (60 of 88 Plaintiffs settled with Stones for rake taken out of the games), Defendant Justin Kuraitis, who was cleared of any wrongdoing and rejected “hush money” from Stones himself, broke his silence and called out those he claimed “rushed to judgement” and “used manipulated data” to destroy his career. (Kuraitis’ statement)
Nearly everyone in the poker community in unison told Kuraitis he was simply inept for not seeing what each of them clearly saw, and what Scott Van Pelt ceremoniously summed up on national TV, “Postle was winning at rates that cannot be mathematically accounted for.”
World class pro Daniel Negreanu, famous for his live reads, further fueled the newly riled up social media justice mob with his take on the Kuraitis outburst.
“First of all, I have no clue who you are or why I was mentioned. After reading this, however, it just seems way more likely that you had to of known this dude was cheating. Oh, and cheating he was.”
– Daniel Negreanu
To settle the score once and for all, respected high-stakes pro Phil Galfond took up the challenge to prove the claim made by Kuraitis about gross data errors was “fake news.” An elated community cheered on, anticipating closure and confirmation from a trusted source, that Postle and Kuraitis were the “cheating scumbags” they told the world they were.
On September 25, 2020 PokerNews made the announcement in an article ‘Galfond, Berkey Helping Propel Research into Mike Postle’s Play.’
“Shouldn’t that have been done before the allegations?” A now “cancelled” Kuraitis quipped.
After all, it was the “irrefutable” data “some very well known poker pros” convinced Scott Van Pelt was simply too much to ignore.
Interestingly, none of the “well known pros,” most of whom are notorious for embracing attention, were named publicly in Van Pelt’s ‘ONE BIG THING’ segment, instead, as the story goes, a bunch of nameless internet sleuths were credited with solving the case.
Today, nearly two and a half years after the announcement on PokerNews, the “proof or lack thereof” Galfond promised is still a mystery, but no one in the poker world seems to want to know why.
Not PokerNews who released the article, not Chad Holloway who covered the scandal from start to finish, not reporters from ‘The Poker Authority’ Card Player Magazine nor PokerTube, all of whom eagerly reported on every facet of the scandal when evidence seemed to support guilt, and not even Joe Ingram who cashed in big when his career skyrocketed after being credited with “solving the case.”
Why?
An objective onlooker might ask what the repercussions would be if the results from Galfond’s research were released.
If the data proves Postle cheated, as it appears Galfond hoped when he referred to Plaintiffs as “victims” and tweeted a puke emoji in response to Kuraitis’ data manipulation claims, why wouldn’t he release his findings?
He could shut up the “flat earthers” for good.
The fact he hasn’t, leads to scenario number two. What if his research found there was no proof in the data as a long list of who’s who in the poker world, including some of his close friends, so vehemently claimed?
What would admitting this do to the reputations of everyone who relied on fake data from “a bunch of internet sleuths” to destroy two men’s lives, and those in media who never questioned its authenticity?
While we can only speculate as to why Galfond hasn’t released his findings, we can report on what the data actually shows, since we researched it thoroughly ourselves.
Our research shows Postle profited under $200,000 in 92 streams, nearly $130,000 less than a chart touted by lead investigator Ingram that put Postle’s profit at $328,569. *Details of our reports can be found on rounderlife.com and our dedicated twitter account @POSTLEGATE.
While alarming this really shouldn’t come as much of a surprise since a disclaimer on the chart warned a $100,000 error was a very real possibility.
The overall profit numbers aren’t all the accusers got wrong. In the lawsuit it was alleged Postle won 94% of the 68 sessions he played from July 18, 2018 onward (which translates to 4 losing sessions), but it leaves out 16 subpar performances, 8 of which were also losing sessions.
The omission of these 16 sessions totally distorts Postle’s alleged winrate percentage.
Claiming he won 94% of the sessions “chosen” would have been a more accurate account of the methodology used to form POTRIPPER comparisons, but even that would have been fallacious.
In addition to the 8 losing sessions the lawsuit ignored, and the 4 they did include, we found 4 more losses listed as wins by sleuths in the initial 68, bringing the total to 16 losing sessions during the timeframe when it was claimed “he won nearly every one.”
He also lost 4 sessions prior to July 18, 2018. In addition, Postle claims he lost “a couple more” due to add-ons pre-stream not factored into the Stones chip-count tracker.
*We didn’t factor the additional losses Postle insists occurred, into our calculations. We also didn’t track his tips, which he claims were over $30k. We deducted $5 rake from hands he won.
The 20 losses in 92 total sessions in 2018/19 puts Postle’s winning percentage at about 78%, close to his sixteen year career average (75%), but nowhere near the 94% still being reported.
Major discrepancies in “winrate” narratives were evident right from the start for anyone willing to take the time to look. He didn’t win like POTRIPPER and he lost a large majority of the hands he played.
For example, after the 2:00:01 mark of the infamous July 18, 2018 session, the exact time it’s alleged Postle started cheating, he loses 17 of the next 18 hands and 45 of 52 overall for a $1,365 loss, yet his accusers claimed that’s the point and time he started “playing perfect.”
The data reported by sleuths could lead anyone to believe Postle “was the greatest player of all time” but it was terribly flawed, in fact it was “so far off” questions needs to be asked; “Was it deliberate? – Who knew about it, and when?”
Rarely were add-ons reported. Data gatherers simply subtracted his starting stack from his ending stack and listed the difference as profit, ignoring obvious rebuys.
For instance in the May 20, 2019 session, included in the lawsuit as “evidence” sleuths reported Postle won $3,300. Our hand-by-hand breakdown shows he lost $2,598. Sleuths reported $0 add-ons, we found $6,000. He won 27 of the 88 hands dealt.
In the March 23, 2019 session, also included in the lawsuit, sleuths reported Postle won $5,900. Our hand-by-hand breakdown shows he lost $1,912. We found $7,900 in add-ons. Sleuths reported $0. He won 13 of the 78 hands dealt, yet experts claim “he never made a mistake.”
After posters on the popular poker forum twoplustwo.com realized the “out of this world” numbers they reported couldn’t pass a smell test, they shamelessly and with little fanfare rewrote “the data is proof” narrative, suggesting now it really doesn’t matter what Postle’s winrate was.
In summary, the suspicious hands, the way he acted, stared at his crotch, told players to rescan their cards, and his visible frustration when his weren’t reading, was evidence enough.
“The math is proof” morphed into “He cheated even if he lost” and now represents the unchallenged consensus of a bunch of internet sleuths Van Pelt credited with solving the case.
In addition to false claims about the data, our research also discovered hours of Postle betting into big hands, folding winners, and checking when he could have bet for value to name a few.
Two of those videos, ‘Mike Postle Not Making All The Right Moves’ Volume #1 and #2 can be found on RounderLife YouTube. Volume #3 and #4 will be released at a later date.
All of the hands are from sessions listed in the lawsuit where it’s claimed Postle would make “a situationally-optimal decision in almost every situation with which he was confronted…”
While investigators said they weren’t cherry picking hands, evidence suggests otherwise. In every session a “cheating hand” is identified, there are numerous additional hands where Postle makes plays where it’s clear he isn’t, but those hands are mostly ignored.
For instance, in a July 2018 stream Doug Polk analyzes a hand he describes as “an obvious example of Mike cheating…allegedly.”
In the hand Postle calls a $26 pre-flop raise with J♣10♥ against an opponent with pocket nines. He calls another $20 on the 3♣2♣9♦ flop, but folds to a $60 turn bet despite hitting top pair.
Hitting top pair here is “good enough to go all the way” according to the Upswing Poker training site owner. He adds, “I don’t think there are any poker players in the world who would float this flop and fold a J turn.”
He goes on to explain if you knew the other player’s cards (set of nines), you would float the flop hoping to turn a draw and hit, knowing your opponent will pay you off because he has such a strong hand.
Polk makes a valid point, but he downplays the obvious – if you know your opponent’s tendencies you can also put him on a strong hand and make the same play without knowing his cards.
In no-limit hold’em there are simply too many variables to make a “clear-cut” cheating case based on the way someone plays a cherry picked sample of hands, especially in the Stones stream, where we can’t even be certain what the player’s cards were.
If folding in spots when experts believe you “have to call” is proof of guilt, poker prison would be full, and Polk himself would have been perp-walked long ago.
We asked Postle about this particular hand, and others “investigators” have referred to as “clear proof of cheating.”
We’ll be releasing a series of videos on rounderlife.com which will include his in-depth breakdowns of the most controversial hands he played.
His response to the J-10 vs 99:
“First of all, I can’t even say for sure I have what the graphics are showing I have in some of these hands, they were wrong so often. If I actually did have JT here, I would call against most other players.”
He continues, “Robert’s C-bet frequency combined with shutting down on turn here without an over pair or better is high, so if he fires close to pot on turn he likely has an over pair at minimum.”
In this instance Postle knew his opponent’s tendencies from experience, and opted to wait for a better spot. When asked why he makes loose calls at times and tight folds at others, he explains “In deep-stack poker you have to be able to shift gears…I can adjust (to players) as well as anyone.”
As mentioned, investigators ignored numerous other hands where Postle doesn’t make “all the right moves” in the same stream. In another hand Postle calls a $30 preflop raise with 6♣3♣ against an opponent holding J♦8♥. He calls $30 more when he flops open-ended on 5♦4♣10♠.
The 10♣ turn card, giving Postle more outs, is checked. The J♠ lands on the river and Postle bets $80 into a hand that is rarely folding to a bet that size in this spot.
A few hands later Postle raises $15 pre with A♣Q♥. Another regular on the stream, JD, re-raises to $55 with A♦Q♠. Postle checks the 2♥7♠10♠ flop. JD bets $70 and Postle folds in a spot we’ve been told he always bets his opponent off (the same hand).
In yet another hand, Postle calls a $25 raise with A♠9♦, also against JD, who held the Q♣J♦. The 4♦9♣K♣ board is checked. Postle bets $30 when the 10♣ lands on the turn, giving JD the nut straight and a straight flush draw.
In another hand Postle folds to a $275 bet with $715 in the pot holding J♣ 3♥ on a 8♣9♣10♠7♣ board against A♥J♠ and J♦3♦.
Throughout the entire session Postle can be seen looking down at his lap and making suboptimal plays, but the only hand experts care to discuss is the one where he folds one pair….with a 10 kicker.
Postle questioned whether any of the “influencers” accusing him will ever finally acknowledge how “player dependent” decisions are for someone like himself who uses an exploitative strategy.
“In games like we had on the Stones Live Stream you can throw GTO and charts out the window. Profiling my opponents based on 1-10 years of playing with them is infinitely more important.”
When asked his thoughts on high profile influencers Joe Ingram, Doug Polk, and Matt Berkey‘s role in the scandal, he reiterated points he made early on.
“It’s so clearly obvious every narrative regarding my play was driven in one direction, when in fact there are three ways to look at it. Between “not cheating” “middle of the road” and “must be cheating” why did they always go down the “cheating” road? Is it because that’s what got the clicks, followers, and drama? Pretty boring when I didn’t do what everyone claimed though. I dare any of these three to have a one on one, question for question, conversation with me now that I’m cleared to talk. We’ll see who provides proof of their claims and who doesn’t”
RFID Myths
We identified numerous RFID errors experts erroneously claimed weren’t possible.
Just a couple of days into the scandal, Matt Berkey, in response to claims Postle didn’t have the cards the readers were displaying due to graphic errors, tweeted, “Watching some of this is distributing. I own RFID Tech & let me tell you graphics almost NEVER misread a hand, you’d have to have misregistered a card, meaning it would consistently be wrong.”
During our research however, we found so many instances of misread hands that we quit spending valuable time searching for them, and they weren’t just occurring in Postle’s hands.
We reached out to Stones who confirmed graphic errors were mainly due to cards passing over another players reader, and rarely were they the result of a misregistered card. Anyone who watched the streams for any length of time knows Berkey’s statement here is incorrect.
At least three of the highly suspicious “cheating hands” were due to graphic errors investigators claimed weren’t possible. If those hands can be explained away by graphic errors, the case loses a lot of its luster, especially when you realize the POTRIPPER-esque data claims were bogus as well.
Berkey and former ‘Live at the Bike’ producer Ryan Feldman, both familiar with the PokerGFX system used at Stones, were adamant there was no way techs could know during a hand if a player’s cards were being misread, then correct the error while the hand was in progress.
In a discussion on twitter about a hand where Postle’s cards changed to 9♠8♠ during the hand, Feldman tweeted, “This just occurred to me so I have to speak up. Shows are produced live & air on delay, so the booth can never know that someone’s cards are wrong. Unless a player says so later, which would be 15/30 min later after it airs. How can the graphics person know cards are wrong live?”
Berkey, who would later criticize Feldman’s livestream operation at Hustler casino during the high profile cheating scandal there, chimed in, “The dealer, mid hand, would have to check Mike’s hand and tell the operator. Otherwise at best they could fix it once the hand ended, not mid decision.”
Again we reached out to Stones and were informed that a “test” feature that enabled techs to “re-check” and “change” players hole cards during a hand, was operational in 2018.
Matt Francis, a tech (at Stones) during the “alleged cheating” scandal, who cooperated with Stones and the DOJ investigations and was cleared of any wrongdoing, confirmed in a recent interview with Rounder, that statements made about RFID errors by those considered to be experts in the field, were “inaccurate and misleading.”
“We used it (test feature) a lot” Francis said.
According to Francis, Berkey was made aware of this early on in the investigation. “I let Berkey know about the feature. I told him over Facebook messenger. I said if you do not see it, you are not with the current version. In order for you to see it, you would have to pay for the updated version.”
Francis said Berkey seemed surprised when informed, replying, “Oh, I’m not aware of it.”
Francis was very clear about the capabilities of the upgrade he said “was not cheap” when we asked for a breakdown – “It would 100% tell us what the card was, and what suit it was, so when Berkey say’s ‘That’s impossible, that’s not how it works’ he is wrong. He isn’t using the updated version.”
On January 26, 2023 in a tweet thread with Berkey, we brought up the GFX software upgrade (enabling techs to view hole cards in real time and change misread cards) that Francis says he informed Berkey about shortly after the scandal broke.
His response to our inquiry?
“Lmao, lies. No such software exists. Andrew Milner has confirmed this time and time again.”
Besides claiming to be in the dark about software updates, the revelation of which would have taken much of the steam out of the investigation, Berkey also says he wasn’t aware of cheating rumors circulating at Stones when he and two other high profile influencers were invited to play in the last session Postle participated in.
For anyone with a skeptical cap, the coincidence of a group of popular vloggers, by chance, being invited to a little-known poker livestream right before a “juicy” scandal breaks, is a bit too convenient, but the three well connected content creators insist it’s true.
To buy into it the story, we have to believe that not only did “whistleblower” Veronica Brill and commentator Kasey Mills, who both suspected Postle was cheating for months, not think they should warn Berkey and his friends they might be walking into a trap, we also have to believe none of the other poker pros and personalities who also suspected something was amiss at the time, thought it necessary to give the influencers a heads up either.
The long list includes Bart Hanson and his CLP data gathering friends John S. and Russ McGinley, as well as David Tuchman, who revealed he knew “what might go down a couple of weeks before.”
It also includes local pros Jake Rosenstiel and Azan Nagra, the inventors of the cheating tale, who recognized Postle’s play style was a mockery to GTO, and mused about “catching him in the act.”
In another eyebrow raising revelation, according to a close friend of Postle’s, Rosenstiel informed her – Postle was “about to have legal troubles,” three months before Brill even went public.
A couple of weeks after the revelation, attorney Mac VerStandig, who represented Plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed aginst Postle, Kuraitis, and Stones, was invited by Brill to play on the livestream. After busting three hours in, he left the game and met with Brill in the adjoining restaurant.
Local pros Ben Jackson, Matt Holtzclaw and Mac Goone were also all reportedly “in the know.” Holtzclaw even played in the final stream with Berkey. Did he keep it a to himself to gain an edge on the high-stakes pro?
The fact is the entire Stones Poker room had been whispering about the cheating allegations for months.
The rumors were so widespread, Postle himself heard about them way back in in January 2019 from someone close to Brill’s inner circle, and laughed them off. A couple months later Frank passed along the gossip to Postle. He heard about it in a poker game at another casino.
Postle, who’s known for being a bit of a smart aleck, which has gotten him into plenty of trouble in the past, had no idea the sh*t storm his antics would lead to, after he was informed “they think it’s your phone.”
Latest Comments and Opinions From Experts
Bart Hanson is downplaying major discrepancies in the data he initially praised as “accurate.” He’s since put out a video of suspicious hands as proof, after first suggesting the hands weren’t enough.
Matt Berkey who once asked where the “$300k” ended up, is now reporting Postle “only won $150k.”
While addressing Postle’s alleged winrate, Doug Polk told his followers “Five to ten big blind per hour is something to strive for.” He recently won over $473,000 in about ten hours in mostly a $200/$400 game.
Sleuths “proved” Postle cheated in 3 days. Phil Galfond set out to prove they were right 2 and 1/2 yrs ago.
Chad Holloway, PokerNews, and CardPlayer Magazine haven’t followed up on announcements they made regarding Galfond’s promise to find the data the “poker community” believes proves Postle cheated.
The Poker Integrity Council has not released a statement on Mike Postle, and its members have yet to clarify what information they relied upon when they commented on the case.
None of the above mentioned responded to our numerous requests for comment.
In his first major tournament action in over 3 years, Mike Postle finished 7th out of a field of 1,074 in the 2023 Million Dollar Heater Main Event at the Beau Rivage in Biloxi, MS. In the last tournament he played in 2019, he chopped 5-ways. That event had 999 entrants. Due to “Twitter outrage” after his final table appearance at the Beau, MGM banned Postle and confiscated rewards he had earned on his Players Card.
Rounder was banned from reporting on the final table, for tweeting a video of him signing his Day 2 bag.
The entire industry has failed in this particular case.
POSTLEGATE is the biggest scandal in poker history, but not for the reasons you were told.
