So many questions have been asked, especially by the poker community following the Mike Postle cheating saga. Postle’s lawyer, William Portanova, puts forward the argument that since he has experienced a losing streak virtually since he started playing poker, it’s plausible by that logic that Postle’s winning streak is perfectly explainable.
Postle’s cheating accusation relates explicitly to his systematic use of several electronic devices while playing in broadcast games of poker, to steal hundreds of thousands of dollars from fellow players.
Stroz Friedberg, a company that specializes in forensic computer analysis, is investigating Stones’ systems and looking through whether Postle had access to real-time information, among other explorations.
The Sacramento Bee suggests on their front page that Postle could be a prodigy, although they don’t have any hard evidence. Postle’s lawyer argues that someone could just as easily win a spectacular number of hands to coin an extortionate amount of winnings from professionals with better records than him. His argument displays the kind of short-thought naiveté that many outside pokers hold about the game.
The case against Postle is built on no such flimsy premise, Portnaova’s statement on Postle’s ‘winning streak’ states:
“I guess he wins a lot of hands of poker. I don’t gamble, because that’s how many hands I lose. But we don’t know what the facts are. I can just say this: When I play poker, I lose almost every hand, so I know such streaks are possible.”
Arguably, the case is gaining ground against Postle. He is likely to be investigated soon. Stones will also be under scrutiny, possibly including Stones Gambling Hall Tournament Director Justin Kuraitis as well as the mysteriously anonymous-to-date “chief confederate” ‘John Doe 1’.