To be clear, the embedded video does not contain any accusation of cheating. In fact, other players at the table seem to understand that and support Lew’s call, despite the odds not being in her favor.
Apparently there was an off-camera conversation where Adelstein confronted Lew and accused her of cheating. Lew says she felt cornered and threatened, so she returned the money she had won from Adelstein to escape the situation. She publicly expressed confidence that she’d win it back.
Adelstein posted an analysis claiming that the call Lew made was “impossible” based on the odds and her prior betting patterns. (I don’t think that word means what he thinks it means.) Adelstein then speculated on ways people can cheat and summarized the off camera conversation with Lew, suggesting that she returned the money because she realized she’d been caught.
My guess is that, if she had been cheating–or even if there was credible evidence that she might have cheated–then the tournament sponsor, the casino, and the gaming commission wouldn’t just let it slide because she gave back the money. So I believe Lew. Adelstein sounds like someone with a giant but delicate ego who believes he was wronged. And perhaps it smarts even more because the person who humiliated him was a woman.
Today I learned what “running it twice” means in Texas Hold 'Em.
Who cares? Except maybe the kind of person who feels compelled to announce to the world that he’s a “math guy” and then gets all pissy and makes false cheating accusations when it turns out that the rules of poker allow for someone to win a hand despite the percentages and odds.
She obviously wasn’t cheating, for the simple reason that if she knew what cards he had, it still would have been a bad call on her part. People who cheat don’t put down 100K when they’re behind in the hand. She made a pointless call and it worked out for her.
Good article here with commentary from her poker coach:
TL;DR: Lew is new to the world of high stakes poker and, against his advice*, took part in a super high stakes streamed tournament and made a rookie error (that worked out in her favour because game of chance) that got broadcast to the world.
*said advice being spend a couple of months playing cash tables to get used to the world of high stakes poker without that process of acclimatization being broadcast to hundreds of thousands of people
I doubt it… not like people take this kind of treatment that women regularly receive seriously most of the time. We’re constantly told it’s all in our heads or that we’re being hysterical. This is especially true in places considered “male” domains, like competitive poker. It’s not going to change until men (as an aggregate) change their behaviors and start treating us like people instead of property or whatever…
The odds were only 53:47 against Lew. It doesn’t seem so hard to believe that she could think that her ability to read her opponent’s bluff gave her a few percentage points advantage, and made taking a chance worthwhile. I think Adelstein was just pissed that a woman challenged him and didn’t back down. She probably was reading him like a book.
Run through every scenario; they all add up to this guy being a misogynistic asshole.
Even if she was using technology to cheat, there is no way he could know it. Calling her out publicly is just pure jackassery, and insted of getting her money he should have been booted from the table.
While I know it’s wrong to judge people by appearances, for some reason, I’ve never seen anyone with this look who isn’t some variety of toxic bro. I wonder where they learn what the jackass dress code is, and why they don’t seem to mind being living stereotypes.
Reviewing the footage, I’m pretty sure she was talking about a previous hand. As in, she (earlier) thought he had ace high, (but he didn’t) and along the way she picked up his bluffing tell or pattern. She was in the middle of explaining that she had put a floater out there to call his bluff, and it worked. And while her jack high hand was weak, so was his, really. I mean it’s nice to have 4/5 of a flush on the flop, but it’s not a shoe-in.
This is especially true in places considered “male” domains, like competitive poker. It’s not going to change until men (as an aggregate) change their behaviors and start treating us like people instead of property or whatever…
