Garrett Adelstein vs. Robbi Jade Lew (part 1)

Recently I spent the day skiing with a friend who goes by the pen name Rigondeaux. Skiing involves a lot of time waiting on chair lifts. At one of these times, I brought up the topic of a controversial poker hand between Garrett Adelstein and Robbi Jade Lew. In this now infamous hand, Adelstein accused Lew of cheating. Since then, gambling forums, including mine, blew with people on both sides of the controversial accusation.

I knew Rigondeaux was a very strong poker player and a generally smart guy. I value his opinion about anything, especially poker. After he regaled me with his argument against Adelstein’s side, over multiply ski runs, I asked him if he would be interested in putting his opinion in writing for my newsletter. He agreed and later delivered a 20-page 10255-word article. What follows is part 1. It is rare that I allow a guest writer, but this is one of those cases where somebody else knows a gambling-related topic better than I do, so I make an exception.

The author, Rigondeaux, is a Wizard of Vegas forum member. He can be reached by private message there if you wish to reach him, including inquiries as a gambling writer for hire.

 

Garrett Adelstein vs. Robbi Jade Lew (part 1)

Some moments in history shatter our expectations so completely that they can be recalled with a few characters: 9/11, J6th and of course, J4. Sober investigation and reflection often leads to the conclusion that these events were not as unusual or inexplicable as they first seem. However, some people, incapable of admitting that their expectations and assumptions were wrong, or needing to find order in a chaotic world, will construct explanations of tremendous complexity to reassure themselves. When one theory is debunked they simply produce another. So it is in the case of J4. Everything points to an intoxicated amateur, in the pressure of the spotlight, cracking and making a blunder. Yet controversy and conspiracy theories still surround the hand.

I know about 9/11 and J6th, what is J4?

The J4 hand is easily the most controversial poker hand of all time, between top level pro, Garrett Adlestein and Robbi Jade Lew, a recreational player, on the popular Hustler Casino Live (HCL) stream.

Skipping to the good part, Garrett held 8c7c on a board of ThTc9c3h. So only 8 high, but an open ended straight flush draw. Garrett bet and Robbi raised, holding only a Jc4h, for pretty much nothing. Garrett moved all in with a huge bet. Robbi thought for a long time, rechecked her hand and, thought some more and then called, breaking the poker universe.

The players agreed to run the cards out twice. Though Garrett was a 53/47 favorite, he lost both runnouts and Robbi scooped a pot of over $200,000 with jack high.

Garrett was initially cordial, believing he missed his draw and lost to a good, made hand. When he saw Robbi had only jack high, he became upset and started interrogating her about the call. The two players went to a private setting with the show’s producer, Ryan Feldman. There, Robbi agreed to return the winnings from the hand. Robbi then continued playing, while Garrett left.

Garrett and many viewers believed that Robbi must have been cheating to make such an outrageous call. These suspicions were bolstered when it was discovered that Bryan, an HCL employee who worked in the production booth and could see the players’ hole cards, stole 3 $5,000 chips off Robbi’s stack when she was away from the table. Many concluded that Robbi and Bryan must be in cahoots.

Garrett wrote a lengthy post on the twoplustwo poker forums expressing his suspicions and the results of his own inquiries. The post declared that it was “very likely” that Robbi was part of a cheating ring involving “at least 3 members.” Robbi, Bryan and another player named RIP were the three. Players who go by the names Beanz and Nik Airball were also suspected. Here’s the post.

Robbi insisted she was innocent. She gave several hours of interviews and sometimes gave inconsistent accounts of what happened. Team Robbi claimed agreeing to unrestricted, often hostile interviews was something guilty people rarely did. Team Garrett pointed to Robbi’s inconsistencies as evidence of lying. She passed a polygraph. HCL hired an outside company called Bulletproof to investigate the case. They found that while HCL was vulnerable to cheating, there was no evidence that it occurred in this case. Thousands upon thousands of hours of precious human life were squandered by people like me, debating the case online.

A Couple Of Principles

I believe in Occam’s razor. The simplest explanation is the most likely to be true. As gamblers, we can see this in terms of a parlay. It’s more likely that the 49ers cover against the Cowboys than that the Bills cover vs The Jets, the Chiefs cover vs The Raiders, the Lakers cover vs The Pistons and The Bucks cover vs The Magic.

It’s more likely that, on 9/11, a militant group executed an attack against the US, their enemy, than that hundreds of people at various agencies and levels of the US Government, working with journalists, police and others, successfully staged a terrorist attack against their own people for convoluted reasons.

It’s more likely that people angry about losing an election rioted than that antifa, the FBI, the media, judges, DAs, juries, etc. somehow created the illusion that a peaceful protest was a riot, killing police and others for convoluted reasons.

It’s more likely that a recreational poker player misread her hand or made a crazy play than that she was part of an elaborate cheating ring which was then covered up with the help of crooked polygraph administrators, a major investigative firm, paid shills on message boards and other outside observers.

Conspiracies do happen. Ask Julius Caesar. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We cannot assume that one crazy hand proves a complex cheating ring exists.

The second principle is that we should lean towards “innocent until proven guilty.” No, this is not a court of law. But the courts hold that standard for good reason. Firstly, it is fair and moral. Secondly, it is often hard and sometimes impossible to prove that something didn’t happen. Meanwhile, if something did happen, there will often be evidence.

Without something like a good alibi, it’s hard to prove you didn’t rob that 7/11. But if you did, you might possess the stolen money or the weapon used in the robbery. Maybe you left a fingerprint, or a person resembling you was captured on video.

The simplest explanation for J4 is that Robbi misread her hand or just made a crazy call. The scenarios in which she is guilty are all complex and some rival the most outlandish conspiracy theories online. There is little compelling evidence that she cheated. For example, no member of the cheating ring has confessed, in spite of a $250,000 bounty. No cheating device has been identified. There was no pattern of highly suspicious plays by the alleged cheaters. No communications or suspicious transactions between cheaters have been uncovered, though Robbi turned her phone over to police (Team Garrett asserts that the cheaters used burner phones to communicate). Nobody has even put forward a coherent, convincing account of how the crime occurred.

While it is hard to prove innocence, Robbi has provided significant evidence of innocence.

I cannot prove innocence here, but I can dismantle the case against Robbi, point by point, and show that by any rational standard, she should be considered innocent. She might be guilty. She might be a serial killer or a secret agent. But it’s safe to assume none of these are true. Let’s begin.