Hacker News Reader

Comment by baobabKoodaa | Hacker News Reader

> The cheating claims for the poker example are absolutely stupid. Only people who know very little about poker would claim that.

Well, I can offer a counter-example that proves you wrong. I played professionally for a decade (so I'm not a person who "knows very little about poker") and I am claiming that she's cheating. I would be very confident making this claim based on her turn call alone, but when you add in the contradictory follow up explanations and the fact that she RETURNED THE CHIPS, I'd rate her cheating at >99% probability.

View on HN

Some people are easier to bully than others.

I paid for college partly through poker. Early in my career I used speech play to tilt a guy and get him to call when he shouldn’t, winning a big pot.

The guy was furious and cornered me afterwords, yelling “we don’t do that here. You better give me my fucking money back!” And so on.

I was 19 and not used to defending myself against angry adult men and I gave him the money back, despite definitely not having to.

I wouldn’t do that now, but if you have a loud angry man yelling at you, it’s definitely possible to just want it to stop.

(And I’m six two and was heavy into martial arts at the time.)

Daniel Negreanu [0] has the opposite read from you:

"The fact that she gave him the money back isn’t an admission of guilt, but likely the contrary.

A money hungry scumbag cheat isn’t likely to give money back in that spot.

Felt like she didn’t want to deal with conflict and can afford it."

[0] https://twitter.com/RealKidPoker/status/1575726681117011968?...

Why does her returning the chips matter? Are you not familiar with how chronic cheaters operate in pretty much any other field?

From fighting games to Donkey Kong to fishing to whatever else you can think of, people that chronically cheat often have the mentality to double down and/or muddy the fields to try and disprove that they're cheating. Because the best counter to any sort of cheating accusation is to never fold. This is even when they're explicitly countered with hard evidence of the cheat.

How do you equate "giving the money back" with "doubling down"?

I didn't? I said that a cheater isn't going to give the money back because they're never going to do anything that makes them look like they're giving up.

> and the fact that she RETURNED THE CHIPS

Much like with plea bargains in the criminal justice system, the fact that she returned the chips is (weak) evidence against the claim that she was cheating (since it suggests she had no plan or preparations for being accused), not for it.

This has nothing to do with the plea bargains in the criminal justice system. There's strong incentives to take take plea bargains, but what incentives are there to voluntarily return winnings?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com