Wizard Recommends Cards

The Garrett Adelstein vs. Robbi Jade Lew (part 4)

In this newsletter, guest writer Rigondeaux continues his examination of an infamous poker hand involving Garrett Adelstein and Robbi Jade. In this installment, he looks at a key argument used by those on Adelstein’s side, that someone associated with the production of the show stole $15,000 from Lew’s chips. The argument is that Lew did not initially press charges, as if the apparent theft was more of a fee for services rendered to aid in the act of cheating.

If you missed the first three chapters, here are links for you:

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

If the topic doesn’t interest you, remember to scroll to the end for the puzzle section, where I answer the puzzle from last week and present a new one for this week.

Why Did Bryan Take Money From Robbi?

When it was discovered that someone who could see the players’ hole cards stole money from Robbi’s stack, public opinion shifted against her. This was probably the peak of belief in guilt, and reasonably so. Later it was discovered that Bryan and Robbi followed each other on Twitter. Many were shocked that Robbi did not press charges against Bryan. Perhaps most damning, Robbi shared a message from Bryan begging for leniency and using the unusual phrase “wouldn’t not.” This is a phrase Robbi has used. Perhaps she actually wrote the message.

While this is a striking coincidence, I’ve never really seen a coherent, convincing account of how it fits into a broader cheating narrative. Team Garrett’s story is usually something like “he was taking his cut.” Or “he thought the scam was blowing up and wanted to get his share.”

There are a few reasons why this doesn’t make much sense. Firstly, Bryan’s alleged confederates were wealthy individuals. Why wouldn’t they pay him upfront? It seems wiser to make sure he is taken care of and the team is cemented than to promise future payment, leaving Bryan uncertain. Why wouldn’t he insist on being paid upfront, for obvious reasons? And while Bryan reportedly made only $40,000 a year at this job, not a great living in LA, $15,000 seems like a paltry sum to be the inside man, cheating in a game with $200,000 pots.

If Bryan was involved in a cheating ring and believed it had just been exposed, it would be monumentally stupid of him to “take his cut” from the stack of a confederate. Even if the HCL cameras were off (they were on) the casino security cameras would capture this. Certainly all footage would be reviewed to investigate the cheating and he would be caught. On the other hand, if Bryan was not aware of any cheating ring, and had no expectation that the footage would be reviewed, he would reasonably believe that he could get away with stealing the chips.

While people often do foolish things that don’t make sense, we are assigning a peculiar thought process to Bryan here, and positing a specific scenario. For some reason, he is not paid up front and accepts that, trusting the other cheaters. But then when things blow up, he now believes he will not be paid, no longer trusting them. Of course, he could still be paid and could even demand more for silence, but he jumps to the conclusion that he won’t be paid for whatever reason. He then takes exactly “his cut” of $15,000, knowing he is being recorded.

As it turns out, Bryan was a chronic thief with a gambling habit and a criminal record. This was unknown at the time. Occam's version of events would be something like: a chronic thief saw an intoxicated amateur leave a huge stack unattended in a chaotic situation and stole 3 chips, figuring they would never be missed.

If this is true, the coincidence of the theft is greatly diminished. Nobody is saying Bryan stole the chips completely at random. The drama and chaos generated by the hand created the opportunity. Robbi was vulnerable. Bryan, a chronic thief, took advantage.

Why didn’t Robbi press charges? This was a sticking point for quite a while. Robbi mentioned not wanting to involve the police. Whether you agree or not, there are many people who distrust the police, the criminal justice system and avoid using them when possible. Whatever one thinks of the Black Lives Matter movement, for example, a lot of people agree with it. Robbi has said she is one of these people.

Filing charges might also just seem like a pointless hassle, unlikely to produce results that Robbi cares about. Maybe she’d rather go to the beach.

Robbi claims that Bryan sent her a message claiming to be a first offender with a family to support who made a bad mistake in the moment, and that she took pity on him. This is the “wouldn’t not” message. Is “wouldn’t not” another coincidence like the game show prize, or did Robbi write the message? It’s hard to say. Even if she told Bryan what to write, so she could share it on social media, this doesn’t mean they were cheating partners. It could be that Robbi wanted to manage appearances while under intense scrutiny.

In any case, team Garret’s theory was that Robbi did not press charges against Bryan because, if she did, he would expose her cheating to the authorities. Her refusal to press charges then, was evidence of her guilt. After facing backlash for her decision, and after learning that Bryan was a criminal with a prior record, Robbi did in fact press charges. And Bryan did not expose a cheating ring.

The direct and objective contradiction of this cheating narrative caused many proponents of cheating theories to admit that they were wrong. I kid! Of course it didn’t. They merely moved on from thinking that charges were withheld to prevent Bryan from flipping, to believing that the cheaters had hired a hitman to kill Bryan or had silenced him by some other nefarious means. Or, they simply ignored the fact that their prior account was refuted and moved on to grasp at another straw. At last report, Bryan had fled to avoid charges and has not been picked up.

Bryan has posted and communicated about the affair and has always insisted that he was not a part of a cheating ring, while admitting to the theft of chips.

We’re also starting to run into the problem with all conspiracies: you have to form and maintain the conspiracy. How did Robbi, a wealthy LA player, meet Bryan, a casino worker living near poverty? How was all this arranged? Did Bryan approach a random player and propose cheating? Did Robbi find out who worked on the show and propose cheating to one of them? How did they know the other person would go along, rather than turning them in? When you put together an entire story, starting with Bryan and Robbi coming into contact and concluding with Bryan “taking his cut” of $15,000 directly off her stack while on camera, but passing up the $250,000, it must be a weird and unlikely story. Possible, but unlikely.

Author: Rigondeaux

 
 

August 22, 2024 Puzzle Question

An evil warden gathers ten prisoners from his prison. He explains to them that in 24 hours he will line them up in height order, starting with the tallest on the left. Every prisoner will face the right (being able to see all shorter prisoners). He will then place either a black or white hat on each prisoner, being careful not to let the prisoners see the color of their own hat. After this step, each prisoner will be able to see the hats of all shorter prisoners only.

Then, starting from the left, with the tallest prisoner, he will ask each prisoner the color of his hat. The responses, “black” or “white,” are the only allowed communication. Any coughing, tapping or other attempts to communicate will result in an immediate and painful death of all ten prisoners. If 9 or more are correct, they shall all be released immediately. Otherwise, if 8 or less are correct, they will all immediately be executed.

The prisoners are then given 24 hours to discuss strategy. There is a way to ensure everybody is set free. What should be their strategy?

August 22, 2024 Puzzle Answer

The short version of the answer is the tallest prisoner to act first should state a color according to whether the number of a particular color of hat is odd or even. From there, everyone else would be able to figure out their own color based on this initial declaration, the responses since then and the hats seen in front of them.

A more detailed answer follows. Instruct the first prisoner to say “black” if he sees an even number of black hats and “white” for odd. He will have only a 50% chance of being right, but we don’t need him to be right because everybody else will be if they follow the plan.

Then, everybody else should use the table that follows, according to:

  1. 1. Whether the first person said “black” or “white.”
  2. 2. Whether the count prisoners saying “black,” starting with the second prisoner, is odd or even.
  3. 3. Whether the count of black hats seen in front of you is odd or even.
 
First prisoner “Black”stated after first prisoner Black hats seen My hat
White Odd Odd Black
White Odd Even White
White Even Odd White
White Even Even Black
Black Odd Odd White
Black Odd Even Black
Black Even Odd Black
Black Even Even White
 

Remember that zero is an even number (except in roulette).

Let’s look at an example. Suppose the hats are, from left to right, as follows:

WBWWBWBBBW

  1. • The first prisoner sees an odd number of black hats so he says “white.”
  2. • The second prisoner hears “black” zero times since the first prisoner, which counts as even. He sees an even number of black hats in front of him. Using White, Even, Even in the table, he correctly says “black” for his own hat.
  3. • The third prisoner hears “black” one time since the first prisoner, which counts as odd. He sees an even number of black hats in front of him. Looking at the White, Odd, Even row in the table, he correctly says “white” for his own hat.
  4. • The fourth prisoner hears “black” one time since the first prisoner, which counts as odd. He sees an even number of black hats in front of him. Looking at the White, Odd, Even row in the table, he correctly says “white” for his own hat.
  5. • The fifth prisoner hears “black” one time since the first prisoner, which counts as odd. He sees an odd number of black hats in front of him. Looking at the White, Odd, Odd row in the table, he correctly says “black” for his own hat.
  6. • The sixth prisoner hears “black” two times since the first prisoner, which counts as even. He sees an odd number of black hats in front of him. Looking at the White, Even, Odd row in the table, he correctly says “white” for his own hat.
  7. • The seventh prisoner hears “black” two times since the first prisoner, which counts as even. He sees an even number of black hats in front of him. Looking at the White, Even, Even row in the table, he correctly says “black” for his own hat.
  8. • The 8th prisoner hears “black” three times since the first prisoner, which counts as odd. He sees an odd number of black hats in front of him. Looking at the White, Odd, Odd row in the table, he correctly says “black” for his own hat.
  9. • The 9th prisoner hears “black” four times since the first prisoner, which counts as even. He sees an even number of black hats in front of him. Looking at the White, Even, Even row in the table, he correctly says “black” for his own hat.
  10. • The 10th prisoner hears “black” five times since the first prisoner, which counts as odd. He sees an even number of black hats in front of him. Looking at the White, Odd, Even row in the table, he correctly says “white” for his own hat.
 

Aug 29, 2024 Puzzle Question

On one side of a river are three people, two small monkeys, one large monkey and a boat that can seat one or two living things. Only the people and the large monkey can row the boat. If at either side of the river the monkeys outnumber the people, then the monkeys will attack the people. The large monkey will follow orders from the people to row the boat and with whom. How do you get everyone across safely? Swimming and other such tricks are not allowed.