Preferences

This scheme doesn’t really make sense. Once you’ve convinced a wealthy person to play at your underground poker table, you’ve already won - just play better poker than them, ultra wealthy fish don’t have time to learn to play perfect poker and you do. Trying to extract slightly more money per hand via x ray tables etc kills the golden goose and doesn’t even necessarily increase total winnings, since it makes you win faster but doesn’t increase the amount the fish are willing to lose to have a good time.

“just play better poker” like that’s an easy thing to do in a game of chance and incomplete information, with variance having years or decades long tails. not to mention it’s an unsolved game, so “better” poker doesn’t even really have a set definition and depends on tons of variables. and they literally knew what hole cards were coming - that’s vastly more of an edge than playing “better poker” than someone.

Besides the fact they were often targeting pros - this was reported on and known by LA area pros for at least two years now. why the FBI decided to act now is weird to me. I can’t stress enough that in the pro scene this was common knowledge. years old podcast clips are coming up talking about it.

source: https://sports.yahoo.com/nba/breaking-news/article/professio...

Some professional poker player told me this anecdote: he was playing at a table with a celebrity. He quickly noticed he has a tell (he did something with his chips when he had a powerful hand or was bluffing, don't remember), and half the table also noticed the same or similar tells. They proceeded to clean his stash.

At the table statistics matter between pros, but if you are not aware of your flaws, you might as well play with your cards face up.

This sounds similar to an article I read about major league pitchers, who must learn to avoid "tells" for the pitch they are about to throw, while opposing teams pour over video of their previous outings looking for those tells.

Some pitchers even said they would deliberately perform a "tell" that opponents had identified then throw a different pitch.

In the exact same way, in cricket there is a style of bowling called legspin and bowlers who use that style have a particular type of ball called a “googly” which turns in the opposite direction to a normal legspin ball. Because legspinners sometimes have to do weird wrist contortions to get this ball to work, batsmen practise trying to “pick” this ball by noticing these tells (mainly whether they can see the back of the bowler’s hand).

So really crafty legspinners sometimes try to develop two versions of the googly: one with a deliberate tell and one without a tell.

Here’s an example of probably the greatest legspin bowler of all time doing exactly this, although with a different ball (a “flipper” or topspin ball) not a googly https://youtu.be/DlyG5wnW7I0?si=O463NAdV6NAAB3cG

Same thing happens in football with audibles. I wonder how many teams are feeding videos like these to AI and asking it to find patterns that might be tough for humans to see. If an AI thinks there's a pattern, verifying shouldn't be too hard either.
My personal favorite example of this in football

https://youtube.com/watch?v=g4SEPufzG7s

Legendary variation from pro tennis between to HoF players, https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/andre-agassi-bori...
The FBI is going to take time building up the case, flipping people, getting recordings, and trying to get as many people involved to not just stop the games but hopefully take down the entire crime families involved. LA Poker pros will start talking as soon as they suspect something fishy.
They almost certainly already have done much of this if they’re going public now. What makes it to the media in the beginning is only ever the proverbial tip of the iceberg.
> They almost certainly already have done much of this if they’re going public now.

Normally I'd agree, but this administration is known for pushing to release public distractions whenever they can.

Exactly. Structures, men behind, organizations involved, networks and other crimes indicated or discovered for example money laundering, betting.

It takes time to build a case. Some laws need people working together and a one time event testing a new table and accidentally having lots of cash in the bags as well as so-called famous people showing up can simply happen by chance.

It is complicated.

I'm not sure I believe this. It seems you can just walk into one of these places and roll the whole place, confiscate electronics, and make all the necessary connections fairly quickly. These games aren't a secret and never have been.

I don't like the private (illegal) scene because it's killed action in casinos and games I used to love playing in. The risk to me of breaking the law, being robbed/scammed, or worse is not worth it to play in these games and I wish they'd go away.

Even the mafia angle - the NY families must have fallen a long way if they're resorting to high profile but ultimately petty scams like this. This seems like PR for the FBI and nothing more, like I said up thread this has been common knowledge for years.

> NY families must have fallen a long way

I spent a fun few hours a couple years back deep diving into what has become of the old-school "Goodfellas"-style mob these days. Looking into both media reports as well as posts by 'mob fans' - niche forums of those who obsessively follow mob and mob adjacent activities via open-source intel methods - I got the sense the traditional Italian mob families have indeed shrunk to a smaller, sadder version of what they once were due to being eclipsed by new, different kinds of organized crime.

Guys who are known "made men" getting out of prison after doing 10-15 and then ending up doing relatively nickel and dime crimes like daylight armed robbery of a jewelry store themselves for lack of enough income. 25 years ago guys like that wouldn't normally do that stuff themselves. Others have even sunk to basically LARPing being old-school mobsters on social media.

It seems there are two key drivers behind the decline: the real money in organized crime has shifted to new kinds of activities which scale better and can grow much larger. That's attracted new competitors. Some are smarter, some more brutal and some which are both. There's also an aspect that these new, bigger opportunities are far more complex, long-term and can also require successfully operating legitimate businesses as one necessary component. I guess it's not surprising. Even illicit industries undergo accelerating change over time. The old crime families still exist and can certainly still be dangerous - they're just no longer the top of the criminal food chain in terms of earnings.

> the NY families must have fallen a long way if they're resorting to high profile but ultimately petty scams like this

The presence of petty scams does not indicate they have stopped their large scale operations. The Mafia has always done scams like this; it's basically the bush leagues to train for the really big stuff.

It's all petty crimes. I've known a handful of low-level "members" and they were all morons (imo) running the most absurd scams.

Things like: "Hey I'm organizing a trip to Vegas. $1000 / head. Great hotel, meals paid, etc. etc."

Then the organizer has the great misfortune of being "robbed" of all the money he collected by a masked assailant.

Maybe the higher level guys were were brighter, but I kind of doubt it.

Matt Berkey called out this exact game a couple years ago: https://x.com/RTNBA/status/1981433175390687603
The FBI is also struggling for legitimacy at this point in history
This did strike me as quite a small scale crime for all the attention it's getting. I guess the notable part is using a couple celebrity athletes to recruit marks for rigged high-stakes poker games. If you think about it, poker games don't scale up into a truly big money. After paying off everyone involved, maybe they clear a few hundred grand in cash? That's chump change in modern organized crime.
Name a decade without a major FBI scandal
The difference it that what used to be a decade-defining major FBI scandal is more like monthly in the current administration.
Name a less competent FBI director ever.
I think they’re also doing good investigations into local crime rings that the states and prior administrations didn’t touch

The political prosecution vendettas are dumb but here in LA they are disrupting “Armenian” crime rings

I understand the "need" for cheating but it does seem like overkill the way they cheated, at least as described. They've already got colluders, and then the auto shuffler reads the cards, and then they've ALSO got the contact lenses? Just some marked cards would have been sufficient. And then the rare time the fish catches up after being behind is your "let them win a hand and get traction". It just seems like they really went too far to control every part of the hand
What's the increased risk of cheating more?

Once you're cheating and colluding you are in danger of going to jail, and it's not clear that more cheating makes it more likely to be caught.

How could more cheating avenues not equal a more likelihood of being caught?

Car analogy--I never had to take my 1976 Olds Cutlass in because the key fob got out of sync or because the touchscreen got fried or the electronic power steering module shorted or... or .. or

More points of failure = more failure.

Is a 76 olds the car to use to make a point about reliability?
Not regarding the paintjob, certainly.
Perhaps those were different iterations of the technique over time. Start with marking cards to identify face cards, then move on to x-ray table.
>“just play better poker” like that’s an easy thing to do in a game of chance and incomplete information

you just need to beat the table, you don't need to become an over-average pro.

that decades long tail you mentioned is for pros chasing profitability in tournaments -- it's a much shorter tail when you're playing fish in setups.

being better at poker than the guy at the table who is good at making money isn't a big leap, it's what sharks and hustlers have been aiming at for hundreds of years.

You're illustrating why the phrase I am nitpicking is silly, and why poker is somehow still profitable even after the boom of 20+ years ago. What is the definition of "beating the table?" Is it winning? Because I promise you, that's a poor definition. You can be playing perfectly great poker and get slaughtered, you can play terrible poker and win. Look at the career of Phil Helmuth, for instance (joke, I'm joking). Playing live poker, you're very unlikely to get a large enough sample size to have a close to 100% confidence you're actually beating the game. You're even less likely to get a large enough sample from a single table/group of players to know either. And like I said up thread - what is "good" or "optimal" or the highest expected value play can change drastically depending on information. Poker is a game of incomplete information, and you can conjure tons of scenarios where folding something like a pair of Aces is correct before the flop, even though many people who have a shallow understanding of the game or haven't studied it deeply would say you should never do that (for instance, in a double or nothing tournament, where half the table cashes and half doesn't, folding AA with a large chip lead to an all in from a certain stack size is the correct play and happens surprisingly often).

Or like, say you're against a "fish" that goes all in preflop with exactly J7 offsuit and nothing else, no matter how big his stack is, because that's their lucky hand or something. You're not playing as profitably as possible if you lack that knowledge, and if you somehow have that knowledge, there are tons of hands you play there that you normally never would and would appear to others without that information as playing "bad."

It's a deeply complex game people try to trivialize. I've been studying for about 20 years and every year that goes by I think I know less than I did the year before. And I'm just talking no limit hold'em right now - there are tons of variants that all have their own areas of study, and that's not even to get into weird live game areas of theory like tells and stuff (which is not as important as people tend to think).

> it's a much shorter tail when you're playing fish in setups

A lot of rich people know more about poker than middle-income scrubs. You don't want to find out the fish you're chasing was a shark all along. The point here is to turn a game a chance into a profit center, suggesting they just do it legitimately missed the point and assumes the scammers themselves have the time or talent to become good enough to reliably fleece people legitimately. It also means you have to vet the people you invite, rather than confidently turning out the pockets of scrubs and capable players alike.

People making most money _playing_ poker are really really good players that get invited to games with the wealthy people. This takes both poker skills, social skills (being entertaining) and potentially doing some occasional "fun" (incorrect) plays.

They are not the best poker players in the world. Best poker players have the misfortune of not being invited to "fun" millionaire games

If you have enough of an edge, the variance is really not that big. The only reason to have high-tech cheating when you already have a table full of fish - is if the people running the scheme are not very good at poker

Why FBI decided to act now is that they probably ripped off the wrong person...
> why the FBI decided to act now is weird to me

Someone didn't pay a bribe on time?

Or the wrong person lost
think of the spotlight the NBA had because of opening night! Someone in the FBI/admin wanted this news to drop right when the NBA was trying to make a splash and tarnish their new season
You can spend the time to learn the odds, and play the odds. Most people don't have even that basic skill.
You are ignoring why people play the game: reading people and avoiding being read (lies, misdirection). I would predict your job is technical rather than people oriented. There's plenty of other card games where learning the odds matters, but poker has a bit more depth.
I read a theory that the poker winnings were not the scam.

The scam was that the criminal element would HELP the NBA players cheat at poker, and then blackmail them with that info to change the outcomes of NBA games, which they were betting on, from which they could derive greater scale of winnings.

Or the players were already jammed up in gambling losses and were then offered to play in these games to forgive the losses.
imo that doesn't make sense. All the online betting platforms will cut off the sharps. If you are net profitable and you make too much money from them, you will get banned.
Well first of all, organized crime does not need an online platform to profit off of fixing professional sports games. There are still plenty of bookies running around offering better odds than draftkings. Though, if they really wanted to, they could make smaller bets under hundreds of accounts.

There is also the very strong possibility that they are colluding with the online betting platforms in some way. Coupled with the fact that any difference-maker athlete is getting a huge salary, and blackmail/extortion becomes your best option to getting one on your side.

Organized crime operations have no problem getting a lot of people involved in their schemes. They wouldn't use one account. They'd spread the bets over a large number of people and accounts and also possibly sell the information.
Yeah, that would limit the scale if they were betting against the platforms.

However, if you assume they were feeding the information to the platforms...

... or if you assume that they control the platforms...
First, people who are banned from online bookies use "horses" or other not-banned players to place bets for them.

Second, the FBI is targeting real world Mafia members, who will typically be the bookies taking action from others. If they know in advance, through blackmail or collusion that an NBA player or coach will throw a game, they can exploit this versus their entire betting pool for massive wins against the suckers placing bets with them.

You're focusing on a game with player vs. house odds, like a casino. Online betting platforms do offer some of these games but they are clearing markets for gambling; they manipualte the odds to arbitrage wagering and take a cut regardless of the outcome. It's all about volume. If you make a huge wager on a long-odds parlay, they no longer look the same for the next (or other side) of that specific (or components of the) wager.
An organization could place the bets through different people each time.
with that level of sophistication I’m sure they’re not using the inside info to place bets on retail platforms.
The do use retail platforms, just like the same orgs send out armies with cloned cards to use retail banking infra.
5d-poker.
You don't want to extract more money per hand, you want to build up the fish (check the text message screenshots in the article) and then strike at the right point. The x rays remove the luck from those big hands.
Exactly. You want zero risk asymmetric payouts.
> Once you’ve convinced a wealthy person to play at your underground poker table, you’ve already won - just play better poker than them, ultra wealthy fish don’t have time to learn to play perfect poker and you do.

You would be surprised at how good some very wealthy people are at poker. There is a lot of variance in the game and they don't want that. In fact what they want is _exactly_ wealthy people who are quite good at poker because they make big bets and you can reliably bust them out on _one hand_ if you set it up properly after playing a fair game all night. And the great thing about that is that they feel like the night overall was fair and fun, because it was. You just cheat them on one or two hands at the most.

People who are bad at poker can also be quite difficult to reliably take money from fairly because they play randomly and sometimes win huge pots out of complete luck. For one thing, they are near impossible to bluff out of hands, so you end up having to fold a lot more than normal because you can only play with strong hands against them. If you are interested in making a lot of money, you certainly want those strong hands more often than normal.

The trick isn't winning when the celebrity is at the table, it is in getting the celebrity to the table, then keepong the victim there.

It's not about winning mote on each hand. It's about keeping the target happy as money drains away. And that was their aim.

By controlling the whole game, they were able to psychologically manipulate the situation. The target was at tbe table with someone they respected. Saw others win and lose large amounts of money. Sometimes won themselves.

Ooooh you use all these tools in order to _control_ the game, so that is is as fun as possible. So the victim still loses, as they would without the tools, but now they're happy as it happens.
Poker requires skill but there's still a major amount of chance involved. Removing the chance and conspiring against a single player turns the game into a show. You can set up cheap wins and expensive losses. It doesn't really matter how well the other players win or lose because they are all on the same team, you're the only one actually losing any money.

I remember as a kid, I'd play battleship with my siblings. I was really good at it, they were not. They hated when it was obvious that I let them win but also hated when I beat them badly so I found a way to make the game go longer. Often we'd play on a glass table and I'd "drop" a piece so I could peek under the table and see where their pieces were. I could get a hit and then miss many follow up shots to slowly destroy their ship and give them more time to find and destroy mine. They'd gloat over their hard-fought win but I'd just smile and beat them for real next round. I could have done this without peeking but I wanted to make sure I didn't accidentally play too well.

Exactly, to a pro poker player a celebrity or athlete looks like an easy target. Someone with a lot of money, likes to play for fun, and doesn't have the same skills as a pro. They are at the table to bait the pros. But now the problem is you need those same players to win in order to extract any money from the game, hence the high-tech cheating.
> just play better poker than them

That's a big "just".

They were using sports celebrities as the draw to the table, not expert poker players.

Cheating at poker also looks less threatening than playing against an expert, counterintuitively. Someone who cheats can pull out some big wins on some bets that look statistically bad. The target can see this and think the other party is playing poorly (betting on non-obvious hands) but simply getting lucky.

Contrast this with a shrewd expert poker player who will be easier to spot.

They want the target to think the celebrity sports figure is just getting lucky on bad bets, not that they're an expert poker shark who's going to take all of their money.

EDIT: Here's a 2 year old YouTube video from before all of this confirming this https://youtu.be/G-TKR5ca5jI?t=1790 (Skip to 29:50)

Having the cheating poker players look bad is a key part of the scam. It tricks the other players into coming back and betting big.

> Once you’ve convinced a wealthy person to play at your underground poker table, you’ve already won - just play better poker than them,

This is why in the book Molly's Game [0], the author mentions explicitly that she didn't want professionals in her game.

This b/c her game was seen as a game between "regular/amateur" players who just happened to be famous and/or have a lot of money. This was also DESPITE poker professionals both asking her to play AND offering to give her a stake of their winnings.

Granted, certain players (e.g. Tobey Maguire) were MUCH better than the other players but it seems that didn't matter as long as poker wasn't their primary source of income.

0 - https://amzn.to/4o05BFi

> just play better poker than them

You really don't understand the mind of fraudsters and criminals. The reason they do what they do is because they don't want to "just be better at X than Y" and spend the effort for that, they want to take the shortcut and they think they've found the best shortcut considering their situation.

Once you start to look at what people are doing with that perspective, things will start to make more sense.

Wealthy people aren't dumb - they don't join games where the odds are tilted against them. In these high-stake private games they can usually demand and set the rules like shallow stacks (100BB), enforced straddles, raising stakes after a loss, button games etc. that remove the GTO / poker element and make the game more gambly.

Boring pros who play these games straight up and don't "give action" don't get invited back.

This is how you can have some of the best poker players like Tom Dwan get absolutely wiped out while playing against whales in Macau

If you want to see a more recent example of this - the amateur whale Monarch recently took on one of the best cash game heads up players Bjorn Lee. I won't spoil the result because it's highly entertaining and demonstrates how the game works at these stakes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCd7giB9s5U

The self made ultra rich are quite smart on average.

I doubt the same is true of these Cosa Nostra and NBA guys.

You don't need to play better poker. You can just have multiple people on the same team at the same table and communicating, vastly increasing your odds of your team having the best hand.
My understanding is that collusion is rampant in poker.

If you get introduced to a 'friendly' game of 5 players there's a good chance that these guys are signalling to each other and basically folding to whoever's got the best hand. You can't win against that. Even if you have 2 new players showing up at a table existing players could worry about collusion.

If you don't have the fancy trappings those guys did it is almost impossible to catch people colluding in poker.

I think it's revealing of how diminished the la costa nostra is. This is such trivial work and, yet, this was a multi-family operation.
Highlighted perfectly in The Sopranos when they try to extort a Starbucks, it's a different world.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/rtnSe0eKmdI

Diminished? More like, matured into white collar crime. There's no need to murder people on the street any more, that kind of dirty work is left to some random Southern American cartels, and the white collar crime brings in more than enough profit while also being way less risky should the feds catch up on it.
I don't know if I buy that. If we were to put this in white collar terms, we'd all be questioning Tim Cook if he decided that selling ice cream was a great resource allocation decision.
What business would you take your organized crime organization into for maximal returns?

Just stick everything in the S&P 500?

I'd get dirt on the sitting president, then leverage him to make decisions with obvious market implication. Examples: give me a day's notice that the federal government is going to invest in a dinky mining company, or tariffs are coming on foreign electronics... except next week <these companies> are exempt. You gotta believe people on the inside are making fortunes as the markets continue to make big swings up & down.
> You gotta believe people on the inside are making fortunes as the markets continue to make big swings up & down.

Yeah but that's friends of the emperor, not organized crime (although granted, the distinction between these two groups is getting smaller by the day).

Organized crime? That money is literally everywhere. Restaurants, real estate, cars, the stock markets... the only place you'll rarely spot it is, ironically, gambling, way too many chances of getting caught on a paper trail. A lot of it is also invested in art pieces stored in one tax haven/freeport or another, really easy to launder money or evade taxes.

Probably going into crypto, the federal government even encourage it now.
> More like, matured into white collar crime.

Honestly this is the first “advanced” mafia scheme I’ve heard of in a while.

Last time I heard about a mafia crime it was a very sloppy hit that sounded more like what you hear from teenagers in Chicago shooting at each other.

Though tbf it could easily have always been like that and I’m just blinded my media bias about a group of people I’ve never known form a time I’ve never known.

Sometimes the wealthy person is the shark, and you're the fish...

In Molly's Game, Tobey Maguire was the celebrity shark. (In the movie he was played by Michael Cera). He could easily have been a professional poker player, but he makes way more from acting and he prefers the easy play in private games.

No need to learn; just hire players who are better than the fish and split the profits??? Once it is your shuffler, I could cobble together a Raspberry Pi to light a slightly different wavelength LED when it dealt them two pictures and would need to concentrate to lose enough to get all their money.
It seems like so much work for relatively so little payoff. There’s a lesson here for non criminals also.
> In what sounds like an Ocean's Eleven film plot, prosecutors say these "unwitting" victims were cheated out of at least $7m (£5.25m) in poker games - with one person losing at least $1.8m.

Definitely a lot of work but that seems like a half decent payday to me.

More than 30 arrests, and the scheme dates back to as early as 2019.

The article says "A cut OF THE PROFITS went to those who helped in the plot," implying that the $7m wasn't truly profit but actually revenue? The writing is unclear to me. I'm not sure if this is before paying out to 30+ people over several years, or after, but article implies before, that it's how much was taken from victims. That I think makes the difference on whether or not it was a decent payday. The profit would be how much supposedly went to fund their other operations, which the article does allege some went to.

There may be more victims. I doubt it’s based on a thorough audit of accounting, just those that put in a complaint. But how do you verify a complaint?
Honestly I imagine a lot of this just became chasing yet another thrill that net you maybe tens of thousands of dollars. I could totally see why someone would be in to that. Most hobbies drain your bank account after all lol

Same reason there are people out there who shoplift even though they don’t need what they’re grabbing. The thrill of the act.

I can definitely imagine a scenario it was worth it (a) just to fund them getting to hang out with NBA players, and/or (b) make connections with other wealthy folks in ways that are beneficial towards other ends.

And that they just didn't want to operate it at a loss.

An nba coach was one of 30 people indicted in the scheme. He made about 5m a year at his straight job.
$5M is a lot unless you have a crippling gambling addiction.
It’s not so much the absolute amount as the comparative one.

Just extorting Chauncey Billips seems like a better ROI than the whole caper if you’ve got some hold on him.

Wasn’t there just a pair of people that walked $100 million euros out of the Louvre?
The profit from a scheme like this would likely be in the high tens of millions of dollars.

The poker game itself in high-roller situations could be a million plus per night depending on the stakes.

Then there's the whole "you owe the Mafia" angle with NBA players and coaches. It's a pretty clear line to the Mafia making tens of millions of dollars on rigged NBA games.

Seems pretty clear to me the risk and excitement of the scheme was probably a big part of the appeal for these people, as much as the total cash amount they took home.
They were also targeting pros, not merely wealthy players: https://x.com/OnlyFriends_Pod/status/1981379130190156129?s=4...
But you are already breaking the law running an underground poker game.
Most criminals have a specific type of cleverness, but not intelligence. If they were smart people, they wouldn't do the crimes in the first place.

I dealt with a low-tech breach at one of the hospitals I worked for. The criminal worked in HIM, and used paper and pencil to note specific info about specific types of patients. Since they worked in HIM, it was expected for them to view many medical records in a day and no app detects paper/pencil, so quite clever so far.

Ultimately, they used this info to file false tax returns to steal the refunds.

The problem? They filed 881 false tax returns annnnnnd used the same address for all of them. DOH.

They were busted/arrested and off to jail they went.

Clever, right until the end, then abysmally stupid.

HIM = Health Information Management for anyone else wondering.

If they were smart people, they wouldn't do the crimes in the first place.

There are tons of smart people committing crimes. The levels of Intelligence, success, luck, greed, and morals can co-exist in every possible combination within one human.

The intelligent ones don't get caught, or at least find the right loopholes to make their obvious crime technically legal.
> don't have time to learn to play perfect poker

Probably don't have time to play so many hands with you that the better player is statistically guaranteed to win, either.

Organized crime groups are rarely interested in "the long game". They work on the assumption that the party will end sooner than anticipated. Each game must be total victory.

This item has no comments currently.

Keyboard Shortcuts

Story Lists

j
Next story
k
Previous story
Shift+j
Last story
Shift+k
First story
o Enter
Go to story URL
c
Go to comments
u
Go to author

Navigation

Shift+t
Go to top stories
Shift+n
Go to new stories
Shift+b
Go to best stories
Shift+a
Go to Ask HN
Shift+s
Go to Show HN

Miscellaneous

?
Show this modal