It seems that the hand with J4o between Robbie Lew and Garrett Adelstein is already worn out, so why don't we talk about it again. Even flashbacks with Robbie began to torment some poker players while watching the NFL.
I can't even get away from this shit during nfl sundays! 😂😂😂 pic.twitter.com/xMliS89BBf— Jesse Lonis (@JesseLonis) October 23, 2022
And streamer Beriuzy, who recently signed with GGPoker , portrayed Garrett vs. Robbie on the soccer field.
Last week, Robbie Lew took a polygraph test. Successfully.
Another day in the office??? Depends who you ask! 🤷🏻♀️ 4 UPDATES to report:— Robbi Jade Lew (@RobbiJadeLew) October 14, 2022
1) Spent afternoon @ Hustler Casino. Met w/ Lead Detective H.G. to submit concrete evidence to finalize arrest for B.S. (Twitter Messages from me, Employee info from Nick). Photos from LA Times coming soon pic.twitter.com/vrZ0U7sdEJ
Robbie answered questions about analyzers, collusion and other methods of fraud during the test, and the polygraph examiner did not find anything suspicious during the check. Does this mean that there was no fraud? Still unclear. Someone thinks that it would not be difficult for a poker player to deceive a lie detector, and someone found out that the polygraph incorrectly processes the data of those who use antidepressants, and Robbie takes them regularly .
Information on the Internet suggests that the polygraph can recognize lies in 90% of cases (commentators on Twitter reduced its effectiveness to 80%). Profilers cope with this task much worse – they can detect lies only in 55-60%. Robbie's hand caught the eye of non-verbal communication and body language experts who advise intelligence agencies and politicians, write books, and help corporations recruit and evaluate personnel. They first compared Robbie's behavior and speaking style in her normal state (on her trainer Faraz Jaka's stream), and then discussed in detail the hand with J4o and her interview explaining her actions after the stream.
Experts in Robbie's behavior also did not find any suspicious signals and did not say anything new about the hand (however, out of four experts, only one knew the rules of poker!). However, to see what the pros pay attention to and how they notice every movement of the players at the table can be very interesting for live players.
Commentators on Twitter expressed doubt about the reliability of the polygraph test and its level. However, we found a professional polygraph examiner on our forum – Misha 'BlackStack94' !
We learned from Misha how polygraph tests are carried out and whether it is possible to deceive them (by the way, it is correct to say a polygraph!). They also deciphered Robbie's results and made sure that everything was in order with the test.
However, this test will not convince anyone who is 100% sure that Robbie is guilty, a theory even appeared on Twitter that it was not Robbie who took the test, but her twin sister, which, however, no one has yet been able to verify. But those who doubt the test results can sway towards Robbie's side.
The polygraph test procedure is a complex and multi-stage event.
First stage. Formalities before the start of the check
The polygraph examiner greets the subject and immediately explains to him that ANY polygraph test is an exclusively voluntary matter. A person must understand that no one is forcibly holding him here. The polygraph examiner gives a receipt to the subject that he voluntarily agrees to the test and can interrupt it at any time.
For more information, I asked the person if he had read something about the polygraph on the Internet. Very often, subjects collect information the day before. When a person says they read that very often the polygraph is wrong, you understand that it will be difficult to convince him otherwise.
Second phase. Pre-test conversation
Simply put, it is getting to know a person. This is the most important, difficult, and creative stage. It is unique and individual for each person.
Never, I repeat, NEVER, start a polygraph test immediately!
Why? As a rule, any polygraph test is stressful for a person. It doesn't matter if he's guilty or not. He still worries. The person involved is worried about being caught; the innocent is worried that there will be a mistake. This excitement is reflected in the results of the check and will distort them.
Therefore, it is necessary to have a conversation with the person. Find out who he is, what he does, whether he has a hobby, etc.
Imagine you come to a polygraph examiner, and he asks: “Do you have a hobby that you enjoy spending time on?” And you say, "Well, I like to play poker." And to you in response: “Oh, wow! I used to play at PokerStars, but my aces got run over by K4, and I realized that poker is not for me.” If the polygraph examiner shows the person that he is also a person, then the subject relaxes.
What is this conversation for?
1. Relax the person. A relaxed person gives out pure reactions without the so-called "noise" (more on that later).
2. Get sympathy. For someone we like, it's harder for us to lie and we're more likely to reveal information.
Such a casual conversation lasts from 15 to 30 minutes, but it is very important. After we have found a conversation on a topic the subject likes and relaxed him, we smoothly move on to the verification procedure.
Third stage. Discussion questions
We start by discussing each question asked. No surprises! A person ALWAYS knows in advance the questions that he will be asked. Verbatim. The polygraph examiner warns that he will not ask any unexpected questions. I always told my subjects: “There is no point in giving a surprise, because if I ask you an unexpected question, you will respond to it 100% non-standard, and then what do I do with such results?”
Questions are not just read out, but discussed. It is important that questions related to the topic under study are not ambiguous, vague and have one interpretation. You and the subject must understand them in the same way.
Another important point, a person can give some comments on this topic. For example, the question: “During your work at company X, did you at least once take out inventory items from work without the permission of management?”. And let's say a person, even at the stage of discussion, says that he took pens with the company logo, paper and other small office supplies from work, but did not take anything of value.
These comments are very important, because then the question can be immediately corrected and formulated as follows: “In addition to the small office, during your work at company X, did you at least once take inventory items from work without the permission of management?” If the answer is NO, then everything is OK.
Thus, you need to go over all the questions.
Fourth stage. self testing
Before the test, the subject must satisfy all his physiological needs – to drink, go to the toilet.
Then the polygraph examiner puts sensors on him. Standard set:
– Two breath sensors (thoracic and diaphragmatic) are fixed around the chest. These are elastic bands that tighten and stretch when a person breathes.
– Two sensors on the fingers that measure the activity of the sweat glands (galvanic skin response)
– One finger sensor for heart rate
– Arm cuff to measure blood pressure
– Plate under the ass that measures motor activity (protection against counteraction)
The polygraph examiner explains to the person how to behave during the test. The most important:
– During the test, do not move and sit still. There will be rest between tests.
– The length of the test is about 2-3 minutes
– Listen to the questions carefully. Answer questions ONLY “yes” or “no”
– If there is a failure, the question can be asked again
4.2. Registration of "calm" physiology
This is an extremely important step! Because by asking questions in the future, we get reactions to them, but the reaction is always some kind of deviation from the norm. For example, after a question, a person has a pulse of 90. And what does this tell us? Nothing in a vacuum. But if we know that he normally has a pulse of 75 (even if it should be a little overestimated from excitement), then a jump to 90 beats is already a pronounced reaction. That's why we need to have some kind of base from which we will build.
What does it look like?
The person simply sits motionless under the sensors for one minute in complete silence. Everything, as in the usual test, just without questions. The polygraph at this time captures the work of his body. I used to suddenly clap at the end to see the reaction.
4.3. Try to fool the polygraph
When the polygraph examiner has a "basic picture" of physiology, the second step is to determine exactly how the person reacts. The polygraph examiner tells the subject that he is studying reactions to lies. The test is very simple: five surnames, including yours, all must be answered – “no”.
– Is your surname Smirnova? No
– Is your surname Ivanova? No
– Is your surname Sidorova? No
– Is your surname Koklyushkina? No
– Is your surname Mikhailova? No
A person will give minor reactions (he is not dead) to other people's surnames, and a more significant one to his own. The polygraph examiner looks at which physiological channels respond best. Someone is breathing, someone's heart is contracting, someone's sweat glands are activated.
At such moments, it's cool to turn the laptop to the subject and show – you see, you will lie, and I will see it. Works amazing.
After we see the physiological picture at rest and potential changes, we move on to the main test, which is also compiled according to a certain methodology.
It is important to clarify that questions are always run 3 to 5 times. They may go in a different order, but we always ask the same thing. This eliminates the influence of chance. Reacted once – an accident, reacted three times – a pattern.
After that, we say goodbye and move on to interpreting the results.
The polygraph model in the Robbie Lew test is the Lafayette LX4000. I have never worked on it, but the name is well known. There is nothing unusual in this model, the polygraph itself is an ordinary small box, to which all the necessary sensors are attached.
Even the software on the laptop is absolutely standard.
At the top, the two blue wavy lines are the breathing chart. The green line below is the activity of the sweat glands. They reacted, the line went up. The red line is even lower – the work of the heart and blood vessels. If the graph went up, the pressure increased, if it went down, it decreased. And each line is a beat of the heart. If there are more “strokes”, the heart beats faster. The purple line at the very bottom usually means physical activity. It is uneven, because a person breathes and moves, but these are very small movements.
The first thing I noticed about Robbie's test was that it was done in the morning.
This is very good, because in the first half of the day there is an active work of the sympathetic nervous system, which is responsible for the physiological mobilization of our body. Toward evening, the parasympathetic nervous system enters the active stage, which, on the contrary, calms our body and prepares for sleep. To obtain more clear and pronounced reactions, the work of the sympathetic nervous system is necessary. And if Robbie didn't play all night at the casino the night before, this is the best time.
Second – the report indicates that there was a pre-test conversation
She was explained that the procedure was voluntary, explained how it would take place, warned that audio and video recording would be used, and discussed all the questions that would be asked. Everything is correct.
Third , the report states that the polygraph recorded respiration, skin electrical activity, cardio and physical activity. This is the standard set.
Fourth , three test questions were used.
R – relevant (or test)
– Have you used any rogue devices while playing poker at Hustler Casino?
Did you cheat in any way while playing poker at the Hustler Casino?
Did you collude with anyone while playing poker at the Hustler casino to cheat?
All questions are correct! Yes, they are blurred in time (for the entire time of the game), and not specific (on such and such a date). But it's not scary when they are answered truthfully. Just by getting a strong and sustained reaction to them, it won't be clear if it was in that hand with jack-high or a year ago with some other rubbish. On the other hand, having received some kind of reaction to these questions, we could ask questions in more detail.
For example, “In that hand with J4o / that day, did you use any rogue devices while playing poker at the Hustler Casino?”
In my work, I preferred to use formulations with absolutely exact place and time. But that is also possible.
Fifth , the test that was used is called the Baxter Zone Comparison Test (ZCT).
This is a good test, I myself have used this and its modifications more than once. It is built as follows:
– Starts with a completely neutral question (like any other test).
– Then comes the sacrificial test question. Reactions to it simply do not count.
– Then comes the so-called zone. This is a set of questions "Neutral – Control – Test". Or maybe "Control – Test – Control". And there are three such zones, according to the report. Most likely, the full test is composed something like this:
NEUTRAL: Is your name Robbie? – Yes
SACRIFICE-CHECKER: In our test, are you going to fool the polygraph? – No
NEUTRAL: Today is Wednesday? – Yes
CONTROL: If you had the opportunity to use an unfair advantage in the game and still go unpunished, would you use it? – No
CHECKER: Have you used any rogue devices while playing poker at Hustler Casino? – No
NEUTRAL: Is it October now? – Yes
CONTROL: Do you consider those who are dishonest to be scum? (you can also have such a control, even with such a harsh wording) – Yes
CHECKER: Did you cheat in any way while playing poker at the Hustler Casino? – No
NEUTRAL: Are you in Vegas? – Yes
CONTROL: If you knew about the conspiracy, would you go to the police? – Yes
CHECKER: Did you collude with anyone while playing poker at the Hustler Casino to cheat? – No
The main thing is to choose good control questions that can switch the attention of an uninvolved person from accusatory test questions. If the security questions are poorly chosen, you can inadvertently blame the innocent.
In the zone test, the responses to the control question and the test question are compared in each ind
The polygraph examiner puts an assessment for each zone, for example:
Breathing: +1 point
GSR: +3 points (reaction to the security question is more than twice as strong)
Cardio: +3 points (strong response to the security question and no response to the security question)
As a result, we get +7 points.
We also evaluate other zones, summarize and make a decision. I’ll make a reservation right away that I painted a very pronounced picture, usually in reality everything is not as simple as in textbooks.
Robbie scored +16 points.
Anything from 9 and above is treated as "not guilty." Anything -18 or below is guilty. Between – indeterminate result.
Often points are set by a computer system according to certain rules. I won't describe them, because it's long, but it doesn't happen by eye, like +1, -3, etc. Everything is evaluated according to clear criteria!
Why are the borders asymmetrical and go deeper into minus? Because, as a rule, by default, verification questions are accusatory in nature. Robbie knew what topic she was being tested on, and that could have made her more focused on them.
Judging by the report, she perfectly managed to switch to security questions. And if she succeeded, we tend to assume that she is honest. If a person is involved in illegal actions, he will not be able to switch to other questions and will respond to verification questions over and over again.
I understand that some algorithm shows the probability of error 1 to 1,000. Pretty optimistic. The real figures are close to 95-98%.
Is it possible to cheat a polygraph?
I blogged about it in great detail . Those who are seriously interested in this topic can read this post.
It is difficult to draw an unambiguous conclusion. Firstly, I did not find information about how many times the questions were asked. If the full test was run from 3 to 5 times, and each time, as it is written in the report, “No significant reactions”, then there is nothing to complain about. But I think there are no fools in the American Polygraph Association.
Secondly, it is not clear what control questions were asked. Although, considering that she showed good reactions to them, this is not so important. But if the verdict was the opposite, it would already be important.
So if we accept that the questions were asked multiple times (and most likely they were), and there was a switch to control questions (despite the fact that she knew that it was the fact of cheating that was being investigated), I am inclined to trust this report. I have nothing to complain about here. Everything is done according to the rules, and formally it is possible to remove the charge from her. But only if the polygraph examiner was not bribed and did not draw these numbers.
We add that the polygraph does not read minds and cannot detect lies. It only registers physiological activity and changes in its parameters. The polygraph does not reveal a lie, but only arousal, which, with a certain degree of probability, may indicate it. Also, polygraph results are not accepted as evidence in court.