Kabrhel defends himself on the Doug Polk YouTube channel
More developments in the alleged card marking story as Martin Kabrhel has denied cheating to Doug Polk, while his lawyer has served people on Twitter.
Whether you are following the story or not, it is undeniable that the card-marking allegations leveled at Martin Kabrhel are the talking point of the WSOP. Last night he appeared on Doug Polk's YouTube channel to defend himself.
Polk is one of the few voices in the high-stakes community who has defended Kabrhel, in an investigation video he was skeptical that he had cheated and warned the poker community not to rush to judgment. He also hosted a call-in show where big names including Tom Dwan, Dan Smith, Chris Brewer, Chance Kornuth, and a playing card manufacturer shared their views.
Last night he invited the man of the moment onto the channel to defend himself:
Kabrhel vehemently denied the allegations and addressed all the major accusations that have come his way, including scratching the cards, standing up to view face-down cards, sticky fingers, his conduct in general, and his legal suit following the allegations.
Kabrhel's lawyer serves on Twitter
Earlier this week Kabrhel threatened legal action against Andrew Robl and he appears to have got the ball rolling.
In an unorthodox moment in legal history, his lawyer Daniel Ravicher appeared to serve Dan Smith, Andrew Robl, Chance Kornuth, Justin Bonomo, and PokerGO on Twitter. The letter informed all the parties involved that a defamation lawsuit was coming their way and to preserve any online messages they had sent regarding Kabrhel, which could be used as evidence.
NOTICE OF LEGAL CLAIMS & PRESERVATION DEMAND
To @JustinBonomo @ChancesCards @PokerGO @Andrew_Robl @DanSmithHolla
Re: Your Defamation of @martinkabrhell
To The Above-Named Parties:
This firm represents Martin Kabrhel with respect to your false and defamatory statements that… pic.twitter.com/3gfG1cimi3
— Daniel B. Ravicher (@danravicher) June 21, 2023
To serve somebody on Twitter is unprecedented, to say the least, but this is poker, so we are used to disputes being settled in unorthodox manners.
None of the parties mentioned in the letter have commented on it at the time of writing.
Will this case see the inside of a courtroom? Let us know in the comments:
