For 10 years , Joe Ingram has recorded podcasts with all the poker stars from Viktor Malinovsky to Phil Ivey .
In the last two years, he abandoned his activities and disappeared from the air. His interest in poker was briefly restored only by the conflict between Robbie Lew and Garrett Adelstein, during which Joe went on air every day with many hours of streams.
When the topic left the top, it disappeared again. We had to wait more than a year for the next coming. In early March, Joe announced that he was returning full-time and plans to record podcasts regularly again. Among the upcoming guests are Eric Persson, Brad Owen and Alan Keating, and the first guest of the new era is Doug Polk.
The old friends discussed the popularity of streaming the super high-roller cash games, the return of Mike Postle, and current online problems.
Joe Ingram – A lot of poker players are maybe used to doing it by themselves. I know I'm used to wanting to do everything by myself, and when you look at what it takes to build a successful company, and especially a successful stream, you need a bunch of people in the back that are all doing different jobs. You need dedicated dealers, dedicated players, commentators, and community members.
I feel like you guys have done a great job of that. I feel like Hustler does a great job of that as well, building out that little community they have with their social media and the meetup games. They're laying out a lot of good examples that other people can follow. Now we've got more players coming to the space. Ballys just debuted their stream last night at Commerce.
Doug Polk – I got to jump in here on this. I've got to preface this by saying there are a lot of great people at The Bike. I've worked with people like Wayne for years. I consider him a friend, and I like those people, but what is going on with the show there? Have you seen the quality of this?
First off, it looks like poker in outer space. Why can I not see anything? The graphics look like they're from 1997, the camera quality is poor. I don't understand. They have all the resources. Just pull up that and then look at any other show and then look at the quality of that show. Why is it so bad? I don't get that they're not investing in their infrastructure or something.
Joe Ingram – I met with them recently. They were talking about Mitch Rubenstein over there, who's kind of coming to poker as an executive producer. He's from outside the poker world, trying to figure it out, and it does surprise me a bit, but yeah, I mean, what's the answer to that question? They're trying to figure out the answer too. They don't want to go out there and have that kind of quality. They want people to tune in and say, "We love this quality. It looks great."
Doug Polk – Well, it just starts at the top. Your producer needs to know what they're doing.
They need to know how to set this up correctly. Then you need people building out your overlay that know what they're doing there, and split test and ask people what they think about how things look and constantly be updating and improving. Then you need to make sure you have high-quality cameras, good lighting. Lighting is just basic production stuff, right? That's something that you should have down. The lighting there is not good. Lighting is an important part of a production. It just feels to me like the actual execution of the product is being put behind the vision of what the company has for it, but you need to be spending money and hiring good people and building from the ground up rather than trying to plaster your name on something and rehash it out again because it's just too competitive now. There are just too many people doing great stuff to show up with something that looks kind of bad and expect it to do really well.
They have great games. You look at the quality of the games, the people they get in those games, they have awesome lineups. I played on there last year. It was probably the best game I played all year. I won $600k, and the game was awesome. Tons of huge pots, big names, an awesome stream. I think it was one of their biggest streams, but if you can't make it look good and you can't make it enjoyable to watch, then I think you're always just going to lose people. So there needs to be a refocus on quality on that show, and if they do that, they have potential because they have the framework, they have the pieces there, but they have to rebuild the stream from a production standpoint, improve the lighting, improve the cameras, improve the overlay, improve the sound. They need a full rehaul, in my opinion, because it's just not up to where the rest of the industry is.
Joe Ingram – Where do you think you find those people, Doug? Because I don't feel like there's a lot of people who really know how to put on a show who have at least proven they have the skills. You could look outside of poker and maybe find a very successful or experienced crew who knows how to come in and put these cameras in, but it seems like they've been having this issue for a while with the normal poker level of quality that we're expecting out of a camera view. Where do you think people find those people? Because I know that's a lot of people out there are wondering. I met with Venetian, the Venetians talking about starting a stream, and a lot of people are struggling with that issue of where do you find competent people who know how to do this?
Doug Polk – I think part of the issue is you need to start from someone that has expertise in production and expertise in putting on shows and then work backwards into poker, whereas I think people are starting with let's find someone that knows poker and then try and backdoor our way into production quality. I don't think that really works. At least that's the approach that we took with our show. We found someone that didn't know poker that much, they were loosely familiar, and they learn over time, but really knew their stuff on production value.
I'm not just saying that to toot our own horn. I do think our show looks awesome. You look at the set, the cameras, the quality, but we took someone that's a complete professional at production value for shows and then taught them that a straight beats three of a kind, you know what I'm saying? We came from that angle. So probably more of a focus in that direction would be good, but I also think that that company is owned by a very large entity, and maybe that's just not high on their priority list, or they're not allocating resources. I don't know why. I'm just merely a viewer and as a friend to a lot of those people, I just think that they can do better than what they're doing.
Joe Ingram – Yeah, I mean, I think that's their goal, and I think everybody's goal out there with a lot of these shows, a lot of the companies I'm meeting with, they all want to put on great events. I was talking with Eric Persson a lot about what he's got planned in terms of his participation with Maverick Gaming and kind of working it into what B has going on, and I think Commerce is now adding World Series of Poker bracelet events. These guys seem like they're very serious about competing out there. I'm sure it's going to drive up, you know, Hustler. I'm sure Hustler is going to be fired up about this. They're always trying to put out their own sick games and these high-stakes games, and they just announced the million-dollar buying game, Doug, which last year, I thought that was one of my favorite events, not because I was necessarily at the event, but it was one of my favorite events of the year. We saw some sick hands. You got owned by Tom Dwan, I'm sure Tom Dwan felt good about that with some of the content over the years, but you played, you mixed it up, you brought the heat. Rampage pulled that sick bluff. We got to see some crazy action, and they just announced the million-dollar game is coming back, and one of the nine players announced was indeed Supreme Leader Doug Polk. Doug, how are you feeling about that game? What's your mindset? What are you thinking about going into a game with a million-dollar buy-in?
Doug Polk – It's an absolute honor to come back and defend my title as one of the top all-time biggest losers on the Hustler Casino. Just great to get a chance to continue to bury myself down there. I mean, look, that stream was epic. In my opinion, that stream last year was the most epic stream there's ever been for poker.
I think it had almost 60,000 live concurrent viewers. We had massive hands, big ass bluffs. I mean, almost every pot, someone ran a monster bluff. We had an incredible lineup. There was drama, gossip. It was insane. As I was sitting there playing, I'm like, "I'm stuck just heaps here, but this is just so incredible to be a part of something this special." I think that I made it better. I think that I was able to play a role in what made that game so good.
I hope I tried to take the loss well. I tried to be good for the table. I tried to give an appropriate amount of action. It's a lot of money, but you obviously don't want to go on the show and just play tight and try and stack people. I think I brought the energy that the game needed, and I think it was a fantastic conclusion to the weekend of games. So I wasn't too surprised I got invited back again. I'm friends with The Hustler guys. I like to be friends with all of the streams if I can. I think there's a lot of good people doing good stuff, and you look at what Hustler has done. They've been basically the leading stream in this space for several years now, starting from scratch. A lot of respect for what Feldman and Veri have done over there, and very happy to come back.
Going to give it the same kind of college try I gave it last time, but this time I'm hoping to actually win some money, Joey. Wouldn't be the worst to win some money this time.
- Increased first deposit bonus
- Increased rakeback and reloads
- Help with deposits and cashouts
- Access to private freerolls
- Round-the-clock support
On the Million Dollar Hustler Game
Joe Ingram – Well, listen, we got the lineup.
Who else are we expecting to see in that game, Doug? Are you wanting Tom Dwan to come back, get a little revenge on Durrr?
Doug Polk – Whatever lineup of players they decide to put together, I'm confident it's going to be great. I'm sure the game will be enjoyable. I did have fun playing with Rob Yong last time. It would be nice to beat him in a pot at least once in my life, so if he's back in there, that would be cool. It's always good to see people like Haralabos, and yeah, the game was fun.
I think the lineup, based on feedback from last year, could be improved by trying to have fewer days and really focusing on having strong lineups and players who can jump in. It kind of lost its momentum last year when the day before what was supposed to be the last day got canceled and moved to the next day. Then there was another day where they lowered the buy-in from a million to 500k to allow a player in. You have to do what you have to do.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again, if it's going to be a million-dollar game, that's the hype, that's the advertisement. I think it should be a million dollars.
I understand the temptation if you have a player that might make the game more exciting to lower it, but I think that's the premise of the game. Try to run fewer days and really make them special.
Also, you need to have players in there who are okay with losing a million dollars or 2 million dollars, whatever it might be. There are definitely some people in this lineup who are willing to do that. Maybe not thrilled about it, but they're willing.
I think some of the early days of the game played a little tighter than people were hoping for. My last piece of advice, and these are just small things overall, I think it was a huge success, but I do think the blinds need to be bigger relative to the stacks. I understand that if you make the blinds too big, it becomes insanely gamble-heavy and people get wrecked, but if it's a million-dollar game, it's not unreasonable for the blinds to be 2K 4K or 1K 2K with a 2K ante. These should all have antes. When the blinds are 500/1k and you're a million deep, you're just so deep that it prevents massive pots from being played. One of the big reasons why it got so intense on that last day was at points we were anteing 5K. I mean, that's basically like 2K 4K. So, I do think the blinds need to be bigger.
I think there should probably be fewer days, and I think just all those things together would really make it pop off. That said, it's going to pop off anyway. I'm sure it's going to be fantastic. I'm excited to go back. I did see that the date overlaps with the heads-up event. Hustler tweeted at me saying I could play this and then that afterward. But if there was a seat in the million-dollar game or the heads-up, I would play the million-dollar game 50 million times out of 50 million. So, I don't know, I guess I'll have to see how it goes. I do love the heads-up event though, Joey.
Joey and Doug Talk About Online Poker Bots
Doug's going to speak on a couple recent bot accusations that were leveled at GGPoker and WPN. If you aren't familiar, catch up by reading this article on the WPN/ACR story from early 2024.
Doug Polk – I think we're seeing some tough things lately, particularly the RTA and botting issue really starting to boil over. We're also witnessing problems on GGPoker with accounts that seem to know the outcome of hands or what cards people have. It raises the question of how long online poker will remain viable.
If we're playing games that are easy to solve or at least somewhat reasonable to solve, or if computers can play baseline pretty well, how long can that go on?
When you play at a table, you can see the other players in front of you, and you know they aren't cheating, at least not with real-time assistance. They're playing their own hand in the best way they know how. Online, you just don't know what you're up against, and it seems like even some of the biggest sites can't implement policies that protect the players.
I'm not saying it's easy. It's got to be really hard to do that, but if you can't protect people on your site, it begs the question: is online poker on a timer?
Joe Ingram – I've been deep down the online poker investigation rabbit hole for a long time, and in some ways, it's easier than ever for some people to make money. Once you learn how to navigate the ecosystem and game select the environments, you can sort of learn which sites may have three or four bots at a table. You have to go some places you might not want to go, and that's where certain people are willing to go. They're willing to go into the apps, into these private game clubs where you're going to have a whole different environment than you're going to see on sites like ACR, which is one environment where some of the best players from all over the world play. You never know what's going on on that site; you play at your own risk there.
Doug Polk – ACR had bots on the platform for the first time in I think 10 years. (wink wink)
Joe Ingram – I covered that story in depth before about the stats for some of the bots at the cash games. I get obsessed with these investigations and go down the rabbit hole. It can be healthy or unhealthy, but I end up following along with these stories. I felt like with ACR and Phil Nagy, he was trying to turn things around. He said he gave refunds to the players after the last investigation series, documenting the refunds. Then I don't know what happened, but apparently, a lot of those accounts are back, playing tournaments and cash games. There's a bunch of data online, but you can never trust data unless you've got it yourself.
In terms of ACR specifically, I don't know. I'm just surprised. I thought they were aggressively trying to take a stand, and they have American ambassadors like Chris Moneymaker, a true legend of the game, promoting the site. It seems like they can't stop the problem of bots or stables and all these different people just trying to win. Some people play the game legitimately, and some don't care how they do it. We rely on the site to police that, to say, "We're going to put a stop to that, to make our software fair, our security fair, and get rid of these stables. We're not going to work with the stables, not going to put the bots in the game ourselves, we're going to let the game be fair. I don't know what's going on there, Doug, but it seems like that is a hard thing for some of these sites to get a handle on.
Doug Polk – I still have to say it was hilarious when their solution was an open challenge for people to come bot on their network.
Joey, do you think the ACR bot problem is happening because they don't care, or because they're completely incompetent at stopping it?
Joe Ingram – There are professionals whose only job is to figure out ways to circumvent the system. On one hand, you have professionals who make a living running bots or figuring out new strategies to beat online gambling sites, and on the other hand, you have the security.
I've never been in the back end to go through all the data to look at the winners, to run my own comparisons from the poker site side. It's really easy for me to sit here and say, "Do a better job of this," and make the problem go away. Some sites allegedly have figured it out, but you never know for sure unless you're the one going through the stats and everything.
I personally just don't know if it's that hard, what level of security it takes. It's something to ask Phil Nagy about. Maybe you can ask him because I know you're passionate about these issues. Maybe he'll listen to something you have to say or a suggestion you have because you've been dealing with these ideas in your mind for a long time too.
Doug Polk – I think they're really trying, they are kind of like Live at the Commerce.
I just don't think they're capable of fixing the problem because if they were, they would be fixing the problem. Maybe I'm being fooled, and maybe they just want to seem like they care, but they realize that bots increase the amount of rake being paid on the network. Why would you want a decade of people railing your site for being a safe haven for cheaters?
I don't think they want that, and they're trying to do stuff like the PLO feature where stuff gets reshuffled back in. I know there were mixed thoughts on that from the community, but they're clearly trying to do stuff.
So I think they just need to take a fresh approach, probably hire a new head of security. I don't know how long that guy's been there, but maybe it's time for some fresh blood. Let's get a new approach, some technical guys in there, a new way of verifying that people are not using solvers. Let's just get a whole new perspective, a whole plan of attack, and get in there. I know just the guy!
Joe Ingram – Not me.
Doug Polk – Come on, Joey, you were born for this. This could be the end of your poker arc, where you save the site you've been railing on for years for this problem.
Joe Ingram – ACR brings out these Americans, lets the Americans promote the site, and every American thinks it's America's card room. I don't think it's out of line to say, "Hey, can we provide some safe games?" I think they want that.
I've talked with Phil Nagy a bunch, and the guy is playing million-dollar buy-in games. He's an interesting guy, Doug, I'm telling you. These characters in poker are interesting guys, and you never know what you're going to get with all these guys. So you know, I learn something every day about people, but about the ACR thing and GG, GGPoker is going through their own thing. They've dominated the poker scene in the online poker world, acquired all the big ambassadors, and had their own superuser scandal, Moneytaker69.
Doug Polk – These guys are now figuring out their own strategies to combat the bots or the problem. They're removing table selection, capping win rates, adjusting the rakeback percentage depending on what kind of player you are, hiding the ability to data mine to get stats on these players so the community can police the issues. Now we're seeing the response that each of these sites is deciding to take.
The GGPoker one's tougher because it's a lot more complex what the issue is, and the number of accounts in question seems at least debatable. It seems like there's been at least a couple that for sure were cheating at some capacity, and then there's been some ones that maybe are a little less clear-cut. Then the question has to be asked if there are ones that are cheating and then there's ones that maybe are cheating, then how many are just cheating and getting by without anyone ever knowing because they're just reasonably cheating or just using it occasionally or whatever it might be.
Look, I can't sit here and say their code is wrong, they got to do this in the development code because I have no clue what they should be doing. But what I can say is it seems like if somehow you're transmitting who wins a hand before the action has taken place, it seems like we got a pretty big problem. I don't know whether that means that it needs to be randomized later on, like not until the decision is made the randomization happens. That feels like an easy solution to me, I don't know, but it seems like a pretty massive security flaw and definitely something that you should be wary of if you're going to be trusting your money playing on this website.
Look, it's the biggest site, I know a lot of people support them, I know that they've done a lot for poker. Again, like I do think that there are a lot of good people trying to grow poker there, but security of the hole cards has got to be priority number one in my opinion for an online poker site, just has to be.
Joe Ingram – Yeah, I mean we don't know what exactly the issue was with that in terms of these guys being able to access it. I guess they found the win rates through one of the Data Tracking sites, and now they're getting rid of that Data Tracking ability. So you know, it's always been a big thing in the community where the community can see the games, the community can go over the hands, the community can point out these issues that it seems like poker sites are, you know, someone's always able to circumvent something whether they're inside man, whether they're an outside man, whether they're some wizard programmer, whether they just found a simple flaw in the code or in the system. That happens all the time, that's what a lot of people are trying to do that out there for every game, every stream, everything. If you got access to the cards, people are going to try to find how to get that information and be able to use the information. It's a never-ending game, it's never going away no matter what you do, it's always evolving as well too.
So you know, with GGPoker, it hasn't been, you know, obviously that issue stood out, but does it make you worry about recommending the site or how does it make you personally feel? Would you be okay playing there or you know, you just say hey that's poker, that's what it is.
Doug Polk – I've not played online poker in seven years. I played versus Daniel Negreanu, and then I played a couple of streams on Twitch, but when someone asks me where should I play online, I'm like I don't know, find someone that's maybe not such a washed-up has-been, you know like ask someone that maybe has pressed raise on a site in the last five years. Find someone that actually has any clue what the rake is like on these sites.
What about you Joey, are you recommending sites to people at this point?
Joe Ingram – No, not really. I don't recommend sites. If I recommend a site, maybe something like a regulated site, especially in America. I'm just putting my faith in that, but I haven't done enough research into what's really going on with a lot of these companies, a lot of these sites.
That's kind of how online poker has always been in my mind where you play at your own risk no matter where you play. You try to put yourself in good positions to win and you try to protect yourself. It's always going to be a predatory environment, there's always going to be people that are trying to take your money some way, and you know some people are going to go about it fair, some people are not going to go about it fair.
That's online poker, that's live poker, that's any poker game.
So to me, you know, it just now there's just many more options and there's the sweepstakes model, there's the club model, there's the regulated model, there's the Black Sea model, the black market model, the gray market model. So there's just all these different options and you having to learn how to navigate that is going to be unique to everybody, whatever they're playing live or online or cash games or tournaments. So to me, it's more opportunity, but it's also more opportunity for both sides to take advantage of that.
Doug Polk – Do you think people should play poker on GGPoker right now?
Joe Ingram – I'd probably play the tournaments, why not? I mean if you got a big tournament with a big field.
Doug Polk – This cheating happened in tournaments, a bunch of it, for the bots and stuff like that for the glitch where they could see who would win at showdown or who was ahead or whatever the specifics of the technical breakdown were.
Joe Ingram – I mean I'm going to take my personal risk right, if I think if it's a big.
Doug Polk – It did happen in tournaments.
Joe Ingram – I'm going to take my personal risk, right? If it's a big field or something like that, like GGPoker was here.
Doug Polk – It depends on how much first place is?
Joe Ingram – I don't know. I play against bots all the time. All I do is battle against bots and trainers. I'm always trying to find the best bots out there, so I'm used to playing. I'm assuming everyone's cheating at these games, so I know what I'm getting myself into. This is a war out here. I'm not expecting a fair game. I'm not delusional about poker anymore, about what people are doing out there these days.
We could say we're too cautious, and that's great, but at least I know when I play my bots that they're working against me, and I don't have to wonder.
Doug Polk – This is the real reason why you're excited to train on Lucid GTO because it's giving you an opportunity to practice for your actual in-game environment, which is playing against people cheating.
Joe Ingram – That's certainly one way to think about it. If I ever want to play in that arena, just get used to it, right? The guy's using RTA; he knows all the stats. Can I beat the guy using RTA? I find that challenge kind of fun.
Doug Polk – It might be time to head down to the local card room.
Mike Postle Appears Back in the Poker World
Doug Polk – While we're talking about cheating, we've got to bring up Mike Postle's re-emergence, an alleged cheater. No one knows for sure, but very recently, Mike Postle has once again re-entered the poker community with some little here, a little there, very picked a spot kind of specifically. What are your thoughts on the recent reemergence of one of poker's greatest villains?
Joe Ingram – I've got to say I'm excited. The investigation got out of hand, and when I look back on it, I would say it did. I spent countless hours, all this time, obsessed with watching the hands, seeing him look at his crotch, seeing him put the phone in the chair. I'm talking to him, talking to Veronica, talking to everybody. I've got all these people hitting me up, and the whole time was absolutely insane.
I've been in communication with Postle pretty much ever since, even before it happened. Before the stream started, I hit him up, and I said, "Hey, what's going on with these hands? These hands look bad." And ever since that day, Doug, for better or worse, I've been in touch with Mike Postle. It's not like we keep in touch; he sometimes sends me updates about the cheating investigations that I might be doing a stream on, and we read it out.
He's always told me he's got his side of the story, he's got this evidence, he's got this whole thing in mind about what really happened to him. He's saying he's got an explanation for what happened when he looked at the crotch, and he's been telling me, "Eventually, I'm going to say something. Eventually, I'm going to say something." I'm like, "Okay, I'm waiting. Is the guy going to say something or not?" It looked like he's looking at his crotch; it looked like there were some crazy hands.
So, it's finally come out. I listened to what he had to say, and we've been talking a little bit more since then. I'm trying to understand where this guy's coming from. He's saying it should be fair for him to be able to tell some of his story. He's got an explanation; people might not agree with it, they might think it isn't true, but at least he wants to be able to try to tell the story from my understanding. He feels like he wants to clarify some points that people are using against him and believe that is true that isn't true.
So, you know, I'm just kind of taking it in. I'm talking with the guy. I'm trying to be open-minded as well, and I'm trying to see both sides. But obviously, I've never been in a situation like this before. This is a very unique situation for me to be in, and I don't know, Doug, what do you think about it? Because you kind of listened to what little he had to say and reflected on that whole thing that happened with Postle back in 2019.
Doug Polk – What I'm mainly interested in is when he's going to come clean. I'm not really interested in rehashing the "I'm innocent, I'm just as good as Potripper, and I'm the greatest ever." But when he wants to come clean, I think it's going to be fascinating. Everything until then is a bit of a snoozefest, and I don't see how this is any different than before. It just seems like the exact same thing all over again.
Look, it's kind of like the Robbie situation, right? If Robbie comes out and says, "I have new information about why I'm innocent," we're like, "Okay, I don't know." Other than actual proof at this point or a confession, what's going to change anyone's mind on either of those?
Joe Ingram – He's saying the data that was talked about, the data that was compiled, was not correct. He's saying that there weren't all the add-ons accounted for, the Potripper comparison isn't true, there are more losing sessions out there of him.
He's saying that in terms of the crotch, that's what I go back to, right? I witnessed the guy put the phone there and then start looking down in the middle of hands, and I think that's what everyone wants an explanation for. He says he has the explanation for that; he says he has the proof of why that was happening. He's saying it wasn't true, and he's got the evidence to prove it.
Doug Polk – It's a prank bro!
Where was this response five years ago? Look, Joey, the guy clearly cheated, and there's no smoking gun, so it's going to go down in the sands of time.
But anyone that's able to use their brain to think thoughts will be able to put this together. This guy was the all-time biggest winner ever at $1/$2 and $2/$5 by looking at his crotch and playing basically perfect in every single river spot, no matter what. Then he's going to say, "Oh no, I lost five sessions you didn't track." Why are we doing this, Joey?
Joe Ingram – He says he didn't play perfect. I mean, listen, I've asked him all these questions, so I know what his answers are to these questions. I've talked to him; I'm trying to figure it out. I'm being a good investigator, in my opinion. I'm at least hearing this guy out. I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
Doug Polk – Alright, Mikey, you're listening. I would love to do a one-on-one in-person interview where we're going to go through things.
We're going to talk about some hands, some spots, some statistics. We're going to get to the bottom of what you actually won.
Then I am going to propose something to you right now. Assuming that players are willing, how about you come on down to The Lodge? We'll provide the bankroll; I'll provide the bankroll, and we'll do a Mike Postle challenge at The Lodge where he gets to play. Any winnings he wins are entirely a total freeroll for Mike Postle.
We'll put in a few hundred hours of play. You can play versus all of the $1/$3 and $2/$5 players at The Lodge. These are not players that – I should be careful how I phrase this – you're going to do just fine down here at The Lodge if you can handle your own at Stones Gambling Hall.
We'll make sure to track everything and it's done fairly, assuming the players want to play with Mike Postle. Let's just see if he can run it back. If he can get anywhere close to that win rate I'm willing to eat my own words as he rakes in my money.
You know what's going to happen Joey? He's not he's not going to win anywhere close to what he won before. He's instead going to
not take me up on this or lose or win small. He's not going to be the greatest poker player of all time and I do hope he brings his hat because there's going
to be nothing in that crotch to help him at The Lodge I'll tell you that right now.
