This is my take on it......... In my opinion, if a player does anything to gain an "Unfair Advantage" then this is cheating. Certain card decks have printed patterns on the back of them which is not ( Asymmetric - definition, not identical on both sides of a central line) For instance the printed pattern on the back of the cards may have full circles printed down the right hand side & half circles printed down the left hand side. Now......knowing this information & the fact that a card shuffling machine cannot turn the cards we can proceed as follows........ Every time we get dealt 7's 8's or 9's we turn the card around, so that the larger circle are on the left. (This can be done much more quickly with the help of another person at the table) After that all we have to do is look at the next card which is ready to come out of the shuffling machine to predict whether it could be a 7, 8 or 9 depending on the symmetry of the printed pattern down the edge of the card. It's not as easy as that in practice but that is the simple explanation of the technique. This imo is cheating, as you are deliberately gaining an unfair advantage over the house/dealer & the rest of the players at the table. Posted by POKERTREV
Great post Trev.
A really fascinating topic, this. There are threads about it on every poker forum. On the Forum elsewhere I frequent most regularly, the thread runs to over 500 posts. The common theme in all of them is that the vast majority side with Ivey, either because he is deemed to be a sort of "poker hero", or because people tend to support the underdog versus the big bad Casino. (You can delete "Casino" & insert "poker site", "sports betting site" or whatever).
Ivey now faces a near identical lawsuit from the Borgota, in Atlantic City. It seems he has been flying the same kite at several venues.
Really interesting topic, & it's easy to see both sides of the debate, but to my mind, it is clear that he was cheating, & that was what the Court emphatically confirmed.
Mr Ivey is definitely a "sharp", & I don't think I'd want to be the other side of a bet with him!
In Response to Re: Ivey in Court : Great post Trev. A really fascinating topic, this. There are threads about it on every poker forum. On the Forum elsewhere I frequent most regularly, the thread runs to over 500 posts. The common theme in all of them is that the vast majority side with Ivey, either because he is deemed to be a sort of "poker hero", or because people tend to support the underdog versus the big bad Casino. (You can delete "Casino" & insert "poker site", "sports betting site" or whatever). Ivey now faces a near identical lawsuit from the Borgota, in Atlantic City. It seems he has been flying the same kite at several venues. Really interesting topic, & it's easy to see both sides of the debate, but to my mind, it is clear that he was cheating, & that was what the Court emphatically confirmed. Mr Ivey is definitely a "sharp", & I don't think I'd want to be the other side of a bet with him! Posted by Tikay10
hmmm, and i used to think he was one of the nice guys. you don't seem to be able to trust anyone these days. it's thanks to these casinos running poker tables that he has much of his fortune, and that's how he repays them :-(
and i guess there's a lot of poker players of the same ilk, based on your comments above #sigh
This is my take on it......... In my opinion, if a player does anything to gain an "Unfair Advantage"then this is cheating. Certain card decks have printed patterns on the back of them which is not ( Asymmetric - definition, not identical on both sides of a central line) For instance the printed pattern on the back of the cards may have full circles printed down the right hand side & half circles printed down the left hand side. Now......knowing this information & the fact that a card shuffling machine cannot turn the cards we can proceed as follows........ Every time we get dealt 7's 8's or 9's we turn the card around, so that the larger circle are on the left. (This can be done much more quickly with the help of another person at the table) After that all we have to do is look at the next card which is ready to come out of the shuffling machine to predict whether it could be a 7, 8 or 9 depending on the symmetry of the printed pattern down the edge of the card. It's not as easy as that in practice but that is the simple explanation of the technique. This imo is cheating, as you are deliberately gaining an unfair advantage over the house/dealer & the rest of the players at the table. Posted by POKERTREV
I often play live poker with a guy, every time he bluffs he scratches his nose. This gives me an unfair advanatage ? Am i a cheat?
In Response to Re: Ivey in Court : I often play live poker with a guy, every time he bluffs he scratches his nose. This gives me an unfair advanatage ? Am i a cheat? Posted by 1267
Reading "players tells" is one thing....deliberately rotating cards to give you an idea of what card is coming out next is another.
And this wasn't poker which is a person vs person game. It was punto banco which is just playing a card game with the smallest of margins for the house.
Where I think he went wrong is in the amount he was trying to walk out of the casino with. Let's say he kept his winnings to £1m, not over £7m. He's doubled up, he could of cashed out without any problems. It's maybe even a good story for that casino's history. 'The night Ivey played here and won a million.' However what he did is akin to the bank robber down in the vault who keeps stuffing money into the bags way past when it was time to get out of there, and then they get caught on the way out.
If anything, the Casino is the cheat. As a company which will/should be looking out for cases where the players can gain an edge. Card counting and what not. With the law and court deciding the result they did. The Casino can basically freeroll Ivey with no risk. Ivey wins and they take him to court and get the money back. Ivey loses 6 million, walks away (knowing he had an edge in the long run, good gambling spot) and they keep his money.
If anything, the Casino is the cheat. As a company which will/should be looking out for cases where the players can gain an edge. Card counting and what not. With the law and court deciding the result they did. The Casino can basically freeroll Ivey with no risk. Ivey wins and they take him to court and get the money back. Ivey loses 6 million, walks away (knowing he had an edge in the long run, good gambling spot) and they keep his money. Posted by 1267
When you cheat, you risk being freerolled.
Its the same for any cheat, be it match fixer, card marker, or someone colluding in dyms.
If they lose, they lose. If they win and are caught they get their winnings confiscated and are freerolled.
If anything, the Casino is the cheat. As a company which will/should be looking out for cases where the players can gain an edge. Card counting and what not. With the law and court deciding the result they did. The Casino can basically freeroll Ivey with no risk. Ivey wins and they take him to court and get the money back. Ivey loses 6 million, walks away (knowing he had an edge in the long run, good gambling spot) and they keep his money. Posted by 1267
Ivey is lucky they didn't take him to court for fraud. reckon it would be 5050 that he'd get lockedup for 3 to 5 years.
Very interesting debate,ivey finds an edge and exploits it to his gain,hmmmmm is this wrong or right i soppose it could be deemed as wrong but on the other hand is the casino to blame for not knowing this.The casinos are happy to have edges over mugs that roll up with money and lose every penny but as time as seen they aint to happy about customers finding an edge ie card counting among other things.i dont blame ivey i blame the casino for not being aware of the cards being marked in a certain way,all casinos and online sites know they have an edge over customers but do they reley that information to them do they **** as like if casinos and online sites run a level par 50/50 game they would not be in the business for long,so the question really is who are the cheats u decide.
This is my take on it......... In my opinion, if a player does anything to gain an "Unfair Advantage" then this is cheating. Certain card decks have printed patterns on the back of them which is not ( Asymmetric - definition, not identical on both sides of a central line) For instance the printed pattern on the back of the cards may have full circles printed down the right hand side & half circles printed down the left hand side. Now......knowing this information & the fact that a card shuffling machine cannot turn the cards we can proceed as follows........ Every time we get dealt 7's 8's or 9's we turn the card around, so that the larger circle are on the left. (This can be done much more quickly with the help of another person at the table) After that all we have to do is look at the next card which is ready to come out of the shuffling machine to predict whether it could be a 7, 8 or 9 depending on the symmetry of the printed pattern down the edge of the card. It's not as easy as that in practice but that is the simple explanation of the technique. This imo is cheating, as you are deliberately gaining an unfair advantage over the house/dealer & the rest of the players at the table. Posted by POKERTREV
At last someone explained it properly how it worked. The British press certainly couldn't!
In Response to Re: Ivey in Court : Casinos will bend over backwards and accommodate all sorts of requests to attract the very high rollers. Posted by FCHD
Yea that's wat I mean if they said that deck was ok then wats the problem. Its there own fault for agreeing to the deck he wanted.
Not been able to follow this too closely.... Can someone tell which of the casino rules/laws Mr Ivey actually broke? Posted by JockBMW
The casino rule he broke was "Cheating" or "Deception"
He used an innocent croupier as a "device" or "tool" (a stratagem; an artifice)
He used this tool/device in a scheme to trick or deceive the casino.
devices: using any device which helps to forecast the odds or aid in a legitimate strategy is regarded as cheating
Extract from The Verdict "Mr Ivey had gained himself an advantage and did so by using a croupier as his innocent agent or tool. He was doing it in circumstances where he knew that she and her superiors did not know the consequences of what she had done at his instigation. This is, in my view, cheating for the purpose of civil law.”
If you read the actual law suit issued by Borgata ( suing Ivey and Sun for exactly the same thing ), it is plain to see they were cheating the casino ----- they were also using a wire transfer to send the money to Mexico, allegedly violating money laundering legislation in the USA
google----
Borgata Lawsuit Against Poker Pro Phil Ivey
The geezer don't need to do what he did, he's a cheat and a fraud !---- and a flopwit greedy one at that!
it should have been spotted by the manufacturer of the cards--- Borgata casino is also suing them---- look at the top right--- the circles are cut much smaller there and are very easy to distinguish from a card turned the other way
Comments
A really fascinating topic, this. There are threads about it on every poker forum. On the Forum elsewhere I frequent most regularly, the thread runs to over 500 posts. The common theme in all of them is that the vast majority side with Ivey, either because he is deemed to be a sort of "poker hero", or because people tend to support the underdog versus the big bad Casino. (You can delete "Casino" & insert "poker site", "sports betting site" or whatever).
Ivey now faces a near identical lawsuit from the Borgota, in Atlantic City. It seems he has been flying the same kite at several venues.
Really interesting topic, & it's easy to see both sides of the debate, but to my mind, it is clear that he was cheating, & that was what the Court emphatically confirmed.
Mr Ivey is definitely a "sharp", & I don't think I'd want to be the other side of a bet with him!
Am i a cheat?
With the law and court deciding the result they did. The Casino can basically freeroll Ivey with no risk. Ivey wins and they take him to court and get the money back.
Ivey loses 6 million, walks away (knowing he had an edge in the long run, good gambling spot) and they keep his money.
Casinos will bend over backwards and accommodate all sorts of requests to attract the very high rollers.
He used an innocent croupier as a "device" or "tool" (a stratagem; an artifice)
He used this tool/device in a scheme to trick or deceive the casino.
devices: using any device which helps to forecast the odds or aid in a legitimate strategy is regarded as cheating
Extract from The Verdict
"Mr Ivey had gained himself an advantage and did so by using a croupier as his innocent agent or tool. He was doing it in circumstances where he knew that she and her superiors did not know the consequences of what she had done at his instigation. This is, in my view, cheating for the purpose of civil law.”
Surprised he lost the case and that there is such strong opinions on this as being cheating.
He has just exploited a weakness in the Casino - it was them who agreed to his requests.
The fact they didn't know what he was doing is their fault imo.
google----
Borgata Lawsuit Against Poker Pro Phil Ivey
The geezer don't need to do what he did, he's a cheat and a fraud !---- and a flopwit greedy one at that!it should have been spotted by the manufacturer of the cards--- Borgata casino is also suing them---- look at the top right--- the circles are cut much smaller there and are very easy to distinguish from a card turned the other way