See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 37

Thread: Phil Ivey case

  1. 12-18-2016, 06:06 AM #1
    Norm
    Norm is offline
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,470
    Blog Entries
    59

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Phil Ivey case

    Don't know if this is a reliable source, but several sources say that Ivey just lost a court decision: https://www.casino.org/news/phil-ive...e-sorting-case
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  2. 12-18-2016, 07:47 AM #2
    CallSaul
    CallSaul is offline
    Member CallSaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Southeastern U.S.
    Posts
    80

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    Don't know if this is a reliable source, but several sources say that Ivey just lost a court decision: https://www.casino.org/news/phil-ive...e-sorting-case
    The court issued its order on damages and its judgment in favor of the Borgata on Thursday. The opinion is up on PACER--if you have an account, you can view it here: https://ecf.njd.uscourts.gov/doc1/119111496259.

    Long story short: the court found Ivey liable for $10.13 million. This is not surprising given the summary judgment opinion from October discussed ad nauseam on this forum.

    No doubt an appeal will be forthcoming.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  3. 12-18-2016, 04:54 PM #3
    Jabberwocky
    Jabberwocky is offline
    Senior Member Jabberwocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Agharta
    Posts
    1,868

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    My bet is the Appellate Court will refuse the case.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  4. 12-19-2016, 06:55 AM #4
    CallSaul
    CallSaul is offline
    Member CallSaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Southeastern U.S.
    Posts
    80

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Jabberwocky View Post
    My bet is the Appellate Court will refuse the case.
    The appellate court (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in this instance) cannot refuse to hear the case.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  5. 12-19-2016, 07:45 AM #5
    Frank Galvin
    Frank Galvin is offline
    Senior Member Frank Galvin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    922

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    CallSaul - Do you have an AP only e-mail address?

    CallSaul,

    Wanted to privately ask you a few questions, but it does not appear that you can receive PM's.

    If you do not subscribe to this forum, I would appreciate your provision of an e-mail account (gmail, hotmail, yahoo, etc) that you might use for AP purposes so that I can send you an e-mail.

    Frank
    "Your honor, with all due respect: if you're going to try my case for me, I wish you wouldn't lose it."

    Fictitious Boston Attorney Frank Galvin (Paul Newman - January 26, 1925 - September 26, 2008) in The Verdict, 1982, lambasting Trial Judge Hoyle (Milo Donal O'Shea - June 2, 1926 - April 2, 2013) - http://imdb.com/title/tt0084855/
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  6. 12-19-2016, 08:38 AM #6
    Jabberwocky
    Jabberwocky is offline
    Senior Member Jabberwocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Agharta
    Posts
    1,868

    0 out of 2 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by CallSaul View Post
    The appellate court (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in this instance) cannot refuse to hear the case.
    Nothing is written in stone.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  7. 12-19-2016, 08:44 AM #7
    CallSaul
    CallSaul is offline
    Member CallSaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Southeastern U.S.
    Posts
    80

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Galvin View Post
    CallSaul,

    Wanted to privately ask you a few questions, but it does not appear that you can receive PM's.

    If you do not subscribe to this forum, I would appreciate your provision of an e-mail account (gmail, hotmail, yahoo, etc) that you might use for AP purposes so that I can send you an e-mail.

    Frank
    Hi, Frank. You can reach me at [email protected]
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  8. 12-19-2016, 08:52 AM #8
    Norm
    Norm is offline
    Random number herder Norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The mote in God's eye
    Posts
    12,470
    Blog Entries
    59

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Jabberwocky View Post
    Nothing is written in stone.
    dscn0114.jpg
    "I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  9. 12-19-2016, 09:04 AM #9
    CallSaul
    CallSaul is offline
    Member CallSaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Southeastern U.S.
    Posts
    80

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    If anyone wants to read the opinion, I uploaded it to Google Drive: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6l...ew?usp=sharing
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  10. 12-19-2016, 10:04 AM #10
    Jabberwocky
    Jabberwocky is offline
    Senior Member Jabberwocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Agharta
    Posts
    1,868

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    What's the statistic on reversing the lower court's verdict? Less than 2%
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  11. 12-19-2016, 11:23 AM #11
    Heisenberg
    Heisenberg is offline
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    72

    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Surely the case is based on the complete bollocks statement "when they knowingly engaged in a scheme to create a set of marked cards and then used those marked cards to place bets based on the markings".
    Ivey and Sun did not 'create a set of marked cards' as they were simply taking advantage of information freely available to the casino, any other players and Ivey and Sun. It's complete nonsense to say they they 'created' anything at all. They must have a huge edge on appeal, surely....
    "He was looking for the card so high and wild he'd never need to deal another" Leonard Cohen
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  12. 12-19-2016, 11:28 AM #12
    Jabberwocky
    Jabberwocky is offline
    Senior Member Jabberwocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Agharta
    Posts
    1,868

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    dscn0114.jpg
    Ok, make that "nussing" .
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  13. 12-19-2016, 11:33 AM #13
    Jabberwocky
    Jabberwocky is offline
    Senior Member Jabberwocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Agharta
    Posts
    1,868

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Heisenberg View Post
    Surely the case is based on the complete bollocks statement "when they knowingly engaged in a scheme to create a set of marked cards and then used those marked cards to place bets based on the markings".
    Ivey and Sun did not 'create a set of marked cards' as they were simply taking advantage of information freely available to the casino, any other players and Ivey and Sun. It's complete nonsense to say they they 'created' anything at all. They must have a huge edge on appeal, surely....
    To a casino card counting is cheating. I don't see why this case should be any different. Do you?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Forum Rules

Other QFIT Sites

Internal Links

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.