Phil Ivey case

[davethebuilder]

I doubt Phil Ivey will declare bankruptcy and there is a big difference between their attorneys advising that they will appeal and actually seeing it through. This case has now been judged in two countries and lost so I think it is time to put it down to experience and move on. It was an interesting case though...maybe Ivey and Sun just went too far with their tactics. Even so I still respect him for being an incredibly talented poker player.

[Jabberwocky]

If they get a reasonable judge, it's far from over.

Do they even exist?

[Norm]

Well it seems we have another case of insane greed by an AP setting dangerous precedents that could have repercussions to all advantage play.

As much as I sympathize with AP suits against casinos, there is a good point here. Take your show on the road. I realize that this is a difficult scenario to set up. But, $10 million. Won't you logically end up in court? A basic concept of AP is to remain under the radar.

[AndretheGiant]

Well it seems we have another case of insane greed by an AP setting dangerous precedents that could have repercussions to all advantage play. Ivey should have let it go and also not been so greedy. Many things may become illegal because some refused to see the obvious. That is the entire play revolves around using a marked deck so you could get a betting advantage. There was no additional information that could be used fro an advantage from the cards until specific turning created a deck that had very useful info marked into the edges of the cards. Ivey may become the pariah that killed all AP play. I sure hope not but lots of attitudes on this forum would make sure that dangerous precedents are set. He had a great advantage play he could have done the rest of his life but he got greedy and tried to win sums that would force attention to the play. I hope he didn't spend his winnings from other casinos because he will likely have to pay all that money back as well. The casinos just need the right judge in other jurisdictions who will embrace this judges decision.

The sky is falling.

[Norm]

Some additional details: http://abcnews.go.com/US/inside-card...ry?id=44300467

[davethebuilder]

This is pretty much what UK-21 and I have been saying all along but I disagree with the last bit...the defendants did more than out think and out strategize the casino and it was those actions that influenced the verdict. I also speak Mandarin and am well aware of how it can be used but I never use it at the tables. Any appeal would be expensive and I don't like their chances given what has already happened but it is the American legal system so I guess we will just have to wait and see.

[bejammin075]

I'm just surprised casino staff don't recognize what turning the cards is attempting to do. When asked to turn certain cards, the first thought should be "Are the backs of the cards uniform?" Ivey had done the card turning play for high stakes 3 or 4 times before the UK casino.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[davethebuilder]

In February, 2017 the UK Supreme Court granted Phil Ivey the right to appeal the Court of Appeals decision handed down in April, 2016 regarding the edge sorting case against Crockfords. It will be interesting to watch this case but I don't like his chances if the appeal actually proceeds. It will be damn expensive too but I guess he can afford it.

[NotEnoughHeat]

I have been aware of Ivey's sorting play since it hit the news but never followed it closely.

Could someone be kind enough to summarize the nature of the court cases to date? I understand that there aretwo already settled in the UK but I don't know with a reasonable precision what the cases were of and the verdict. In other words, I get what the play was and what happened but I don't know exactly what type of cases there were (criminal, civil) and the details to actually be able to describe the cases whatsoever.

[davethebuilder]

They are both civil cases. At no time was Scotland Yard or the New Jersey State Police involved and there is no accusation of criminal cheating. The specifics of the case have been discussed in various threads on this and other forums.

Here's a timeline...

ENGLAND

August, 2012: Phil Ivey and Cheung Yin Sun used edge sorting to gain an advantage at Punto Banco Baccarat and won 7.8m British Pounds at Crockfords Casino in London. The casino accused him of cheating and refused to pay him any winnings but refunded the 1m British Pounds he put up as front money.

May, 2013: Phil Ivey sues Genting UK PLC, the parent company of Crockfords Casino, for his winnings.

October, 2014: High Court of Justice hears the case and Phil Ivey loses.

January, 2015: Phil Ivey is granted permission to appeal the case.

April, 2016: Court of Appeals upholds the High Court decision.

February, 2017: UK Supreme Court grants permission for an appeal.

UNITED STATES

April - July, 2012: Phil Ivey and Cheung Yin Sun used edge sorting to gain an advantage at Punto Banco Baccarat and won 9.6m US Dollars at the Borgata Hotel and Casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey. The Casino paid the winnings.

April, 2014: Borgata Hotel and Casino sues Phil Ivey to recover the money plus additional winnings. Cheung Yin Sun and Gemaco(card manufacturer) are co-defendants.

December, 2016: Phil Ivey loses the case and is ordered to repay the Baccarat winnings.


A final thought...I hope Phil Ivey understands that the UK Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case so they can clarify certain aspects of UK gaming law which are of significant public importance. The irony of this case is that the edge sorting techniques he and his colleague used are easily preventable if the casinos had taken basic game protection measures. In any case, it will be a nice payday for the lawyers.

[NotEnoughHeat]

They are both civil cases. At no time was Scotland Yard or the New Jersey State Police involved and there is no accusation of criminal cheating. The specifics of the case have been discussed in various threads on this and other forums.

Here's a timeline...

Great! Exactly what I was looking for. I appreciate it Dave.

I go back and forth on what I think Ivey deserves. Saying that the casino could prevent it by taking basic game protection measures is an understatement. There's just some silly requests that the casino should never comply with.

What bugs me a bit about situations where legal damages meet advantage play is that damages are based off actual winnings but effectively giving the casino a free roll. Even if the large sums are way above EV you lose it all in a case like this. It also wonder about the craps winnings since they didn't have anything to do with the sorting play afaik. If I accept a $5 misplay and run that up to a couple grand should the casino be able to ask for the couple grand back? Does it make a difference if that was the last $5 I have on me or whether it was part of a larger roll? Lots of fun questions concerning the law and gambling.