There's a rumor that Phil Ivey just settled his $10.1 million edge sorting lawsuit With Borgata. But, can't find a reliable source.
Eliot Jacobson may know as I understand that he acted as an expert witness for Phil Ivey in the Crockfords Casino case in London, England. In that case Ivey kept appealing and eventually lost so he was never paid. Although Atlantic City, New Jersey is a different jurisdiction in another country and the Borgata did pay the outcome of the case in England may serve as a precedent in these types of cases.
Casino Enemy No.1
I don't have any information on the Borgata case.
Quick story. The morning of the day that Judge Mitting handed out his Crockfords verdict Phil said to me, "Today is a $42 million dollar swing for me." He intuitively knew that whatever happened that day would be what happened at Borgata as well. Then, when the judge came in to read his ruling, Phil took one look at him and wrote "I'm dead" on a yellow legal pad and showed it to me. If there is one thing Phil is good at, it's reading people.
Last edited by Eliot; 07-14-2020 at 09:04 PM.
No doubt about his ability to read people which he has used very successfully in Poker. He may be a gambler but I still wonder why someone so smart and successful kept appealing. The cost is prohibitive and although he can afford the best legal representation he surely must have been advised that his chances were slim. The only reason I can think of is to clear his name as a cheat which appears to have different meanings depending on whether you define it under British or American law. In any case, settling with Borgata was a wise decision and the terms will probably remain confidential. It was an interesting case which everyone can learn from.
Casino Enemy No.1
Here is a source, but don't know if its reliable.
https://www.pokernews.com/news/2020/...ment-37591.htm
Email: [email protected]
Ivey was not found to have cheated in the Crockford's case. In fact, the judge had to invent a new kind of "social cheating" to favor Crockfords in this case. Judge Mitting explained in court that he was a bridge player and he would never look at his opponents cards, that would be cheating, even though he would never be criminally punished for doing so.
Climate change blog: climatecasino.net
I was not defending Ivey, I was defending the method of advantage play called edge sorting on behalf of advantage players everywhere.
The case featured an American millionaire against a billion dollar Malaysian corporation (Genting) in an English court. After the case had been decided one of Ivey's lawyers said to me that Ivey estimated their chances of winning were about 10%, but they didn't want to tell me that ahead of time because they thought it might discourage me.
Last edited by Eliot; 07-15-2020 at 08:57 AM.
Climate change blog: climatecasino.net
I started using that tag line when I was an assistant professor of mathematics at Ohio University in about 1987 (I think that's about when we started using email). The department was systemically corrupt and I wanted to call it out, while also expressing futility. For example, in my first year I caught the senior professor in my area -- who was instrumental in getting me hired there -- cheating on behalf of one of his PhD students by feeding his student the questions ahead of time that were on the written preliminary exam. I called out one thing after another for 15 years until they bought out my tenure in 1998. Fortunately that got me to UC Santa Barbara.
The tag line just stuck -- it seems just as appropriate in the context of casinos and the AP world as it did long ago in that pathetic department.
Last edited by Eliot; 07-15-2020 at 11:31 AM.
Climate change blog: climatecasino.net
Pretty damning comments. Some might accuse you, among other things, of being a conspiracy theorist. On the other hand, others might applaud your pessimistic comments, of which I am one. I would enthusiastically add that the gauntlet applies virtually to every corporation, public and private organization in the world.
I’ve made a pretty decent living, among other things, of being an untrusting pessimist towards corporate doublespeak, and being able to dissect The bullshit into the shit stained truth - such is the way of corporate ethics. In doing so, I felt It more useful to deal with the immediate bullshit issues, rather than delay said message through endless proof reads.
Bookmarks