Mayfair Casino witholding Ivey's winnings

[77dave]

What sort of money will both sides of spent in taking this to court?

[baldock92]

Like it's been said, it's so negative for Genting in the long run, if the whales see that one of the most well known professional gamblers on the planet isn't being paid out and is being taken to court, they have to rethink whether they want to use that casino in the future

[redarmi]

Edge sorting cannot be classed as illegal because the accused only used information already in the public forum/casino, which was readily available, so should be classed as Strategy

You obviously don't understand what went on.  Using deception he persuaded the dealer to organise the cards in such a manner that he could tell whether he would be dealt a favourable card and so increase his bet.

One of the definitions of cheating in the Gambling Act:

cheating at gambling may, in particular, consist of actual or attempted deception or interference in connection with—

(a)the process by which gambling is conducted,

Although this is a civil and not a criminal case, if Crockfords can get the judge to believe that what Ivey did was "actual or attempted deception or interference ", he won't win and might actually be arrested.

My understanding is that Ivey specifically set out his terms of playing ie. which brand of cards he needed, which dealers etc in advance and deposited and showed up on the basis of that.  They agreed because they were greedy and now that they have lost they don't want to pay.    If they werent so greedy they would have thought about why he wanted those specific conditions but by agreeing and then not paying they were effectively freerolling him and should pay him.  He didn't manufacture the cards, he didn't touch them, he just requested the casino play the game in a certain way in order for him to be willing to play, at very high stakes.  They were perfectly at liberty to refuse those requests and should have been suspicious but they just wanted the whale and it bit them on the arse.  I dont even see how it can be considerded deception.  They bought the cards, they just weren't as observant as Ivey or his associates with regards to their imperfections.  many years ago Billy Walters sent out teams to check results on a number of roulette wheels and found that there was a bias on one.  He went and bet the numbers that were coming up more often and won something like $3m.  Presumably you think he shouldn't have been paid either?

I don't have an opinion on whether he should get paid or not.  I am just pointing out why there's a court case.  As far as your Walters example is concerned, the "edge" was there whether he identified it or not.  Ivey's edge only existed when he persuaded the casino to mark their own cards.

 

How did he persuade them to mark their own cards?  They were already marked when they bought them.  That is the whole point.  They just didn't notice the mark.

[FUN4FRASER]

Casino Makes its Living Milking Punters with its "House Edge"

Punter is too smart and finds a Legal way to beat the " House Edge"

House Crys Like a Baby and withholds Punters Money    Fucking Disgrace !

Punters shouldn't play in establishment that doesn't pay its debts

[theprawnidentity]

House Crys Like a Baby and withholds Punters Money    Fucking Disgrace !

Punters shouldn't play in establishment that doesn't pay its debts

This.

[doubleup]

How did he persuade them to mark their own cards?  They were already marked when they bought them.  That is the whole point.  They just didn't notice the mark.

FFS   He persuaded them to arrange the deck so that he could identify good cards.  If certain cards hadn't been turned round by the dealer, the marking would have been irrelevant.  So persuading the dealer to manipulate the cards is one of the crucial elements of Ivey's scheme.  

The casino (Genting Group) believes that its employees were manipulated into playing a game that it had not authorised. Ivey believes he asked to play a game with certain rules and the casino agreed.  

I hope that Ivey's lawyers grill the casino about their knowledge of edge sorting and advantage techniques.  If it transpires that they were free-rolling, the Gambling Commission should revoke their license and look into criminal charges.  On the other hand, if Ivey's scheme specifically revolved around persuading a junior employee, the Chinese speaking dealer, to manipulate the cards so that he could make his bets, then he shouldn't be paid and be charged with cheating.

    


  

[arbboy]

How did he persuade them to mark their own cards?  They were already marked when they bought them.  That is the whole point.  They just didn't notice the mark.

FFS   He persuaded them to arrange the deck so that he could identify good cards.  If certain cards hadn't been turned round by the dealer, the marking would have been irrelevant.  So persuading the dealer to manipulate the cards is one of the crucial elements of Ivey's scheme.  

The casino (Genting Group) believes that its employees were manipulated into playing a game that it had not authorised. Ivey believes he asked to play a game with certain rules and the casino agreed.  

I hope that Ivey's lawyers grill the casino about their knowledge of edge sorting and advantage techniques.  If it transpires that they were free-rolling, the Gambling Commission should revoke their license and look into criminal charges.  On the other hand, if Ivey's scheme specifically revolved around persuading a junior employee, the Chinese speaking dealer, to manipulate the cards so that he could make his bets, then he shouldn't be paid and be charged with cheating.

    


  

There is no way, imo of course, that a game of this size the dealer alone would have been allowed to make a decision based on cards being turned around.  The inspection/pit boss plus the camera guys would have definitely have had to give the ok for normal procedure to be broken in dealing the cards in this manner.  There is no way the dealer would have been allowed to do this without far more senior members of staff agreeing to it.  If the dealer was allowed to do this without question then wtf was the pitboss/inspector doing in a game of this size given he/she would have been watching this game exclusively surely with no other distractions?

[redarmi]

What really gets me about this is Ivey lives in Las Vegas.  This is no secret.  He can presumably get all the action he wants within a five minute drive of his house.  Did they think he was coming to London with all of the these prerequisites just because he fancied fish and chips for a change?

[pleno1]

Where can we watch it?

[Marky147]

What really gets me about this is Ivey lives in Las Vegas.  This is no secret.  He can presumably get all the action he wants within a five minute drive of his house.  Did they think he was coming to London with all of the these prerequisites just because he fancied fish and chips for a change?

Think they sent a jet over to collect him from Barca so he could play there.

[FUN4FRASER]

What really gets me about this is Ivey lives in Las Vegas.  This is no secret.  He can presumably get all the action he wants within a five minute drive of his house. Did they think he was coming to London with all of the these prerequisites just because he fancied fish and chips for a change?

Agree with you

they didn't think anything at the time , it was merely a desperate after thought and that was to withhold his winnings.

 

[edgascoigne]

What really gets me about this is Ivey lives in Las Vegas.  This is no secret.  He can presumably get all the action he wants within a five minute drive of his house.  Did they think he was coming to London with all of the these prerequisites just because he fancied fish and chips for a change?

Fish and chips, though.

Cryptic, yet predictable a response as this is...never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.

[Royal Flush]

I wish people in this thread would stop spouting off about what is and isn't legal given, to the best of my knowledge, most of you haven't got a scooby about the law in this area.

One thing we can agree on though is that morally (pumter vs casino) he should be paid, much the same as if you get hustled etc, the law is something we don't know about but as has been stated i doubt genting would go this far unless they are right.

[FUN4FRASER]

I wish people in this thread would stop spouting off about what is and isn't legal given, to the best of my knowledge, most of you haven't got a scooby about the law in this area.

One thing we can agree on though is that morally (pumter vs casino) he should be paid, much the same as if you get hustled etc, the law is something we don't know about but as has been stated i doubt genting would go this far unless they are right.

Sigh

Its a forum where people " are meant to be allowed " to voice an opinion  !

Kill peoples opinions , it kills the thread and kills the forum  !   Is that what you want  ?

[BangBang]

I wish people in this thread would stop spouting off about what is and isn't legal given, to the best of my knowledge, most of you haven't got a scooby about the law in this area.

One thing we can agree on though is that morally (pumter vs casino) he should be paid, much the same as if you get hustled etc, the law is something we don't know about but as has been stated i doubt genting would go this far unless they are right.

Do you have any idea of the law in this area? Or did you just want to end the thread or limit debate?

Agree with the second paragraph...