- Dec 18, 2010
- Total posts
i dont know i kind of think its b.s that they want ivey to pay it back its like saying you cannot win at our casino you cannot beat the house and when you do we want it back.. now i understand he used edge sorting but it says the card manufacturers are responsible for this defect and now ivey has to pay for it sounds like the casino is scamming him
that makes a lot of sense. actually should hold the dealers responsible and yea how did they never notice the marks on the cards? seems like they made the mistake on their own!At first glance, I was thinking the casino should be held entirely responsible for not checking their cards. However, the act of having the dealers turn high cards 180 degrees is cheating. If I am reading this correctly, the pattern on the back of the cards was closer to one edge than the other. So, the only way there is an advantage is if the dealer cooperates and turns only certain cards 180 degrees. So, if my understanding of the situation is correct, he should absolutely have to pay. At first I was thinking he just noticed certain cards had marks on them. So, I was thinking that the only mistake he made was having the dealers turn the cards 180. But then I realized that this guy is way too smart for that. The only way the edge marking would work would be collusion with the dealers.
So yes you're reading it correctly. However there was no collusion Phil and his buddy actually made stipulations to the casino that the casinos agreed to. They agreed to these stipulations because Ivey and his buddy agreed to out X amount of cash in play on there casino floor if the casino agreed to their terms. Some of those terms included:icon_tong:icon_tong:icon_tong:icon_tong
Ok, so I googled it. I am still not sure that the casinos made an agreement in order to get them to play. It sounded more to me that all casinos give high rollers perks. The dealer fell for the "those are my lucky cards routine," and the casino paid for it. If Ivey doesn't get greedy and spaces his winnings out, he might still be making money off of them.So yes you're reading it correctly. However there was no collusion Phil and his buddy actually made stipulations to the casino that the casinos agreed to. They agreed to these stipulations because Ivey and his buddy agreed to out X amount of cash in play on there casino floor if the casino agreed to their terms. Some of those terms included
Using the same deck of cards for the duration of their stay.
Dealer turn requests (I.E.) 180 rotation.
The dealer could only change the direction of the cards if the two players requested it.
The casino agree to all this. I don't see how they have a leg to stand on. Phil Ivey did this a several casinos Google it and then see what you think? It's a good read.