UK Supreme Court to hear Phil Ivey's Baccarat Case

festeringZit · Feb 28, 2017

[ Hopefully they will rightly rule in Ivey's favor ]

http://www.cardplayer.com/poker-new...urt-decides-to-hear-phil-ivey-s-gambling-case

[h=1]UK Supreme Court Decides To Hear Phil Ivey's Gambling Case[/h][h=2]Poker Legend Will Ask High Court To Reconsider Previous Rulings[/h]

by Brian Pempus | Published: Feb 28, 2017 | E-mail Author

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom has agreed to hear Phil Ivey’s infamous high-stakes baccarat case.
Ivey won 7.8 million British pounds while playing at Crockfords Casino London in August 2012. Ivey and a playing partner were able to spot manufacturing defects, in the form of asymmetries, on the backs of playing cards to gain an edge on the unsuspecting house.
Ivey never touched the cards and though his “edge sorting” isn’t cheating, the casino refused to pay that man his money. Crockfords has so far been successful in keeping it.
Ivey lost a court decision in October 2014. The 10-time World Series of Poker bracelet winner lost an appeal in November of last year.
The New Jersey native issued a statement Tuesday following the Supreme Court’s decision to hear his case.
“Last November’s Court of Appeal ruling made no sense to me,” Ivey said. “The original trial judge ruled that I was not dishonest and none of the three Appeal Court judges disagreed, and yet the decision went against me by a majority of 2 to 1. I am so pleased that the Supreme Court has granted me permission to fight for what I genuinely believe is the right thing to do in my circumstances, and for the entire gaming industry. I look forward to the Supreme Court reversing the decision against me.”
Ivey’s attorney Matt Dowd also issued a statement praising the Supreme Court.
“Phil and his legal team are delighted that the Supreme Court judges have decided that the Court of Appeal’s decision should be reviewed,” Dowd said. “The Court of Appeal’s ruling left the interpretation of Section 42 of the Gambling Act totally unclear and the decision to grant permission to appeal demonstrates that the Supreme Court agrees with that view.”
Crockfords is owned by Genting Casinos, one of the largest casino operators in the world.
Ivey is fighting in a similar case over in Atlantic City. He edge sorted against Borgata, the city’s largest casino, and was recently ordered to repay about $10 million. Unlike Crockfords, Borgata paid Ivey out before realizing that he had outsmarted the game.

HarryCaray · Feb 28, 2017

Genting has a nice place in London that I frequent when I'm over there. Little neighborhood casino, it's so strange cause it is in a neighborhood and it literally looks like a house. You walk through the front door of this house and it's a casino.

Nice poker scene over there, half the floor space is poker.

Anyway, pay the man his fucking money.

slapshot · Mar 1, 2017

Cheater screw Ivey

niltes · Mar 1, 2017

what does cheater screw ivey mean? it is beyond my reading comprehension abilities.

devocr · Mar 1, 2017

slapshot said:
Cheater screw Ivey

He forgot a comma.

Cheater, screw Ivey.

I agree.

niltes · Mar 1, 2017

ivey cheated? please tell me how?

niltes · Mar 2, 2017

still waiting

SmallDaddy · Mar 2, 2017

If they keep Ivey's money, they better refund every single Baccarat players' money that they kept

niltes · Mar 2, 2017

unfortunately the laws are written with great input from the casinos and
little or none from neutral gambling experts or from anyone that
represents and protects players' rights. as a result casinos in most
cases unless there is a strong and fair gambling commission are
able to manipulate gray area decisions to their benefit and players
rights are NOT protected either by overseeing groups or the courts.

Seymour · Mar 2, 2017

I don't know how UK law works but it's impossible to win on appeal in the US - and he lost the same exact situation in NJ (though I would doubt he willingly refunded the 10m)

slapshot · Mar 2, 2017

niltes said:
ivey cheated? please tell me how?

You know how he did it if you're fine with it ok

I think he cheated

festeringZit · Mar 2, 2017

slapshot said:
You know how he did it if you're fine with it ok

I think he cheated

Say you're playing blackjack, and you notice that the dealer sometimes accidentally exposes their hole-card as they are pulling it out of the shoe.
If you use that information to make your decision, are you cheating?

I think not.

festeringZit · Mar 2, 2017

slapshot said:
You know how he did it if you're fine with it ok

I think he cheated

Say someone has been tracking a roulette wheel for months, and they've noticed that possibly because of wear on the wheel, the ball disproportionately lands on black 17, like maybe 1-2% more than it should. If someone using this information places a bet on black 17, are they cheating?

I think not.

tatehill2000 · Mar 2, 2017

zit is right,,, but even more so,, and i hate to use roulette as an example,, however,,

same is true,,, casinos go to great lengths to make sure a roulette wheel is true,, but if they dont? and if a groove is found?? and a "timer/Clocker" comes in, and begins to work,,, are they then sued?? NOPE,, lol

they are thrown out,, lol,, and banned,,, worst that should happen in this case is he is banned from casino, and he keeps the money,,, its their responsibility to balance the wheel, and as Zit said,,, its their responsibility to train their employees,,

festeringZit · Mar 2, 2017

slapshot said:
You know how he did it if you're fine with it ok

I think he cheated

Do you think card-counting in blackjack is cheating?

I think not.

slapshot · Mar 2, 2017

None of them examples are close to what he did

festeringZit · Mar 2, 2017

slapshot said:
None of them examples are close to what he did

Please explain? They seem very similar to me.

You're saying the fact that he asked them to turn the cards a certain way made it different?

slapshot · Mar 2, 2017

festeringZit said:
Please explain? They seem very similar to me.

You're saying the fact that he asked them to turn the cards a certain way made it different?

Phil brought the bad cards into the game knowing the were bad these were not the casino cards

Phil brought the dealer into the game

who could speak Mandarin and his girl would speak to him and no one knew what the hell they were talking about

like some bad mojo thing that he would believe because of how he was brought up he would turn the cards

Phil brought the shuffle into the game so cards were not washed or turned back around

why did Phil do all of this to play a honest game

Nope

slapshot · Mar 2, 2017

He didn't just walk up and start edge sorting he set the whole scam up

festeringZit · Mar 2, 2017

slapshot said:
Phil brought the bad cards into the game knowing the were bad these were not the casino cards

Phil brought the dealer into the game

who could speak Mandarin and his girl would speak to him and no one knew what the hell they were talking about

like some bad mojo thing that he would believe because of how he was brought up he would turn the cards

Phil brought the shuffle into the game so cards were not washed or turned back around

why did Phil do all of this to play a honest game

Nope

Nope, Not true. Phil did not bring the cards into the game, he only requested that a certain brand of cards be used, and the casino
complied with that request. They were the casinos cards that the casino brought into the game.

'Ivey and Sun allegedly requested several accommodations from the casino "to make the edge sorting scheme work" including a private area in which to play, a dealer who spoke Mandarin Chinese, as well as "(3) a guest (defendant Sun) to sit with him at the table while he played; (4) one 8-deck shoe of purple Gemaco Borgata playing cards to be used for the entirety of each session of play; and (5) an automatic card shuffling device to be used to shuffle the cards after each shoe was dealt, which retained the orientation of each card that Sun requested to be turned," Hillman wrote.'