Joined: Apr '11
Location: Romania
Age: 58 (M)
Posts: 2432
Crockfords Casino has claimed that Phil Ivey used a technique known as "turning" to win £7.8 million. According to an article , Ivey and his female accomplice were able to read the back of each card because of an imperfection in their design. Because the cards hadn't been cut properly during the manufacturing process, the diamonds on the back weren't symmetrical. This flaw allowed Ivey to know when the cards were in his favour. While Ivey wasn't allowed to touch the cards during the game, it's believed his female companion asked for certain cards to be rotated 180 degrees in order to read the imperfections. To further add credence to Crockfords' suspicions, Ivey asked for the deck to be held in the shoe overnight and that the cards not destroyed. It's also claimed that the female observer had previously been banned from two Las Vegas casinos following similar incidents.
Joined: May '08
Location: Lithuania
Age: 39 (M)
Posts: 10090
i think ivey will not get the money back, actually he should consider himself lucky to escape without any punishments from the officials: 1) female that accompanied ivey was banned from a casino for the same thing 2) isn't this a coincidence that improperly cut deck appeared at the casino once ivey and his banned female companion was playing. 3) how the hell casino haven't spotted the issue when they have been asked to rotate cards 180 degrees- doesn't that sound at the very least suspicious...especially when someone is winning millions? 4) ivey asked for the same deck to be held overnight? wow - what imbeciles...whenever player stars winning deck should be changed or shoe reshuffled...
Joined: Dec '10
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 70 (M)
Posts: 206
oi who supplied the cards
Ivey NO His accomplish NO The dealer NO The Casino YES
Has Ivey confirmed he had an accomplish I doubt it.
Has the Casino suspended his win due to the casino providing an imperfect deck ?
Has Ivey done anything wrong because he picked up the flaw in the deck of cards provided by the casino NO.
The Casino should reduce the amount won by Ivey to 50% and pay him, the rest should be shared out to all players who played a hand at the same table when Ivey was in the hands, and not every hand played at that same table, when Ivey didn't play in the hand and mucked his cards the table was in my view played straight has no others seem to have picked up on the flaw, this would be fair to Ivey and the rest of the players at the table has mentioned above.
The casino should pick up the loss for carrying out at that time a game of cards when the cards were imperfect.
I am sure Ivey will be perusing to have his winnings paid to him in total if they are suspended, but a chop would be the fairer method don't you think.
Joined: May '13
Location: Ireland
Age: 50 (M)
Posts: 54
Be under no illusions, Ivey is a gambling degenerate, he is also ultra competitive and will win by any means necessary, we can see similar goings on every week on pro soccer pitches and in last few weeks on the fairways with Woods gaining unfair advantage without a thought for anybody else. It is a sad state of affairs but unfortunately for every 'winner' there is a loser and empathy is not a part of the vocabulary in the 'High Stakes' circuit of professionalism.
Joined: Mar '09
Location: Greece
Age: 47 (F)
Posts: 14136
Havent went through all this so far. In terms doing a search to see if everything that being said lately about Ivey is true. If thats the case i wonder how they still allow him to play poker. Because he has lots of money?
Joined: Apr '11
Location: Romania
Age: 35 (M)
Posts: 6669
This way they find to defend themselves is pretty weak if you ask me...
I mean Ivey did not get those cards to use on their casino, plus they don't really can prove that he used that technique... I think they don't have the money to pay him.
Joined: Sep '11
Location: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Age: 41 (M)
Posts: 3048
Casino's cards, the casino agreed to up the limit, and the dealer turned the cards when asked. The casino could have not turned the cards, refused to bet at any time and could have switched to different decks. This guy deserves the money. He was smarter, faster, and knew the game better than the house. HOUSE LOOSES. He did not cheat.
wow what a crazy story. It's kinda hard to say who's fault it is in that episode.. Ivey was just smarter than the casino I think. Usually they would beat the heck out of that guy but it's Phil Ivey lol
Joined: Feb '12
Location: Canada
Age: 64 (M)
Posts: 6036
The only thing that makes me wonder is that chick he was with that was accused by and banned by other casinos... Other than that, I don't think the casino has much of a case... although, the card turning thing DOES smell a little fishy...
...but the cards were supplied by the casino... who knows,....
Joined: May '08
Location: Lithuania
Age: 39 (M)
Posts: 10090
anyways will be interesting to see how this unfolds...lots of various comments, some support ivey some casino...btw lost of mobsters point out that casino supplies the cards- this is not true: casino orders them from suppliers/manufacturers...and considering that ivey's companion was banned for same reason from other casinos there might be a situation where she has good contacts with someone working for the manufacturer...anyways lets give this time and see the outcome (p.s. i still think ivey will not get his winnings back)
Joined: Dec '10
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 70 (M)
Posts: 206
Ivey wont get his money back you think so do you, put it this way the casino will loose the $7.8 million dollars they lost to Ivey and will loose another several million in legal fees, it was an employee of the casino who was employed by the casino management who probably supplied the cards to the casino floor so don't you think you mite change your statement pochui. were is there any case what so ever for the casino to pass the buck its just going to be a very expensive buck to pass if they to don't you think.
Ivey has already taken out a law suit to have his money paid to him, look in the news on BRMOB, some one here isn't up to speed here don't you think.
Joined: Mar '09
Location: Greece
Age: 47 (F)
Posts: 14136
My curiosity on this is minimal So if i see any other news regarding this matter here in BRM i will read it. But if you ask me i would like the casino to be right. Never liked Ivey in the first place.
Joined: May '08
Location: Lithuania
Age: 39 (M)
Posts: 10090
@simon: yeah i know of the lawsuit, so what- what i'm trying to say is that we should wait for the outcome of the lawsuit...i'm pretty sure ivey has informed casino before he had taken legal action that this is going to end up in court...as you see casino didn't have anything against that...probably they have their arguments?
i'm not saying that i'm right or wrong...this is just an interesting story to observe & if i had to pick the "winner" of this dues i would go with casino.
Joined: Sep '12
Location: Romania
Age: 33 (M)
Posts: 1052
I'm happy because he won't get his money back and i'll be happy if someone will take action regarding this way of cheating... anyone who played on LAS VEGAS or that people who saw Casino with Robert De Niro know what happen when someone try to cheat the casino. I like the Arab rule... if you steal with left hand then you'll lose your left hand
