Phil Ivey denied $11 million win...

[horses4courses]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I have an honest question, H4C:

A well-known professional gambler walks in the place where you work, holding several million dollars in cash...and wants to play some baccarat with slightly modified rules. Who is it that ultimately makes this decision?

Director of Table Games, or the General Manager

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by horses4courses

Director of Table Games, or the General Manager

That's what I thought. And I think it's safe to assume that the same people probably made that decision at the London casino too...no? Now...are these the sort of people who get easily "starstruck"?

[horses4courses]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

That's what I thought. And I think it's safe to assume that the same people probably made that decision at the London casino too...no? Now...are these the sort of people who get easily "starstruck"?

I see your point.
Whoever made the call, it was a bad one.

Still, defective cards were outside their control.
That's how the judges seem to see it, at least.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by horses4courses

I see your point.
Whoever made the call, it was a bad one.

I agree. This was the sort of decision which should have caused heads to roll. I wonder if that was the case...

[Dark Horse]

Originally Posted by horses4courses

In Ivey's case, the game was compromised, and he knew it.

He had about a 5-6% edge. Exactly how compromised is that? What about sports bettors who win at a 55-56 ATS clip? It means that he could still lose on any given night.

The main point, to me, is that the London casino free rolled him. As soon as they realized the deck was stacked against them, they should have informed Ivey. A classy place would have paid him his winning up until then, and told him to leave. Instead, they let him play. Because he could lose... In other words, they cheated as much as they accuse Ivey of cheating. They knew, at one point, that they wouldn't pay him. Free rolling is a big no-no. A judge is not going to pick that up, but gamblers know.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by horses4courses

I see your point.
Whoever made the call, it was a bad one.

Still, defective cards were outside their control.
That's how the judges seem to see it, at least.

When the casino allowed the defective cards into the game, they assumed control imho. At least can we agree that Phil Ivey had less control of the cards compared to the casino? He didn't make the cards, bring them to the game, nor alter them in any fashion. He played by the rules granted him by the casino. What did Ivey do wrong?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by tucker6

When the casino allowed the defective cards into the game, they assumed control imho. At least can we agree that Phil Ivey had less control of the cards compared to the casino? He didn't make the cards, bring them to the game, nor alter them in any fashion. He played by the rules granted him by the casino. What did Ivey do wrong?

He didn't lose.

[lamboguy]

Phil Ivey got screwed in this deal, but i wonder how many other casino's he got with bad cards. from the bottom of my heart, i wish that he beat them for more millions than he got them for, and got all those guys in suits to their knees just like they do to most of their customer's that walk in those joints.

[_______]

Originally Posted by TJDave

It is never a fair game. Casinos write the rules and have an edge. The only way the gambler wins is by sheer luck... or cheating.

Or playing a game where the casino takes a rake in a player vs. player bet and being good enough to overcome the rake.

[horses4courses]

Originally Posted by _______

Or playing a game where the casino takes a rake in a player vs. player bet and being good enough to overcome the rake.

It amazes me how people expect casinos to run games
that have no theoretical win percentage for the house.

Just go ahead and build the facilities, staff them,
pay the utilities and insurance, plus any other overheads
you might care to name. That's what the player wants,
or even expects.

Then there's the "look at all the lives they have ruined" types.
Alcohol and drugs have done far more damage to our society,
but this "vice" is legal, so it's much easier to criticize.

Now, I'm not saying that casinos are fun-filled amusement parks.
There is definitely a downside to some of the activities.
I have spent a fair portion of the last 28 years in US casinos.
I can definitely state that I have seen far more people having
fun inside them than not. I have also known many people who
have worked in them, and earned a decent living.

Sure, casinos have their faults, but do you think this
country would be better off if they didn't exist?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by horses4courses

It amazes me how people expect casinos to run games
that have no theoretical win percentage for the house.

Just go ahead and build the facilities, staff them,
pay the utilities and insurance, plus any other overheads
you might care to name. That's what the player wants,
or even expects.

Then there's the "look at all the lives they have ruined" types.
Alcohol and drugs have done far more damage to our society,
but this "vice" is legal, so it's much easier to criticize.

Now, I'm not saying that casinos are fun-filled amusement parks.
There is definitely a downside to some of the activities.
I have spent a fair portion of the last 28 years in US casinos.
I can definitely state that I have seen far more people having
fun inside them than not. I have also known many people who
have worked in them, and earned a decent living.

Sure, casinos have their faults, but do you think this
country would be better off if they didn't exist?

They overdo it sometimes, H4C...and they piss the players off as a result.

I was at the craps tables one night at the Mirage...and a guy was throwing the dice for what had to be at least half an hour. I had tried to cut into the game about 15 minutes prior, but there was no empty spot at the table to be found. The only player at the table who wasn't betting $1,000 chips was the shooter...and all the players there were making a killing. The shooter's style was to toss the dice into the air higher than normal, but he knew what he was doing...and he always kept the dice on the table.

Well...after about half an hour of this, a pit boss approaches the shooter and announces in a voice loud enough for everyone to hear:

"Bring the dice down a little bit, sir. Any higher and they'll bring down rain".

The shooter gets flustered and intimidated by the pit boss...and adjusts his toss on the very next roll. And he sevens out. A coincidence, I know, but you should have seen the reaction of the players...who all departed from the table in great haste, after giving the pit boss a piece of their mind.

Why mess with people who are having a good time and are doing nothing wrong? The casino always wins out in the end...so, why not show a little class when it's the players' turn to win?

[horses4courses]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

They overdo it sometimes, H4C...and they piss the players off as a result.

I was at the craps tables one night at the Mirage...and a guy was throwing the dice for what had to be at least half an hour. I had tried to cut into the game about 15 minutes prior, but there was no empty spot at the table to be found. The only player at the table who wasn't betting $1,000 chips was the shooter...and all the players there were making a killing. The shooter's style was to toss the dice into the air higher than normal, but he knew what he was doing...and he always kept the dice on the table.

Well...after about half an hour of this, a pit boss approaches the shooter and announces in a voice loud enough for everyone to hear:

"Bring the dice down a little bit, sir. Any higher and they'll bring down rain".

The shooter gets flustered and intimidated by the pit boss...and adjusts his toss on the very next toss. And he sevens out. A coincidence, I know, but you should have seen the reaction of the players...who all departed from the table in haste.

Why mess with people who are having a good time and are doing nothing wrong? The casino always wins out in the end...so, why not show a little class when it's the players' turn to win?

Nobody's perfect.....some of the bosses sweat every dime.

As long as the shooter is hitting the back wall of the table,
he can throw them near the ceiling.

[dirty moose]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

They overdo it sometimes, H4C...and they piss the players off as a result.

I was at the craps tables one night at the Mirage...and a guy was throwing the dice for what had to be at least half an hour. I had tried to cut into the game about 15 minutes prior, but there was no empty spot at the table to be found. The only player at the table who wasn't betting $1,000 chips was the shooter...and all the players there were making a killing. The shooter's style was to toss the dice into the air higher than normal, but he knew what he was doing...and he always kept the dice on the table.

Well...after about half an hour of this, a pit boss approaches the shooter and announces in a voice loud enough for everyone to hear:

"Bring the dice down a little bit, sir. Any higher and they'll bring down rain".

The shooter gets flustered and intimidated by the pit boss...and adjusts his toss on the very next roll. And he sevens out. A coincidence, I know, but you should have seen the reaction of the players...who all departed from the table in great haste, after giving the pit boss a piece of their mind.

Why mess with people who are having a good time and are doing nothing wrong? The casino always wins out in the end...so, why not show a little class when it's the players' turn to win?

**** THE MIRAGE! I had a problem there years ago. I'll never gamble another dime in that shit hole.

I was out there for a wedding, Mirage was the only spot we were doing any kind of winning at. We had been at the table long enough for the dealers to know a friend and I.

At the point in the shooters roll I had all the bases covered. Had maybe $110 on the inside. I also had a pass line bet. Point was a nine. Shooter threw the dice, one die landed on a 4, the other landed half on a chip and half off. If you rolled the die one way, it was a 7, the other it was a nine.

Dealer calls it 7. Not the box man but the pig dealer. We screamed out to no avail. We protested to the pit boss, he said "if you don't like it, play else where".

I'll never been seen in that casino ever again. We still talk about that story to this day.

Moose.

[Robert Fischer]

Would a casino have any incentive to cheat by increasing their edge?

We know that they win in the long run, due to the dynamics of the rules giving them a built-in edge, but would there be any logical reasoning that having an additional edge could be to they're advantage?? (e.g. reducing exposure to large wagers and streaks etc...)?


The reason I ask is because

• a) I am ignorant and don't know the answer
• and b) we have just taken the soundbite of the article to be true, but we haven't done much questioning as to who put the cards in there, and who knew , and who benefited.

It's possible that Ivey's informant was the only one who knew, but it's also possible that a much larger group was in the know than what is assumed.


I think it is pretty certain that to think Ivey 'discovered' an imperfection is naive. He was certainly informed.


So who put the marked cards in place? Was it for Ivey? Was it bigger? Is it possible that the Casino knew?

[horses4courses]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

Would a casino have any incentive to cheat by increasing their edge?

We know that they win in the long run, due to the dynamics of the rules giving them a built-in edge, but would there be any logical reasoning that having an additional edge could be to they're advantage?? (e.g. reducing exposure to large wagers and streaks etc...)?


The reason I ask is because

• a) I am ignorant and don't know the answer
• and b) we have just taken the soundbite of the article to be true, but we haven't done much questioning as to who put the cards in there, and who knew , and who benefited.

It's possible that Ivey's informant was the only one who knew, but it's also possible that a much larger group was in the know than what is assumed.


I think it is pretty certain that to think Ivey 'discovered' an imperfection is naive. He was certainly informed.


So who put the marked cards in place? Was it for Ivey? Was it bigger? Is it possible that the Casino knew?

Manufacturing flaw in how the cards are cut.
Machine cutting made some edges have a detectable pattern for certain cards.
I don't know the details, or the manufacturer.
I also do not know how long before the London incident that flawed cards
were first noticed in other casinos throughout the world.

There are reports that some people knew of the flaw months before.
It definitely was not done specifically for Ivey.
He was just along for the ride.