Phil Ivey Baccarat System

[albionmoonlight]

Kind of an amazing story if you are into such things: Famed poker pro with remarkable $9.6 million scheme has to pay it back, judge rules - The Washington Post

I don't know the law here, but I don't see why card counters just have to leave the casino but Ivey has to pay back the money.

[Butter]

This sounds different than card counting. In card counting, you assume that you know what cards are coming but could still be wrong.

It sounds like here that Ivey's companion KNEW what each card was based on the design on the back of the card. That's not just gaining an edge, that's pretty close to fraud.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

This judgment is almost laughable.

Phil Ivey requested various things for the game session in the high roller's suite. The casino had the right to accept/refuse any of his conditions, including the cards and the rotation of the cards as described in the article. They accepted all his criteria, so he sat down to play.

[bhlloy]

Doesn't the little old lady accept all the conditions of the guy coming to her door selling her stuff, who then proceeds to rinse her of her life savings? Is your argument a casino is a big evil corporation who should know better?

Seems to me like fraud is fraud. If he told the casino that his companion had memorized the backs of the cards and they still let him play with those cards then they are idiots. Otherwise I don't see how he has a leg to stand on.

[larrymcg421]

Yeah, I love Ivey, but this is a clear case of cheating, especially since he's using a partner to pull it off. The casino accepted his request for her to sit at the game, but that doesn't mean they've signed off on her helping him out.

[bhlloy]

I will say reading more the casino are definitely grade A idiots here - I want this one particular woman to sit with me and these exact cards, no reason K? - but that doesn't mean he shouldn't have to pay it back

[tarcone]

I thought this was going to be about doubling your bet every hand. Thought this guy pulled it off.

[Toddzilla]

I mean, he basically asked the casino to put the cards in the shoe face-up since he knew what was coming, and the casino said "sure, why not?".

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

I will say reading more the casino are definitely grade A idiots here - I want this one particular woman to sit with me and these exact cards, no reason K? - but that doesn't mean he shouldn't have to pay it back

Exactly. The casino did everything wrong here, but he's at fault. Not buying it at all. Some of the facts in this judgment set an extremely dangerous precedent regarding the house advantage.

[QuikSand]

For a judge to rule against Ivey here, it just seems like he must not have understood the general framework of casino gambling. Unless the reporting here and elsewhere has missed major elements, I come down very solidly with Ivey -- he asked for absurd but specific accommodations, they accepted them, and then he used them to gain an advantage against the house. That seems totally different than just walking into a house and using some slick sleight-of-hand cheating method to defraud the house.

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

Seems to me like fraud is fraud.

Except the Judge said it wasn't fraud, but rather a breach of contract. I don't think the article mention if Ivey entered into a specific contract with rules regarding sportsmanship or if the judge ruled on an implied promise of non-gamesmanship(?) by players.

On what I hear so far, it seems like the Judge got this wrong. The casino's real beef should be with the company that printed the cards.

[kcchief19]

Exactly. Ivey did not in anyway physically manipulate the game or use any artificial means to give himself an advantage. He used a flaw that the casino itself was solely responsible for. Ivey asked for ridiculous conditions, but the casino fully agreed to the terms.

Here's the rub though. Essentially in New Jersey -- and probably other places too -- it's considered cheating if you alter the odds in your favor in anyway. That essentially allows casino to define any number of techniques as cheating if it improves the player's odds.

It seems ridiculous to me that the casino can claim you are cheating if you detect an error on the part of the casino that improves your odds but don't tell them about it. Yet it's not cheating if the casino notices errors that improve their own odds and don't tell you.

[stevew]

UK casino accuses American poker star Phil Ivey of cheating | Fox News

Is this the US version of this scam he was running in GB?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by stevew

UK casino accuses American poker star Phil Ivey of cheating | Fox News

Is this the US version of this scam he was running in GB?

The difference thus far is that the US casino paid him while the UK casino held back the money. So in the US, Ivey is being sued while in the UK, he's the one suing.

[DanGarion]

The guy is a fucking cheating dick, end of story.

[Landshark44]

i dealt craps to Ivey a bunch of times- it wasn't fun

one of his conditions was that none of the dealers are allowed to talk to him or make any sort of eye contact... I get that he's there to gamble, and not into the small talk.... but craps is a game where there needs to be some communication... i would have to ask his partner "does Mr Ivey want odds on his six"? it was a long night dealing to him-

[digamma]

Do the scam and fucking, cheating dick commenters think that counting cards in black jack is a scam or fucking cheating?

That's an honest question.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by digamma

Do the scam and fucking, cheating dick commenters think that counting cards in black jack is a scam or fucking cheating?

That's an honest question.

Is a second person doing the counting for you and signaling you when to play?

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by Landshark44

i dealt craps to Ivey a bunch of times- it wasn't fun

one of his conditions was that none of the dealers are allowed to talk to him or make any sort of eye contact... I get that he's there to gamble, and not into the small talk.... but craps is a game where there needs to be some communication... i would have to ask his partner "does Mr Ivey want odds on his six"? it was a long night dealing to him-

Sounds like a charming guy. Seriously, being a good poker player entitles you to act like a diva?

[EagleFan]

Basically for a casino, find a way to turn the odds in your favor and you are a cheat. They can do the same to you and everything is fine.


I try to count cards if I play blackjack (really play, not just there for a few hands to relax). Especially if I can find a single deck game. Nothing illegal, just me, myself and I. Multiple times I seemed to have gotten the attention of someone because I was winning well. That is when the pit boss would start asking me if I wanted rated almost every hand. When he wasn't asking me that it was a cocktail waitress asking if I wanted a drink.

After a few hands of them doing that I had enough and took my (their) money and moved on.

So I say bravo to Ivey (but not for being a dick) and think the judge is wrong for asking for repayment.

[Groundhog]

I find it a little funny that people expect casinos to act reasonably when, literally, the only reason they exist is to take your money away from you.

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by digamma

Do the scam and fucking, cheating dick commenters think that counting cards in black jack is a scam or fucking cheating?

That's an honest question.

Regarding counting cards, I would say an individual playing by himself and not using anything but his mind, would not be cheating and in this case card counting would be a skill. Team play and any technology would be cheating. Normally, having a non-player at the table counting cards for you would also be cheating.

This case is somewhat unique because of the setup and the agreed to conditions by the casino. I don't know, it just seems like there is an implied agreement that she would be assisting him in some way, be it "Lady Luck" or something else.

From what I understand of baccarat though, the edge-reading technique employed by Ivey did not substantially alter his odds of successful hands. All it really affected was how much he decided to bet each hand. So by employing this technique, you are not even altering your odds of winning or losing the hand.

[Butter]

What I read, it gave him a 55% edge... so if he was betting big, there were probably some swings, but he could expect to come out ahead. Which he did.

[jbergey22]

I will play at your casino with a card counter, marked cards, private table and electronic shuffler.

Casino "sure"



This is how I look at it. Now that they lost money they dont want to pay the debt. If Ivey had lost money they would have invited him back with open arms with the same setup.

Casino should have either denied the request or atleast been suspicious and set a limit on how much they would allow Ivey to take them for under the conditions they set forth.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

This case is somewhat unique because of the setup and the agreed to conditions by the casino.

I'll pick this out as a point of difference. It's not "somewhat unique" (sic) -- it's 100% completely different, and that completely upends the fact pattern and the appropriate response.

He didn't show up and subvert their rules with this ridiculous setup - where I'd likely agree with people saying he unfairly cheated them and deserves to lose this case. No, he explicitly asked for every single thing in his setup as a condition of playing, they explicitly accepted, and then they balked at the eventual result. They made a contract. The casino now wants to break it. And a stupid judge seems to be baffled by this.

[Butter]

Did he tell them why he wanted the lady there? If he did and he lied about it just saying she's "good luck" or something, would that not be fraud?

Obviously no idea if this happened or not, but just wondering.

[larrymcg421]

If the casino agrees to let him have a friend sit at the same table, does that mean they are consenting to anything that person does? That's what I don't get here. At no point do I see where the casino agreed to let Ivey and his friend work together.

[Ned Doolittle]

This was a win-win for the casino from day one. Agree to his conditions and one of two outcomes was favorable: he either loses outright playing under conditions he specified or he wins under those conditions and they sue him for being a cheat.

This is why I don't gamble in casinos. I have a lot of vices but gambling thankfully is not one of them.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

If the casino agrees to let him have a friend sit at the same table, does that mean they are consenting to anything that person does? That's what I don't get here. At no point do I see where the casino agreed to let Ivey and his friend work together.

They didn't, and that's the issue. I'll agree with those who have no problem with card counting, etc., if the person is doing it themselves. Ivey had someone do the work for him and signal him how to play. That's undoubtably cheating and he should have to give the money back.

[Bobble]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

They didn't, and that's the issue. I'll agree with those who have no problem with card counting, etc., if the person is doing it themselves. Ivey had someone do the work for him and signal him how to play. That's undoubtably cheating and he should have to give the money back.

I don't really get the difference. It's the same game of chance whoever gets in on the decision making. If Mrs. B and I go play blackjack and she asks me if she should double down, are we cheating?

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by Bobble

I don't really get the difference. It's the same game of chance whoever gets in on the decision making. If Mrs. B and I go play blackjack and she asks me if she should double down, are we cheating?

Has she spent months memorizing defects in a specific deck of cards and then sat at the table without actually playing herself?

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Bobble

I don't really get the difference. It's the same game of chance whoever gets in on the decision making. If Mrs. B and I go play blackjack and she asks me if she should double down, are we cheating?

Or what if I realize that there is a really good player, maybe a card counter, at my table and I start matching his bets. Am I cheating?

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by digamma

Or what if I realize that there is a really good player, maybe a card counter, at my table and I start matching his bets. Am I cheating?

If you personally arranged for the card counter to be there, and deliberately withheld the information from the casino that he was a card counter despite given the opportunity to do so, yeah I would think so

[Bobble]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

Has she spent months memorizing defects in a specific deck of cards and then sat at the table without actually playing herself?

Say, she has. Seems like you're saying that is wrong. Why? It's the exact same game of chance that the casino is offering. It's the exact same deck of cards that the casino has always used. If I read a book about gambling strategy written by someone else, I'm utilizing the knowledge of someone other than myself. Is that cheating? Is it criminal that the big, bad gamblers are teaming up on the poor, innocent casino?

I don't really have a dog in this fight but it seems to me that as long as I'm playing the game as the casino is offering it, I should be fine. If they don't want card counting, add more decks. If the cards they use can be read from the back, change 'em. If you think my strange requests might be giving me an advantage, refuse them. Boot me out if you think I'm winning too much but I don't think they should be able to sue me for the winnings after I agree to play the game as you offered it.

[Carman Bulldog]

I'm still baffled by this. The casino should be going after the card manufacturer. For those that believe Ivey was in the wrong, would you feel differently if...

a. He had been alone and had memorized the defect and was doing the edge-reading himself or;

b. The girl at the table was the one doing the betting and the edge reading, with Ivey "advising" her on how to bet.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

I'm still baffled by this. The casino should be going after the card manufacturer. For those that believe Ivey was in the wrong, would you feel differently if...

a. He had been alone and had memorized the defect and was doing the edge-reading himself or;

b. The girl at the table was the one doing the betting and the edge reading, with Ivey "advising" her on how to bet.

No problem with a since he's the one playing. Big problem with b as it's clearly cheating. It's a game where a single player is making the bets. Having any help from another person is cheating.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by stevew

UK casino accuses American poker star Phil Ivey of cheating | Fox News

Is this the US version of this scam he was running in GB?

US poker star Phil Ivey loses UK case, won't get millions

Looks like he lost this bet.

[albionmoonlight]

Borgata Finally Settles $10M Edge-Sorting Case With Phil Ivey

This has apparently been in the courts this whole time.

But now appears to be coming to an end with a settlement after arbitration.

[QuikSand]

I recognize I'm in the minority here, but this still upsets me. It's dressed up as high concept math and fraud, but bottom line this is just like the investment banks getting taxpayer bailouts after all their horseshit leading to the great recession and millions of Americans losing their financial well being. Awful.

[Carman Bulldog]

There's actually a good 30 for 30 Podcast episode on this for anyone interested.