I’m sure a lot of you are aware of, or maybe have even discussed, the situation that Phil Ivey found himself in with Genting Casino.
A short version of the story:
Genting Casino invite Phil Ivey to play at one of their locations. I believe he is allowed to choose the game, bet size, and deck. He chooses a form of baccarat and requests a guest with a private room, which is granted.
Turns out Phil Ivey had invited an “edge-sorting” professional, as he knew a certain deck at that casino had errors on the backs which helped identify denominations. He won over $7 million that night.
When this went to court, Phil Ivey was honest about what he had done, claiming the casino set the rules and he just played by them. He didn’t bring the cards.
A jury decided he was dishonest and voted in favour of the casino. Phil Ivey’s winnings were withheld.
Who do you think should have won this court battle?
A short version of the story:
Genting Casino invite Phil Ivey to play at one of their locations. I believe he is allowed to choose the game, bet size, and deck. He chooses a form of baccarat and requests a guest with a private room, which is granted.
Turns out Phil Ivey had invited an “edge-sorting” professional, as he knew a certain deck at that casino had errors on the backs which helped identify denominations. He won over $7 million that night.
When this went to court, Phil Ivey was honest about what he had done, claiming the casino set the rules and he just played by them. He didn’t bring the cards.
A jury decided he was dishonest and voted in favour of the casino. Phil Ivey’s winnings were withheld.
Who do you think should have won this court battle?
