Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="OzExorcist, post: 2024556, member: 23910"] FYP. Not really much point them making a song and dance about it now, even if they did pay him all the money, because pretty much everyone who read the story forgot about it a long time ago. The only people that are likely to feel they have any personal connection to the story or interest in its outcome are the other high rollers who play at the same casino. And they don't need a news story or a public statement to reassure them - that's what casino hosts and comped expensive dinners are for. Aside from those high rollers, the casino doesn't really have any reason to care what Joe Public's opinion is on whether or not Ivey got his money. One other thing: even if Joe Public [B]was[/B] somehow invested in the outcome of this story, do you really think it'd stop people gambling at the casino? After all we're talking about gamblers, not everyday rational people. Remember it was gamblers that kept playing on Ultimate Bet and Absolute Poker after the superuser scandal. We're not really a very selective bunch when it comes down to it. What you're talking about is the house edge - the mathematical advantage the house has in table games. There's an easy way to tell whether the odds are stacked in favour of the house or the player, by the way: [B]if you're playing against the house, then the odds are in the house's favour.[/B] House edge in the game Ivey was playing, Punto Banco, is in the low 1% range depending on the bets he was making and the exact odds the casino was laying. More info here: [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punto_Banco#Punto_banco[/URL] [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_edge#House_advantage[/URL] That'd be because nobody other than the parties involved has the full facts - the original story contained little more than speculation and there's been no hard info released since. Nor is there likely to be. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us