- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: $9.6M "stolen" by "cheating" at casino
Posted on 10/9/14 at 9:14 am to Robin Masters
Posted on 10/9/14 at 9:14 am to Robin Masters
quote:
Ive already posted the NJ statute on cheating in this thread.
And ignored people that told you how it didn't apply.
quote:
Pretty clear that what Ivey engaged in was a "fraudulent scheme" as evidenced by his careful selection of playing partners, card brand and dealers, oh and his knowledge of what the cards were.
All information that the casino had and agreed to. It's actually perfect that you put fraudulent in quotes, because what you describe does not fit the following definition at all:
quote:
obtained, done by, or involving deception, especially criminal deception.
There was no deception. He was upfront about it with the casino, and the casino agreed to it. That is on them. Especially since they have employees whose job it is to know these kinds of things.
quote:
The courts have a long history of siding with the casinos when there are errors in the machines/equipment.
Well that doesn't scream corruption at all.
0
Posted on 10/9/14 at 9:15 am to Robin Masters
quote:
What is the basis for appeal?
What is the basis for appeal in any case? But please, dodge the question.
Posted on 10/9/14 at 9:16 am to Scooba
quote:
don't play cards in casinos, but does asking a dealer to flip cards a certain way or shuffle only one way as to align all the cards not tip a dealer off to something?
Does that happen frequently at tables? Superstition?
I don't know. Ive never played Baccarrat. Obviously the casino didn't know Ivey knew what the cards were. He tricked them and by legal definition that is fraud. I know we all want to stick it to the casino but legally Ivey is wrong.
Posted on 10/9/14 at 9:18 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
What is the basis for appeal in any case? But please, dodge the question.
You don't just get to appeal because you want to. There has to be a reason. The reason for an appeal in this case might factor into my decision on this case and would be reflected in the answer to your question.
Posted on 10/9/14 at 9:21 am to Robin Masters
quote:
You don't just get to appeal because you want to. There has to be a reason.
quote:
The reason for an appeal in this case might factor into my decision on this case and would be reflected in the answer to your question.
Just answer the damn question already. I'll ask again. If he (through however means you'd like to think up) wins an appeal, how will you process that? One court said one thing, and another will have said something different.
Or even better, what if he lost this case, but wins in NJ?
Posted on 10/9/14 at 9:24 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
Just answer the damn question already. I'll ask again. If he (through however means you'd like to think up) wins an appeal, how will you process that? One court said one thing, and another will have said something different.
Or even better, what if he lost this case, but wins in NJ?
He won't. If I'm dreaming up fictional scenarios I'd rather think about me banging 3 co-ed at the same time.
Gotta get back to work.
Posted on 10/9/14 at 9:25 am to Robin Masters
quote:
He won't.
Question dodged again.
Posted on 10/9/14 at 9:57 am to Robin Masters
quote:
don't play cards in casinos, but does asking a dealer to flip cards a certain way or shuffle only one way as to align all the cards not tip a dealer off to something? Does that happen frequently at tables? Superstition?
Watched a documentary a while back about high rollers in Vegas and AC, it is not uncommon for them to negotiate certain things before they get to the casino. Players can get a discount on losses, x amount of free play on so much total money played, certain hand gestures meaning something, and if the dealer doesn’t catch it, its a free bet, etc... So to answer your question, no it wouldn’t tip off a dealer if a big player asked for certain things to happen. Now if Joe Shmoe goes in and sits at a $10 table, I doubt they would accommodate him.
ETA: It'd done so the player gains some of the built in advantage the casino has on the games.
This post was edited on 10/9/14 at 10:00 am
Posted on 10/9/14 at 11:59 am to Robin Masters
quote:
Robin
No problem with you disagreeing, but your comparisons are beyond weak. The CASION put the cards in play, not Ivey. The casino bought them, the casino opened them, and the "experts" at the casino approved them well ahead of time. Only then did they accept and agree to the contract.
Not only that, it is beyond arguing that they are dealing with a person considered one of, if not the, best card gambler in the world. If there is an advantage to be had, he would have a knowledge of it. They cannot act like some guy walked in and started counting cards. If so, it has been established, they would still have to let him cash out and ask him not to return. All a card counter does is use his KNOWLEDGE to gain and advantage that other normal gamblers don't have.
Ivey is a pro, they knew it and they invited it, therefore they invited the extra risk.
Quick question...on roulette, the put the dice in a spin device to make sure they are legal. Then they let the dice go into play. After that, if you win 1 million dollars because you notice the dice lands on 4 often, then they have no one to blame but themselves if you win big and leave the casino. How is that cheating on your part? Because you used you eyes to notice an edge? So you should bet the other way to make sure you don't cheat?
Now use the same situation with cards. They bring em in, they inspect them, and they live by their decision.
Have you ever been to a casino where the pitboss comes over and tells you not to hit, effectively taking away the house advantage that they have built in for themselves? It's simple, you go in fully aware they have a house advantage. They went in with Ivey fully aware of his mental edge and also OK'd the playing cards via their protocols..
Posted on 10/9/14 at 12:13 pm to twoliter
quote:
I've never understood how this is considered cheating. Especially "cheating" enough to get in trouble for it. The way I see it, the casino is at fault for their own losses for using defective cards. Think about it, if you noticed all the face cards had a different pattern or color or shade on them compared to non-face cards, would you not use that to your advantage? I don't see how it's any different than knowing when another player is bluffing by noticing changes in their behavior.
Casinos have figured out players bet (and lose) more when they drink, so they shower victims, err, players with alcohol. They would do better to simply sweep these events under the rug and trespass players like Ivey in the future. They won't win in court, as Uston proved in Atlantic City.
Posted on 10/9/14 at 1:12 pm to Robin Masters
quote:
I don't know. Ive never played Baccarrat
Lulzzzzz
No offense, but I couldn't help notice you ignored my earlier response to you.
Every game in the casino is situated to give the house an edge. You as the player, ignorantly or willingly agree to play.
In a similar fashion the Casino had time to perform due diligence in this case and made a mistake. Wasn't cheating. Not a chance. He clearly gave them the conditions in which he was willing to play in advance. They reviewed and agreed to those terms.
The due diligence falls on the casino and it's nothing short of incompetence.
Not Guilty.
Posted on 10/9/14 at 1:14 pm to Signature
quote:
Every game in the casino is situated to give the house an edge. You as the player, ignorantly or willingly agree to play.
In a similar fashion the Casino had time to perform due diligence in this case and made a mistake. Wasn't cheating. Not a chance. He clearly gave them the conditions in which he was willing to play in advance. They reviewed and agreed to those terms.
He had to "get back to work" when I made the same point.
Posted on 10/9/14 at 1:15 pm to Byron Bojangles III
quote:Are you retarded? Serious question.
That still isn't illegal. They just asked the dealer to flip the cards a certain way. Does that mean they paid the dealer? No.
Posted on 10/9/14 at 1:23 pm to Signature
quote:
The due diligence falls on the casino and it's nothing short of incompetence.
Equipement failures have caused many patrons to "win" jackpots that they were refused due to a software malfunction.
quote:
n a similar fashion the Casino had time to perform due diligence in this case and made a mistake. Wasn't cheating. Not a chance. He clearly gave them the conditions in which he was willing to play in advance. They reviewed and agreed to those terms.
So Ivey knowing what some of the cards were was part of their pre-arranged deal?
quote:
Every game in the casino is situated to give the house an edge. You as the player, ignorantly or willingly agree to play.
Yes, its a highly regulated industry and the house is allowed only a certain edge which is well known and easily researched.
For the record I don't care either way and I certainly don't care if a casino loses money but in looking at the law and the precedent I don't see how Ivey will keep his money. Although I think if I played Ivey head to head, lost a ton of money and later found out he knew the value of some of the cards I would feel cheated. Most any sane person would.
Posted on 10/9/14 at 1:30 pm to go ta hell ole miss
quote:
They won't win in court, as Uston proved in Atlantic City.
You really think counting cards is the same thing as knowing the actual value of a card or cards?
This post was edited on 10/9/14 at 1:31 pm
Posted on 10/9/14 at 1:31 pm to Robin Masters
quote:
You really think counting cards is the same thing as knowing the actual value of a card or cards?
Shouldn't the casino be suing the makers of the cards if anything? Ivey didn't mark the cards.
Posted on 10/9/14 at 1:43 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:I agree if it was flawed cards that he coincidentally noticed. However, if the dealer was in on it, whole different ballgame.
Ivey didn't mark the cards.
Posted on 10/9/14 at 1:45 pm to The Mick
quote:
I agree if it was flawed cards that he coincidentally noticed. However, if the dealer was in on it, whole different ballgame.
It was a design "defect" by the manufacturer. Defect isn't really the right word, but they were manufactured in such a way that a good player could gain an advantage. That's not cheating AS LONG AS the casino knew what cards he requested ahead of time, which is clearly the case here.
Posted on 10/9/14 at 1:49 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
Shouldn't the casino be suing the makers of the cards if anything? Ivey didn't mark the cards
I feel pretty certain they have looked into it but the fact that they are going after Ivey should tell you where the law is on this.
So if this were to happen at the WSOP and Ivey was the only one who noticed that the cards were defective and he used it to win. You wouldn't consider that cheating? You dont think the other players would consider that cheating? The WSOP wouldnt feel like their brand was tarnished and the integrity of the game was undermined?
Posted on 10/9/14 at 1:51 pm to Robin Masters
quote:
So if this were to happen at the WSOP and Ivey was the only one who noticed that the cards were defective and he used it to win. You wouldn't consider that cheating?
Obviously not. Is it his fault he noticed something the manufacturer messed up?
quote:
You dont think the other players would consider that cheating?
I highly doubt it. And you don't know the answer to that, so don't act like you do.
quote:
The WSOP wouldnt feel like their brand was tarnished and the integrity of the game was undermined?
I would assume they wouldn't use that particular type of card again. But it's not like it is something only Ivey could know. The advantage is right there for anyone astute enough to notice. Ivey didn't put it there. Why should he be penalized for being observant?
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News