We Remember The Magic Café We Remember
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The Gambling Spot » » Judge: Poker Pro Phil Ivey Cheated At Casino (4 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4 [Next]
JasonEngland
View Profile
V.I.P.
Las Vegas, NV
1589 Posts

Profile of JasonEngland
Arnold,

I think what Artie was saying is that Crockford's doesn't actually think a crime was committed or they would have sought to have Phil arrested. I don't care how big of a gambler he is, when someone tries to rob you of $12,000,000 (or the UK equivalent), you don't try and handle it by simply not paying. You call the cops.

As for murder, rape, etc., it's true that people get away with these crimes all the time, but they're also routinely arrested for those crimes at the very least! The getting away with it part comes when they're acquitted at trial usually.

Phil was not only not arrested, but probably could not have been arrested even if Crockford's had wanted him to be. Law enforcement in the UK (and in the US in the Borgata case) hasn't said a peep about the case. Why not? Because they almost certainly think that what he did wouldn't be found illegal in a criminal case. Prosecutor's don't like cases they can't win, but they sure love a slam dunk case. Notice they're staying away in droves on this one. What does that tell you?

It tells me what Phil did wasn't illegal. Sneaky? Sure. In violation of some UK "gambling contract" precepts? Perhaps. In violation of the actual cheating laws? No.

Jason
Eternal damnation awaits anyone who questions God's unconditional love. --Bill Hicks
AMcD
View Profile
Inner circle
stacking for food!
3097 Posts

Profile of AMcD
AMcD
View Profile
Inner circle
stacking for food!
3097 Posts

Profile of AMcD
And the judgement:

https://wwwdotapheatdotnet.files.wordpre......ent1.pdf

Thanks to the World Game Protection letter.
Artie Fufkin
View Profile
Special user
857 Posts

Profile of Artie Fufkin
Those documents indicate that at no time was ivey considered by any associated party to have committed the criminal offense of cheating, and at no time was he in violation of any law that would result in arrest, prosecution, or penalty.
(factual proof being that he was never arrested, charged, or caused to serve time behind bars)

he was simply denied his winnings for reasons that were circuitously clarified as being related to an unapproved and unexpected advantage play.
AMcD
View Profile
Inner circle
stacking for food!
3097 Posts

Profile of AMcD
Man, I explained myself 10 times here...

I don't care about what the judges said or considered. It's about money and in such cases rarely the words "justice" or "reasons" are relevant. From the beginning, I've always talked about ethics, not laws. As I said many times, because you are not arrested, sentenced, etc, does not mean you are not guilty for real, at all! Just open your newspaper and check how many scandals there are EVERY day. Just take a look at politicians! Always embezzling money yet never (according to their lack of sentences) guilty!

I was the first to say PI deserved his money, what he did was clever. I also mentioned several times how stupid the casino was and how silly their request was because, after all, they accepted all the requests from the crew. Etc.

BUT, ethically, what they did was cheating. They asked for some cards to be turned, in order to recognize them from their backs. In clear, they asked for the deck to be marked. Cleverly, sure, but they played with marked cards. And that, it's cheating! I could fill 2 pages about the fact that all was planed from the start. The woman was involved in same affairs before, the fact she could speak the dealer's language, etc. But I'm fed up about all this.

PI is nice, sexy, rich, famous, clever, a good soul, anything you want, a hero, you can even erect a statue as a tribute to him if you please, I don't mind! I have nothing against him. But FOR ME, it was not advantage play, it was cheating. I'D REALLY LIKE TO KNOW WHAT IS CHEATING FOR YOU if marking a deck is not considered as cheating...

I don't say I'm right, it's just my opinion based on ethics. Now, if you just reason according money and laws, that's your way of thinking not mine and I wish you good luck in real life.

Personally, it's my last answer about that story. As long as people may seem interested, I may keep to post a few news if I run across any.

Cordially.
Artie Fufkin
View Profile
Special user
857 Posts

Profile of Artie Fufkin
Your breathless diatribe ignores, and willfully dismisses far too many hard facts in this case to be taken very seriously
AMcD
View Profile
Inner circle
stacking for food!
3097 Posts

Profile of AMcD
"PI is not a cheat because he hasn't been arrested as a cheat". Your own diatribe is obviously far superior...

I "willfully" dismiss nothing. It's just that you have problems with my (yet) very basic English. I'm talking about ethics. To me, someone marking cards is a cheat. Whatever the way he uses. Is that clear enough? An advantage player is someone using his brain, computing odds, counting cards, etc. These are not your standards, your definitions? Sorry about that.

I strongly suggest you never play cards in Europe, you may face problems with our ethic Smile.
0pus
View Profile
Inner circle
New Jersey
1733 Posts

Profile of 0pus
I thought it was amusing that Crockfords finds "advantage play" to be unacceptable. Isn't that exactly what casinos (including Crockfords) are built on?
Ron Conley
View Profile
Regular user
105 Posts

Profile of Ron Conley
Phil Ivey to Appeal against London High Court Ruling

http://www.tightpoker.com/news/phil-ivey......ng-5821/
AMcD
View Profile
Inner circle
stacking for food!
3097 Posts

Profile of AMcD
Thanks.
Cagliostro
View Profile
Inner circle
2199 Posts

Profile of Cagliostro
Let me start by saying it is not my intention to start posting. However the decision in the Ivey case was important as it directly could affect me so I checked in to see what type comments were made on the BB. Since I read through all the comments I think it only fair that I leave something in return, so I will comment one time on the subject.

I agree with all of Jason England's comments completely and his analyses regarding casino play in this instance is spot on. I believe his remarks are complete in and of themselves. From what I have seen, people with real time knowledge and/or experience with professional casino gambling have a keener understanding of things that can and do happen in that venue and in general understand casino hustling a little better than most.

I have read the wording of the court's decision and their reasoning has merit. Although I am not an attorney, my understanding is because this is a CIVIL case and not a CRIMINAL proceeding that has significant bearing on the verdict and why Ivey was not incarcerated or convicted of "criminal" intent. The judge adjudicated Ivey "cheated" based upon the CIVIL definition of the term which required different standards and definitions from criminal cases. If the court adjudicated that Ivey cheated in the criminal sense of the word, would they let him get back his original stake? That seems highly unlikely. To me it seems the court is saying or implying (in their indirect legalese way), that Ivey did not cheat in the criminal sense as such but rather that what he did, while not perhaps illegal, was somewhat unethical or "not quite proper" in the staunch British sense of the word. Moreover Crockfords is a powerful force in the UK and a decision against them, especially by an English court, would have affected their reputation and cost them millions of dollars. That may have had an influence on the decision made by the court. Further I believe an American court may have ruled differently and if the case were tried before a jury, I doubt that a unanimous decision would have been reached either way.

I also think that most who are knowledgeable and experienced around casino gambling and advantage play hustling would conclude Ivey was not cheating. They would probably believe he was very clever or at worse perhaps unethical, devious or sneaky… but not a cheater in any sense of the word.

The purpose of hustling and advantage play is to obtain an edge and make money from that edge regardless of the game being played. Hustlers seek an advantage in BJ, Poker, Baccarat, Golf, Backgammon or whatever game they believe they can hustle. That is what hustling and gambling with an advantage is all about and it usually incorporates some form of deception or “con” to make it work. Because hustlers have an edge or use con to get that edge does not necessarily mean they are cheating although in some instances they may be. I have written before that advantage players sometimes walk a very thin line and step over into cheating on occasion. However, hustlers think differently than academics, hobbyists and square johns. (The judge in this case is a square john.) Advantage players make their living from hustling and don’t spend time with sophistry.

Further my understanding and interpretation of AMcD's statements leads me to conclude that he believes many legitimate decks are marked from the factory. For instance, I am looking right now at a deck of Bicycle playing cards. The white borders are not equal on all sides and these cards could be turned to accomplish virtually the same advantage as the deck Ivey played against. To say the cards are marked because of this variance is incorrect to me. A marked card by definition is one in which the card has been physically doctored, in and of itself, to identify its value from the other cards, or in the case of sorts purposefully combining different decks to make certain cards distinguishable from others. If there is a weakness in the design of some playing cards that does not make them “marked” cards.

Moreover to further extrapolate AMcD's statements, it would seem all "one-way" decks are marked since "turnabout" can be used with all of them. I find that to be a stretch of the definition of marked cards and find it difficult to believe most would support that conclusion. To me that is almost like saying that all decks of playing cards are cheating instruments per se because one can use them to cheat with.

I believe that if Ivey or his cohort actually turned the cards themselves to set up the deck that would be “manipulation” and constitute cheating. This is what the Blackjack casino cheating teams did many years ago playing “turnabout” against the Bee playing card decks or that day. However, to have the dealer turn the cards because of "con" is quite different in my opinion even though the end result may be the same.

For example, if someone plays location by controlling a slug of cards during his shuffle, that would be manipulation and constitute cheating. If the hustler induces the sucker to only riffle shuffle the cards (because the hustler cons the chump into believing it is the only "fair" way to shuffle), but in reality wants the chump to riffle shuffle because the sucker doesn’t shuffle the bottom 10 cards or so and therefore leaves the slug of cards known to the hustler in order, that would not be cheating. It would perhaps be devious, unethical or even immoral to some, but not cheating IMO.

Of course opinions vary greatly which is why we have courts of law which attempt to codify and add reasoned consistency to the situations they confront based upon formulated laws and previous decisions derived thereof, i.e. case law. Courts of law are far from perfect but are the best alternative we have. Without them we would be forced to make decisions based upon a myriad of different and varying opinions, many of which would be considered unfounded or whimsical.

I personally don’t think Ivey cheated in any sense of the word and believe most professional gamblers and hustlers would concur.

However, let me add that what any of us personally believe is irrelevant. It is all opinion although I think some opinions are more realistic than others.

Let’s see what further court decisions render on this situation. These decisions are very important to some very sharp people involved in professional casino gambling.
AMcD
View Profile
Inner circle
stacking for food!
3097 Posts

Profile of AMcD
Hey, welcome back Sir!
123crampt
View Profile
Veteran user
389 Posts

Profile of 123crampt
Is the term 'cheating' subjective?
If you sat down at a game in a casino and there were large bold letters on the backs of the cards revealing their identity, would it be illegal for you to take these 'markings' into account while playing?
AMcD
View Profile
Inner circle
stacking for food!
3097 Posts

Profile of AMcD
When everyone has his own definition for "cheating", for sure, it's not easy to debate.

Me, I'm just a stupid person, I use very simple concepts. Playing cards is my brain against my opponents' brains. A few odds, tells reading, etc. Period.

All the rest is cheating. Calling it clever play or advantage play is just sophism. In my humble opinion, you need a high level of hypocrisy for calling marked cards (whatever the way or who you use for marking them) advantage play. Wait, I go even further, it's ridiculous.

Because the casinos have an edge justifies people can cheat? What crap! No one forces you to enter a casino. Because someone is stupid justifies you can rob him? Geez, at the end of your life, you surely will be proud to watch yourself in a mirror.

Yeah, I cheated at cards, I don't try to pass myself as a hero. But I cheated guys who were cheating me first. Nothing to be proud of. Even for $100, even from jerks, it's still robbery. Advantage play, LOL.
AMcD
View Profile
Inner circle
stacking for food!
3097 Posts

Profile of AMcD
And my apologies for the strong language...
bishthemagish
View Profile
Inner circle
6036 Posts

Profile of bishthemagish
Quote:
On Nov 11, 2014, AMcD wrote:
When everyone has his own definition for "cheating", for sure, it's not easy to debate.

Me, I'm just a stupid person, I use very simple concepts. Playing cards is my brain against my opponents' brains. A few odds, tells reading, etc. Period.

All the rest is cheating. Calling it clever play or advantage play is just sophism. In my humble opinion, you need a high level of hypocrisy for calling marked cards (whatever the way or who you use for marking them) advantage play. Wait, I go even further, it's ridiculous.

Because the casinos have an edge justifies people can cheat? What crap! No one forces you to enter a casino. Because someone is stupid justifies you can rob him? Geez, at the end of your life, you surely will be proud to watch yourself in a mirror.

Yeah, I cheated at cards, I don't try to pass myself as a hero. But I cheated guys who were cheating me first. Nothing to be proud of. Even for $100, even from jerks, it's still robbery. Advantage play, LOL.


I think advantage play came from Erdnase and the way the book was written makes it sound sort of romantic.
Glenn Bishop Cardician

Producer of the DVD Punch Deal Pro

Publisher of Glenn Bishop's Ace Cutting And Block Transfer Triumphs
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1168 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On Nov 11, 2014, AMcD wrote:
When everyone has his own definition for "cheating", for sure, it's not easy to debate.

Me, I'm just a stupid person, I use very simple concepts. Playing cards is my brain against my opponents' brains. A few odds, tells reading, etc. Period.

All the rest is cheating. Calling it clever play or advantage play is just sophism. In my humble opinion, you need a high level of hypocrisy for calling marked cards (whatever the way or who you use for marking them) advantage play. Wait, I go even further, it's ridiculous.

Because the casinos have an edge justifies people can cheat? What crap! No one forces you to enter a casino. Because someone is stupid justifies you can rob him? Geez, at the end of your life, you surely will be proud to watch yourself in a mirror.

Yeah, I cheated at cards, I don't try to pass myself as a hero. But I cheated guys who were cheating me first. Nothing to be proud of. Even for $100, even from jerks, it's still robbery. Advantage play, LOL.



Smile
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
15456 Posts

Profile of tommy
If you flash you hole cards in poker then that is your problem. If you own a casino and use marked cards which players read, that is also your problem, unless your name is Crockfords.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
AMcD
View Profile
Inner circle
stacking for food!
3097 Posts

Profile of AMcD
The problem is to define was cheating really is.

And as we are all coming from different places, different cultures, it's impossible to agree. For instance, me, I see things from the philosophical angle. Others judge according money, judgments, laws, etc. Not two people have the same background, the same philosophy. Therefore, such stories just lead to have clans with very opposite views.

It's no big deal. You know, I'm from a Latin culture, I grew up among people taking care of people, families, getting learned, getting educated, sharing things, etc. when I came to England (Anglo-Saxon culture) it's been a shock! I was under the impression that only two things matter here, money and money. Maybe a third one, money. Some would say there is a fourth important thing here, money. Not mentioning reality TV and so on. It was like I was discovering a new planet. It took me a while, but I eventually got used with it Smile.

The most important is to understand and to accept each other. The rest, is just a matter of opinions.
beeblueback
View Profile
New user
Italy
11 Posts

Profile of beeblueback
Quote:
On Nov 12, 2014, AMcD wrote:
The problem is to define was cheating really is.


Yes.. or you can define what cheating is not... Infact this is what the law has done... I know this is not about card counting but the principle that apply is the same...

Quoting a Steve Forte interview (full interview here http://www.crapspit.org/steve-forte-cheating-prevention/ ):

Image


So, aside any moral considerations (that are not relevant in court... at least in laic states), if a player "doeas not alter the basic features of the game" but "he merely uses his mental skills to take advantage of the same information that is avalaible to all players", he is not cheating...
"When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience leaves with money and the man with money leaves with experience."
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The Gambling Spot » » Judge: Poker Pro Phil Ivey Cheated At Casino (4 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2018 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.25 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL