darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 266
  • Posts: 9070
August 23rd, 2015 at 9:48:57 PM permalink
That's not the way I understand it. No cards were dealt prior to betting otherwise yes, there would be a much bigger edge than just 6% knowing from the backs all four cards.

The way I read and understood it, only the top card in the shoe (next one to be dealt) could be distinguished from its edge. If this gave away that the card was an 8 or 9, because that card automatically went to player side first, huge bet was made for player, since any second card that was a ten card would be an almost certain (but not guaranteed) win.

It was still gambling but with a player edge of 6% which is huge for a high stakes player like Ivey.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Ahigh
Ahigh
Joined: May 19, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 5161
August 23rd, 2015 at 10:59:41 PM permalink
I've been asked, "are you a player's advocate?" I don't really consider myself such, really. But I'm on Phil's side here.
speedycrap
speedycrap
Joined: Oct 13, 2013
  • Threads: 46
  • Posts: 1252
August 24th, 2015 at 3:58:56 AM permalink
Any member has a full account of how Ivey played at that particular occasion???
beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 99
  • Posts: 14232
August 24th, 2015 at 11:25:24 AM permalink
There's a lot of detail in this report about crockfords that might be useful. I saw others at the time (the crockfords' trial) that went into a lot of detail, based on court testimony. Borgata supposedly saw the exact same behaviors from them, so I would think there's some value in what info was released in England.

My understanding (from having read those earlier reports) is that:

They played mini-bacc.
They asked for a mandarin speaking dealer, and Sun was the one who did the talking.
They asked for the 8s and 9s to be turned as they appeared in the shoe, basing the request on superstition.
They asked in advance that, during their multi-day stay, their shoe be kept intact for their entire visit, with the same cards, again based on superstition. Normally the cards would be changed on a several-times-a-day rotation.
The cards were not dealt in advance of betting. However, the bottom edge of each next card could be seen in the shoe. (There's an upside-down U shape in most shoe fronts, tapering to the edges, to allow the dealer to get a finger on each card and slide it out.)
There was not, at the time, a shuffle procedure that turned 1/2 of the cards during the shuffle, so the cards remained in their orientation unless specifically turned during play.
The first card out of the shoe after a bet was placed always went to the player. (standard)
There was a report that they started out betting much smaller the first time through the shoe, then increased their bets once the shoe was "sorted". Not sure if they ramped up only when they could discern an 8 or 9 on Player, or just flat-bet at a higher level once the shoe was set.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
Wizardofnothing
Wizardofnothing
Joined: Jul 3, 2015
  • Threads: 121
  • Posts: 3493
August 24th, 2015 at 11:41:39 AM permalink
Very well summarized and very accurate
No longer hiring, donít ask because I wonít hire you either
Ibeatyouraces
Ibeatyouraces
Joined: Jan 12, 2010
  • Threads: 68
  • Posts: 11933
August 27th, 2015 at 10:59:54 AM permalink
Breaking news: Ivey accusing Borgata of something we've known forever.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/pro-borgata-uses-booze-sexy-155022749.html

I don't think it'll help his case.
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
SanchoPanza
SanchoPanza
Joined: May 10, 2010
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 3497
August 27th, 2015 at 11:38:48 AM permalink
Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Breaking news: Ivey accusing Borgata of something we've known forever.

He can't really be that much of a novice on the main floor. ;)
Artemis
Artemis
Joined: Nov 20, 2010
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 441
August 27th, 2015 at 2:58:09 PM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

There's a lot of detail in this report about crockfords that might be useful. I saw others at the time (the crockfords' trial) that went into a lot of detail, based on court testimony. Borgata supposedly saw the exact same behaviors from them, so I would think there's some value in what info was released in England.

My understanding (from having read those earlier reports) is that:

They played mini-bacc.
They asked for a mandarin speaking dealer, and Sun was the one who did the talking.
They asked for the 8s and 9s to be turned as they appeared in the shoe, basing the request on superstition.
They asked in advance that, during their multi-day stay, their shoe be kept intact for their entire visit, with the same cards, again based on superstition. Normally the cards would be changed on a several-times-a-day rotation.
The cards were not dealt in advance of betting. However, the bottom edge of each next card could be seen in the shoe. (There's an upside-down U shape in most shoe fronts, tapering to the edges, to allow the dealer to get a finger on each card and slide it out.)
There was not, at the time, a shuffle procedure that turned 1/2 of the cards during the shuffle, so the cards remained in their orientation unless specifically turned during play.
The first card out of the shoe after a bet was placed always went to the player. (standard)
There was a report that they started out betting much smaller the first time through the shoe, then increased their bets once the shoe was "sorted". Not sure if they ramped up only when they could discern an 8 or 9 on Player, or just flat-bet at a higher level once the shoe was set.



Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Breaking news: Ivey accusing Borgata of something we've known forever.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/pro-borgata-uses-booze-sexy-155022749.html

I don't think it'll help his case.



Quote: SanchoPanza

He can't really be that much of a novice on the main floor. ;)





Hey BBB, thanks for the link. Today I've learned a new tag-line: "ILL PRACTICE." So... Mr. Justice Mitting ruled that Mr. Ivey was guilty of ill practice.

Wait a minute... casinos are also guilty of ill practice too, i.e., they're notorious for their predatory practices, and they don't play fair. Here are examples:

1) Casinos get gamblers drunk and bankrupted them, i.e., the case of Leonard Tose. They attempted to get Mr. Ivey drunk too, but he's too smart for them.

2) Casinos've targeted the degenerated gamblers and ruined their lives, i.e., the case of Arelia Taveras, Esq.

3) Casinos welcome & target the helpless losers, but UNinvite & blacklist the educated winners, i.e., the cases of Lemieux66, MasterHoudini, and the almighty Don Johnson.

4) Above all, casinos have this greatest unfair advantage/ill practice: They have "the wait and see trick", and they can stiff any gamblers they want with loopholes and excuses.

They let gamblers play out suspicious games (i.e., the case of Mr. Ivey, OR the case of the 14 baccarat players vs AC Golden Nugget).

If gamblers lose all their bankrolls due to "bad luck", casinos will never refund a dime. If gamblers win big, then casinos find excuses/loopholes NOT to pay the winners. Admonitio: Caveat emptor!
I'm OK with Corps which pick and choose clienteles. Both insurance companies and casinos have the right to pick and choose customers. They may keep profitable ones and kicked out the rest. But, I'm not OK with a casino supervisor who says counting cards... is like stealing food from a buffet (a foodlifting offense), or video-taping a movie in a cinema (a piracy offense).

  • Jump to: