beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 97
  • Posts: 13730
October 22nd, 2016 at 3:53:42 AM permalink
Quote: onenickelmiracle

I would have to know what gambling regulations Ivey broke to judge in the judge's favor. Otherwise stupidity is just as acceptable to the casino taking money from people, and the casino has no inherent right to be protected from their own stupidity. They don't seek out anyone they've wronged and offer refunds, so how is this fair.



This.^^^
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
  • Threads: 131
  • Posts: 16741
October 22nd, 2016 at 4:00:44 AM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

This.^^^

Do you think they swindled the casino?
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 97
  • Posts: 13730
October 22nd, 2016 at 4:07:51 AM permalink
No, I don't. I think the casino swindled themselves through not seeing the angle he was trying. Through giving him special treatment because of the celebrity and the bet sizes. And not knowing their own game and its vulnerabilities. They screwed up. They lost. And they sued, looking like idiots the whole way.

I would think this cost them much, much more than the 10M they're fighting over in high roller action, let alone all the less-than-skilled shot takers of all values who won't come lose to them after this.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 261
  • Posts: 13805
October 22nd, 2016 at 4:31:59 AM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

And not knowing their own game and its vulnerabilities. They screwed up. They lost. And they sued, looking like idiots the whole way.


Consider the old trick:
Woman player uses makeup and daubs the cards. Male Confederate wears red contacts and can see the finger daubs. Is this cheating? Clearly it is.

Edge sorting is akin to having the casino daub the cards thinking they are only giving in to the whims of a weirdo.

Is it disgraceful to the casino to have been fooled this way? YES.
The question in a court of law does not relate to the casino's disgrace or business decisions relating to recouping its losses, the question before the court will be "in enlisting the casino's aid in marking the cards, did the player vitiate the game?
Homelessnyc
Homelessnyc
Joined: Jun 1, 2016
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 236
October 22nd, 2016 at 4:41:43 AM permalink
Quote: FleaStiff

Consider the old trick:
Woman player uses makeup and daubs the cards. Male Confederate wears red contacts and can see the finger daubs. Is this cheating? Clearly it is.

Edge sorting is akin to having the casino daub the cards thinking they are only giving in to the whims of a weirdo.

Is it disgraceful to the casino to have been fooled this way? YES.
The question in a court of law does not relate to the casino's disgrace or business decisions relating to recouping its losses, the question before the court will be "in enlisting the casino's aid in marking the cards, did the player vitiate the game?



Again that is someone adding something to the cards.

This is a manufacturers defect if I understand correctly. So the borgata should be having suit with the manufacturer not a player that found it and was allowed to use it to their advantage.
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
  • Threads: 131
  • Posts: 16741
October 22nd, 2016 at 5:11:28 AM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

No, I don't. I think the casino swindled themselves through not seeing the angle he was trying. Through giving him special treatment because of the celebrity and the bet sizes. And not knowing their own game and its vulnerabilities. They screwed up. They lost. And they sued, looking like idiots the whole way.

I would think this cost them much, much more than the 10M they're fighting over in high roller action, let alone all the less-than-skilled shot takers of all values who won't come lose to them after this.

I think you are saying the casino's greed allowed them to get swindled.

I don't think he cheated and im not on the side of the casino, but I do think he swindled the casino. I really don't know how anyone can dispute that fact. If that's not a swindle I don't know what is.

If I invited you to play a card game with me, and lets say we both knew I was better at that game than you. So you asked me to buy a special deck of cards because you secretly knew the cards were marked and you used that to your advantage to beat me silly. You don't think that's a swindle?
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
HeyMrDJ
HeyMrDJ
Joined: May 29, 2015
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 101
October 22nd, 2016 at 5:42:47 AM permalink
This was a total free roll for the casino. I think they already knew about this trick, and they possibly already knew Phil was involved.

If he lost, they say nothing. When he wins they cry foul. It was my understanding, that even with the edge sorting the variance is such that he could still blow chunks before seeing the profit.

FWIW I dont consider this cheating at all.
Guess who peed in my Cheerios? Romes did...
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 214
  • Posts: 5465
October 22nd, 2016 at 6:54:09 AM permalink
Natutally the casino will adk for the return of its money but they will add court costs and most likely try to add 4 years interest as lost income which could potentially b very problematic for ivey

Im curiuos if the judge is saying the cards were marked in essence by gemaco then cant ivey create a countersuit that the borgata used improper gaming devices. Certainly there must be something about that in nj regulations. They could point to this ruling as evidence

Finally i think it sets up a dangerous precedent. Can this argument not be used for an unbalanced roulette wheel. What if a player discovers a glitch that helps him recognize wen to win and keep playing. I am reminded of the vp glitch which required the double up feature to b enabled. Were they marking in this sense by making requests that would enable them to win. Perhaps those charges were dropped cause they gave the money back and this is really just a sore loser play on the part of casinos
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
RS
RS
Joined: Feb 11, 2014
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 8545
October 22nd, 2016 at 7:11:42 AM permalink
I wonder if the Gemaco half-diamond cut (or whatever they're called) were already in play at Borgata or if they were special ordered.
# Свободный Натан
DRich
DRich
Joined: Jul 6, 2012
  • Threads: 68
  • Posts: 4920
October 22nd, 2016 at 7:54:47 AM permalink
One of the arguments I heard was that they were knowingly using marked cards to give themselves an advantage. It didn't matter who marked them, just using marked cards for an advantage is classified as using a cheating device,
Living longer does not always infer +EV

  • Jump to: