Sorting Allegations

Poker winner Phil Ivey may lose his battle with litigation, seeking baccarat winnings of $12 million against a London casino, but he has remained steadfast in the fight against his own reputation, tarnished by allegations and cheating and edge sorting.

Ivey doesn’t believe that he has cheated. He believes that what he does is simply finding advantages wherever he can, something that every other gambler worth their salt does. At a scheduled interview, moments before he’d continue his play, he’d specify that conditions are agreed to by the casino before he sat down to gamble millions of dollars that, he said, gave him an edge.

As described by Associated, during the interview, there was the understanding by the casino to make use of particular brands of whatever he might have used to gain an edge at the table. The list of these would include cards, shuffling devices, and dealers. Additionally, Ivey said, he would bring along others that would help him in communication, and deal with whatever side matters would possibly spring up.

What these add up is a case against Ivey that include a number of devices that that gambler used to gained slight edges, across a multitude of factors. While slight, they are nevertheless a contribution to a case of casino fraud. In the U.K. suit, Ivey was found to have clearly went beyond the pale of appropriate casino behaviour, through a number of measures that he would use the ascertain the particular value of cards, such as tarnishing the edges. The court ruled these advantages were not fair, and ruled that the casino owner, Malaysia’s Genting, didn’t need to pay Ivey for his related legal expenses.

Ivey contends that none of this adds up to cheating, and is a result of amateurs misunderstanding the system.

About the Author

You may also like these