Ivey is a cheater. And no, hes not great at poker...he just has money from sponsors to burn. You act like hes so smart, was it was all her idea, skills and planning. If he was so smart, he would have taken his 20 million and had nothing to do with her. Just another "hustler"....greedy...so greedy he would have did it forever
How exactly is a casino "unfair" ? Can you give specific examples of when casinos routinely do something unfair? Violence against players or refusing to cash out a player's legitimately won chips is not routine so don't go there. The house edge on all games is published and well known by any gambler with even an ounce of curiosity. By playing in a casino, gamblers agree to play with the casino having that house edge. The fact that they agree to it makes it fair. Also, being asked to leave after winning a lot of money is fair. Just as you are free to stop playing after you've lost a lot money, similarly the casino is free to stop playing after _they_ have lost a lot of money. Both parties can stop playing at any time. What is unfair about this?
It's an abomination that Ivey lost this case in court. Ridiculous. Fair play? The casinos have no ethics. Ever seen a stickman try to disrupt a shooter on a heater in craps? Limit bet sizes in BJ? Abruptly increase shuffling frequency? Rigged system for the courts to actually side with the casino here.
Considering Ivey accepted a settlement out of court with one casino, it's most likely they offered him a big chunk of change, maybe even his full winnings. That way both keep the face.
I can tell you have no idea what you’re talking about when you say the stick man disrupting a shooter- hahaha what? You have no idea what you’re talking about and it’s obvious. The casino didn’t agree to the dealer spinning cards.
@@dr.options I’m telling you that because I AM an expert in this field and that, based on your comment, you are in no way qualified to have an opinion to be taken seriously. You simply do not know what you’re talking about.
@mixedmartialanarchist6469 really? What are your credentials that make you an "expert"? You have a PhD in Gambling? You're also welcome to just ignore me if I'm such an idiot in your little mind. ua-cam.com/video/ojvj_rkVHh0/v-deo.htmlsi=111lbUvuEYe_EHxP
Any fair judge with half a brain would have ruled that although these requests did alter the odds of the game, the Casino agreed to all requests so they owe the players the money plus the cost of their legal representation they needed to collect the money.
@@mixedmartialanarchist6469listen to your words. "The dealer' who works for who? If they thought something was wrong they would have stopped the game. PERIOD. They just don't like losing!!
What irks me is that Ivey may have had an advantage, but he still could have lost. And you know if that had happened, the casinos would’ve had zero issue with the edge sorting.
@@TILT223 Funny enough, some high rollers are able to utilize their status and receive partial refunds on losses. Fellow poker great and friend of Phil Ivey Daniel Negreanu talked about how Phil would private jet to multiple casinos offering him this promotion, play high stakes for an hour (coin flip games like blackjack where player odds are close to 50-50), then bounce to the next. If he was up on a session great, and if he was down he would pocket the loss refund, and it ended up being massively profitable.
The issue4 was the lying he told when they made separate rules for him. That was him getting into a contract...a binding one. And it was a fraudulent one. If he just noticed the edges one day while playing, and it was just a table that always used the same deck, and he say there and won millions without any conditions that he put on them, then the courts would have ruled in his favor.
well yeah, gambling against the house is not supposed to be profitable. You can have lucky hands but if you're winning in the long term on a game that's supposed to be pure luck with an advantage to the house, you are cheating. I don't understand the uproar about this. There are games of skill like poker, if you're applying skill to a game of chance, what would you call that other than cheating. clever, extremely difficult, but definitely cheating.
You have to love how the casino's have no problems with taking a person's last penny but when someone is smart enough to beat the game within the rules they're all up in arms about it and will even ban them from coming back. It just doesn't seem right or fair. "We'll let you play as long as you don't use your brain."
The casino didn’t agree to the dealer spinning cards which is the important part you’re missing. It’s like talking the dealer into paying on hands you lose then saying “I didn’t do anything, it was your dealer”.
@@mixedmartialanarchist6469that was literally one of the stipulations that Ivey requested in order for him to play. And before you say you’re an expert, I’ve worked in casinos in table games for 16 years. I’ve attended advantage play seminars for my job where they specifically talk about this case. The casinos were greedy and wanted his play so they agreed to his terms. When they got hit they cried foul, and the courts bailed them out
@@mixedmartialanarchist6469 Did you watch the video? According to the video, they agreed to have the cards turned. Ivey mentioning that it’s for “good luck - nothing more”
The casino agreed to all of their conditions and they broke zero rules if they did they would be in jail. If you think intelligent people can't beat the house you must not be paying attention. There are lots of professional gamblers that make good livings doing it every day.
@@jeremywinklervery true. They followed rules and casino negotiated the rules which they often do to bring in junkets. Risk of the trade. The advantage they had was similar to how card counting works although slightly different in the fact they could get an idea of one card by looking at it prior to a hand. EG top card = picture so now player has more chance to win. Bs court decision. Imagine saying they breached an agreement they agreed to. It's silly. The settlement would have them being paid in full and nothing less. Casino gets to put an apparent 'message' to advantage players, but at end of day nothing illegal about advantage play. Just like casinos have the right to choose their patrons and therefore exclude winners. Advantage players have the right to play within rules and try to find a weakness. The casino will also be super careful about when and how they approach advantage players as well. They can be super devious about it. EG I've had a casino let me play longer with an advantage just because they did not want to let the table I was know they were revoking my play. It makes other players around realise they are idiots more than anything else does. Some lifetime BJ addict can have the 'aha' moment when they witness another player being backed off from a game. It's strange but sometimes it's the thing thay actually makes them realise the casino is milking them. Seeing someone they don't see at the casino regularly get told that their play is to good and you can only play other games now makes people realise more than gambling help services sometimes.
What a scumbag, typical 🧔🏾♂️ trying to gain the system. Why do people say casinos cheat? Everybody knows that the odds are against you in every casino game. Casinos are in business to make money like every other business. When a casino makes millions, they are crooks but when a player cheats and wins millions, it’s ok. WTF is wrong with you people?
@@mixedmartialanarchist6469 yeah that's what the court said but I personally don't think that should be considered as such when everything they did was ask for ahead of time and agreed to by the casino. The casino should have red flagged their asks and denied them but chose not to because they figured the house would still win. If someone is asking for a single deck to be used the whole game, an automatic shuffler, and to be able to tell the dealer to do something abnormal to the cards the casino should have said no, but just like the players the casino was greedy and said yes. The casinos argument that the players violated the spirit of free play when all the asks were done well in advance and agreed to should have gotten the suit thrown out like it did originally.
They don't. They get outsmarted daily by counters until the create games so bad that can't have an edge when there is no competition. It's just on this occasion the casino were stupid enough to open up way to much risk and loss so on this occasion went big given the $$$$ at play. Free roll given they the winnings. If it was more like 6 figures they pay, move on, bar the people and share the Intel with the industry as they all help eachother out in that way I also agree 100% it's on casino. Just contradicting they don't always cry to daddy - this is an outlier coz it was a serious hit. Normally they pay up coz at end of day people are allowed to outsmart the casino - just can't cheat or use devices etc etc
The casinos were insane to agree with their requests and I think that's where their case falls apart. Under normal circumstances (normal game play), I can at least see where the casino could make a case. I don't agree with it, but I could understand them having a path forward in the court system. But because they *agreed* to change the game and had the power to end the game at any point, this was all on them. When I was in Vegas, one of the incentives I had access to was a coupon that I could present on my first Blackjack hand that worked like an Ace (then I would be delt one card instead of two). There were restrictions on the amount I could bet and other such rules, but this was to encourage me to go to a specific casino to play Blackjack. The casino altered the rules of the game to try to win my business. They accepted the risks that were involved. The changes to the game on Ivey's request are no different. If the casino agrees to a rule change, they have to live with the results.
Not to mention, they accepted the changes requested by the most famous and successful card player at the time. Did they really think that a guy who stakes his entire career on odds is going to bet high stakes on a game that naturally gives the house an edge? Nope, what they did was they analyzed the requests and came out with the conclusion of "This guy's an idiot, there's no way these requests give him any advantage"
Ivey's attorneys made the argument that Casinos violate "fair play" implied contract when they offer free drinks to players such to diminish players judgment. I would argue that Casinos also violate "fair play" when they induce known addicted gamblers by offering perks. This practice has ruined many, many addicts. But Casinos facetiously post warnings on how addicts can get help. I have no sympathy for Casinos when advantage players succeed.
@@EyeCU-hd6nj . My friends dad sold his business for around $ 17.5 million decades ago, and he started Making regular trips to Vegas with that money! At the end, he was making $10k/20k bets at black jack tables and, of course, casinos where flying him. In from the east coast on private jets, and offering him the most expensive "villas" on the strip,(The mansion at MGM for example) plus extensive amenities and perks!( He'd arrive to his rooms to find free lap tops, expensive watches, $300 bottles of wine and champagne, and have his pick of working girls sent up. etc!!) In less than a year and half, he went through all 17.5m between 3or 4 diiff vegas casino resorts(mgm, Ceasars, bellagio, Aladin). Shameless casino hosts!!!! Doooont do it!!!
It's illegal to serve a drunk customer in a US bar but perfectly fine for a casino to offer free air travel, booze, food and rooms to a known gambling addict.
Crockfords became alerted to the scheme. They continued to engage with Ivey. The winnings AFTER the discovery were withheld despite that Crockfords knowingly continued. Seems to me the English Court didn't adhere to the contract of fairness doctrine. A side note: Borgata sued Gemaco to recover Ivey losses due to card defects. Court held that Gemaco owed Borgata $27 for the decks used in the game; nothing more.
Another great video. Keep em coming! Also...casinos make me so angry. They have no problem manipulating players, feeding them booze, etc to make them lose...but when the tables are turned they sue, or just plain kick you out.
The fact that they let them make the demands, met the demands and then after they lost deem it cheating is stupid. The casino shouldn't have won they should have been told to bad you let them do this, next time understand what is going on.
It should have been viewed the same way as card counting and once it was identified they could have prevented him from playing any more, but basically he beat them fair and square at the game using the rules that all parties agreed to.
How is it legal for a company to sign a contract to have a game playing under certain conditions, and after the contract is completed, claiming the contract should be voided. The judicial system is a sham!
They didn't sign anything, they merely allowed the accommodations requested by Ivey. Ironically, by accepting those changes, they enter into an "implied contract" that they understand that there is likely some risk in allowing those accommodations, yet they still allowed it. The casino didn't just enter those terms with some average Joe, they did it with the most well-known gambler at the time lmao and somehow are shocked that a professional gambler was playing with an edge
Being better than the house is not cheating. Also, no rule in any card game I'm aware of, says that the cards have to be identified by their face side. He didn't cheat. The casinos got complacent with their operation by not checking the cards thoroughly enough.
@present3348 it is never a players responsibility to ensure the dealer is competent. An incompetent dealer being exploited is being better than the house. They employed a subpar dealer. Further more, no rules of game play were ever changed and everything that was done, was within the rules of all of the casinos that he beat. Try again clown.
That's more than normal tho, you can go to any casino and ask to play with any specific deck that they are used to use Why would they think that there's an issue with a deck that so many casinos are using? Gamblers are superstitious and casinos are fine with that
Same, every game of Baccarat I’ve seen now, the player places bets even before any cards are dealt. Unless Sun was able to detect the first card in the shoe and advise Ivey on how to bet just based on that?
@aaronykam That's exactly what happened. That's why they demanded that particular shoe, so the first card (or at least the corner of the first card) is shown face down pre-deal.
Eh, I'm on the side of the Casinos here. Whether or not anyone considers this cheating, it's certainly not playing the game the way it was meant to be played, using the detail on the back of the cards to set up and win is not part of the rules. It's pretty sheisty however you look at it. The fact that Phil needed an "expert" to do it and they tried everything they could to make it look "normal" and hide the plan with another language, I don't see how anyone can agree that this wasn't bad faith, even if the casinos deserve it. Phil took advantage of his fame and reputation to instigate the conditions necessary for this to work.
Knew this case as a Phil Ivey fan from long ago, crazy it only ended recently. However, I go against the grain here, whilst he did not cheat, he did manipulate the game. We all hate casinos etc, but I know full well when I play a game of roulette, or blackjack etc that there is a house edge and I am designed to lose. Its still my choice to play it and hope I get lucky. In this case (and its left out of this video) the edge sorting goes a little deeper, the women specifically knew someone at the manufacture of the cards, already was aware they were imperfected (was rumoured she helped this, but couldn't be proven) and then they requested the cards, yes the Casino agreed, but they only agreed because they were not aware of this. Ivey manipulated the game, they weren't playing a random game anymore. Its a hard one, I think Ivey did outsmart them, but by using dirty tricks and clearly changed the game. If this happened the other way around and casino provided cards that the dealers knew about and wouldn't let the player raise their bet etc due to knowing what cards were coming out, we would want the casino shut down.. It was a "random game" turned into a different game...
Thank you! Slightly restored my faith in people. The sad bitter ‘stick it to the rich casinos’ comments are laughable. And I’m an ex-card counter who was asked many times to leave because my game was too strong. Don’t like casino rules, don’t go. If enough people refuse to play they’ll go out of business.
Caught due to greed. They should have played it smoother and faked some lost evenings. With a system like that, they could slowly milk the casinos, or just take their millions and move on to something else.
I'm confused, could someone please explain this part to me? If she was capable of identifying a specific card by its edge pattern at all then why did she need it to be flipped 180 degrees in the first place?
It's just an illustration, wasn't trying to suggest it was a hand of 9 although on reflection I see why you thought that! Thanks, always learning and trying to improve the next video for you :)
Seeing as Ivey is worth 100 million today. I dont really feel as bad for him as I should. He should have seen the withholding coming from a mile away especially with wires being involved.The casino would have plenty of time to watch the footage before wiring the funds. Its like commiting a crime while knowing you are being filmed. You can lie to yourself and say you got away but not really.
Ivey's conditions should have been a dead giveaway to the casinos to say "Maybe the publicity you bring in is not worth it after all." Reusing the same cards is OBVIOUSLY for some sort of advantage, even if the casinos couldn't tell what specifically it was.
That's the funniest part, it's not even illegal. Illegality means that they broke a law, the only thing they broke was "implied contract" - AKA, the casino believes they broke some arbitrary mutual understanding that is not in writing, not enforced, and not agreed upon, yet for some reason stands up in court. If this isn't a prime example of how corrupt and worthless the justice system is, I'm not sure what is lol
Any person at that casino who was in on the agreement to Ivey's requests knew they were to give him an advantage. They knew they were going to lose, which also means they also probably knew they would win in court. I don't give casinos much credit, but they definitely checked their way through this hand and slow played to the win.
Yes and she should have asked cards to be rotated every 5 times or some simple pattern and just waited longer to get the edge, asking for high value cards to be rotated is how I expected them to get caught as I was watching
So edge sorters huge bets are only made on the "player" bet then? Sun could only see the first card that was to be dealt, right? The variance in this strategy must be massive. As a dealer, i can tell you that an 8 being dealt first card to player doesn't result in a natural nearly as often as you'd think. It's slightly higher for a 9, but still. #freeiveysmoney
@@TILT223Another video said they actually purposely lost some of their winnings using the same edge sorting technique so the casino wouldn’t be as suspicious?
Wouldn't it be the same odds of getting a Natural whether the first card is an 8 or a 9? Either would require the second card be a 10, J, Q, K. And also an Ace if it's an 8, or a 9 if it's a 9.
You lose everytime they say it s bad luck,if you win or outsmart them it s illegal and you are cheating,what a cruel world we live in.Anyways,congrats Ivy for destroying them and playing with the casino owners fellings.
Casinos bawling about fair play? Trust? What a surprise, and industry of thieves and vultures gets all whiny when their own tricks get put back on them.
The casino took the risk by granting Ivey his requests. Certain dealer, certain deck, certain shuffler. Lots of high-limit players request changes to blackjack like single deck, dealer doesn't hit on soft 17, shuffling cadence. The Casino can't whine and cry by agreeing to rules that give the player a better edge, they know this - that's why people like us can't make these requests and we play constant-shuffler, hit-on-soft-17, no-surrender, 6-5 blackjack. Casino gotta just deal. Too bad. They did nothing illegal, they played by the agreed-upon rules.
Thats not Cheating. They play within the rules that the Casino has astablished. He didnt touch the Cards, he didnt mark it, he play perfectly within the rules.
@@present3348 - unfortunately with the auto-shuffler, having one 9 being out of cycle, there is an equal chance of 32 A - 8 and 128 10-spot cards and 31 possible 9s. since the machine constantly shuffles and randomizes the next 3 cards, anything can happen since the past has nothing to do with future outcomes like a hand shuffle with dealing to a predetermined point in the shoe.
If you can determine the opening card is an 8 or a 9, that's a big advantage, and you'd bet the Player. If it's not a 8 or 9, you'd bet the Banker. Not a guaranteed win on any particular hand, but over numerous hands, numerous sessions, it gives you the 6.5% advantage over the casino.
The casinos can say a slot machine wasn't supposed to hit a jackpot. How is that not cheating if you know whether or not the machine should have hit or not?
good overview of said scandal. uhm i lay blame to the Casino + Dealer's. Casino/Hotel manager saw no red flags in their request for how the guest wanted their furnishings to be upon arrival? Dealer could of let the next dealer or Pit Boss know of their actions during play. 😡
You ever sit for 20 minutes on a hot dice roll while your cooler gets a marker to bet against you. Then immediately crap out. I should have asked for new dice. Harras.
12:34 "...the casino wasn't just after the money no-they wanted to send a message to *advantage players..."* So, an industry that was established and still continues to function via *"systematic built in advantage"* over their customers, is complaining and wants to "send a message to advantage players?" 🤔
When this was all going down I remember thinking about how if I ever become a billionaire I'm gonna wire that dude 20m cause he definitely got cheated! Either that or I'd go on a Vegas bender with him. I bet that'd be fun as shit hanging out with him for a week and having unlimited money 😂
They agreed to Phil's terms and he cleaned house.this is a legendary tale that ended exactly how you thought it would.these casino's are dumb.who let's Phil Ivey in a casino to play with an advantage.
Phil Ivey and Kelly have to defend their reputation? They are HEROES in the books of the average american, especially those who have lost their livelihood to the casinos. Didnt know him before but def have mad respect for him putting his money on the line even if he was doing it for the money. Kelly... definitely have now words for that brave woman. My parents have lost friends over them killing themselvers over the addiction of casinos.
If you're a casino and completely agree to those four asks, which to any reasonable person would raise suspicion, then it's on you. Phil and Sun didn't cheat, they didn't manipulate the game.
The casinos agreed to the requests, if we as players agree to the casinos agreements even though it's not "fair" we can't get mad about it later.. it was an agreement. Just like and malfunctions, etc void any slot wins nothing we can do as the potential winner besides ask for the gaming commission to investigate and see if it was actually a malfunction of some sort..
Really sad what happened here. Edge sorting has been considered a legitimate advantage play for 60+ years and well accepted as fair play amongst the gambling community. I guess everything is "cheating" once you win $10 million though, sad.
@@michaelgeorge4643agree. And for all we know the out of court settlement w Borgata was just to get his original stake back. Sad that so many in these comments are ball washing a celebrity.
Yeah, but the terms were unfair. It's like me lying to a bank to get them to give me a loan and then when they take me to court for fraud, I say that they agreed to it so it's on them
![What Makes Phil Ivey The GOAT? [Untold Stories]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/K50K98NMPQE/mqdefault.jpg)
NEXT: The Nerd Who Cheated Vegas Without Being Noticed - ua-cam.com/video/jkXT0ULjN4s/v-deo.html
Ivey is a cheater. And no, hes not great at poker...he just has money from sponsors to burn.
You act like hes so smart, was it was all her idea, skills and planning.
If he was so smart, he would have taken his 20 million and had nothing to do with her.
Just another "hustler"....greedy...so greedy he would have did it forever
@@DVaz-v6k Dude, he has 11 World Series Bracelets, second only to Phil Helmuth. He is quantifiably one of the greatest.
"The spirit of fair play" ironic coming from a casino
"The spirit of fair play" - when only the casino is allowed the edge, not the player
How exactly is a casino "unfair" ? Can you give specific examples of when casinos routinely do something unfair? Violence against players or refusing to cash out a player's legitimately won chips is not routine so don't go there. The house edge on all games is published and well known by any gambler with even an ounce of curiosity. By playing in a casino, gamblers agree to play with the casino having that house edge. The fact that they agree to it makes it fair. Also, being asked to leave after winning a lot of money is fair. Just as you are free to stop playing after you've lost a lot money, similarly the casino is free to stop playing after _they_ have lost a lot of money. Both parties can stop playing at any time. What is unfair about this?
@@thebellcurve3437 Everything they do is unfair. What are you talking about?
@@thebellcurve3437 why cant the player have an edge but the house can?
@@thebellcurve3437okay but then by that logic, Phil Ivey made requests that the casino knowingly agreed to. So it was completely fair right?
It's an abomination that Ivey lost this case in court. Ridiculous. Fair play? The casinos have no ethics. Ever seen a stickman try to disrupt a shooter on a heater in craps? Limit bet sizes in BJ? Abruptly increase shuffling frequency? Rigged system for the courts to actually side with the casino here.
Considering Ivey accepted a settlement out of court with one casino, it's most likely they offered him a big chunk of change, maybe even his full winnings. That way both keep the face.
I can tell you have no idea what you’re talking about when you say the stick man disrupting a shooter- hahaha what? You have no idea what you’re talking about and it’s obvious. The casino didn’t agree to the dealer spinning cards.
@@mixedmartialanarchist6469 evidently you and I have walked in different circles and had different experiences for you to be oblivious to them.
@@dr.options I’m telling you that because I AM an expert in this field and that, based on your comment, you are in no way qualified to have an opinion to be taken seriously. You simply do not know what you’re talking about.
@mixedmartialanarchist6469 really? What are your credentials that make you an "expert"? You have a PhD in Gambling? You're also welcome to just ignore me if I'm such an idiot in your little mind.
ua-cam.com/video/ojvj_rkVHh0/v-deo.htmlsi=111lbUvuEYe_EHxP
Any fair judge with half a brain would have ruled that although these requests did alter the odds of the game, the Casino agreed to all requests so they owe the players the money plus the cost of their legal representation they needed to collect the money.
100%
They didn’t agree to the dealer spinning the cards
Free roll for the casino... we agree to everything... but of you WIN, we aren't paying!
@@mixedmartialanarchist6469listen to your words. "The dealer' who works for who? If they thought something was wrong they would have stopped the game. PERIOD. They just don't like losing!!
@@mixedmartialanarchist6469 then who turned them?
What irks me is that Ivey may have had an advantage, but he still could have lost. And you know if that had happened, the casinos would’ve had zero issue with the edge sorting.
This is so true, the casinos couldn't care less if somebody loses. I wonder if they have ever refunded the stakes to failed edge sorters 🤣
This is the point that matters
@@TILT223 Funny enough, some high rollers are able to utilize their status and receive partial refunds on losses. Fellow poker great and friend of Phil Ivey Daniel Negreanu talked about how Phil would private jet to multiple casinos offering him this promotion, play high stakes for an hour (coin flip games like blackjack where player odds are close to 50-50), then bounce to the next. If he was up on a session great, and if he was down he would pocket the loss refund, and it ended up being massively profitable.
The issue4 was the lying he told when they made separate rules for him. That was him getting into a contract...a binding one. And it was a fraudulent one.
If he just noticed the edges one day while playing, and it was just a table that always used the same deck, and he say there and won millions without any conditions that he put on them, then the courts would have ruled in his favor.
It's only cheating if the Casino loses!
well yeah, gambling against the house is not supposed to be profitable. You can have lucky hands but if you're winning in the long term on a game that's supposed to be pure luck with an advantage to the house, you are cheating. I don't understand the uproar about this. There are games of skill like poker, if you're applying skill to a game of chance, what would you call that other than cheating. clever, extremely difficult, but definitely cheating.
@@friedsensei you think poker is a skill game but not bj you gotta learn your head from your ass before you speak on anything 💀
@@friedsenseishut up
@@devontemoericke493 no you are
@@friedsensei lol 😂 i said shut up smh
You have to love how the casino's have no problems with taking a person's last penny but when someone is smart enough to beat the game within the rules they're all up in arms about it and will even ban them from coming back. It just doesn't seem right or fair. "We'll let you play as long as you don't use your brain."
The casino didn’t agree to the dealer spinning cards which is the important part you’re missing. It’s like talking the dealer into paying on hands you lose then saying “I didn’t do anything, it was your dealer”.
@@mixedmartialanarchist6469that was literally one of the stipulations that Ivey requested in order for him to play. And before you say you’re an expert, I’ve worked in casinos in table games for 16 years. I’ve attended advantage play seminars for my job where they specifically talk about this case. The casinos were greedy and wanted his play so they agreed to his terms. When they got hit they cried foul, and the courts bailed them out
@@mixedmartialanarchist6469 Did you watch the video? According to the video, they agreed to have the cards turned. Ivey mentioning that it’s for “good luck - nothing more”
The casino agreed to all of their conditions and they broke zero rules if they did they would be in jail. If you think intelligent people can't beat the house you must not be paying attention. There are lots of professional gamblers that make good livings doing it every day.
@@jeremywinklervery true. They followed rules and casino negotiated the rules which they often do to bring in junkets. Risk of the trade.
The advantage they had was similar to how card counting works although slightly different in the fact they could get an idea of one card by looking at it prior to a hand. EG top card = picture so now player has more chance to win.
Bs court decision. Imagine saying they breached an agreement they agreed to. It's silly. The settlement would have them being paid in full and nothing less. Casino gets to put an apparent 'message' to advantage players, but at end of day nothing illegal about advantage play.
Just like casinos have the right to choose their patrons and therefore exclude winners. Advantage players have the right to play within rules and try to find a weakness.
The casino will also be super careful about when and how they approach advantage players as well. They can be super devious about it. EG I've had a casino let me play longer with an advantage just because they did not want to let the table I was know they were revoking my play. It makes other players around realise they are idiots more than anything else does. Some lifetime BJ addict can have the 'aha' moment when they witness another player being backed off from a game. It's strange but sometimes it's the thing thay actually makes them realise the casino is milking them. Seeing someone they don't see at the casino regularly get told that their play is to good and you can only play other games now makes people realise more than gambling help services sometimes.
He didn't cheat, he outsmarted the casino
Watch all of the video! :) I think it was an unfair ending to be honest. Casinos are so greedy!!
What a scumbag, typical 🧔🏾♂️ trying to gain the system. Why do people say casinos cheat? Everybody knows that the odds are against you in every casino game. Casinos are in business to make money like every other business. When a casino makes millions, they are crooks but when a player cheats and wins millions, it’s ok. WTF is wrong with you people?
Some might say instructing the dealer to spin certain cards is cheating.
@@mixedmartialanarchist6469 yeah that's what the court said but I personally don't think that should be considered as such when everything they did was ask for ahead of time and agreed to by the casino. The casino should have red flagged their asks and denied them but chose not to because they figured the house would still win. If someone is asking for a single deck to be used the whole game, an automatic shuffler, and to be able to tell the dealer to do something abnormal to the cards the casino should have said no, but just like the players the casino was greedy and said yes.
The casinos argument that the players violated the spirit of free play when all the asks were done well in advance and agreed to should have gotten the suit thrown out like it did originally.
@@GurtTheHurt I hear ya, I read the official docs a long time ago- I don’t think they asked about spinning the cards prior to though.
It is up to the Casinos to protect their games. They can't just go crying to daddy everytime they get outsmarted.
Exactly this! They get away with it though...
They don't. They get outsmarted daily by counters until the create games so bad that can't have an edge when there is no competition.
It's just on this occasion the casino were stupid enough to open up way to much risk and loss so on this occasion went big given the $$$$ at play. Free roll given they the winnings. If it was more like 6 figures they pay, move on, bar the people and share the Intel with the industry as they all help eachother out in that way
I also agree 100% it's on casino. Just contradicting they don't always cry to daddy - this is an outlier coz it was a serious hit. Normally they pay up coz at end of day people are allowed to outsmart the casino - just can't cheat or use devices etc etc
When a few skilled players win big it promotes the idea that others could too...but overall the casino wins more.
This is my favorite documentary channel. Keep it up!
Your vids are great dude, keep it up
Thanks, will do!
The casinos were insane to agree with their requests and I think that's where their case falls apart. Under normal circumstances (normal game play), I can at least see where the casino could make a case. I don't agree with it, but I could understand them having a path forward in the court system. But because they *agreed* to change the game and had the power to end the game at any point, this was all on them.
When I was in Vegas, one of the incentives I had access to was a coupon that I could present on my first Blackjack hand that worked like an Ace (then I would be delt one card instead of two). There were restrictions on the amount I could bet and other such rules, but this was to encourage me to go to a specific casino to play Blackjack. The casino altered the rules of the game to try to win my business. They accepted the risks that were involved. The changes to the game on Ivey's request are no different. If the casino agrees to a rule change, they have to live with the results.
Not to mention, they accepted the changes requested by the most famous and successful card player at the time. Did they really think that a guy who stakes his entire career on odds is going to bet high stakes on a game that naturally gives the house an edge? Nope, what they did was they analyzed the requests and came out with the conclusion of "This guy's an idiot, there's no way these requests give him any advantage"
Ivey's attorneys made the argument that Casinos violate "fair play" implied contract when they offer free drinks to players such to diminish players judgment. I would argue that Casinos also violate "fair play" when they induce known addicted gamblers by offering perks. This practice has ruined many, many addicts. But Casinos facetiously post warnings on how addicts can get help. I have no sympathy for Casinos when advantage players succeed.
@@EyeCU-hd6nj . My friends dad sold his business for around $ 17.5 million decades ago, and he started Making regular trips to Vegas with that money! At the end, he was making $10k/20k bets at black jack tables and, of course, casinos where flying him. In from the east coast on private jets, and offering him the most expensive "villas" on the strip,(The mansion at MGM for example) plus extensive amenities and perks!( He'd arrive to his rooms to find free lap tops, expensive watches, $300 bottles of wine and champagne, and have his pick of working girls sent up. etc!!)
In less than a year and half, he went through all 17.5m between 3or 4 diiff vegas casino resorts(mgm, Ceasars, bellagio, Aladin). Shameless casino hosts!!!! Doooont do it!!!
It's illegal to serve a drunk customer in a US bar but perfectly fine for a casino to offer free air travel, booze, food and rooms to a known gambling addict.
really loved that you had a full outro this time. been loving all your vids since finding your channel man, big thumbs up
Thanks, I take feedback seriously!
Casinos talk about fair play is a joke
Crazy isn't it? They're the worst.
Crockfords became alerted to the scheme. They continued to engage with Ivey. The winnings AFTER the discovery were withheld despite that Crockfords knowingly continued. Seems to me the English Court didn't adhere to the contract of fairness doctrine. A side note: Borgata sued Gemaco to recover Ivey losses due to card defects. Court held that Gemaco owed Borgata $27 for the decks used in the game; nothing more.
Males sense. It's up to the user to inspect the decks for defects.
Another great video. Keep em coming! Also...casinos make me so angry. They have no problem manipulating players, feeding them booze, etc to make them lose...but when the tables are turned they sue, or just plain kick you out.
Thanks! Will do! What did you think of the animations in this one?
@TILT223 they were pretty good... Where did you find the young Phil I've look alike?😄
The fact that they let them make the demands, met the demands and then after they lost deem it cheating is stupid. The casino shouldn't have won they should have been told to bad you let them do this, next time understand what is going on.
9:59
Bogatta saying “violating trust between player and Casio”
😂😂😂😂
Getting up and leaving after winning a ton and they change the deck? Super suspicious behavior 😂
So it wasn't about Ivey's "genius", but about a Chinese lady who needed a celeb able to make certain requests that the casinos might accept.
It should have been viewed the same way as card counting and once it was identified they could have prevented him from playing any more, but basically he beat them fair and square at the game using the rules that all parties agreed to.
Golden content, great job. Keep it on!
Thanks, will do!
How is it legal for a company to sign a contract to have a game playing under certain conditions, and after the contract is completed, claiming the contract should be voided. The judicial system is a sham!
@@present3348 have you heard of a verbal contract before? They have been heard of in the court of law
They didn't sign anything, they merely allowed the accommodations requested by Ivey. Ironically, by accepting those changes, they enter into an "implied contract" that they understand that there is likely some risk in allowing those accommodations, yet they still allowed it. The casino didn't just enter those terms with some average Joe, they did it with the most well-known gambler at the time lmao and somehow are shocked that a professional gambler was playing with an edge
Being better than the house is not cheating. Also, no rule in any card game I'm aware of, says that the cards have to be identified by their face side. He didn't cheat. The casinos got complacent with their operation by not checking the cards thoroughly enough.
@@present3348 they were better. It's not their fault that the casino employs subpar dealers.
@present3348 it is never a players responsibility to ensure the dealer is competent. An incompetent dealer being exploited is being better than the house. They employed a subpar dealer. Further more, no rules of game play were ever changed and everything that was done, was within the rules of all of the casinos that he beat. Try again clown.
Try sueing a casino after losing…..
Love these videos. It's crazy the casino allowed all those conditions to be fulfilled
Yes, totally insane. Even more crazy that they then complained after they willed the whole thing on.
this is the best explanation i've seen about this story
Thank you!
you Are a very good editor your channel will reach a million within a year
Great video!
Glad you enjoyed it
I get how they didn’t think something was up when he said you have to use this particular deck, that’s fishy as hell even if you are Phil Ivey
That's more than normal tho, you can go to any casino and ask to play with any specific deck that they are used to use
Why would they think that there's an issue with a deck that so many casinos are using? Gamblers are superstitious and casinos are fine with that
Implied contract is such a hilariously ridiculous legal concept.
Good detail with the story! ❤
the courts wont let anybody harm their precious revenue generators
Moral conclusion: you are not allowed to scam the scammers
Fair
In what does the casino scam ?
Once again. Bravo 🎉
Casinos should have known something was up. When an advantage player mentions "luck and being superstitious" beware.
Many highly skilled poker players are very superstitious but in this situation agreed.
TILT WITH ANOTHER SUNDAY BANGER!! 💯
Haha thanks man, glad to have you onboard.
So glad I subscribed
What I don’t understand is if the cards are in the shoe, the cards don’t come out till you bet so
Same, every game of Baccarat I’ve seen now, the player places bets even before any cards are dealt. Unless Sun was able to detect the first card in the shoe and advise Ivey on how to bet just based on that?
@aaronykam That's exactly what happened. That's why they demanded that particular shoe, so the first card (or at least the corner of the first card) is shown face down pre-deal.
Eh, I'm on the side of the Casinos here. Whether or not anyone considers this cheating, it's certainly not playing the game the way it was meant to be played, using the detail on the back of the cards to set up and win is not part of the rules. It's pretty sheisty however you look at it. The fact that Phil needed an "expert" to do it and they tried everything they could to make it look "normal" and hide the plan with another language, I don't see how anyone can agree that this wasn't bad faith, even if the casinos deserve it. Phil took advantage of his fame and reputation to instigate the conditions necessary for this to work.
I agree with you to a point. I see it as 50% devious, and 50% wit. The casinos were dumb to agree to all those stipulations (numerous times!).
These type of stories are exactly the reason I do not feel bad when casinos get scammed!
I agree, how the casinos behave is a total contradiction. Do as they say, not as they do!
12:17 if the casino allowed him to influence the action than that falls as a loss for the casino. It does not amount to cheating. Zero argument
Knew this case as a Phil Ivey fan from long ago, crazy it only ended recently. However, I go against the grain here, whilst he did not cheat, he did manipulate the game. We all hate casinos etc, but I know full well when I play a game of roulette, or blackjack etc that there is a house edge and I am designed to lose. Its still my choice to play it and hope I get lucky.
In this case (and its left out of this video) the edge sorting goes a little deeper, the women specifically knew someone at the manufacture of the cards, already was aware they were imperfected (was rumoured she helped this, but couldn't be proven) and then they requested the cards, yes the Casino agreed, but they only agreed because they were not aware of this. Ivey manipulated the game, they weren't playing a random game anymore. Its a hard one, I think Ivey did outsmart them, but by using dirty tricks and clearly changed the game.
If this happened the other way around and casino provided cards that the dealers knew about and wouldn't let the player raise their bet etc due to knowing what cards were coming out, we would want the casino shut down.. It was a "random game" turned into a different game...
Bootlicker
Thank you! Slightly restored my faith in people. The sad bitter ‘stick it to the rich casinos’ comments are laughable. And I’m an ex-card counter who was asked many times to leave because my game was too strong.
Don’t like casino rules, don’t go. If enough people refuse to play they’ll go out of business.
The irony and hypocrisy of the terms “fair play” and “honesty” from a casino 😂
You agree to playing whatever game they offer even though you know the odds? Casinos are not responsible for the visitors
He NEVER was charged or arrested, FAR FROM CHEATING. He embarrassed them and got FOOKED, PERIOD POINT BLANK
How do you make the background animations?
Caught due to greed. They should have played it smoother and faked some lost evenings. With a system like that, they could slowly milk the casinos, or just take their millions and move on to something else.
💯 Completely agree. Instead they took their ball & went home pouting.
Was really hoping for a poker video - its the only form of gambling I do.
More good ones coming up!
I'm confused, could someone please explain this part to me? If she was capable of identifying a specific card by its edge pattern at all then why did she need it to be flipped 180 degrees in the first place?
To see the pattern clearly, not all edges are the same.
Classic case of casinos not paying out when they lose amazing how they expect to take you for everything and when they can't they don't pay.
as Baccarat player this is good story
Thanks, really appreciate that.
That thumbnail is unforgivable.
The two hands of baccarat you showed wouldnt be 9, they'd actually both be 8 and a tie hand. Natural 9 is like 4-5, 2-7 etc.
It's just an illustration, wasn't trying to suggest it was a hand of 9 although on reflection I see why you thought that! Thanks, always learning and trying to improve the next video for you :)
100% not cheating
Seeing as Ivey is worth 100 million today. I dont really feel as bad for him as I should. He should have seen the withholding coming from a mile away especially with wires being involved.The casino would have plenty of time to watch the footage before wiring the funds. Its like commiting a crime while knowing you are being filmed. You can lie to yourself and say you got away but not really.
I would love to see a good movie based off this. *Oceans 11* style.
Ivey's conditions should have been a dead giveaway to the casinos to say "Maybe the publicity you bring in is not worth it after all." Reusing the same cards is OBVIOUSLY for some sort of advantage, even if the casinos couldn't tell what specifically it was.
It’s like insider trading, only illegal if your caught in the act
That's the funniest part, it's not even illegal. Illegality means that they broke a law, the only thing they broke was "implied contract" - AKA, the casino believes they broke some arbitrary mutual understanding that is not in writing, not enforced, and not agreed upon, yet for some reason stands up in court. If this isn't a prime example of how corrupt and worthless the justice system is, I'm not sure what is lol
Any person at that casino who was in on the agreement to Ivey's requests knew they were to give him an advantage. They knew they were going to lose, which also means they also probably knew they would win in court. I don't give casinos much credit, but they definitely checked their way through this hand and slow played to the win.
They were too arrogant and obvious. They should have lost a session or 2 on purpose.
greed will always get you caught
Yes and she should have asked cards to be rotated every 5 times or some simple pattern and just waited longer to get the edge, asking for high value cards to be rotated is how I expected them to get caught as I was watching
exactly, it would have good smoothly like in butter
Why they weren't being dishonest he just had the edge and they agreed to his terms before he started playing.
💯 They didn't even have to go so far as to lose on purpose. All they had to do was sit & play normal Baccarat for a while.
So edge sorters huge bets are only made on the "player" bet then? Sun could only see the first card that was to be dealt, right? The variance in this strategy must be massive. As a dealer, i can tell you that an 8 being dealt first card to player doesn't result in a natural nearly as often as you'd think. It's slightly higher for a 9, but still. #freeiveysmoney
Interesting. At 6.5% a hell of an edge, the last session they were 3M ahead at one point so the variance must have been high.
@@TILT223Another video said they actually purposely lost some of their winnings using the same edge sorting technique so the casino wouldn’t be as suspicious?
Wouldn't it be the same odds of getting a Natural whether the first card is an 8 or a 9?
Either would require the second card be a 10, J, Q, K.
And also an Ace if it's an 8, or a 9 if it's a 9.
A natural yes, but a "winning natural" would have been a more apt statement
how do u cheat a cheat? he was only playing them at their own game, ie gaming the game.
Casino: "You're supposed to lose. If you win you must have cheated." Casinos HATE IT when players win! (don't ask me how I know, lol).
Always, even when they approved everything themselves!
Not sure why he didnt go with a jury trial, juries are way harder to bribe than judges.
You lose everytime they say it s bad luck,if you win or outsmart them it s illegal and you are cheating,what a cruel world we live in.Anyways,congrats Ivy for destroying them and playing with the casino owners fellings.
Casinos, pay up - Ivey didn’t cheat
Casinos bawling about fair play? Trust? What a surprise, and industry of thieves and vultures gets all whiny when their own tricks get put back on them.
One important point - as far as I know, even the casinos did not accuse Ivey of cheating. They know that he did not cheat.
The casino took the risk by granting Ivey his requests. Certain dealer, certain deck, certain shuffler. Lots of high-limit players request changes to blackjack like single deck, dealer doesn't hit on soft 17, shuffling cadence. The Casino can't whine and cry by agreeing to rules that give the player a better edge, they know this - that's why people like us can't make these requests and we play constant-shuffler, hit-on-soft-17, no-surrender, 6-5 blackjack. Casino gotta just deal. Too bad. They did nothing illegal, they played by the agreed-upon rules.
Thats not Cheating. They play within the rules that the Casino has astablished. He didnt touch the Cards, he didnt mark it, he play perfectly within the rules.
as a dealer and player of baccarat, I cant figure how knowing the denomination of only the first card can make a difference
@@present3348 - unfortunately with the auto-shuffler, having one 9 being out of cycle, there is an equal chance of 32 A - 8 and 128 10-spot cards and 31 possible 9s. since the machine constantly shuffles and randomizes the next 3 cards, anything can happen since the past has nothing to do with future outcomes like a hand shuffle with dealing to a predetermined point in the shoe.
Player has a massive advantage if they know one of the 4 cards is an 8 or 9.
I can't figure out how you can't figure it out lol.
@@jamesstetson6581 - not necessarily. if the first is and 8 or 9, and the third is a 2, you still have a low hand
If you can determine the opening card is an 8 or a 9, that's a big advantage, and you'd bet the Player. If it's not a 8 or 9, you'd bet the Banker. Not a guaranteed win on any particular hand, but over numerous hands, numerous sessions, it gives you the 6.5% advantage over the casino.
Quick correction : the house odds are never 1. So saying 1.01 is a small but meaningful difference
The casinos can say a slot machine wasn't supposed to hit a jackpot. How is that not cheating if you know whether or not the machine should have hit or not?
Agree
The casinos are there for one reason and one reason only and that is to take you money, nothing else.
good overview of said scandal. uhm i lay blame to the Casino + Dealer's. Casino/Hotel manager saw no red flags in their request for how the guest wanted their furnishings to be upon arrival? Dealer could of let the next dealer or Pit Boss know of their actions during play. 😡
They played it beautifully. Sad part os they thought their tactic would never get.caught. plus casinos agreed to same deck.
No way in heII, any casino would be so blind as to accommodate these requests. They knew this was coming.
You ever sit for 20 minutes on a hot dice roll while your cooler gets a marker to bet against you. Then immediately crap out. I should have asked for new dice. Harras.
They shouldn't have invited them back multiple times. Dumb greedy casinos.
Always.
The SOBs consider "card counting" as cheating ... they want all the rules stacked on the casinos side
They deserve to lose the case, why would you leave immediatley after the deck is changed? That'l easly give away your advantage.
Corrupt judicial system? Im shocked
12:34 "...the casino wasn't just after the money no-they wanted to send a message to *advantage players..."* So, an industry that was established and still continues to function via *"systematic built in advantage"* over their customers, is complaining and wants to "send a message to advantage players?" 🤔
Yep, they want losers only.
Hungarian is the most difficult language in Europe to speak
It's funny that casinos only care when they lose money. The odds are typically stacked against the player and they're perfectly okay with that.
When this was all going down I remember thinking about how if I ever become a billionaire I'm gonna wire that dude 20m cause he definitely got cheated! Either that or I'd go on a Vegas bender with him. I bet that'd be fun as shit hanging out with him for a week and having unlimited money 😂
They agreed to Phil's terms and he cleaned house.this is a legendary tale that ended exactly how you thought it would.these casino's are dumb.who let's Phil Ivey in a casino to play with an advantage.
Casinos are very bad losers it’s bad for your health to win in one
Phil Ivey and Kelly have to defend their reputation? They are HEROES in the books of the average american, especially those who have lost their livelihood to the casinos. Didnt know him before but def have mad respect for him putting his money on the line even if he was doing it for the money. Kelly... definitely have now words for that brave woman. My parents have lost friends over them killing themselvers over the addiction of casinos.
Amazed they lost these cases. They gave them what they asked for
Unreal. Ivey gave the casino terms and conditions to which they agreed. THEY set the rules of the game. Not him. They could have said "No thanks".
They never seem responsible...
If you're a casino and completely agree to those four asks, which to any reasonable person would raise suspicion, then it's on you.
Phil and Sun didn't cheat, they didn't manipulate the game.
The casinos agreed to the requests, if we as players agree to the casinos agreements even though it's not "fair" we can't get mad about it later.. it was an agreement. Just like and malfunctions, etc void any slot wins nothing we can do as the potential winner besides ask for the gaming commission to investigate and see if it was actually a malfunction of some sort..
Yes this is the thing with casinos, they want to honour agreements that favour them and not anything else.
Really sad what happened here. Edge sorting has been considered a legitimate advantage play for 60+ years and well accepted as fair play amongst the gambling community. I guess everything is "cheating" once you win $10 million though, sad.
I couldn't agree more, clearly it's the big numbers that made the difference
Casinos whining about fairness is the ultimate irony.
I had a co worker at my credit union who spoke mandarin. I learned a good amount in return for me teaching her Spanish 🤓
damn, what a crazy story.
"He almost got away with it?" HE WON THE LAWSUIT!!!
No, he lost $12M in winnings in England. How is that winning? He didn't get away with anything if he didn't take away his lawfully won winnings
@@michaelgeorge4643agree. And for all we know the out of court settlement w Borgata was just to get his original stake back. Sad that so many in these comments are ball washing a celebrity.
If you (the casino) agree to my terms and let me play and I win? That’s on you.
Yeah, but the terms were unfair. It's like me lying to a bank to get them to give me a loan and then when they take me to court for fraud, I say that they agreed to it so it's on them