Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="batu2, post: 2190233, member: 104806"] [b]Opinion: Did traps Phil Ivey?[/b] Despite being universally considered the best player in the world and a key figure in the scandal at Full Tilt's Phil Ivey may have achieved worldwide fame for a story unrelated to poker. It is alleged cheating he did in the casino Crockfords in London playing Punto Banco. Ivey won £ 7.5 million were confiscated and now the casino has denounced in court to get paid . Most likely you will reach an agreement out of court . Money aside, if this ends up being a long and cumbersome legal process , both sides have much to lose as bad publicity for their operations. But to us what we want is ... Did you make traps or not? The argument used is that the letters had small design flaws that allowed to know what the letter was the reverse pattern . Ivey allegedly took a partner expert in design view these errors , giving him quite an advantage . Ivey and his partner asked them to change the deck , until one with the errors appeared on the back , it was with the play calling . The casino Ivey argues that " act to defeat the essential premise of the game" , but Phil himself said it was a mistake from the casino and he is a player with an advantage but the game continued . This technique is similar to Blackjack card counting , something you might take for a casino, but it is not technically a form of cheating . Although Ivey influenced the decks with which it was played , ever influenced the way of distribute . Simply was fixed and made decisions based on what he saw. The casino was within his rights to change his deck at any time, but Phil wanted to continue playing. The big question is : how a casino , who is prepared to host games of high stakes as enormous as this , commits a rookie mistake as using barajas with errors in the design of their bakcklashes? One can say that is by sheer incompetence , but if I were a cynic , would suppose that is because were fully aware these Errors in the design and wanted use them in your favor. So yes did traps ? I believe that neither from afar. * Ivey did not influence the result of the cards in absolute and had the same information the casino. No say that has not been something calculated or even a little shady by part of Phil , but the blame is the casino by afford a vulnerability well . In my opinion Ivey acted following the rules of game and the Crockfords had time to spare for influence action that was taking place to prevent to Phil win their £ 7.5 million. Is a bitter pill (and one incompetence ) by your part, but should ... [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us