Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Keith_MM, post: 2464835, member: 109318"] thats the whole point though , he didn't win it "fair and square" he got the dealer to manipulate the deck so that he "knew" when he had favourable cards. The cards were no longer random and gave him a huge advantage over the casino. There was no memory feat involved. he may as well have been playing with the cards in the deck face up. they are a business and are within their right to refuse to deal with anybody.Banning winners is no different than a pub refusing entry to people who became violent and damaged their property etc. they are a net cost rather than a source of profit. if he spotted the flaw with the cards and didn't manipulate the cards then there is no case, its at the point where he got the dealer to rotate the favourable cards that he then stacked the deck and the game became unfair. if he used bill money in a casino then hes an idiot in the first place.The casino's run on a premise that they have a house edge, everyone knows that and people gamble accepting that edge. SAying that casino's should know about the edge sorting is a poor argument as Ivey has admitted doing it all around the world. its only now that he has been caught doing it that everyone now knows about it. Crockfords may only have found out about it by reveiwing the security footage afterwards. The "wiring the money" may have been to give themselves time to review the tapes . he played for two days , over that time the casino would have expected to have made money, not to have been losing consistently and they may have let him continue playing so that they could figure out how he was managing to defeat the house edge.Ivey was guilty of one najor thing that led to him being caught, he got too greedy, he played too long and he won too much which gave the casino the incentive and the sample size to figure out how he was doing it. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us

Language