{"id":3889,"date":"2014-10-08T19:19:35","date_gmt":"2014-10-08T23:19:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/?p=3889"},"modified":"2014-10-09T20:30:23","modified_gmt":"2014-10-10T00:30:23","slug":"phil-ivey-loses-edge-sorting-case-borgata-next","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/phil-ivey-loses-edge-sorting-case-borgata-next","title":{"rendered":"Phil Ivey loses \u00a37.7m Crockfords Case &#8211; Is Precedent set for Borgata?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/phil-ivey-baccarat-edge-sorting.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/phil-ivey-baccarat-edge-sorting-215x300.jpg\" alt=\"\" title=\"phil-ivey-baccarat-edge-sorting\" width=\"215\" height=\"300\" class=\"alignright size-medium wp-image-3893\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/phil-ivey-baccarat-edge-sorting-215x300.jpg 215w, https:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/phil-ivey-baccarat-edge-sorting.jpg 257w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 215px) 100vw, 215px\" \/><\/a>Phil Ivey took a bad beat in court when a UK High Court judge ruled against him in a \u00a37.7 million baccarat edge sorting case. <\/p>\n<p>Predictably, Ivey argued that edge sorting is not cheating and he wouldn&#8217;t use the technique if he thought it cheated the casino. The judge believed that Ivey didn&#8217;t think he was really cheating. However, the judge still sided with Crockfords&#8217; argument that Ivey went above and behind the normal scope of advantage play, including asking for a bunch of favors under the guise of being superstitious (i.e. cards tilted at 180-degree angle, same deck used, Chinese-speaking dealer).<\/p>\n<p>After the case was decided, a disappointed Ivey continued to profess his belief that he won fair and square. The 10-time WSOP champ said the following:<\/p>\n<p><em>I am obviously disappointed with this judge\u2019s decision. As I said in court, it is not my nature to cheat and I would never do anything to risk my reputation. <\/p>\n<p>I am pleased that the judge acknowledged in court that I was a truthful witness by saying that \u2018I am entirely convinced that Mr Ivey did not consider that what he was doing was cheating. <\/p>\n<p>I believe that what we did was a legitimate strategy \u2013 we did nothing more than exploit Crockfords&#8217; failures to take proper steps to protect themselves against a player of my ability \u2013 clearly today, the judge did not agree.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>There&#8217;s also a $9.6 million lawsuit filed by the Borgata against Ivey that&#8217;s yet to be decided. Another edge sorting case, Ivey was actually paid the $9.6 million in baccarat winnings before he left the casino. However, Borgata now wants their money back and, like Crockfords, they&#8217;re taking their case to court.<\/p>\n<p>Given what happened in the Crockfords judgement, there may be some precedent here. Of course, Borgata is dealing with a different country and they already gave Ivey the money. This case is supposed to be decided next year, so it&#8217;ll be interested to see if Ivey goes 0-for-2 or he gets better luck this time.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Phil Ivey took a bad beat in court when a UK High Court judge ruled against him in a \u00a37.7 million baccarat edge sorting case. Predictably, Ivey argued that edge sorting is not cheating and he wouldn&#8217;t use the technique if he thought it cheated the casino. The judge believed that Ivey didn&#8217;t think he [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,1],"tags":[1789,1842,1841,96,1843],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3889"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3889"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3889\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3898,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3889\/revisions\/3898"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3889"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3889"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thepokerpractice.com\/poker\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3889"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}